I’ve seen Jim Parsons in a few projects outside of Big Bang Theory and thought he did fine. (Visions, Wish I Was Here) I wasn’t constantly thinking of him as Sheldon. Also Garden State, but that was before BBT.
Most of them?
Most of them?
Parsons easily has a great and long career ahead of him. I’ve seen him in several Broadway shows playing characters nothing like Sheldon and he was great. I don’t know why people watch him in *one *role and then say he can’t do anything else? :dubious:
Jim Parsons is the actor who made James Earl Jones look great in a comedic role.
Mayim’s reading of the line “It’s a tiara” was pitch perfect. I also hear her in my head saying it whenever I see a tiara.
Oh, and I remember Parsons in a really awful Slim Jim ad – I don’t remember the Quiznos one. Johnny Galecki had a very un-Leonard-like role in The Opposite of Sex. He was quite good.
Parsons was good in Hidden Figures. I see no reason he can’t be a good character actor. Whether he’ll be the star of anything again is another matter.
He also played Classmate #2* in 2006’s School for Scoundrels (starring Billy Bob Thornton).
*OK, just “Classmate.” but on imdb, he’s the second one listed.
Chuck Lorre is hardly an unbiased opinion. Sheldon as a character is definitely 90% Jim Parsons. But his performance in any given scene is “Emotion C matched with Facial Expression 6” that is extremely common in sitcom acting. Most actors do this, and we’re so used to it we don’t question it. Johnny Galecki did this 100% of the time. So did Simon Helberg. And for the most part it’s fine, I don’t really mind that this is done.
But Mayim Bialik is different. She never fell back on the same familiar character beats. Whenever a similar situation came up that she’d done before, she gave a different nuanced reaction. Her most famous scene, the Tiara reaction, was never once repeated. When a similar kind of appeal to her ego came up, she approached it differently. When the tiara itself returned a couple of times, there was an acknowledgement of her affection for it, but never a repeat reaction. She approached each scene from the viewpoint of understanding her character, and not from what will get laughs.
That’s completely irrelevant. They’re all perfectly competent actors, they know how to stay in character and deliver their lines for maximum audience appeal, but if they can’t make an unfunny script funny, then they’re missing something fundamental. Mayim always managed to be true to her character, and her comic timing was masterful. She always stood out to me, even in the worst episodes.
Annie-Xmas, what did you mean in saying this?:
> GuanoLad, you praise Mayim Bialik, and did she have most of her scenes with? Jim
> Parsons as Sheldon Cooper. The interplay between those two was even more
> amazing, considering she is a devout Jew and he is gay. And has never been in the
> closet.
I can’t find any evidence that Bialik being a devout Jew has made her prejudiced against homosexuals:
I don’t get the line of thinking that an actor can only play one type of character. Granted, there are some who seem to have a very limited range (does Diane Keaton ever play anything but Diane Keaton?), and some who seem to have agents who keep them in the same crappy roles. But for the most part, isn’t part of being an actor the ability to act - to be whatever the role demands?
Yeah, I know, Meryl Streep wouldn’t make a believable Terminator, but isn’t the mark of a good actor the ability to be convincing in more than one character? Heck, even Ahnold stepped out of his action-hero persona to play Danny DeVito’s twin - OK, not Oscar-worthy, but I think he pulled it off decently enough.
So why would anyone automatically supposed that TBBT actors are forever stuck with those personas?
Well, (a) there’s a variety of skill levels and even different skills involved. It’s like thinking any decent baseball player would make a decent shortstop. And (b) sometimes it’s not up to the actor’s skills but whether the audience will accept them in a radically different role.
???
His voice, mannerisms, etc. on talk shows are exactly the same as Sheldon’s. Even down to some of the goofy faces and such.
On TBBT he is basically just reciting lines as himself.
Personality-wise, maybe he doesn’t have OCD and all that, but that doesn’t matter in terms of acting skill. That’s just the writing.
He is definitely going to be quite limited in his future acting range.
Simon Helberg should have the world at his feet, but unfortunately casting directors are unlikely to feel the same.
Agreed. In fact I will volunteer to go first. 
A small aside.
Was the following a slight subtle sexist bit?
When Amy, to be role model for female empowerment and girl scientists to be, is the one of the couple who is shown doing housework including the cleaning out of the fridge?
Absolutely NOT! Jim Parsons has a natural openness and whimsy that Sheldon Cooper could never come close to. He’s actually CUTE.
You’ll have to get at the end of the line.
Was nothing special to me. Felt like they could have another season with everything carrying on as usual no problem. Sheldon was a jerk and enlightened in the very same episode. He’s still got a long way to go. It was as good as it normally is, but nothing special really.
Of course, these actors are all financially set for several lifetimes. It’s a great luxury to be able to turn down roles. Some of them might decide they don’t want the grind of a weekly sitcom anymore. Some might accept the occasional film role. Some may gravitate to the stage. Some may choose to do nothing at all for a while. Some may be driven to work, work, work and get right back on the horse.
The point is, I don’t think we’ll be able to use the frequency of their post-TBBT work to gauge their employability or talent level. They’ll be making their own choices from now on.
Except for Rati Gupta (Anu), whom we never want to see or hear from again.
Of course she never got the fat checks the main cast did, so unlike them, she will need to continue to work.
I thought he did pretty well with a dramatic role in Maggie.