Poll: Vote for this episode
This poll is closed.
3 Penny Blossoms
0%
0 0%
2 Penny Blossoms
16.67%
1 16.67%
1 Penny Blossom
50.00%
3 50.00%
The Neutral Zone
33.33%
2 33.33%
1 Dirty Sock
0%
0 0%
2 Dirty Socks
0%
0 0%
3 Dirty Socks
0%
0 0%
Total 6 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

SPOILER WARNING: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation
#15
9.4 The 2003 Approximation

While in terms of content this episode didn't add much to the season, functioning more as a filler episode than anything else, it did serve as a stark contrast between the tones of the earlier seasons and that of the latter.

This takes place with the secondary story of Howard and Raj wanting to form a filking band, Footprints On The Moon. They're excited about the name, about everything, really, and this enthusiasm for their song, Thor and Dr. Jones, came off the screen and into my home. I was smiling because they were genuinely having a good time. I got to see an intimate Howard and Raj moment where they absolutely love each other's company and how they are so creatively in synch. It gave me a feel like Panty Pinata with the search for the America's Next Top Model house.

However, given that this is s9, my bubble had to burst and it came in the form of Emily saying that the song was 'cute' but that she preferred songs that she could dance to. Granted, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the way that, in the span of a few hours, Raj goes from loving his song to asking Howard to make it more 'danceable' made me grumble. It's that same stupid later-seasons theme that the woman knows best and that the guys can't enjoy something that truly represents themselves. Their interests are too weird and abnormal to be taken seriously. And when I say seriously I'm not suggesting that Thor and Dr. Jones is the next Mrs. Robinson, only that the song was a culmination of the early seasons mantra—witty, clever, funny and FUN—and it was very effectively stabbed by a simple 'It's cute'.

The ending at the comic book shop is an absolute rewrite of the characters and another attempt to show growth even as the characters distance themselves from their earlier selves. Raj and Howard put their hearts into their song as they sing. All of the listeners, save Penny, seem stunned and at times embarrassed with the song. Stuart's asking at the end if they could 'play something we can dance to' is an absolute end to his character. I mean he's the guy who puts all his efforts into his comic book store—a venture that had him bathing at car washes and sharing tins of tuna with a stray cat instead of closing shop. He was my last Defender of the Geek and he let me down with something so horribly mundane. 'Play something we can dance to' means play something mindless and generic so that the masses will like it. It's practically the motto for s5+.

Only Penny seemed to get what the point was to the song. While she probably didn't get a lot of the geeky references, she did smile a couple of times. And not a fake, quasi-apologetic one that Leonard flashes. Penny was genuinely entertained by the song—and that means a success in anyone's filking book.

**Hint to the showrunner, having a show that is 'merely' entertaining, witty and fun to watch isn't a bad thing, y'know.

As for the A plot, I don't want you to think for a moment that Sheldon's reversion to 2003 portrayed what I said about wanting a return of Vintage Sheldon to the show because this was not him. Vintage Sheldon was there when he read out the Eternal Dibs clause for the couch that Leonard had to initial. But the man who sat in the lawn chair wasn't the Sheldon of the early seasons. That Sheldon couldn't conceive of Amy marrying someone better than he because Sheldon had no peers. And no interest in dating for that matter. In fact, the Sheldon plot showed the problems the later seasons writers have in interpreting the early seasons. Sheldon might have reverted the apartment to The Staircase Implementation but these are just cosmetic changes. It isn't the lawn chair that I like but Sheldon's explanation as to its position. It's the arrogance and the assuredness and the logic that counts. This is what's missing in tonight's Sheldon, who is more than prepared to happily fulfil the role of Leonard and Penny's dog.

In my opinion, great comedic characters share one trait in common—dignity. Clouseau had it. Frank Drebbin. There's a sincerity that's involved in all that they do and this is what made Vintage Sheldon great. He was his own man, the Alpha male, and he elevated the level of writing because it took some seriously superior work to show Sheldon Cooper in all his glory. Now, my beloved Homo Novus is content being a family dog.

So don't believe for a moment that this was a sincere attempt at returning Sheldon to his roots. It was a superficial attempt at trying to simplify Sheldon and the early seasons so as to show how much more superior the show is now. A 'see, Sheldon's grown so there's no going back'.
If they meant that the s5-8 canon crap can't be ignored they might have a point. Unfortunately, it seems as though TPTB have interpreted it as 'not going back to what made the show FUN'.
Let's go exploring!
The following 11 users Like wellplayedpenny's post:
  • devilbk, Idle Miscreant, Gamma, Tuesday Pajamas, Nutz, Toad, FlyingMonkey, SpaceAnJL, Trust No One, Satnight815, Lollywho
Reply


Messages In This Thread
9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Idle Miscreant - 09-11-2015, 07:01 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Nutz - 09-11-2015, 10:28 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by FlyingSolo - 10-07-2015, 01:54 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by devilbk - 10-07-2015, 02:12 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by FlyingSolo - 10-07-2015, 04:07 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by SpaceAnJL - 10-07-2015, 02:43 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-08-2015, 07:55 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-08-2015, 11:38 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Ratman77 - 10-08-2015, 02:24 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Berliner - 10-08-2015, 05:27 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by wellplayedpenny - 10-13-2015, 08:36 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Toad - 10-14-2015, 03:39 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-14-2015, 11:22 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-14-2015, 10:31 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-14-2015, 10:41 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-15-2015, 05:00 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-15-2015, 05:02 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Kimk26 - 10-14-2015, 06:44 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Kimk26 - 10-20-2015, 02:43 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Kimk26 - 10-14-2015, 07:47 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by SpaceAnJL - 10-14-2015, 08:07 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Kimk26 - 10-14-2015, 08:14 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Louise - 10-15-2015, 05:16 AM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by A.D.A. - 10-19-2015, 12:35 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by A.D.A. - 10-19-2015, 01:40 PM
RE: 9.04 The 2003 Approximation - by Nutz - 10-19-2015, 01:47 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)