His other ones had vampires and demons (Buffy,Angel,and even aliens in one episode),or a completely futuristic society years and years later than our (Firefly). This one instead is set in our world and only has advanced robots. So of course is still sci-fi but between all the Whedon series is the most realistic one. And this element give a different vibe to the series compared to the others of the Whedonverse. We'll see how The Nevers will be.
shareIndeed
shareLOL. . .it's *easily* his least realistic show. You can't prove vampires/demons don't exist, and who knows what the future will look like. But the "science" on this show is so eye-rollingly ridiculous, it's light years beyond those others.
As happens, often, when soft sci-fi masquerades as hard sci-fi.
Bottom line: Dollhouse posits a number of scenarios that are *demonstrably* impossible; Whedon's other shows don't.
often, when soft sci-fi masquerades as hard sci-fi.
can you give some more exmaples of soft sci-fi masquerades as hard sci-fi?
Sure. I love Crichton, but he's particularly guilty of this. From Jurassic Park onward. Then there's Interstellar, Bladerunner, etc, etc. . .I could go on and on. At a certain point, of course, what's considered "hard" by people is all a matter of perspective.
I suppose what I'm really saying is that people get tweaked by movies/elements within depending on their grounding in science. Often, they don't realize that they're seeing "hard" concepts completely misrepresented (Jurassic Park, et al) or portrayed ever so slightly out of focus (see: ANY time-travel movie).
yeah good examples , but as you say they do fall short on the science under close examination
People often confuse genre, realism and accuracy. And they're different things.
Accuracy is about the precise depiction of real objects and events. Elizabeth Kostova's The Historian is an example of a vampire novel written with extreme historical accuracy.
Realism is the events and choices happening in a realist way in the context of that story. I Am Legend and The Vampire Tapestry are two examples of highly realist vampire novels, particularly the second one.
The genre is a different thing. You can have a story happening in our world being neither accurate or realist, like Fringe or Dollhouse. Firefly is probably the most realist thing Whedon has done, and it's a space opera.
Given your (very precise) definitions of those terms, I'd absolutely agree with you.
I suppose I was referring to the more conventional definitions.
You are missing the point! The point is the atmosphere of the show! If you make vampires or a futuristic society you enter in another world! While in Dollhouse there is "our world" (except for the Epitaph episodes) just with these "modified humans".
shareRespectfully, I'm not. When one speaks of "realism," even (especially???) with speculative fiction, the most useful/common application of that concept is "could this happen in our world?"
On that basis, as I've said: as far as the supernatural. . .who knows? As far as laughably inaccurate science: DEFINITELY not the Dollhouse.
Posit "modified humans" all you like. . .it's just not possible, as described in this show. Posit demons/supernatural creatures? Who knows? One is a shrug depending on belief systems, the other is demonstrably false.
The reason people make these types of claims is, they simply don't know enough about enough to know better.