Have you met anyone from India? Non-drinking/getting drunk off a few sips is not a stereotype I am familiar with. Just the opposite. I live in the area with probably the largest Indian community in the country. Given the large numbers of DUIs (along with extremely high BAC) and alcohol related domestic violence, the Irish might have to give up their stereotype.
The show is character driven. Most of the laughs come from reactions. Reading the lines cold on a page will not seem funny. And a lot of the later jokes are self-referential so it would be harder to get if you don’t know the characters. Tastes vary of course but to me it is just about the only traditionally shot sitcom that is consistently funny. And to me it’s mostly because of those acting in the roles.
Truth be told, it’s a sitcom about late-20’s much like How I Met Your Mother, or Friends, or Seinfeld, etc. except the characters happen to work in academia and have stereotypical nerd interests. They deal with relationships, friendships, etc. and instead of meeting at a bar, they meet at a comic book store or the cheesecake factory. It’s really not especially geared towards nerds or especially geared towards anyone. It’s plain vanilla and if you don’t like it, it’s not because of nerdbashing or racism but rather you don’t like mainstream american sitcom comedy.
Well, I will admit that when I was much younger than I am now, I did get a slight feeling of superiority over some people from the fact that I did not like certain types of popular music that they liked. However, I grow out of that a long a time ago. I might not necessarily like some of those types of music any better, but I no longer think that that makes me better than the people who do. Maybe I sometimes do feel a bit of a temptation to feel superior to some people who like things I don’t like (reality TV and soap operas, say) but inasmuch as I am aware of that feeling in myself, I am ashamed of it, and rightly so, I think.
I am well aware that BBT is cheap, pandering entertainment with very little in the way of artistic redeeming qualities. Nevertheless I enjoy it quite a lot. It does not bother me that some other people do not like it. Chances are that most of them also do enjoy some other forms of cheap, pandering entertainment, which I may or may not like myself. Even if they don’t, I don’t really care. I can be high-minded when I want to; I do not feel any shame at all (maybe even a little pride) that I do not have to be that way always. I don’t mind that people’s tastes differ. I don’t really mind if they get a feeling of superiority out of their differing tastes (although if they do, I think it actually rather diminishes them). I do mind, however, when they start implying that my differing tastes in lowbrow entertainment mean that I am an idiot or an asshole. People who do that ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
I disagree. It takes tremendous skill to write/produce a sitcom, every week (during season) that people will watch and enjoy. Chuck Lorre’s creations (Mike&Molly excepted - ugh) show a lot of this skill. In BBT, Two and a Half Men, and Dharma and Greg, the jokes have a rhythm that is snappy and consistent, the timing is usually very good, and he has a knack for getting the right actors (and apparently writers) together. That’s a tremendous skill. As evidenced by how few people could achieve what Lorre did - two (arguably three) top level shows in a row.
Maybe I missed it, but I didn’t see anybody saying you were an idiot or an asshole for liking BBT. Saying you think something is crap is not the same as saying people who like it are morons. I hear this kind of defensiveness a lot from people when something they like is criticized, and it’s usually their perception rather than what’s actually been said (for example, I don’t recall anybody saying they were superior to those who watched the show).
In any case, you seem to be able to assess the show and what you like about it honestly, and I don’t think anyone here would call you an idiot because of it.
Right. Just because I’d behead the Sheldon Cooper character with a dull potato peeler doesn’t mean I won’t watch the original Trek’s planet-eating ice-cream-cone-from-hell rerun for the eleventy hundredth time.
That article is EXACTLY what I’m talking about, except that I didn’t give the show another chance. It comes closer than anything else I’ve read to persuading me to give the show another chance–except that it sounds like the laugh track problem, my biggest problem with the show, continues. I hate the laugh track so much.
To be clear, I don’t think my opinion of the show is objective truth. I think there is some objective truth to my complains about the eye-candy problem of the first few episodes, but my loathing of laugh tracks is personal, no different from someone else that loathes onions in their food.
If we grant that things like Arrested Development and Community aren’t mainstream American comedy, you’re half-right. I also sometimes relax to Modern Family and The Office, the difference being that those shows don’t have a freakin laugh track.
It’s sitcom expediency. The characters are drunk when the script says they should be. No racial implication except in your head. The talk to girl cure for Raj is a placebo, but he doesn’t get obnoxiously drunk on just sips. Sheldon is overly affected by all drugs (caffeine, etc.). Rule of funny, 100%.
One time, after Penny had drunkenly ridden him like a cowgirl, Leonard gets schloshed and tries to return the favor. Other than that, Leonad and Howard are shown ordering drinks and drinking without being visibly drunk.
Sheldon is adorable! I mean, he’s bloody high maintenance, but adorable in a man-child way.
/agree with Dorkness on laughtracks - I can’t believe these are still a thing. They’re like training wheels on bikes, we shouldn’t be using them in supposedly adult comedies. They’re condescending, presumptuous and distract me from actually laughing. Maybe there was a point when it was an actual studio audience laughing, but canned laughter? Fuck off.
It is also a bit unfair to just remove laugh track and show the action without it. The show is designed around audience laughter. If there was no laugh track, the writing/acting/rhythm would be different.
Both, I think. They may sweeten the laughter a bit, or delay it, but according to people who have been at tapings it’s pretty much the studio audience laughing.
TBBT is taped in front of a live studio audience. The audio mix has the audience track too loud, but it is an audience. You can even see the actors waiting for the laughs to die down to deliver their next zinger. The show is more a televised play than a short movie.
I’m usually laughing too much to notice it, really, but I can understand the complaint from people more used to single-camera comedies that use canned music to tell the audience when to laugh.
Because of the hit-and-miss nature of comedy, laughter from an unprompted studio audience during taping is generally supplemented with stock audio when used as a TV laugh track.
Regardless of the true source, it still sounds like a laugh track, so the effect is the same. And yes, I’m a fan of the show, but that’s despite the laughs, not because of them.
It well might be. Again, this isn’t an intrinsic fault in the show. This is something that makes me twitch. It may be worse with BBT because I thought the jokes were so lame, and every time I heard the laughter I thought, “Gee, thanks for telling me I was supposed to laugh there, but no thanks.” But even under the best of circumstances I just don’t like laugh tracks.