Hannah Swithinbank

Dollhouse returns. Woohoo.

For I have learned to love it. Well, I pretty much fell head-over-heels half-way through the first season, at exactly the moment Joss said it would get good. Really, TV stations, learn to trust the man. Sure, Dollhouse isn’t up there with Buffy yet, or Firefly (which probably hit the ground faster than any other of Whedon’s series’, if you watch it in the right order).  I wouldn’t be surprised if I never watch Season 1, episodes 1-5 again though.  The new start really does jump right in.  It doesn’t matter if you’ve not seen ‘Epitaph One’ (though you should, because it’s great) – which is as it should be, since it didn’t air on TV, and just shoots off about three months from where ‘Omega’ ended.   As pretty much the whole Dollhouse-related section of the internet has already declared, the Topher/Saunders stuff is the best storyline, although I am also intrigued by the Boyd/Ballard dynamic, since they are both clearly more concerned about Echo than they are about anyone else – and I suspect Boyd sees a lot of himself in Ballard and in what Ballard is doing.  He *is* ex-cop, after all. Ex-Cop/Ex-Fed, getting involved in morally shady underground stuff, for what reasons?  Somone asked Boyd ‘why?’ in Season One – and that’s not gotten answered yet.

“What “Dollhouse” is about theme-wise is fascinating, and what “Dollhouse” is about story-wise is only sometimes interesting.
What episodes like “Man on the Street” and, especially, the unaired “Epitaph One”(*) showed was that the dramatic meat of the series wasn’t in Echo’s missions, or even in Ballard’s attempt to take down the Dollhouse and save Caroline, but in those much larger questions of identity, and of the moral implications of being able to erase a person and make them into someone else entirely.”
– Alan Seppinwall gets it right on his blog

However,the Echo-Mission storyline didn’t grate this week, it fused nicely, because the questions of identity and moral implications are steadily becoming part of her storyline as the programming misfires on her.  Given the last scenes of the episode, Dollhouse is really looking to bring the big themes and Echo’s ‘plot of the week’ stuff together.  Huzzah, indeed.

I also join pretty much everyone else on the Dollhouse-internet in declaring this the line of the episode: ““My whole existence was constructed by a sociopath in a sweater vest. What do you suppose I should do?”

The best moment though, was Topher telling Saunders how he made her: “I made you question. I made you fight for your beliefs. I didn’t make you hate me. You chose to.”  I loved that – he created her to fulfil a function, and made her a certain kind of person to do so – but she’s taken on the traits and is expressing them in specific ways.   Speaking as someone who couldn’t stand Amy Acker as Fred in Angel, I am suprised at how sorry I am that her character’s only going to be in three episodes of Dollhouse this season.  Maybe they’ll cancel her other show?

oh scotland scotland scotland

Last time I whined about the BBC’s rugby coverage on this blog I got a comment from someone at the BBC. Seriously.

So I’m going to try again.

Dear BBC Scotland,
Surely, in this day of digital interactive television it is not necessary for you to change the schedules to show the Scotland rugby match on BBC One, whilst everywhere else in the country shows Ireland vs Argentina, that usually thumping and engaging fixture which, on this occasion, has actual meaning for the world cup seedings. You see, the Scotland match is on BBCi, so people can watch it if they choose to watch it.
If you must put the Scotland match on BBC One, could you possibly see your way to putting the other fixture on BBCi in Scotland. No one can possibly watch a Scotland rugby match on two channels at the SAME TIME.

Kthx bai.

I will continue to ignore the fact that England are getting thumped by South Africa. Again.

Let's change the subject

Let’s not talk about Sarah Palin, or rant about my work, or about the fact that the money that was supposed to cover my council tax the year I stop being a student is locked in Icesave as it collapses. Let’s instead talk about the BBC miniseries, State of Play, and the fact that it’s being re-made as a movie, and let’s weep a little inside.

I have finally (only six years late) got around to getting hold of and watching State of Play, and spent the last two evenings glued to it (It’s only six hour-long episodes, so that’s not too epic a time investment). I know why I didn’t see it before – it aired in the part of my life where I didn’t have a television. I don’t quite know why I’ve not picked it up before now – given that about half a hundred people have told me how wonderful it is, and that it stars Bill Nighy, David Morrissey and John Simm – oh and James McAvoy, back before he was the new Big Thing. Nor am I quite sure why the world needs a movie of it, when the original is so damn fine.

The TV series: BBC produced, Paul Abbott written, British newsroom – House of Commons based conspiracy series about the unravelling of the story after a young black kid is shot in London and the researcher for a prominent government MP is pushed under a train, on the same day. David Morrissey is the MP, John Simm the senior reporter, Bill Nighy the editor of the paper. It unravels beautifully, hour by hour, it’s tense, it’s disturbing, it’s sad, it’s freaking funny, particularly when Bill Nighy, who is a truly great actor, is playing the editor being a really bad actor playing innocent to get his way. It just works on all its levels.

The film. Well, it’s being directed by Kevin MacDonald (Touching the Void, Last King of Scotland), who I like. Russell Crowe is playing the journalist. Ben Affleck is the Congressman (‘cos, oh yes, it’s being set in the States, because Britain doesn’t have a political system worth caring about, or a journalistic tradition either). Bill Nighy is being replaced by Helen Mirren; Kelly McDonald by Rachael McAdams (Rachael McAdams, a reporter, dare me not to laugh, go on). All fine – except, y’know, I love Helen Mirren, but they didn’t want to get Bill Nighy? Really? Everything is made better by the presence of Bill Nighy.

I’m sure the film will be just fine. Except for Affleck, who I’m deeply unsure about, and who I think is deeply inferior to David Morrissey in pretty much every way as an actor. I’m sure everyone will act their little socks off. I’m sure it would have been better with Ed Norton as the journalist and Brad Pitt as the Congressman, but what the heck. With it’s pedigree – the director, the cast, the fact that the original story is so darn good (though how they’re going to compress it to 2 – 2 1/2 hours, I don’t know) – it might even be really good, and probably Oscar bait. It might even be illuminating about the American political system. Who knows.

But I’m just not sure why we need it at all? Why is a movie better than a TV series? I’d put money on State of Play becoming ‘that TV series the movie was based on’ – as has happened with Traffik/Traffic. It’s a better show than that – it deserves better, and the cast and writer deserves better. I’m probably just cranky because I’m having a cranky day, and I’m sure that people invovled in the original will make money off selling the rights, and good for them. Why oh why oh why does the world feel the need to remake things that were already great in their own right – and yes, I’m looking at you Martin Scorsese, for making The Departed, that thoroughly inferior remake of Infernal Affairs; and you Cameron Crowe for turning Abre los Ojos from a great Spanish film in which Penelope Cruz could act to a wacked out schmaltzathon in which she proved that she cannot act in English. And now you, Kevin MacDonald – you should know better after you Munich proved to be a crappy fictional film about an event you made a fabulous documentary (One Day in September) about.

Just tell everyone to watch the original, ok. It’s worth it.