I have to say I'm dubious about the premise of the show.
While I'm sure it will offer them opportunities to address the objectification of women, it couldn't start from a place that's deeper in the hole on the subject.
So I'm fearing lots of Dark Angel in heat type moments, and Sydney in slutwear type moments.
It's pretty far from the premise: "I want the blond in the alley to kick the vampire's ass."
Whereas now you're starting from: Sentient sex doll reads Germaine Greer.
Anybody else have qualms?
Well, so far does it say it has to be sexual? Why are you limiting it to Sydney in slutwear? Why not Sydney in any persona?
In fairness, nearly every single Variety rag premise summary I've read has sounded shit - which includes many shows I've seen which have turned out great. I think it's a little early to be deciding the show is going to suck.
No one said the show is going to suck. We said "qualms".
Very true. Sorry, my brain went to an odd place there.
Well, so far does it say it has to be sexual?
Somewhere I read that most of the scenarios would not be sexual.
Somewhere I read that most of the scenarios would not be sexual.
The two articles I read mentioned sexual as well as a bunch of other stuff. To give it equivalent weight to the each other scenario discussed, it would definitely not be in the majority.
Anybody else have qualms?
sounds a lot like Molly's backstory in Neuromancer? Not a qualm exactly. I'd like to see that movie be. But if the smart gets overwhelmed, I'll have qualm.
I have qualms, but not about that. There are male and female dolls, so I don't see how the premise inherently objectifies women. It seems like it's more about being an actor than being a woman.
