An Un-unravelable Web?

[Idle Miscreant]

That last quote ("it's hard to have "character-based" humor when you're willing to change your characters wildly for the sake of a joke." etc) is very interesting.
I think part of the problem is that from S5 onwards there was suddenly a plethora of these "jokes for the sake of jokes" at the expense of character.
Sheldon's line to Penny about her taking the Krengjai piece; "I've seen pictures of your mother. Keep eating." and his drunk line to Wolowitz "And the first woman you ever disappointed sexually!" for example. Aside from the fact that they're horrible things to say, they're also not things Sheldon WOULD say. They're banal and vulgar, nothing usual about them, the phrasing is not his, and the knowledge is not his either.
Anyone could have said these lines. The "humour" is basic bitchy/laddish humour, and Sheldon shouldn't be made to say it.

I feel they've done the same thing with the romance. There's an occasional effort to keep Sheldon's reactions "Sheldony" (aside from when he starts dribbling out some fanfiction dialogue), but they're battling against the inherent character "wrongness" of Sheldon, who worked perfectly in his independence, being in a relationship at all. And moreover, choosing a type of relationship (tepid, disinterested and one-sided for over two years) that doesn't suit his obsessional nature. It makes no sense for someone so flagrantly passionate about such a variety of things to be so indifferent in love. Makes no sense and is very dull to watch.

Incidentally, they can't just make it passionate NOW after 3 years. That's trying to have it both ways, and is artistically dishonest.
I note that they've rebooted Amy's character back to Season 5 Amy. This chopping and changing doesn't help either.

Another example of non-character-based "humour";

Howard: Why would someone want to make clothes out of your skin?

Raj: I don’t know. Maybe ’cause dark doesn’t show the stains?

Almost all of Raj's "Indian Jokes" are things I can't believe anyone who's Indian would actually say. My Chinese pals don't make "Chinese Jokes", my Nigerian friend doesn't make Nigerian Jokes (he's a right London toff whose only form of humour is cynicism actually...)...Generally speaking people don't make fun of their own country so constantly and in a way which fixates upon physical appearances. Australians take the piss out of themselves all the time, but we don't pepper our conversations with little self-loathing comments about Crocodile Dundee.

Again, Raj being Indian really has no bearing on his personality, so those "jokes" are grafted on, rather than being a natural expression of his character.

And Raj saying "That's not racist, because I'm Indian!" sounds just like CBS frantically covering themselves.

EDIT - Would this comment sit better in your Humour thread WPP? I can move it sharpish if so.

[wellplayedpenny]

Deseret BBT Formula February 27 2009

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/70528...works.html

Memorable Lines:
"Leonard is the only character that's in motion by his own choice," Prady said. "He is the only one who is reaching for something."

"That was apparent to me early on — that he just had this nagging notion that other people have fuller lives than him," Galecki said. "He just doesn't know how to attain that. There's no manual, and he has not been given an invitation outside of the world that he lives in, and it's frustrating."

"The somewhat unspoken collaboration between us — me, Chuck, the rest of the writers — is simply that we have to walk up to the line. We cannot cross it," Parsons said. "And we've had to go through scenes where we've had to correct on the spot going, 'We've gone too far. We must bring this back. The audience is not pleased with the way you are talking to Penny. We can be biting, and he can observe something in a situation, maybe get snarky about it, but it can't be malicious."

Part of the formula of keeping a successful sitcom successful is to keep the characters the same while, at the same time, allowing them to grow "oh-so slowly," Lorre said. .... "if there's any magic trick to sitcoms — stuff happens. Nothing changes."

Mood of the Masses: No comments

---

LA Times Cast April 12 2009

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/12/...-bigbang12

Memorable Lines:
"The thing about Sheldon is that he can't exist without Leonard," said co-creator Bill Prady ("Dharma & Greg"). "Unless you show that somebody is capable of loving him, and Leonard clearly does, unless you show that somebody in the world is capable of putting up with him, why would you as a viewer put up with him?"

"The rhythm of the language they've written for Sheldon, I love that challenge," Parsons said. "The writers are so good at using so many words and scientific jargon and being verbose in general and burying the joke in there. The challenge of threading that out, driving these speeches in a way it still hits the comic rhythm, I love it, though I want to pull my hair out sometimes."

Mood of the Masses: No comments.

[Louise]

"Leonard is the only character that's in motion by his own choice," Prady said. "He is the only one who is reaching for something."

"That was apparent to me early on — that he just had this nagging notion that other people have fuller lives than him," Galecki said. "He just doesn't know how to attain that. There's no manual, and he has not been given an invitation outside of the world that he lives in, and it's frustrating."

LOLWHUT? So, being a highly educated professional with a well-paying and intellectually stimulating job in his chosen field, having a close-knit group of friends, many hobbies and interests, and a decent place to live, is not enough for Leonard. None of it matters, unless he can somehow "prove himself" by dating a blonde busty cheerleader-type?
If Prady's statement is true, all this shows is that L. has a "grass is greener" mentality and an inability to just relax and appreciate what he already has.

Sure, it's entirely normal to want a "significant other" and a romantic/sexual relationship, and perhaps even normal to feel rather lonely and adrift without one, for some people. But, I always come back to this question: why does Leonard act so *desperate*, when he's still so young and his adulthood has only just begun, really?

The show acts like time is running out for these characters; like they've spent decades being desperately lonely, when in fact they're in their mid-twenties, in S1/S2.

"I don't happen to have a date at the moment" is not a tragedy, but if this statement of Prady's is true, then Leonard thinks it is, and we're supposed to think so, too.

Nobody has a perfect life. Everybody has problems, maybe even serious problems. Nobody has *everything* they want. There are plenty of people who have pretty much *nothing.* Nobody is psychologically fulfilled in every single aspect of life, at all times. If the guys have a professional life and a personal life, but little or no romantic life, then I'd say two out of three ain't bad.

If you look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, I'd say all four guys were in the top tier, or second-to-the-top tier, already, in S1/S2. Sure, they all have problems, issues, moments of discontent or self-doubt, but *so does every human being on the planet.* Even with their assorted issues and neuroses, I'd still say they have plenty of reasons to be happy.

This quote really highlights TPTB's belief that unless you're "in a relationship" (AKA having sex with a conventionally-attractive person), everything else is empty and worthless.

The message here seems to be "unless I have absolutely everything I want, all at the same time, life is empty."

I'd say pretty much everyone goes through a time of uncertainty and soul-searching in their 20s. That's normal. If Leonard thinks he doesn't have a "full life", that simply means he's lacking perspective and his priorities are askew. It also seems to take the responsibility off him and put it on other people, as if other people are supposed to *supply him* with a "better life."

If you don't like your life, do something about it, instead of sighing and being emo.

I just don't get it. "I'm 26 and I don't have a date at this exact moment!!!! Tragedy!!!!" So? I'm 34 and I don't have a date, Leonard. Chillax.

Consider this: things are seldom how they appear, and someone who appears to have a "perfect life" might actually be very depressed and unhappy inside. To believe that "everyone else's life is easier than mine" is very immature. The people whom Leonard envies or aspires to be, must surely have their own share of hidden problems.

Of course, if the guys have been rejected, ostracized, bullied, and emotionally abused by their peers, during their childhood and teen years, then that surely must've affected them deeply. But Prady & Galecki don't say "Leonard is unhappy because he's been bullied and this has damaged him." They say he's "reaching for something."

Well, EVERYONE is "reaching for something", in life, and it never stops. That's the human condition. It's not a reason to have a pity-party or to believe that you received the short end of the stick and that everyone else has a fuller life than you.

What exactly does Leonard* think will happen, once he gains entry to this magical forbidden world of "fulfilled" people? All his problems will instantly disappear and everything will be perfect forever and ever? Non-geeky people spend their time eating dinner, going to movies, going to work, and doing ordinary things, just like the BBT gang.

*And in this case, I don't just mean Leonard the person, I also mean TPTB and the whole attitude which they promote, via the character, as a mouthpiece.

---

Part of the formula of keeping a successful sitcom successful is to keep the characters the same while, at the same time, allowing them to grow "oh-so slowly," Lorre said. .... "if there's any magic trick to sitcoms — stuff happens. Nothing changes."

This is such a bunch of confused and confusing word-salad. He's contradicting himself in every sentence: the characters change...but they don't!....but they do!....but they don't!

None of the "growth" on this show has been slow, gradual, and believable. It literally sounds like Lorre is just spouting a bunch of sound-bites, here. Just stringing together some phrases that sound good.

"Stuff happens but nothing changes" would actually be my personal description of a perfect sitcom, but clearly TPTB have not adhered to their own advice.

[wellplayedpenny]

EW Possibility of Shenny April 16 2009

http://insidetv.ew.com/2009/04/16/will-big-bang-g/

Memorable Lines:
“We’re as baffled as Sheldon’s friends are by what his deal is,” never mind what his deal with Penny is, [Prady] says. “He doesn’t seem to have any interests that are particularly social, whether they are friendship ones or romantic ones."

Mood of the Masses:
Many people point out that "Penny and Sheldon have the best chemistry on the show, and are by far the most entertaining duo". While there are those who want the Sheldon/Penny relationship to remain close but platonic there are a fair share of pro-Shenny commentators wanting the relationship to take on a romantic angle as "there’s a spark there that...could be easily transformed into romance." BUT the majority say that it should happen over a couple of seasons or else it would feel false, especially for Sheldon's character.

There is a definite line in the sand between the Lennys and the Shennys. Whereas a lot of 'Ordinary Fans' assert "there is no way to make sheldon a sexual being without sacrificing what makes his character unique" the Lennys see Sheldon and Penny as a "jump the shark" moment that would wreck the show dynamic. As for the Shennys, they're adamant that Leonard is only interested in Penny for her 'hotness' and is furthermore "a hypocrite" who could date Leslie and Stephanie and lust after Alicia, but "pitches a fit any time [Penny] dates a guy who isn’t him, even though they already tried a relationship that did NOT work out." As one Shenny fan prophetically said, " Don’t let the show jump the shark by putting Leonard together with Penny! That pairing will KILL the show."

What was kind of creepy was the comments I found that TPTB seemed to have taken to heart like the suggestion that Penny become Sheldon's "'person' you put on “in case of emergency” forms and the like" or "It would be much funnier for Penny to be (somehow) hooked up with Koothrapali (when he’s drunk, he’s a ladies’ man, you know)" or "keep Sheldon asexual unless you find a woman for him whose character is similar to his".

I've seen in different comment sections references to Leonard's mother as a compatible partner to Sheldon as they got along; "that if Sheldon could fall in love with a woman, Leonard’s mom would have a better chance than Penny." Perhaps this is why Amy at the beginning is so much like Sheldon? However, there is a contrary opinion as several people pointed out that if Sheldon were to date he "NEEDS an opposite like Penny to balance him out. Putting him with someone just like him? Would only create a pointless and boring relationship."

Best Quotes:
" It obviously has to be developed slowly but I’m all for an eventual Sheldon/Penny romance. BBT might have started out as Leonard/Penny but smart tv shows know to change the game plan when something’s not working and when to capitalise on something that is. Look at Monica and Chandler they weren’t in the original game plan either." (Jo)

" It would be a complete and total train wreck to put Penny and Sheldon together that way. However, I have known a train wreck or two, in the hands of good writers, to be absolutely HI-larious. I’m fine with their current awkward, antagonistic friendship, to be honest; it’s one of the best aspects of the show. But if they go with a funny train wreck, I’ll be along for the ride. If only to point and laugh, of course." (Monica242)

"For me personally, a Sheldon/Penny romantic relationship would be much more INTERESTING than Leonard/Penny. I mean, just think about the storylines possibilities alone. How will Sheldon get to that point? Why would he decides (sp) that Penny is a worthy companion? There’s much to explore, compared to the normal, straight-forward (and in another word BORING) romance between Leonard/Penny. It’s so been there, done that. Sheldon/Penny could be a very unique & original coupling. Yes, it could also be disastrous if not done right, which I hope the writers are smarter than that." (Dawn)

[wellplayedpenny]

Blog Critics Comic Con Prady July 28 2009

http://blogcritics.org/comic-con-roundta...ill-prady/

Memorable Lines:
Regarding Leonard and Penny going out: " And I don’t think he knows to be with her friends, and all these things, so this is a very rich area and there’s nothing that prevents them from then breaking and being awkward, and then awkward living across the hall from each other, things like that. So when we realized that it doesn’t end stories, it begins stories, why not do it? Also I think it’s sort of the Sam and Diane paradigm. Is the 1970s the last of the 1940s paradigm where getting together and marriage, happily ever after is the end of the story? "

"If you look at those amazing scenes with Kaley that Jim does where you’re watching Jim do that crazy stuff that he does, remember the comic genius of the person who’s holding onto the reins of the horse, and that’s the other person in the scene. And if you go back and watch that you’ll see that the comic success of that big character is based on the timing of the person working with him."

Mood of the Masses: No comments.

[Louise]

[Tuesday Pajamas]

That last quote ("it's hard to have "character-based" humor when you're willing to change your characters wildly for the sake of a joke." etc) is very interesting.
I think part of the problem is that from S5 onwards there was suddenly a plethora of these "jokes for the sake of jokes" at the expense of character.
Sheldon's line to Penny about her taking the Krengjai piece; "I've seen pictures of your mother. Keep eating." and his drunk line to Wolowitz "And the first woman you ever disappointed sexually!" for example. Aside from the fact that they're horrible things to say, they're also not things Sheldon WOULD say. They're banal and vulgar, nothing usual about them, the phrasing is not his, and the knowledge is not his either.
Anyone could have said these lines. The "humour" is basic bitchy/laddish humour, and Sheldon shouldn't be made to say it.

My thoughts exactly. It made me wonder who the hell on the writing team is coming up with this trash. Who can I blame? It shows a disregard for character. Sheldon being factual, dismissive and derisive? Yes! But Sheldon being deliberately cruel, no way. There's a line and they used to care about not crossing it. But now the show is too big for it's booties and they know they don't have to respect the viewer anymore. No one even dares to give them a bad review even though they are not doing their best work.

[Louise]

A person whose superior intellect has zero application beyond the confines of the university where he works and/or his private study given that he can't do something simple such as not run into a door when the lights go out, or much less, open that door.

I think this is what's behind the dumbing-down of the characters. It's the "absent-minded professor" trope taken to extremes: we've gone from "the guys are awkward in certain social situations" to "the guys can't perform the basic functions of everyday life without help, or without external pressure."

Sheldon (and the others) aren't supposed to be Rain Man. I've mentioned this before, but the idea that their skills don't transfer to other areas of life is troubling.

I'm sure there *are* some people in the world with a really huge gulf between their academic skills and their life-skills, but I don't think these characters were ever meant to be *that* extreme.

Yes, they all have problems and neuroses, maybe even serious ones, but I'd argue that the only one whose problems had reached a truly *disabling* level is Raj, with the mutism.

I got the impression that they were naive, not that they were totally hopeless at everyday life, or incapable of being shrewd when the situation called for it.

As usual, it's sour grapes and anti-intellectualism: "these geniuses are actually total idiots at everything except for one very narrow and completely theoretical area of knowledge, which nobody cares about, anyway. So, they're really no smarter than the rest of us, and maybe even worse." It's a nasty type of populism.

Combine this Idiot Savant trope with the Dumb Sitcom Husband/Boyfriend trope, and you've got a perfect storm.

---

I feel they've done the same thing with the romance. There's an occasional effort to keep Sheldon's reactions "Sheldony" (aside from when he starts dribbling out some fanfiction dialogue), but they're battling against the inherent character "wrongness" of Sheldon, who worked perfectly in his independence, being in a relationship at all. And moreover, choosing a type of relationship (tepid, disinterested and one-sided for over two years) that doesn't suit his obsessional nature. It makes no sense for someone so flagrantly passionate about such a variety of things to be so indifferent in love. Makes no sense and is very dull to watch.

Incidentally, they can't just make it passionate NOW after 3 years. That's trying to have it both ways, and is artistically dishonest.
I note that they've rebooted Amy's character back to Season 5 Amy. This chopping and changing doesn't help either.

This is a key point. That's all I have to say.

[wellplayedpenny]

Coming Soon s2 dvd review September 1 2009

http://www.comingsoon.net/dvd/reviews/58...ond-season

Memorable Lines:
This season the show focused less on Leonard pining over Penny and that was a good thing. It would only last so long before becoming stale and I think they ended it at the right time. They paced it well just like they did with Jim and Pam on “The Office.” Sure, it’s still here to some degree, but it’s not the focus of the series.

I was also amazed at how much more screentime Sheldon got as the show progressed. Towards the end of this season, it practically became the Sheldon and Penny Show.

Mood of the Masses: No comments

---

Movie Line Jim Parsons September 4 2009

http://movieline.com/2009/09/04/jim-parsons-interview/

Memorable Lines:
*So after someone yells 'Cut,' you guys just sprint to the ping pong tables?

As soon as you see the stage manager start looking at his watch about the break, people start going, 'Dibs!' Literally. And there's running, you run. I'm not kidding at all. I'm not making any of this up.

*And are they just off camera? Just to the left?

It depends. Sometimes you have to run and find them. They fold up, so sometimes you're like, "Where the fuck is the table?! We only have five minutes!"

Mood of the Masses: Overall the comments are beyond positive with people noting the superior writing of seasons 1 and 2 and Jim Parsons in particular. There is more than one comment saying that they know/are married to/are friends with people just like the guys so it's obvious to say that there is a real connection between the audience and the characters.

Best Quotes:
I've always liked unusual characters in a TV show. A decade or two ago, it was the late John Inman's character, Mr. Humphries, from Are You Being Served? that I looked forward to seeing. Nowadays, it's Dr. Sheldon Cooper from Big Bang Theory. (Dotty Kurtz)

If Jim Parsons was to no longer play Sheldon Cooper I would stop buying all the collectables and no longer be a fan!!!, The cast is a great formula don't mess with something that is not broken, Don't change a thing Pleased!!!!!! (Abby)

---

The Wrap Jim Parsons September 6 2009

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/article/big-ba...lled-6444/

Memorable Lines:
I think Sheldon's saving grace, as a character, is that he truly means no harm even when he offends someone or says something that make others feel awkward. He is a scientist and, in order to get to the truth you must have all the facts and deal with them. The other actors keep Sheldon grounded in reality: their reactions to him are honest and usually tinged with love and, I think, when the audience has the chance to view Sheldon through those other characters eyes, they have the chance to love him too.

Mood of the Masses: No Comments.

---

Craveonline Kaley Cuoco September 8 2009

http://www.craveonline.ca/tv/interviews/...ang-theory

Memorable Lines:
Kaley Cuoco: You know, I firmly believe, only because I’ve been doing this for so long, every show takes three years. 90% of them don’t get three years. It just does. It takes a long time to build a community, build a friendship with your characters. It’s hard for people to grasp on and make them care about you. We’ve been lucky enough to get the opportunity but a lot of shows don’t get it. I think a lot of good shows don’t make it on the air so it’s just a process. You have to grow. You have to learn who you are as a character. You’re all of a sudden playing a new person with a whole other life.

Kaley Cuoco: I guess Leonard and Penny are going to date for a little while and I think that’s going to put a little jab between the guys and Leonard. I hope our relationship doesn’t last long. I want it to kind of go off and come back, how life really is and I think Chuck wants that to happen too.

Crave Online: What do people want to know about the show when they recognize you?
Kaley Cuoco: They keep wanting to know, “What’s going to happen with Leonard and Penny? Why can’t Sheldon and Penny date?” Which cracks me up. That would have to be a nightmare sequence in season nine because they would kill each other. Penny would kill Sheldon

Mood of the Masses: No Comments

[Idle Miscreant]

I’ve always found it mildly amusing (and a little bit embarrassing for Cuoco) that Kaley seems to have the same mental block as your average canon literalist. A relationship isn’t just sticking two characters together and keeping their interactions identical, it’s keeping the characters the same, but adding “impetus”. In this case, love.

The impetus in TBBT is that Penny is “in love” with Leonard (for whatever inexplicable reason, shored up by constant reiterations of this flimsy notion to the audience, because the audience still isn’t convinced, even eight years on) which apparently justifies why she’s getting married to a man with no discernable personality.

“Penny would kill Sheldon” sure, if they were merely put together in a constant “romantic” scenario (ie forced to share a bed etc) without love or reason to it.
Which is what Cuoco’s imagining. But if her character was written to fall in love with Sheldon, recognising his charms under his infuriations, then of course she wouldn’t bloody kill him.

It’s dreadful logic on Cuoco’s part. And on our friend Garble’s, actually, as that’s his favourite argument. “Penny would throw Sheldon out of a car if she were in a relationship with him!” Well then, why is she in a relationship with him in the first place?

Things which might otherwise be annoying, become delightful when one is in love with the person doing the annoying thing. Or if not delightful, at least more bearable.
And as it would be with Penny and Sheldon.

Penny and Sheldon aren’t together because they haven’t been written together. That’s it. Incredibly simple.

And Cuoco has done her character a disservice by not pushing for such a concept.
All Penny’s best scenes were with Sheldon. And vice versa.