---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Q: Any news if Terminator or Dollhouse will be picked up for next year? — Patrick

MATT: Sarah Connor's fate seemed cinched (in the bad way) until last week, when both of Fox's Friday-night shows delivered somewhat unexpected ratings gains. Now, fingers are anxiously crossed in Terminatorland until May, when the final word comes down. The forecast looks a bit better for Dollhouse. Joss Whedon was not kidding when he touted this week's episode as the one to watch. I audibly gasped at least once while screening it, then fast hit rewind to make sure I had indeed heard what I thought I heard. It also boasts one of the best hand-to-hand fight scenes I have seen in some time, a cool reveal about the Dollhouse's business model and, as an added bonus, much shirtless Tahmoh.

http://www.tvguide.com/News/MegaBuzz...s-1004144.aspx

---

---

Joss Whedon on 'Dollhouse's' humor, layers and 'ick factor'
by Maria Elena Fernandez

The "Dollhouse" episode that Joss Whedon wants the whole world to see is airing Friday, so the popular TV scribe held a conference call today with the entertainment press to discuss how he's feeling about his new series and why there is still hope for this Fox drama.

The rocky road of Whedon's highly anticipated series has been well-documented, but Whedon is very excited about "Man on the Street," the upcoming episode that he wrote, and the fact that his audience grew by 21% last week to 4.3. million viewers.

The following are excerpts from a Q&A with reporters:

Q: Your fans have been been waiting for your signature humor to shine through. Is that coming in future episodes, or is this just not that kind of show?

Joss Whedon: There is humor in the show. There's a lot in the episode after. The fact of the matter is that this is not a comedy. And if there is a typical Whedon show, this is not it. It's not the lighthearted romp that the other shows were. The fact of the matter is that there's definitely funny stuff coming up. There's always moments of funny. It doesn't build like a comedy. It wasn't designed to be a comedy. It's not going to play that instrument. You have to do different things at different times. And if people are feeling like it's too serious, either their expectation has to change or we have to lighten up a little. But you're never going to see the long, six-page runs of pure humor. This is just not that show .... You can't turn it into pop-culture referential "Dollhouse."

Q: Viewers have complained of the ick factor of the premise. Most of the dolls are there voluntarily, but knowing that at least one isn't, doesn't that continue to make the show uncomfortable?

Joss Whedon: It makes me uncomfortable. I'm not going to lie. For me it's part of what we're dealing with. We're dealing with people who have power and are abusing it, and people who don't and are trying to regain it. In some instances, we want to show the dollhouse is providing a service that somebody is looking for. And in other instances that's going to be abused and the ick factor gets very high.

Q: Do you think there might have been a negative side effect to all the interviews you did where you emphasized that Episode 6 was where you wanted people to get hooked?

Joss Whedon: You know, there may have been a negative side to it because people may have said, 'The first five episodes are crap," which I don't believe. But I do believe there's the negativity of somebody saying, "Well, now he's blaming the network" for the other episodes. No, no, no. We did our best to try and figure out how to put the show over as a new paradigm under the gun while we were in production or, occasionally, out of production. And what happened with "Man on the Street" — it came to me as a concept really quickly. And for the first time, there was a real simpatico. They were like, "Oh, yeah, we get that." And it was a very simple thing. I wrote it faster than anything I've ever written. It just poured out of me. All of that brewing we'd been doing became the soup for that episode. It really was a game changer for us on set and in production. The cast and the staff read it and a lot of tumblers fell into place. That's how we felt about the episode. There may be a negativity associated with hyping it. But a lot of the following episodes really work on the model of "Man on the Street." It was a big moment for us. We found a new level and were really proud of it. Other people may feel differently, but we walked away from shooting that episode going OK, we've just added a layer and we feel pretty excited about it.

Q: What was that other layer that you found?

Joss Whedon: Doing an episode that somebody who had never seen the show could walk in on because it explains the premise very clearly. In fact, it's about explaining the premise. At the same time, really getting under the skin of the dollhouse and of Paul's character and what's going on with everybody and the workings of the place and coming at it kind of sideways rather than just showing an engagement and flipping in some information around that engagement. This was one where we got to look at the cogs of the clock, and that's what gave it such momentum for us.

Q: How much of this was you needing the time to find the show? Or was it the network relenting and letting it get to the place you wanted?

Joss Whedon: It was kind of both. "Man on the Street" definitely contains elements that were pitched by or developed by people at the network in terms of the motivations of "Dollhouse" and the feel of the politics of the thing and the thriller aspect. It wasn't like, "Oh, now they've shut up, and now we'll do it my way." It's very much the stuff they were pitching, but it also is storytelling-wise much more how I had envisioned coming at it. You know, to be only in a sense that is clearer than my original pilot. My original pilot was deliberately obtuse. You had to go along and figure it out .... We lay it out as simply as we did in the first five, but because we get to get inside the dollhouse and have the events take on more resonance, it's got what I had hoped to bring to the other episodes. It was really finding the code to a show that I can do my best work in and the network can still get behind. It was a meeting of the minds.

Q: Obviously, the big market for the dollhouse is weird, weird sexual engagements. But the first five episodes touched on that very little. Is that a choice because you're on network TV or are you waiting to get the show to that place later?

Joss Whedon: Yes, some people at the network were like, "Wait a minute, this idea that we just bought is illegal and very racy and frightens us." There was definitely an element of "Shall we tone this down?" That for me was frustrating because what I was selling them was dangerous ground. That's not to say that the only thing I pitched them was Echo having sex. The idea was that she was always going to be different things.

Sexuality was a big part of it and certainly the most edgy and titillating part of it, but not in any way the only part of it. When I pitched it, it was "Alias" meets "Quantum Leap." I thought of her, more than anything, as a life coach. As the kind of person you absolutely need in your life at a certain moment who will either change you or comfort you or take your life to the level you want it to be. And that could be nice, evil, sexual. It could be any number of things. It was never meant to be the one. The one just took over because it's the one that frightens people the most and also obviously interests them the most. I think we ended up not going there as much as we would have in the first few episodes because we were still in that dialogue with some of the people at the network. You end up doing a disservice if you just gloss over it and hit it head-on.

Q: How deep are you going to go with relationships? Could there be romances developing?

Joss Whedon: The emotion of the thing is really why we're there. It's the only thing that really interests us. If we have to figure out a caper, that's work. But to figure out something that causes one of them to be in pain, that's fun. As the show progresses, we are able to get further with the emotionality because the dolls are actualizing more and everything is going to get much more tense for everybody.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/show...ss-whedon.html

---

---

Dollhouse: "Man on the Street" Review
by Eric Goldman

For those wary of any and all spoilers, I'll be delving into some of the basics of this episode (including a major element revealed by commercials) but not discussing in detail the specifics of where the story leads or any major plot twists.

And here we go… This episode changes everything! This is the best show ever!

Okay, let me relax that a bit. Dollhouse has been a disappointment since it debuted, with an intriguing but shaky premise – and an unfortunately un-engaging group of characters and storylines. But even before the show premiered, we were told episode 6 changed things and was when the series really gets going.

Let's get it out of the way – this is indeed the best episode yet, and a well paced, entertaining hour of television that leads to some exciting revelations. Written by Joss Whedon, "Man on the Street" has a ton of forward plot momentum, with many different story points going to the next level and characters taking dramatic new turns.

Paul Ballard's investigation leads him to a longtime Dollhouse client – played by comedian Patton Oswalt. This also leads to Paul coming face to face with Echo for the first time ever, though how exactly that plays out and where it leads I'll leave for you to discover.

As for Oswalt, his character is interesting – the first attempt to get into the psyche of someone using the Dollhouse for a fairly understandable emotional reason (even if you still condone it). Oswalt's character has some snarky lines, but for the most part plays it straight, having some fairly heartfelt moments which he does a very solid job with. His psychoanalysis of Ballard is a little silly – he is way to on the money with way too little information about the guy. But overall, it's nice to have one of the Dollhouse clients get a more well rounded portrayal here.

It's strange, because I usually love Joss Whedon's dialogue, so it's odd to find some of it clunky on Dollhouse. "Realistic" dialogue is overstressed by some – Whedon, like many terrific writers, doesn't write realistic dialogue, he writes great dialogue, which I'd much prefer in my television. But there are some scenes between Paul and Mellie in this episode that fall a bit flat, as they share some of the most Whedonesque dialogue yet on this series. Perhaps it's somewhat because of the actors – I like both Tahmoh Penikett and Miracle Laurie, but they might not have the right offbeat style needed to make some of Whedon's banter fly. Though one call back to an already iffy line involving stock (as in the stock market) would be hard for anyone to pull off. Also, there's some less than stellar acting from some actors who have brief man on the street interviews (hey, like the episode title) in a bit used throughout the episode, where a reporter asks people what they think about the rumors regarding the Dollhouse.

Those issues aside, there's no denying the last third of this episode delivers some great stuff. I can't go into detail, but there is a standout fight scene that's particularly exciting and fun. And it's all tied into some big new developments in the story, involving Echo, Paul and others, that definitely pick up the pace in a big way and make for a better, much more multi-layered story.

There's also a subplot involving Sierra and the interest Victor was taking in her last week – which takes a very dark turn here. The ultimate resolution to this storyline is very satisfying, and ultimately ties back into the main plot in an exciting way. It also allows for Boyd to get an audience-pleasing moment that is quite fun to see. (Hint: it involves glass). This subplot also is notable because it articulates and puts right up front some of the most seedy and unsettling aspects of the entire Dollhouse concept.

Do I think the show is "Fixed" now? Not entirely – as I've said before, this series has an overreaching plotline -- involving Echo recalling past events and who she really is -- that you either move at a molasses pace (to allow it to potentially continue for years) or move so quickly, the show's entire concept becomes null, or in need of a major overhaul. But this episode definitely has me genuinely intrigued for the first time about what will happen next and gently optimistic again that perhaps Whedon has some tricks at the ready about how to deal with some of those aforementioned problems. I still wish the characters were better defined and more likable, but the story at least has some definite strength behind it after this episode. Let's hope that trajectory continues going forward.

Dollhouse: "Man on the Street" airs Friday, March 20th at 9pm on FOX.

http://tv.ign.com/articles/963/963760p1.html

---

---

'Dollhouse' improves --finally
by Rob Owen

Echo (Eliza Dushku) meets Ballard (Tahmoh Penikett) in "Dollhouse." (Fox)It's about time. After weeks of episodes that were boring and not up to the standards previously set by TV scribe Joss Whedon, his Fox series "Dollhouse" (9 p.m. Friday, WPGH) finally turns out a worthwhile episode this week. Another episode airing April 3 also merits a rave.

What changed?

Rather than another repetitive mission-of-the-week episode, Friday's episode actually moves the greater story forward with some surprising revelations and an opportunity for Echo (Eliza Dushku) and FBI agent Paul Ballard (Tahmoh Penikett) to finally meet. Ballard is pursuing the notion that the Dollhouse exists.

The episode is wrapped at its start and after each commercial break with footage from a news report comprised of man on the street interviews on whether or not the Dollhouse exists. These brief snippets do a much better job of illustrating the premise of the series than anything in past episodes. It's a smart, savvy setup. Why couldn't they have done this earlier?

Sadly, I suspect Fox is to blame. Whedon has said in past interviews that by the latter half of the season "I do feel like we got back to our vision in a way that really works for the network."

If tomorrow's episode had aired earlier in the episode's run -- or the April 3 episode, in which some of the dolls try to escape their captivity -- there would have been much more incentive for viewers to tune in. Other than a slight uptick in ratings (up 21 percent last week in viewers but still dismally low), "Dollhouse" has been a disaster, garnering even fewer viewers than perennially low-rated "Friday Night Lights" on NBC.

In a teleconference with reporters today, Whedon said that the concept for Friday's episode, which he wrote, came together very quickly and "for the first time there was a real sympatico" with the network.

"It really was a game changer for us on set and in production," Whedon said. "It's an episode somebody who'd never seen the show could walk in on. It's about explaining the premise and at the same time really getting under the skin of the Dollhouse and what's going on. ... We're coming at it sideways rather than just showing an engagement and slipping in information around the engagement. This is the one where we get to look at all the cogs in the clock."

And "Dollhouse" is the better for it. So how much were the earlier, lesser episodes a function of Whedon trying to get the show on its feet and how much was it pushback from the network? Whedon said it was both.

"[This week's episode] contains elements that were pitched or developed by people at the network in terms of the motivations of the peopel at the Dollhouse and the feel of the thing and the thriller aspect. ... It's very much full of the stuff they were pitching but it also is storytelling-wise much more how I had envisioned coming at it," Whedon said. "It was really about finding the code to a show that I can do my best work in that the network can still really get behind, a meeting of the minds."

Next time, I think everyone would be better off if Whedon's mind was allowed to drive the train from the beginning.

http://community.post-gazette.com/bl...s-finally.aspx

---

---

Cult Alert: Dollhouse

Ah, Fridays. Cult night. Overlapping with Galactica’s final bow, Fox’s steadily improving Dollhouse (9/8c) delivers a turning-point episode, written by the show’s creator Joss Whedon, that includes an existentially fraught moment that sounds like it could have come from Battlestar itself. The hour is structured around man-on-the-street interviews about the “urban legend” that is the Dollhouse. An unidentified science prof lectures us to imagine a world in which “every part of you that makes you more than a walking cluster of neurons [could be] dissolved at someone else’s whim … We will be over as a species. We will cease to matter.” In this world, we’re not in danger of becoming robotic Cylons. We could be “dolls,” programmable vessels with wipe-able memories, designer drones, slaves to the rich and powerful who control our fate and identity.

This is the long-awaited episode where FBI Agent Ballard (Battlestar’s Tahmoh Penikett) finally comes face to face with the elusive "doll" Echo (Eliza Dushku), who he only knows as Caroline. He seeks to save her, but how can you rescue someone who isn’t aware there’s anything amiss? At one point they come to blows in a serious smackdown (reminiscent of some of Buffy’s wildly choreographed mayhem), with Ballard at a distinct disadvantage because he doesn’t want to further damage this lost soul. She has no such compunction—although Echo does reveal a mystifying agenda likely to set mythology buffs buzzing. (A separate twist involving Ballard’s world floored me.)

The intrigue is thick within the walls of the Dollhouse as well, as the PTB continues monitoring the curious relationship of dolls Victor and Sierra. “The dolls don’t have sex drives, do they?” puzzles one of the handlers. “They’re all broken,” opines Echo’s overseer Langton (Harry Lennix) later in the episode. And as security chief Dominic (Reed Diamond) concludes much later on, “They’re not as ignorant [as in innocent] as they pretend to be.”

This is a juicy episode, but also one that illuminates Dollhouse’s central dilemma: how to make us care about characters (the “dolls”) who are basically blank slates between imprints, while exposing us to the nefarious misdeeds of the Dollhouse staff, who with the exception of Langton and the scarred, fretful doctor (Amy Acker) are either coldly or smarmily played. Wolfram & Hart this ain’t, and more’s the pity.

http://www.tvguidemagazine.com/matt-...55.html?page=2

---

---

Dollhouse Is About To Get Damn Good

If you were disappointed by Dollhouse's early episodes and walked away, please do consider a return visit this Friday, when Fox airs episode six, "Man on the Street," which is a vivid and thrilling turning point for the series.

In the way episode seven of Buffy the Vampire Slayer unveiled Angel's series-altering secret, episode six of Dollhouse completely reenergizes the series and reveals some huge character secrets (The remote activation of Actives is key). And, oh yeah, there is also a brutal, totally badass and blatantly passionate fight between Paul Ballard (Tahmoh Penikett) and Echo (Eliza Dushku) that marks the beginning of their adversarial and exciting relationship.

Bottom line: "Man on the Street" is crazy awesome craziness. Look for the kind of dramatic and wordish excellence that makes us all love Joss Whedon.

Speaking of Joss, we just caught up with him by tellyphone, and he spilled some very juicy secrets about what's to come from the denizens of the Dollhouse. Read on for news about the sex, violence and comedy to come...

Love Among the Actives: Despite Paul and Echo's radioactive chemistry at their first meeting, the true romance of the show is about to become Victor and Sierra, despite the fact that both characters are largely trapped in childlike emotional comas. Without spoiling too much, it turns out to be true for Actives as much as for garden-variety humans that love conquers all. As Joss notes, "For certain people, there could be some romance, but it's never simple." P.S. Mad props to Enver Gjokaj and Dichen Lachman for bringing so much charm and depth to their roles—they're rapidly becoming new Jossverse faves.

Man on Fire: Don't except to find out in season one why Paul (gorgeous, gorgeous Paul) is so obsessed with the Dollhouse in general and Caroline in particular. Instead, says Joss, "We don't go back into his story, but that's because we are about to send him forward. There's a thorn in his side, and we feel that we can push it further, twist it and possibly hit a vital organ. We want to challenge him [in this obsession] and make it as hard for him as possible."

Holler: What happens Friday with Paul's neighbor is stunning. Shoulda seen it coming, and heck, slightly suspected, but the spoiler-free surprise was wonderful. Suffice it to say, she's at the center of the most harrowing scene of Friday's episode.

Who Watches the Watcher? Something cool is coming with Harry Lennix's character, Boyd. Says Joss, "Boyd definitely cares about Echo more than his job requires. Their relationship is going to have to shift." Hmmm...in the meantime, on Friday, when a crime goes down inside the Dollhouse, it's superhandy to have a readily available badass mofo with finely honed cop instincts.

Cut From the Sane Cloth: Look for a multitude of reveals about the mysterious and beautiful Claire Saunders in the weeks to come. Says Joss, "I love that character, not just because it's Amy Acker, but because she wears misery and torture on her face literally, and we definitely learn how Claire came to this fabulous career. In the last few eps we get to turn the Acker up pretty high." Yay!

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watc...damn_good.html

---

---

Q: I think the resistance that a lot of viewers have been feeling has been that they get the part about the sleeping with people, but they're not exactly sure, for instance, why you'd hire a midwife or a safe cracker or whatever. Do you really think you've made that argument yet or are you still working on it?

Whedon: You know, we do work on it. Again, it's one of those things where because it makes sense to us on some levels, we look back and go, "Are they with us?" But we finished shooting it before any of it aired, so it's a little dicey there. There were times we talked about why [with] some of the engagements. it seemed a little bit like you could find somebody who might be that person. [Our thought was] that for a lot of the rich people [dolls] have just become a status thing. It's just become, "it's just the way we do it." But we never spent too much time with that because we were never sure how much of an issue that was going to be. It's the one thing that's difficult about making a show when it's not airing, is you don't have that feedback yet and you don't know what is the thing they need to hear? So it gets addressed, but probably not as much as people would like. I still have no problem with the idea that somebody very rich and very far off in the mountains would hire the perfect midwife because the birth of my child, you don't want a thinker.

Q: I read that you're intending to leave TV for online media exclusively.

Whedon: I never actually said that. Definitely, the new media is very attractive to me. It's an open field. There's a lot of freedom and I'm very afraid that that freedom will be taken away before the artistic community has a foothold in it. So for reasons both artistic and political, I wish very much to pursue new media.

But that doesn't mean that I'm never going to do television. Everybody knows I had a rough time getting Dollhouse up-to-speed, but that doesn't mean I'm never going to do television. I love television and I love it in a different way than I love the Internet in a different way that I love movies. It's a kind of storytelling that is just, the scope and the breadth and the depth that you can get from a TV show is unlike anything else and I love it.

I have to admit I'm shooting a movie right now, producing a movie that really went from script to preproduction in a matter of weeks. I did Dr. Horrible in a matter of days. The television process is a grind for me that I'm not as used to as I was, but that doesn't mean that I'm turning my back on it as a medium. I adore it. And the people I've dealt with have been honorable and honest. It's just getting TV show off the ground is rough waters, no matter what. And sometimes you feel up for a swim and sometimes you don't.

The problem is that we have two completing opposing models, regular television, which is made for a lot of money, has a lot of crews, employs a lot of people. You can make a good deal of money in that business, and so can the networks and whatnot. And then there's in the internet, which is not that at all. Although with Dr. Horrible we made money, we didn't make the kind of money that would make a studio stand up and prick its little ears up. Nor were we paying people the kind of dollars where they can just do that for a living.

With things like Hulu, all that means is that shows are going to be shown on the Internet probably instead of reaping reruns on television, which means no residuals for the artists, which means that there's almost no money model on the Internet and a lot of money, but also a lot of waste model on TV. They're trying to bring them together, but nobody knows how they're going to mix, how they're going to meld, where they're going to meet.

At some point it would be great if they met, if we could have fast, well made, but not slow moving productions on the Internet that employed enough people to keep the community in a good place, but at the same time, cut some of the fat out, so that everybody was able to do more work and still feel secure in their making a living. But right now that model doesn't exist, and none of us have figured it out. Believe me, we've been talking about it - how to mix the two.

Q: This goes back to what someone else was asking before about how we're going to be left wondering if any of the employees are actually dolls themselves. Is that going to prevent us from seeing what Topher does outside of the dollhouse? Is he ever outside of the dollhouse or do we just assume he lives there? Does he have a girlfriend that he goes to the movies with? Are you handcuffed, as far as showing that stuff?

Whedon: We're not handcuffed. It's just that at this point, we're still interested in how they relate to our actives and particularly Eliza. So we don't spend a lot of time with people in their outside lives, although we do spend some. We will learn a little something about the private lives of some of our employees, but something we're threading in lightly. That's really something you would come to later in a season.

Our first 13 are basically, just take the baseball bat and keep on hitting and then later on if you have people hooked, those threads are easier to weave in because people, they're more invested. But at this point, we're just swinging for the bleacher emotionally in the second half and so some things we will get to show because it will give us insights into the characters, but not everybody has an apartment set there.

Q: Amy Acker's character, Dr. Saunders, seems so sad - she's a cloud of misery. I don't understand why she's so sad and has this horrible job. Are we going to learn more about this very intriguing character?

Whedon: Yes, we sure are. I love that character, not just because it's Amy Acker, but because she wears misery and torture on her face literally. We will definitely learn how she came to this fabulous career. In the last few episodes, we get to turn the Acker up pretty hot and it's very exciting.

Q: Will we see some Buffy alumni on Dollhouse?

Whedon: Well, I did mention that Felicia Day was going to appear in an episode and that's pretty much it for Buffy. Most of them are, I'm happy to say, working, but I do like to see the gang. But we have to establish to reality of this world before we can bring in somebody without it being too jarring. Although we have one episode with a guy who looks a lot like Nick Brendan and his character's name is Nicholas and that was a terrible idea. We should have never named him Nicholas because every time I see his footage, I go, "Hey, wait a minute. Oh, I'm confused."

http://tv.ign.com/articles/964/964481p1.html
http://tv.ign.com/articles/964/964481p2.html
http://tv.ign.com/articles/964/964481p3.html
http://tv.ign.com/articles/964/964481p4.html

---