I like XKCD, though I don’t follow it. However, it rarely makes me laugh. Instead it has a dry and sarcastic observational sense of humour to it, and only the surreal or quirky ones get a wry chuckle on occasion.
Big Bang Theory makes me laugh at least once or twice per episode, and sometimes way more.
This.
I’ve watched a number of episodes of TBBT, but I don’t think I’ve ever laughed at it. I’ve laughed at xkcd a few times, though. I don’t particularly seek either of them out.
I enjoy both. XKCD has duds, but has is funny most times and has had some masterstrokes. Big Bang Theory is very smart & funny for a network sitcom. It still gives me a smile that there is a Network Sitcom that knows who Frodo is, not to mention all its other geeky goodness. Sure it’s not perfect, but for gosh sakes it’s a frickin’ Network Sitcom.
I like both but for different reasons. XKCD is funny (most of the time), smart plus it challenges me and sometimes educates me.
BBT is a good sitcom with a geek sheen on top that makes me laugh.
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness]
TBBT has a laugh track
[/quote]
It is (mostly, at least) recorded with a live audience… they do seem to be rather easily pleased.
The ‘laugh track’ put me off for a long time, in a good episode there are maybe a handful of properly funny jokes. It is off-putting that there’s a full blown laugh for every running gag (tap-tap-tap Penny! etc) but I can sort of filter those out now as noise.
XKCD I only really see when someone here links to it with a WTF? So, funny? Not really (though I bet Sheldon loves it).
Both can make me laugh, so I put “both are funny.”
Neither gets a hit every time up to bat, but neither did Mickey Mantle.
XKCD is so superior to BBT in every way, that even though I have to look everything up, use the mouse over, and read several wiki articles before I can enjoy my half hearted chuckle, it is still preferred to suffering through a cliched sit com.
Is a laugh track and a live audience mutually exclusive? I thought they (not specifically TBBT, just ‘they’) sometimes used the track as an “Applause” sign for the live audience but it’s nothing I spend much time thinking about.
TBBT doesn’t use a laugh track. They have a live studio audience. They sometime have to pause so the audience quiets down and can hear the next joke. I know some people don’t like the mixing of the audience reaction with the dialog.
Also if you become a fan, then you learn the inner jokes. A lot of that revolves around the white boards, which are made by the science adviser for the show. I remember one time I saw a still from the next episode and said, “It looks like the next episode has something to do with graphene”. Recording the shows in High-Def, so you can look at the white boards and vanity card come in handy.
BTW, the science adviser has his own blog to discuss the science on the show.
http://thebigblogtheory.wordpress.com/
I’ve noticed that some of the best XKCD strips aren’t technically speaking funny.
http://xkcd.com/802/
On this one, you click to blow it up and study the details.
This one made me watch the movie Primer.
http://xkcd.com/657/
I put both, but really my vote would be for BBT is just sorta okay, while XKCD is actually very good.
I’ve started watching BBT in re-runs recently and it is pretty slight, but occasionally amusing ( and the first season is the weakest, though it doesn’t exactly explode thereafter ). As noted it is primarily character-driven as per standard sitcom tropes, the so-so science nerd thing is just set-up. Jim Parsons’ little pseudo-Asperger ticks and Kaley Cuoco’s reactions to them being the biggest reason for its success. It’s not utter dreck, but it is at best a guilty pleasure.
XKCD, like most high-quality comic strips ( and it is ), ranges from meh to brilliant. But it does hit often enough that I have to judge it as a lot more successful than BBT.
Then they are sweetening those audience reactions like Willie Wonka.
One of the regular post-ers here attended a Big Bang taping & described it. He felt most of the laughter you hear is from the audience.
Both funny in their own ways, but neither funny every single time. I don’t see a conflict here.
I love xkcd. It’s not always funny, but often it’s not aiming to be funny and is instead aiming to be clever or thought provoking or a philosophical musing or just simply art. When it is funny, sometimes it’s pretty straightforward, sometimes it relies on some specialized knowledge which makes it that much more satisfying if its funny without having to have it explained, and sometimes it takes some observation on the part of the reader. It’s just an excellent mix nerdiness, intellect, art, and the full range of humor from juvenile to observational. If I were to compare it to a comedian, I’d say it’s very much like toned down (as in, not being deliberately offensive), nerdy version of George Carlin. He too would go off on a random tangent for 5 minutes about euphemisms that wasn’t intended to make you laugh, just make you think, then follow up with some observational humor and throw in some juvenile potty jokes too.
I tried to watch Big Bang a couple times and it was just, boring. Admittedly, it wasn’t straight up painful to watch like 30 Rock or Raymond, but it just wasn’t entertaining. I was under the impression that it should have that intellectual part but it just didn’t and it falls flat. It just struck me as another fairly generic sitcom with a bit of a different premise and aimed at a younger audience.
xkcd is moderately entertaining, with occasional flashes of brilliance. BBT is consistently entertaining with more than occasional flashes of brilliance.
Both are worth the effort.
I’m with Loach - Big Bang Theory is funny; xkcd isn’t (usually). De gustibus non est disputandum, as usual.
Regards,
Shodan
I think I should elaborate. TBBT doesn’t really do geek humor the way XKCD does. TBBT is a lowbrow sitcom with several nerdy characters. These nerdy characters often say nerdy things, but it’s more to establish their character than anything else. It seems that a lot of the show’s detractors interpret these non-jokes as failed jokes, because they incorrectly expect the show to go for smart laughs.
It’s just a regular sitcom, except for the window dressing. A good example is the episode “The Irish Pub Formulation”. Leonard slept with Raj’s sister, and Sheldon found out. Sheldon agrees to keep Leonard’s secret, and devises a comically elaborate alibi for Leonard involving going out to an Irish pub and going home with a fiery-haired waitress, complete with a lock of red hair (stolen from the primate lab) as proof. Leonard assures Sheldon that he won’t need an alibi at all; then this happens. Geekiness acts as a catalyst for the humor, which itself is non-geeky.
I suppose you wouldn’t attend a taping unless you were a fan of the show and found it funnier than the average man so I guess that makes sense in a self-selecting sort of way.
I agree with what others have said. They’re both funny but they’re very different in their approach. The Big Bang Theory makes jokes about intelligent people. XKCD makes jokes for intelligent people.