ext_13058 ([identity profile] shadowkat67.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] shadowkat 2009-02-14 11:31 pm (UTC)

NUMBERS is a procedural though, just a bit different than most of them - in that it doesn't focus on serial killers and violent crimes every week, and the focal point is "what is the math of the episode?" Compare this to Buffy or BSG or Dollhouse - where the focal point or jump point is for Buffy - "What is the Buffy of the episode" or "what does it mean to be human" of the episode. NUMBERS wants to know what is the math of it. How does math relate to real life. Everything in Numbers, including the relationships of the people circle around that concept.

I'm not a math person, although I do have a great and abiding respect for math. And work with it every single day.

Dollhouse, BSG, and Sarah Connor are all about the characters.

I read your review on Dollhouse - sorry didn't get a chance to respond. I agree with you on it, though. I think there's a lot going on here. I also think Echo and Eleanor Penn may have a bit of overlap.

Whedon hints at something in the beginning of the episode - where Echo (Caroline - is that her real name?) states: "The problem with slates is no matter how often you clean them, the stuff you wrote still remains." It does, on chalkboards, you still see the ghostly words sitting behind the new ones. To what degree does Echo's old personas still sit behind each new one, bleed into it?

Eliza was working for me in this show. Actually all the actors are, which I hadn't expected. It's good to see Whedon found a role for Amy Acker. Wonder if he'll be able to insert any of his other former series regulars? Outside of the ones who are obviously busy elsewhere.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting