Season 8 Musings

[Louise]

Perfect! This so deserves to be illustrated...

Haha, yeah, I thought so, too. But I don't know how to do any of that stuff. It would make a fun graphic...

[SpaceAnJL]

Or there's the Seven Dwarves - Creepy, Shrieky, Sleazy, Mopey, Whiny, Ditzy and Dumbass.

(Penny used to be Snow White, but she drifted...)

[Trust No One]

Couple of stray thoughts:

1. What is people's evidence/justification/explanation for the assertion that this show would've been cancelled after S2 or S3 if A and B weren't added and changes weren't made? I'm guessing "diddly squat", because that's the Canons' usual level of skill at debating/persuading...but maybe another HQer has some insight into this.

2. Why do they assume that this would be a bad thing? If someone told me "this show would've ended after two or three years if it didn't change", my answer would be a resounding "GOOD." This idea that a sitcom should run for 10 years seems to have become a deeply, deeply ingrained cultural belief, in America, whereas in many other countries, TV series often last for just two or three seasons, no?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of *any* long-running sitcoms that added new *major* characters unless there were special circumstances, like another castmember left, was fired, or died, and therefore needed to be replaced. Something like "The Office" doesn't count, because that was truly an ensemble show which had a large cast from the start. Jim and Pam were usually the POV characters, supported by a rotating group of secondary characters.

I know I've said this in several other posts, but I strongly believe that we'd have higher-quality television and more enjoyable things to watch if this concept of the long-running traditional sitcom would die. People don't question this idea that a sitcom should just keep running and running indefinitely. Apparently it's become so commonplace that they just accept it, uncritically.

Three seasons would be 60-70 episodes, no? Is that really not enough for some people? That's a hell of a lot of episodes, from where I'm standing. Do people really think that a show ended prematurely if it doesn't make it to 8, 10, 12 seasons?

This idea that a sitcom should last for ten years needs to be broken. Again, the general viewing public is not smart enough to even realize there might be other formats, other ways of doing things. I would like to see more "mini-series" of maybe 15-20 episodes and then done.

I will choose quality over quantity every single time. If you really examine it closely, a typical Canon statement like "Shows need to change or die" is very self-contradicting. That's some type of logical fallacy, although I'm blanking on what exactly to call it. It's one of those Yogi Berra-type statements that doesn't make sense. If a particular concept has been exhausted, if there's nothing left to say about that particular situation and those particular characters, then surely that means the show in question has reached its natural ending-point. If the story is over, if a show has explored all the territory and all the plots that it can explore, then continuing it beyond that point is like putting a dead thing on life-support.

Of course, I *don't* believe that TBBT had exhausted all possible plots and all possible situations with the original 5, at all. That's part of the reason why HQers are so frustrated, right? Because so many great and funny stories COULD HAVE been told, but instead we received romcom.

If you have to change pretty much everything about a show: cast, premise, tone, structure, format, then surely on some level it ceases to be the same show. Now they've even changed the setting, to some extent, because some of the characters no longer live where they used to live, or work where they used to work.

"Shows must change or die" and "Characters must grow and mature" are like pieces of religious dogma. They're not any type of logical argument, because you can't produce *any* evidence or examples or adequate explanations, to back it up. "This is true because everyone says so, and everyone says so because it's true." It's just a widely-accepted and deeply ingrained cultural value, not a fact.

This is Internet debating at its worst and lowest level: "this is true because I say so."

I dunno, I'm sleepy right now and I'm not explaining myself very well, but something about "This show would've died if it didn't change" reminds me of "When did you *stop* beating your wife?" It's that same type of circular reasoning. The reality is not "the show continued *because* changes were made", it's "changes were made *and* the show continued."

How can you KNOW the show would've ended? You'll never, never know. There is absolutely no way of knowing, because it *didn't* end. And it continued for the sake of $$$, not because TPTB had some kind of master plan or grand artistic vision, or because they're hopeless romantics who want to see everyone paired-up. Really, the Canons give way, waaaay too much credit to TPTB, if they think the show's continued existence has anything to do with character-based, plot-based, story-based reasons, like "Oh, we love these characters and we don't want to say goodbye."

No, it's filthy lucre, bitches!

I'm unhappy because of the destruction of these beloved characters, not because I didn't get X number of seasons. I'd jump for joy if all copies of S3 or 4 onward were somehow destroyed by Nostalgic Terrorist Guerrillas.

TL;DR: why do people believe that a sitcom needs to run, and run, and run, for as long as it possibly can? When did this become standard practice? And why do people get away with statements like "This show would've been cancelled if didn't change", when there is no possible way of proving that?

ETA: some nitwit on IMDB is telling Nostalgics to "curl up in the fetal position in your Mom's basement and watch S2 on continuous loop." But, he/she used the word "feral" instead of "fetal", so I don't think much of their writing skills

ETA again: prior to the 1970s, most TV shows did not have "story arcs", and most episodes were self-contained. There were PLENTY of very successful and very popular long-running sitcoms where *nothing* ever changed and there was little or no attempt at "character development." Fashions come and go in TV, just like fashions come and go with clothes or music. I'm not saying that I want zero character development, ever, or that modern TV shows should be like "Gilligan's Island", but the statement of "A show will be cancelled if it doesn't change" is easily disproved. Hogan's Heroes ran for six years and won Emmys, and that's a show where every episode is literally the same.

Also, as we've all noticed, the phrase "character development" is not being used correctly, now. It's being used to mean "radical changes made arbitrarily, in a very short time-span." I'm not opposed to *all* character development, but my idea of what that concept actually entails, bears no resemblance to the definition used by the Canons.

Really not much I can add Louise except I agree as usual. To me, this show was doing fine with the early season format. I do not recall this show having ratings problems at all. Have a very hard time believing this show had to go to stale Ships to survive

[Louise]

To me, this show was doing fine with the early season format. I do not recall this show having ratings problems at all. Have a very hard time believing this show had to go to stale Ships to survive

I'm so long-winded and you're so succinct, Ses. I think you just said everything I said, in one sentence

[Trust No One]

I'm so long-winded and you're so succinct, Ses. I think you just said everything I said, in one sentence

I think it's that you are smarter than me.

[Louise]

BBT in its early seasons isn't a sketch comedy but there was a feeling of the absurd as the group could be doing anything from secret agent laser chess to bouncing a laser off the moon. Nothing needed to be justified. They did it because it was f-u-n and that's what made it fun for the viewer. Anything was possible.

Exactly. This is why I like S1 so much. It feels sort of leisurely and relaxed and unhurried. It's sort of loose and open, for lack of a better description. As you said, anything could happen, and does.
The guys have some mishaps but it's nothing super-upsetting or game-changing; the problems and conflicts are kind of low-grade.

I enjoy things that are low-key, like that. I don't need "story arcs" or big dramatic events. I like that feeling of being a fly on the wall and getting a glimpse of what the characters are up to. The early seasons provide that.

To me, in S1 & s2, the Lenny stuff feels like an interruption and a distraction from the other fun stuff that's going on. It's like you're watching two different shows, almost. This is why I say that the best parts of this show were unrelated to the ostensible premise, and S1/S2 were good almost by accident.

Then S3/S4 rolls around, and it's like TPTB woke up one morning and went "Oh, shit, we forgot to make things *happen*!" So, you start getting these attempts at a more formal, traditional style of storytelling.

I guess what I meant, in my previous post, is that there's just *no* internal consistency anymore, especially with characterization. I don't mind things that are sort of plotless and directionless; but I mind them f*cking around with the characters...

ETA: the absurdism is what I like; you nailed that.

[Trust No One]

Exactly. This is why I like S1 so much. It feels sort of leisurely and relaxed and unhurried. It's sort of loose and open, for lack of a better description. As you said, anything could happen, and does.
The guys have some mishaps but it's nothing super-upsetting or game-changing; the problems and conflicts are kind of low-grade.

I enjoy things that are low-key, like that. I don't need "story arcs" or big dramatic events. I like that feeling of being a fly on the wall and getting a glimpse of what the characters are up to. The early seasons provide that.

To me, in S1 & s2, the Lenny stuff feels like an interruption and a distraction from the other fun stuff that's going on. It's like you're watching two different shows, almost. This is why I say that the best parts of this show were unrelated to the ostensible premise, and S1/S2 were good almost by accident.

Then S3/S4 rolls around, and it's like TPTB woke up one morning and went "Oh, shit, we forgot to make things *happen*!" So, you start getting these attempts at a more formal, traditional style of storytelling.

I guess what I meant, in my previous post, is that there's just *no* internal consistency anymore, especially with characterization. I don't mind things that are sort of plotless and directionless; but I mind them f*cking around with the characters...

The Lenny dynamic has really hurt this show IMO and has been horrible for the Penny character. The Leonard character has also never recovered once the Lenny was given serious attention. You really sense a pattern with characters really suffering with this Ships. Sheldon, Howard, and even Raj now. There has not been one character that has benefited from these Ships.

[Louise]

The Lenny dynamic has really hurt this show IMO and has been horrible for the Penny character. The Leonard character has also never recovered once the Lenny was given serious attention. You really sense a pattern with characters really suffering with this Ships. Sheldon, Howard, and even Raj now. There has not been one character that has benefited from these Ships.

Exactly, Ses. These ships have not made anything better, only worse. They have not opened up new avenues for stories and situations, they only burn bridges and make the scope of the show narrower and narrower. The writers have painted themselves into a corner, story-wise, but that's not as troubling as the destruction of the characters.

I like early-Seasons Leonard well enough. He's easily my least-favorite of the four guys, but I don't hate him.

Years from now, I wonder if anyone would bother to start watching this show from the beginning, knowing that the story is basically over by S4.

[Louise]

Is one of you secretly named "skrmish"? Because I think I found a true HQer in the making, over at IMDB:

"I am on a run of the previous seasons(1-4) and the juxtaposition makes the present season all the less bearable. It seems the writers truly have no idea what the audience really enjoyed in the earlier seasons. The reasons i think the show has deteriorated are

(i) Sheldon in a relationship - I feel Sheldon behaving in an asexual way was way more humorous than his eagerness to "have a girlfriend". The whole episode where he proposed to Amy to become his girlfriend was a cringeworthy episode. Contrast this with the episode where a Girl has affections for Sheldon( The nerdy girl in her class/ The green lantern girl) and he is blissfully clueless. Those were hilarious episodes. In the aftermath of the relationship with amy, we were fed other pathetic storylines ( That Train episode where Sheldon/Amy kiss, Relationship agreement clauses etc are few examples of this whole story arc not working.

(ii) Lack of Recurrence of interesting characters- Where the hell are Kripke, Leslie Winkle, Priya, Sheldon's sister, Raj's parents, Leonard's mom.

(iii) Howard in a relationship - Can you ever imagine Howard enacting the scene to Penny where he described how they were engaging in carnal repartee/ erotic to and fro. It seems he has been tethered down to a submissive, wife pleasing, awkward role. The most fun we had when he was unrestrained and flirtatious. I cant ever forgive the writers for downgrading Howard's character. Can you ever imagine Joey( From friends) in a relationship. They ruined it with Barney( in HIMYM) and now with Howard.

(iv) The girls- At best, they could have served as good secondary characters. Their elevation to primary characters was really a disastrous move and to make matters worse, the three girls have no chemistry at all. The guys have awesome camaraderie while the girls are just plain annoying when together. You can always predict what is going to happen. Amy will conjure up some awkward comment with regards to her miserable past or her current gaucherie and Penny will make a dumbfounded face and in the next scene, Amy will try to ingratiate herself into Penny's good books.

********************RANT OVER*********************************"

I feel like leaving a note of encouragement for this poster, 'cause I'm sure they'll get dogpiled and ridiculed, as per usual...

[Louise]

The one relationship, the on-and-off-again Leonard and Penny, was sufficient for the show’s romance content. There are now four couples, which is ridiculous and unrealistic.

Y'know, this made me think. If TPTB originally conceived of this show as a vehicle for JG, where Leonard and his pursuit of Penny were the main focus, then why add the Shamy and the H/B? If Leonard's the protagonist and the leading man, then seemingly they wouldn't want anything to distract from that; they wouldn't want other shippy/romance types of plotlines upstaging him.

If Lenny is the main event and JG is the golden boy, then what is the point of Shamy and H/B? It's almost like TPTB realized that Sheldon was the breakout character, but didn't understand the reasons why, so they started giving him more prominence, but in all the wrong ways. They think people like the Lenny, so they just decided to triple it?

Even if one accepts this idea that the Lenny is this show's central focus and Sheldon is supposed to be a secondary character, surely that's all the MORE reason why JG should get the romantic storylines and the other three guys should be left unattached, so that they can be used for the "nerdy hijinks" storylines. I feel like that was the original plan.

TPTB aren't even following their own gameplan. There isn't any gameplan. They're just fumbling around in the dark.

I find it laughable when canons actually believe that TPTB have some Master Plan™ and all this "character development" was carefully, intentionally plotted-out, starting from Day 1. No, these people are making it up as they go along, and then they create this mythology about "growth" and "character development" just to cover their ass and explain-away any continuity errors.

I know HQers really, really hate the Lenny, but at least it was there from the beginning and didn't involve brand-new characters suddenly appearing out of nowhere, three or four years into the game. If this show had ended after three or four seasons, as I believe it should have, then I don't know what that would mean for the Lenny, but at least they wouldn't be getting married, etc.

It seems incredible that TPTB would be *so* out of touch with viewer reactions that they still, after 8 years, believe that this is The Johnny Galecki Hour. But if it were, at least we wouldn't have Shamy or H/B. I know that's no comfort to people who (with good reason) hate the Lenny, but I'm just thinking out loud...

Another random thought: imagine, if you found someone who had zero prior knowledge of this show, and you showed them Season 1, and kept that person in a total vacuum, not reading/hearing/seeing any other comments, articles, opinions, etcetera, about the show. IMO, that person would never, never, never predict the current state of the show, and the events of S3/4 onwards. They just wouldn't. Why? Because these developments aren't natural. They're not a natural outgrowth of what came before, they're the worst kind of artificial tinkering by a God-like author/showmaker.

Also, and this might be wishful thinking on my part, but if you showed this same person just the first few eps of S1, and then showed them a particularly egregious ep. from S6 or S7, I think they wouldn't conclude it was the same show, at all. They'd think it was some type of SNL-style parody, or a different show with a few of the same actors.

(I also think nobody would describe Howard as creepy, if you showed them just the first few eps of S1 and kept them sequestered from outside opinions. But I'm obviously biased, on that topic.)

ETA: I still think the H/B wedding was a way of keeping the romance-lovers appeased, because TPTB know they can't roll out the Lenny and Shamy weddings, yet, or else their show and their money are over, so they have to throw the shippy types a bone, in the meantime. As the saying goes, "this oughta hold the little bastards for a while." It was possibly also a test to see if the audience would accept this sort of thing. And most fangirls don't care about Howard, so he's expendable.