Big Bucks
It's took a long time to get this news. The Big 3 are looking for 1 mill each per episode and Simon and Kunal are going for big raises too.

It's just get a bit silly after a while. I mean are our actors there for the show anymore, of just the big cheque?

[Image: 1405576391690.jpg-620x349.jpg]

That's just my view but some of you might think they are worth the increase. 350k to 1m seems like a huge jump to me.
More on the pay deals.
It seems reasonable to me. They got locked into longer contracts earlier in the life in to show. Likely to avoid a 'Friends' situation where they renegotiated every year collectively as a cast gradually increasing all their salaries by 100K or more each year until they eventually reached $1M by season 9 and 10.
I can understand wanting more money in their contracts. The show is probably pulling in crazy amounts of money in syndication, merchandise and who knows what else and they should get a fair cut. I'd demand more money too.

BUT do I think half-assed acting and writing should be rewarded with that much money an episode? Hell no.

It's just business now.
I don't fault them at all going after the big bucks. Lorre, Prady and CBS are making money hand over fist. And MB's ego aside, the show can't go forward without them. I suspect that at this point the money is the only reason they're still there.
The following 1 user Likes devilbk's post:
  • wellplayedpenny
They are funding their retirements....most of their hiatus projects have been forgettable. Writing on the wall that TBBT is the peak of their careers and they have nothing to look forward to except dancing with the stars and one off gigs on other sitcoms
The following 1 user Likes lewstonewar's post:
  • queenoftheDales
True, I guess I don't blame them. We will only see once the show closes if any of them can 'escape' the BB typecasting.
If the money is there (and it is) it is their duty to go after it. Because if the big three don't get it, God knows the hagbeast will want her piece.
Is it terrible that I don't want the actors to be able to settle and some of them end up quitting? Maybe with certain actors no longer on the show, people will finally stop watching this crap.
Avatar by wickedgrdn @ LJ
The following 1 user Likes CassandraElise's post:
  • queenoftheDales
[In the opinion of someone drinking tea out of a pint glass and who fell asleep in their fedora last night, which now has a large crease in it, so the wearer is rather cranky...]

Jim won't quit. Aside from being a gentleman enough to not drop everyone else in the muck, the money's ridiculous, and he's either oblivious to the degradation of his onscreen character, or it doesn't bother him. Which is fair enough. Possibly even he's unaware merely because he doesn't obsessively watch re-runs like the lot of us, thus the distinction isn't as marked to him.

Personally, if he's not playing Sheldon in his original manner, and how Sheldon was originally written, ie, the highly poised, swiftly articulate, dignified alien-in-the-midst, but rather just as an abrasive, obnoxious, dopey boyfriend, I wish to devil he'd quit long ago, and gone back to stage work, for his sake. Or, given the Infernal Bridegroom productions, some absurdist or existential cinema. Jim would have fit in marvelously in Richard Ayoade's version of Dostoevsky's "The Double".

If his character keeps on being written and played in this buffoonish, idiotic manner, he won't be able to make the transition to anything worthwhile after the show ends.

Vintage Sheldon could transition to absurdist film, or black comedy, or noir, with no break in the illusion. Shelberk, the current version, can transition into...what? A romantic leading man? Not with that dull, naff, appallingly twee, one-sided "romance" he's in currently. And even if they amp it up notch (unbelievably I might add, because why NOW, if not before? If the fucker's bored, and browsing his phone on a date, he's not going to suddenly fall passionately in love a year later. Well not with the same person anyroad.) what will we have then? Another romantic lead? God knows Hollywood doesn't have any of THEM!

In short, I'm worried for Parsons. I fear he's betraying his theatrical muse in some fashion. His portrayal of Vintage Sheldon shows the extraordinary embodiment of a character that he's capable of, and I want the chap to extend that splendid talent into other roles. And if Gripe wants this, then obviously IT MUST BE DONE. (late afternoon Jehovah complex...)

Cuoco does indeed seem bored, but then she's got fuckall to do now.
Job Description - Sit in a chair eating or drinking and make sarky comments.
At least with her earlier scenes with Sheldon she got to exercise her comedic skills. She plays better off Sheldon than anyone, and vice versa. Odd Couple set ups always work. But we know this.

Galecki - subtle, under-appreciated actor, best in his scenes of weariness and despair.
Job description - "Shellll-don!" "Here we go..." *smile ingratiatingly at Penny*
I can see why the chap might want to get behind the camera for a change.

Helberg is a clever, witty bastard, and probably yearns to continue on with his rather excellent film work. But playing Wolowitz is good for his profile, he's still young, he can save up money to work on independent projects later. And Helberg gets a fair amount of screen time.

Kunal - I know nothing about Kunal...Except that I get the impression he would prefer to be playing a traditional romantic lead. I think he'd suit a gangster flick myself. Or a hustling one. He'd play a good Paul Newman type...

Rauch - No bloody idea. Seems highly witty. Same set-up as for Helberg - good exposure here (but not much range allowed, alas), probably will move on to Independent film.

Bialik - I'll try to be civil...Er, she's a talented comic actor, and probably would better suit her own show (again), where the peculiar heaviness of her acting (not meant disparagingly) can be the focal point, rather than placing her character on the edge of the main three, where she throws off the balance of everyone else. In an ensemble piece, Bialik works best in small doses. The money disparity's a problem insofar as as the leading character's SO, they're currently giving Bialik the same amount of screen time as Cuoco, which isn't fair to either of them.

They need to dial back Bialik's part to a tertiary character, leaving the "Big Three" rightfully in centre with most of the screen-time. Then you can have Bernadette & Howard on one side, and Raj & Amy on the other. Either as two INDIVIDUALS (heaven forfend!) or shack them up together, as TPTB seem so keen on doing with any independent characters. Better yet, have the other four intermingle in a variety of pursuits and combinations, but as secondary and tertiary characters, to allow space for the odd outlier like Stuart, Zack, or Kripke.
That would restore balance. At the moment there is no centre. There are 4 couples with equal screen time, which swiftly stagnates if you don't find those couples interesting. Particularly if all they're talking about is the state of their coupledom.

Personally, if I could rejig the cast of TBBT it would contain only Sheldon, Penny, Stuart, Zack, Kripke, Wolowitz, Gablehauser, Mary Cooper, Bob Newhart, Winkle, and Wil Wheaton. And a large amount of episodes would centre on Sheldon's various attempts to take over the Universe.

Edited to clarify a couple of my more massive assumptions. One can only EVER assume under these circumstances...
It's subjective speculation based on available empirical evidence (blogs, interviews, social media), not logic based on absolutes...
The following 6 users Like Idle Miscreant's post:
  • devilbk, Gamma, Tuesday Pajamas, ricardo shillyshally, Wisp, lewstonewar

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)