Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

The Media Thread Emanation

shapeshifter

Recommended Posts

BlossomCulp

BlossomCulp

But regardless Amy leaving would change the group dynamic and would impact on everyone.  Stuart leaving just wouldn't.  Doesn't mean he's not a good character but the only real change would be they wouldn't have someone living with Bernadette and Howard anymore and if they went to the comic book store he wouldn't be there.  Not a big deal.  There are already lots of scenes in these two settings where Stuart doesn't appear.

Amy may not be as pivotal a character as Leonard, Penny and Sheldon but she has had her share of good storylines and adds a lot to the show.

  • Love 10
  • Replies 500
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

chitowngirl
chitowngirl

Having BBT money means the actors don't have to be the lead. They can be in a Hidden Pictures or a Florence Foster Jenkins and have the resume of being a reliable, good character actor. 

jeffwildstar
jeffwildstar

Hello, I am the artist that does the robot girl images featured in Stewart's comic shop on the show "Big Bang Theory". I Just did a bunch of new images for the final season. Plus they will be featurin

CherryAmes
CherryAmes

There is a huge difference!  Amy is an integral part of the cast.  Stuart is not.  The show could go on quite nicely if Stuart disappeared tomorrow.  With Amy they'd have a lot of explaining to do!

Posted Images

Snarklepuss

Snarklepuss

5 hours ago, LoneHaranguer said:

Not really. Amy could meet someone else, or Sheldon could cross a line with her and she'd be gone. Raj could take up the slack when the story needs a gal-pal for Penny to talk out something. There are at least a couple of directions they could go with Sheldon.

Writing Amy out of the script would be a huge deal since she is one of the main characters' live-in girlfriends.  Stuart is a 3rd, 4th and 5th wheel anyway so writing him out wouldn't take much.  Plus Amy is probably one of the fan favorites and it would disappoint far more people if she were to go than Stuart.

  • Love 8
SmithW6079

SmithW6079

On 5/2/2017 at 1:18 PM, CherryAmes said:

There is a huge difference!  Amy is an integral part of the cast.  Stuart is not.  The show could go on quite nicely if Stuart disappeared tomorrow.  With Amy they'd have a lot of explaining to do!

The show could go on quite nicely if Raj disappeared. He's become a totally useless character.

  • Love 1
buffynut

buffynut

18 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

The show could go on quite nicely if Raj disappeared. He's become a totally useless character.

I don't want Raj to disappear, I want the writers to make him a useful character. He's been there from the beginning, wasn't as skeevy as Howard was, and while Howard has grown, Raj has become pathetic.  I hope now that he's no longer sponging off his parents, he will grow and next season will find some success in his personal life.

  • Love 6
SmithW6079

SmithW6079

8 minutes ago, buffynut said:

I don't want Raj to disappear, I want the writers to make him a useful character. He's been there from the beginning, wasn't as skeevy as Howard was, and while Howard has grown, Raj has become pathetic.  I hope now that he's no longer sponging off his parents, he will grow and next season will find some success in his personal life.

I disagree. I think Raj was always skeevy, we just never heard him when women were around. If I recall, Howard once remarked to Penny that Raj was a dick, she just couldn't hear him. 

I don't think the character works anymore in the show -- it's really about two married (and one soon-to-be engaged) couples now. All the single people on the show are losers.

  • Love 1
buffynut

buffynut

55 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

I disagree. I think Raj was always skeevy, we just never heard him when women were around. If I recall, Howard once remarked to Penny that Raj was a dick, she just couldn't hear him. 

I don't think the character works anymore in the show -- it's really about two married (and one soon-to-be engaged) couples now. All the single people on the show are losers.

That's true. It still bugs me, though, that SHELDON has evolved and is about to be engaged, yet Raj hasn't changed at all, or perhaps has actually changed for the worse.  And since the actor, like everyone else, has signed on for 2 more seasons, I really don't want to see 44 more episodes of pathetic, loser Raj.

  • Love 2
msani19

msani19

I don't think I need to see Raj (or Stuart) in relationships. I just need them to have something that doesn't make them annoying, pathetic or creepy. I'd be as infuriated about getting them relationships as I would be if they were female characters. Too often the default move on shows, is that in order for a person to be happy, they NEED TO BE WITH SOMEONE! Otherwise, how sad for them. I know the show has morphed into a traditional relationship sitcom and it has suffered because of that. As long as Raj, more so than Stuart since he's part of the original cast gets something interesting and satisfying in the next 2 years then fine. Given where the show is now, I know it's going to be a GF. 

Maybe one day, tv shows will be brave enough to have an individual person (male or female) who is single and not wanting to blow their brains out because of it, and perhaps even have other characters not harp on that as a character flaw. And one day maybe my parents will get me that pony.

  • Love 6
MSterling

MSterling

Yeah, Young Sheldon looks like a train wreck, which might be of interest to Sheldon.

6 hours ago, roamyn said:

though I have to say Zoe looks, but more amazingly sounds like her mother.  That was the only bright spot I could see.

Sometimes I see and hear Perry's mother, other times I see her father. I hated her in Scandal. Oh, I hate Scandal now too, but not because of her.

Snarklepuss

Snarklepuss

On 5/18/2017 at 11:59 PM, SmithW6079 said:

On "The Big Bang Theory"'s Facebook page, they posted a lengthy trailer for "Young Sheldon." It looks excruciatingly bad, except for one touching scene between young Sheldon and his father at the end (which seems a retcon of what we know about Sheldon and his dad).

OMG, this is even worse than I thought it would be!  One would think they could do much better than this!

wknt3

wknt3

I posted on the Young Sheldon forum that I thought it looked surpisingly good. Especially since I still believe it was conceived entirely as a giant bribe to Jim Parsons to get a couple seasons of Big Bang Theory without giving him more money per episode than his co-stars. I was shocked when they actually put it on the fall schedule. And from a BBT POV it doesn't look that great - I don't think that it meshes with everything we've been told and I'm sure that it will be the sort of continuity mess that both young and old Sheldon would hate. But as it's own thing it looks much more watchable than most of what's on television, the cast looks great, and as long as they don't too far from the source material I think the audience can past the contradictions (at least most of the audience) and can see it working. Of course it could end up sucking too. I really think it depends on if they can strike the right balance between prequel and being it's own thing and if the writing holds up. I'll give it try which is more than I was planning on.

  • Love 3
hnygrl

hnygrl

I was quite pleasantly surpri....well...SHOCKED would be a better word, when I saw the preview for Young Sheldon. I actually laughed out loud twice and guffawed once. In a short 5-plus-minute clip. 

Huh

And when he took the mitten off to hold dad's hand? Awww-worthy.

Well shoot.

It's good. Really really good. Credit where credit's due...BBT may be circling the drain, but Young Sheldon looks really really good and funny as hell.

  • Love 4
hnygrl

hnygrl

On 5/13/2017 at 4:15 PM, msani19 said:

don't think I need to see Raj (or Stuart) in relationships. I just need them to have something that doesn't make them annoying, pathetic or creepy. I'd be as infuriated about getting them relationships as I would be if they were female characters. Too often the default move on shows, is that in order for a person to be happy, they NEED TO BE WITH SOMEONE! Otherwise, how sad for them. I know the show has morphed into a traditional relationship sitcom and it has suffered because of that. As long as Raj, more so than Stuart since he's part of the original cast gets something interesting and satisfying in the next 2 years then fine. Given where the show is now, I know it's going to be a GF. 

Maybe one day, tv shows will be brave enough to have an individual person (male or female) who is single and not wanting to blow their brains out because of it, and perhaps even have other characters not harp on that as a character flaw. And one day maybe my parents will get me that pony.

AMEN MSANI!!!! PREACH!!!

Why can't they make Raj the successful scientist? Why can't he win a prestigious award for his work, get a ginormous grant, enough to get out of debt and be RICH again, and make the marrieds Jealous? Why does his 'loserdom' have to be because he's single? Or 'broke?' It's so frustrating. This is supposed to be a "smart" show, so let's smarten it up. Make Raj the one in line for a Nobel. That should really put a dent in Sheldon's ego for sure. I'd love it if Raj had no time for girls because he was so busy with his research and running his brand new department that he's the head of...

  • Love 5
shapeshifter

shapeshifter

  • Author
(edited)
3 hours ago, Luckylyn said:

The Adorkable  Misogyny of The Big Bang Theory 

This reminds me of the debates about whether plots on the 70s sitcom Barney Miller were serving a public good in drawing attention to the issues presented or if they were endorsing the status quo. For example, the Barney Miller episode in which a wife accused her husband of rape had Barney pointing out that the law at the time would not permit the cops to charge her husband with rape—I wonder if the sitcom is an inherently ineffective medium to have such issues taken seriously, or if it sometimes succeeds in reaching narrow minded viewers with an almost subliminal message. 

Edited by shapeshifter
  • Love 1
Sage of Main St.

Sage of Main St.

On 5/13/2017 at 9:15 PM, msani19 said:

I don't think I need to see Raj (or Stuart) in relationships. I just need them to have something that doesn't make them annoying, pathetic or creepy. I'd be as infuriated about getting them relationships as I would be if they were female characters. Too often the default move on shows, is that in order for a person to be happy, they NEED TO BE WITH SOMEONE! Otherwise, how sad for them. I know the show has morphed into a traditional relationship sitcom and it has suffered because of that. As long as Raj, more so than Stuart since he's part of the original cast gets something interesting and satisfying in the next 2 years then fine. Given where the show is now, I know it's going to be a GF. 

Maybe one day, tv shows will be brave enough to have an individual person (male or female) who is single and not wanting to blow their brains out because of it, and perhaps even have other characters not harp on that as a character flaw. And one day maybe my parents will get me that pony.

That was handled a long time ago in the Mary Tyler Moore Show.

  • Love 4
shapeshifter

shapeshifter

  • Author
6 hours ago, wknt3 said:

Bill Gates is doing a guest appearance.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/entertainment/bill-gates-big-bang-theory/index.html

Cool. But does anyone here recall what the word was in the MS Word version from the 90s that caused the thesaurus to suggest as a synonym, "wishing Bill Gates dead"? It would be fun if the guys brought that up, but probably wouldn't have a lot of meaning for most viewers. I could imagine it turns out that BG promoted the person who did it because it showed creativity.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...