<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Whedon Dissects &quot;Dollhouse&quot;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/</link>
	<description>Science Fiction TV and Movie News, Interviews &#38; More</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:05:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: bob</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487853</link>
		<dc:creator>bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487853</guid>
		<description>just finished an email to the yo-yo&#039;s at syfy network about the show stargate universe.  what a slow, slow show. with all that tech on that ship they dwell on the stories of the people. discovering only one new thing every couple of weeks on the ship that might help them was just too slow.  if memory serves me most of the stark trek type shows ended when they started to get into the soap crap and got away from the exploring, cool tech and cowboy and indian stuff. why do you think that law and order and the like are still around? they show just the facts mam.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>just finished an email to the yo-yo's at syfy network about the show stargate universe.  what a slow, slow show. with all that tech on that ship they dwell on the stories of the people. discovering only one new thing every couple of weeks on the ship that might help them was just too slow.  if memory serves me most of the stark trek type shows ended when they started to get into the soap crap and got away from the exploring, cool tech and cowboy and indian stuff. why do you think that law and order and the like are still around? they show just the facts mam.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487651</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487651</guid>
		<description>I think the show&#039;s really stepped things up this season. We know Eliza Dushku isn&#039;t the strongest actor but the rest of the cast is solid and in 2.5 &amp; 2.6 Enver Gjokaj (Who plays Victor.) does a dead on impersonation of Topher that&#039;s brilliant to watch. (Summer Glau was creepy good too.) I&#039;ve sort of wondered why Fox never broadcast season one&#039;s apocalyptic finale. It gave a whole new lens to watch the show through and I think it would have made a difference as far as getting viewers to come back to the show.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the show's really stepped things up this season. We know Eliza Dushku isn't the strongest actor but the rest of the cast is solid and in 2.5 &amp; 2.6 Enver Gjokaj (Who plays Victor.) does a dead on impersonation of Topher that's brilliant to watch. (Summer Glau was creepy good too.) I've sort of wondered why Fox never broadcast season one's apocalyptic finale. It gave a whole new lens to watch the show through and I think it would have made a difference as far as getting viewers to come back to the show.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487427</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487427</guid>
		<description>I was actually really getting into Dollhouse. The problem was that it was a show ,t that in my belief, would have worked much better as a film or miniseries, then as a series. It was a good show. I will live without it, but I was happy just to see it. 

Firefly was a success. Its success was it&#039;s failure. The fact that it was cancaled makes it a classic. Hey, it might be one of the best scifi shows ever, but I&#039;ll tell you what, part of it&#039;s charm is how little there is. There&#039;s a charm in dieing before your time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was actually really getting into Dollhouse. The problem was that it was a show ,t that in my belief, would have worked much better as a film or miniseries, then as a series. It was a good show. I will live without it, but I was happy just to see it. </p>
<p>Firefly was a success. Its success was it's failure. The fact that it was cancaled makes it a classic. Hey, it might be one of the best scifi shows ever, but I'll tell you what, part of it's charm is how little there is. There's a charm in dieing before your time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GazerBeam</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487297</link>
		<dc:creator>GazerBeam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:17:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487297</guid>
		<description>Michael, just because you don&#039;t see it doesn&#039;t mean it isn&#039;t there.  Specifically, Joss has had two commercially successful TV shows, each running for at least five years.  He&#039;s had one show that was (and still is) a critical success, spawning a major movie.  He&#039;s created one of the best original web series so far.  All of these were based on the one thing that Dollhouse intrinsically lacks... strong characters in lead positions.
If there&#039;s any flaw with the show it&#039;s that.  The main characters we&#039;re supposed to care about don&#039;t have a set personality (by design) to get behind.  The show is more about ideas than characters, and characters have always been Joss&#039;s strong point.
And to further rebut, success does not always denote quality.  Cases in point: the Saw series, American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, the CSI spinoffs, etc...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michael, just because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.  Specifically, Joss has had two commercially successful TV shows, each running for at least five years.  He's had one show that was (and still is) a critical success, spawning a major movie.  He's created one of the best original web series so far.  All of these were based on the one thing that Dollhouse intrinsically lacks... strong characters in lead positions.<br />
If there's any flaw with the show it's that.  The main characters we're supposed to care about don't have a set personality (by design) to get behind.  The show is more about ideas than characters, and characters have always been Joss's strong point.<br />
And to further rebut, success does not always denote quality.  Cases in point: the Saw series, American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, the CSI spinoffs, etc...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487247</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 05:06:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487247</guid>
		<description>Whedon dissects Dollhouse...

Umm, lemme help you there Josh... your show was a piece of shit that no one watched.  That pretty well sums it up!

I fail to see why this idiot is considered a sci-fi guru when he basically has only had one successful show?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whedon dissects Dollhouse...</p>
<p>Umm, lemme help you there Josh... your show was a piece of shit that no one watched.  That pretty well sums it up!</p>
<p>I fail to see why this idiot is considered a sci-fi guru when he basically has only had one successful show?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: D. C.</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487243</link>
		<dc:creator>D. C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:28:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487243</guid>
		<description>Whedon was right on the money with that quote, Michael. The rise of reality TV has convinced the networks that the future of television is unscripted and dirt cheap. Hence we get stupid ideas like NBC handing the 10 pm time slot, 5 nights a week to letting Jay Leno recycle all his Tonight Show material.

As for Dollhouse, I kind of think the show would have been more successful if they did less glorified call girl plots and more espionage stories. And as I mentioned earlier, the Echo has a meltdown every week plot was already getting tiresome by episode 3 of this season.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whedon was right on the money with that quote, Michael. The rise of reality TV has convinced the networks that the future of television is unscripted and dirt cheap. Hence we get stupid ideas like NBC handing the 10 pm time slot, 5 nights a week to letting Jay Leno recycle all his Tonight Show material.</p>
<p>As for Dollhouse, I kind of think the show would have been more successful if they did less glorified call girl plots and more espionage stories. And as I mentioned earlier, the Echo has a meltdown every week plot was already getting tiresome by episode 3 of this season.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Natale</title>
		<link>http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/12/05/whedon-dissects-dollhouse/comment-page-1/#comment-2487144</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Natale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 00:55:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sliceofscifi.com/?p=17330#comment-2487144</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s the money quote right here:

“But for me, the Internet is slightly more interesting right now just because I feel like we have to get in there and start figuring out how to create entertainment without the networks and the studios, because they’re basically trying to figure out how to create and entertain without us.”

Dopes.  I guess we win if Whedon starts creating original content for the web so I suppose that&#039;s something.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here's the money quote right here:</p>
<p>“But for me, the Internet is slightly more interesting right now just because I feel like we have to get in there and start figuring out how to create entertainment without the networks and the studios, because they’re basically trying to figure out how to create and entertain without us.”</p>
<p>Dopes.  I guess we win if Whedon starts creating original content for the web so I suppose that's something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

