I wonder if cops watch cop shows and say "they are making cops look bad" or teachers watchs shows with teachers in them and say "they make teachers look bad", ect.
Just something to think about.
"I wonder if child beauty pageant moms watchs Honey Boo Boo and say 'they are making child beauty pageant moms look bad' or rednecks watchs TLC shows with rednecks doing stupid things in them and say 'they make rednecks look bad', etc."
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I wonder if cops watch cop shows and say "they are making cops look bad" or teachers watchs shows with teachers in them and say "they make teachers look bad", ect.
Just something to think about.
Could be worse - I don't think any work of fiction has ever portrayed corporate lawyers as anything other than scheming blood-sucking villians.
Not that I'm saying it's inaccurate...
|
Fair comments!
Working in the casino business for quarter of a century, every time I watch a film with casino gambling in it I'm spending more time laughing or shouting at the absurdities than I am enjoying the film!
It should be no surprise that we have the same reaction to the inaccurate on-screen portrayal of our hobby, or geekdom in general.
I watched the first 3 episodes and understood that the show was "Look at the nerds! Look at the nerds!" Characters with atrocious traits and the inability to retain "lessons" learned from episode to episode.
Recently I was trapped into watching an episode where the main characters' were reported to HR for creating a hostile/threatening work environment. Oh the laughs! Another episode of "look at the nerds!"
*hee hee* They don't know they aren't allowed/shouldn't treat women or talk to them that way. (How many years has this show been on now? They still don't know better despite all the previous incidents?)
*yuk yuk* They face minimal consequences for doing so. (Admittedly standard for a sitcom. Handled in a better show ie: misheard, out of context comments etc that are cleared up once those involved explain)
*bwa-ha-ha-ha* The prime offender pawns off his consequence, take online course, onto the very woman who reported him for his behavior. (Not only is lesson not learned, but "in your face" to the one who reported him)
Ok, I've gotta go get some air...before I throw up.
Someone let me know when the show is not "Look at the nerds! Look at the nerds!" anymore.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
4 episodes out of what, 5 seasons? Pretty small sample size you've got there.
The typical argument is that Penny is meant to be the audience stand-in character who allows us to watch these geeks and laugh at their expense, but if you actually pay attention to the program, Penny comes off quite poorly too. She's a college dropout, a failed actress (working as a waitress), a bit of a tart who makes terrible relationship choices (often getting involved with dumb, insensitive men who treat her poorly), a borderline alcoholic, and generally unable to manage her own life (she often has money troubles and demonstrates difficulty controlling her impulses).
The "nerds," by contrast, are (despite their character flaws) responsible, accomplished men - Raj is honored by Time magazine for his research, Sheldon and Leonard are both respected academics, and Wolowitz has participated in a number of important engineering projects (and even got sent into space). Socially awkward they might be (at times), but they are all have their lives together, and enjoy positions of relative prominence and influence.
And on the social front, each of the characters has grown considerably. Wolowitz began as a shallow womanizer, but through his relationship with Bernadette (who later became his wife), he was able to understand what a pig he had been. Leonard begins to develop more confidence with women, and Sheldon not only begins to explore the possibility of a romantic relationship, but with the help of his more socially-adept girlfriend, has been making an effort to treat others with consideration and something approximating empathy. Raj is still a mess, but I personally think he outlived his usefulness once Wolowitz stopped needing a sidekick; the writers probably just don't know what to do with him.
The show takes great pains to show real character development, and presents us with nicely rounded individuals. While they may have begun as relatively flat stereotypes, they've become much more, and that is to the show's credit. Particularly the inclusion of the female characters has made the show a much more interesting program, and belies the claim that the show just wants to show the male nerds as pathetic losers - Leonard has dated three EXTREMELY attractive women, and Wolowitz is married to another. Even Sheldon has a girlfriend. These characters are far from the general "pathetic geek" stereotype, but you actually have to watch the show and pay attention to the details in order to notice that.
Having a sense of humor helps, too, but that's another discussion entirely...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
4 episodes out of what, 5 seasons? Pretty small sample size you've got there.
No stop. Stop right there. You're going into the same argument people have made about Twilight. "You've only read snippets," or "You haven't read the whole book so you can't judge it." No it doesn't work like that. I took the challenge and read Twilight, it was worse than I've heard and I wish I haven't read it. So I'm not gonna take your challenge of, "You only saw a few episodes." I have seen 13 and that was not of my free will. My belief this is a bad show only grows with each passing episode.
Have you ever heard of the Three Episode Rule? A show has 3 episodes to interest an audience or establish a interesting premise. There are outliers that suddenly change and improve drastically at like episode 22 or something but generally you can judge a show for it's worth just by watching three episodes. Big Bang Theory only needed 1 to establish itself and many people did not like it. And the most damning of all of the show is that the many people who do not like it have seen more than 3 episodes, enough to pass judgement.
TL;DR plot advancement and character development =/ a good show.
I've given The Big Bang Theory it's chance. I expected nothing and I'm still disappointed.
As long as you remember that "I dun like it" =/= A bad show.
The show takes great pains to show real character development, and presents us with nicely rounded individuals.
I really think you're overselling the character development angle here. The vast majority of the jokes within the show still come from laughing at the characters for being socially inept caricatures.
As long as you remember that "I dun like it" =/= A bad show.
Conversely as long as you and others remember that "dis show is da bomb" =/= A good show.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like BBT and Community ( position declared ) and IMO
1. BBT is a more mainstream sitcom than Community ( but they are both sitcoms). As part of the sitcom formula the characters have flaws and are periodically the butt of jokes. The characters flaws and idiosyncrasies are exaggerated, they tend to do stupid things and it generally works out alright in the end. Like all sitcoms, like Friends - Monica had her neat freak, competitiveness exaggerated, Joey is enfatuated by food and is dumb. The purpose of these exaggerated characteristics is to poke fun at these fictional characters weaknesses as they may be reflected in people we know. This is intentional, they are not intending to say all people who like things to be neat are OCD or hyper competitive, or chefs,. Or that all people who love food are dumb.
2. In BBT they do this same thing. The premise of the show is that a bunch of socially awkward but academically intelligent types struggle to be less socially awkward. By it's sitcom nature it pokes fun at all of the main characters. I guess they could have been socially awkward by being jocks or frat boys but that has probably been done before - in hundreds of frat boy movies. But they weren't, they were geeks. The geek characters ( especially leonard )are meant to be identified with and sympathized with to some extent. Yes their foibles are meant to be laughed at but that has been the same since I Love Lucy.
3. If you know people who think that because you like star trek or play RPG's you must be like Sheldon or Raj etc that is their ignorance. It is the same if they believe that all people of a certain gender should be more nurturing or all people of a certain race be better at certain sports. That ignorance is not the shows issue, it is the issue of the person who holds that belief. Just because Howard is Jewish and comes from a broken home with an odd mother relationship doesn't mean anything about anyone except Howard. BBT portrays its main characters as having certain flaws. It has portrayed scientists as cool motorcycle riding womanisers as well. So what? Surely just because William Shatner portrayed a Crazy lawyer in Boston legal people don't believe all lawyers in Boston are like Denny Crane? ( though that would be freaky)
4. The portrayal of the BBT characters does laugh at them but it also shows them as caring smart vulnerable people. In one episode Penny ( the non geek girl) watches a show recommended by Leonard ( her boyfriend ) because she is envious of the passion she sees the geeks have in the things they like. It's a passion she doesn't really have for anything. The geek hobbies are non mainstream, they are not baseball - to suggest they should not be treated as being a bit different is pointless.
5. Community has no greater relevance to the debate than Friends or Seinfeild. It is a show about characters who ( in the main) are not geeks. Jeff is a selfish lawyer, Annie is a swat, Shirley is a Christian mum, Pierce is an old bigot, Troy is a jock, Britta is a protester, Abed is somewhat Aspergers who lives his life through TV. They are not portrayed as particularly geeky in their hobbies ( apart from Abed and later Troy but that is more TV geek ). When they do portray RPG like in the second season Advanced Dungeons & Dragons episode the relevant person that is the reason they play the game is an outsider to the group who they have previously mocked and referred to as 'Fat Neil' . He is expressly described as a loser who is considering committing suicide due to his sucky life choices ( epitomized by his being overweight, playing D&D and consequently having no friends). How is this a good portrayal of geeks? The game itself ( in which senor chang plays an awesome Drow) involves a scene where one player intimately describes sex with an NPC ( thus crossing into the other roleplaying reference) . I get it's a joke but do your friends think that is an accurate portrayal of role players, or what happens in roleplaying games? How is this portrayal better than BBT.
6. Finally as someone who enjoys both these shows, but believes they are merely sitcoms and therefore no more realistic than the story about two men who walk into a bar one of them holding a duck ( ie i believe men and bars exist, and men sometimes carry ducks or walk into bars - but on this occasion it's just the set up for a joke, i do not draw any adverse inferences against bar patrons, bar tenders or duck owners because of it). I say if you don't like them it doesn't necessarily mean its badly written, or that you are too dumb to get it. It just might mean it doesn't appeal to your sense of humor. I thoroughly enjoy the warmth beneath the sense of humor of both the shows .
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I asked my mother, who quite likes The Big Bang Theory, a series of questions.
"Why do you like the Big Bang Theory?" "Because it is funny."
"Who is your favorite character?" "Sheldon. He's so funny."
"Who is your least favorite character?" "Howard, because he's a pervert." (My mother doesn't share many of my Don Juan characteristics.)
"Is Penny a loser?" "No, she's a nice girl."
"Do you think it makes fun of nerds?" "Yes. So what? Seinfeld made fun of yuppies, All in the Family made fun of blue-collar Americans, Sanford and Son made fun of black garbage collectors. Who the hell are nerds that they can't be made fun of?"
(I may have edited her last answer)
Happy Mother's Day!
Interesting thing about Friends is that it was inspired by the movie Singles....
Singles is one of my favourite movies....
I have never been able to watch a full episode of Friends.
Interesting thing about Friends is that it was inspired by the movie Singles....
Singles is one of my favourite movies....
I have never been able to watch a full episode of Friends.
I Did not know that, I will have to track it down for a look see.
( I like Friends too)Doodlebug I pretty much agree with your Mum ( although Leonard's my favorite - Sheldon is too selfish imo, even if he probably can't help it). I would say would say it pokes fun at geeks and everyone else in the show ( geek or not).
Interesting thing about Friends is that it was inspired by the movie Singles....
Singles is one of my favourite movies....
I have never been able to watch a full episode of Friends.
I Did not know that, I will have to track it down for a look see.
( I like Friends too)Doodlebug I pretty much agree with your Mum ( although Leonard's my favorite - Sheldon is too selfish imo, even if he probably can't help it). I would say would say it pokes fun at geeks and everyone else in the show ( geek or not).
Warner Bros. Television tried immediately to turn Singles into a television series. When Crowe balked at the notion, the company proceeded with the idea, engaged a new writing and directing team, changing elements and the name to Friends, which ran successfully on NBC from 1994-2004.
Singles is very 1990's...
Friends was great. It's one of those shows that ran for so damn long that random re-runs still pull up episodes I've never seen.
and soon to be cancelled Community.Not enough melange lately? Your prescience is failing you.
I'm trying to wean myself off the spice. I've been hitting it hard in the last few years trying to stay on the Golden Path.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So if you don't like BBT does that mean you do not like The Gamers or Dorkness rising? It really makes fun of gamers and points them in a stereotypical way.
Personally I love The Gamers and Dorkness rising,. Why? Because I've meet players just like them, just like I have meet people like in BBT
"The Gamers: Dorkness Rising" was very, very good. Can't wait for the third one.
This should not be confused with the other so-called comedy "Gamers" (I believe it was somehow associated with the SCTV crowd), which was highly insulting and very poorly researched.
I know - I meant this one.
|
So if you don't like BBT does that mean you do not like The Gamers or Dorkness rising? It really makes fun of gamers and points them in a stereotypical way.
Personally I love The Gamers and Dorkness rising,. Why? Because I've meet players just like them, just like I have meet people like in BBT
To me, the difference is in HOW BBT makes fun of gamers. It basically uses the fact that they game at all as a punch line. Essentially, it's just one character asking another if they want to play D&D tonight...cue laugh track.
To me, the difference is in HOW BBT makes fun of gamers. It basically uses the fact that they game at all as a punch line. Essentially, it's just one character asking another if they want to play D&D tonight...cue laugh track.
It's not that they tell jokes while playing D&D. It's that playing D&D IS the joke. Which makes sense if you're making a show for people who think D&D nerds are funny/silly. But as a fairly average RPG enthusiast I don't really 'get' the inherent funny in a such a common pastime.
Except that playing D&D ISN'T the joke. The joke is "these guys have attractive women who want to spend time with them, but they would rather do something else instead." It's not D&D specific: just look here, for example (warning: arguably NSFW). Heck, there's one episode of The League where a main character has his extremely attractive wife waiting to make love to him in bed... but he neglects her in favor of making a trade for his fantasy football team.
I hate to say it, but I'm beginning to think that a lot of people who find BBT offensive are a bit over-sensitive about their own hobbies/social demographics. And I think another large group of people who find it offensive don't really understand the mechanics of the humor of the show (which is why I've yet to see someone else point to specific episodes and analyze the jokes to support their claim - they're just going on gut reaction, not thoughtful reflection).
I really think you're overselling the character development angle here. The vast majority of the jokes within the show still come from laughing at the characters for being socially inept caricatures.
Not at all. You'll notice that I pointed to lots of specific evidence to support my contention that the characters have developed significantly - Leonard begins to show a lot more confidence around women (and has several significant relationships with very attractive women); Howard reforms and begins to move away from his horndog ways; Sheldon begins making an effort (with the help of his girlfriend) to understand how interpersonal relationships work, and even though he's still not quite there yet, he's getting better (there's also been a lot of light shed on his background - growing up in a highly religious and dysfunctional family in Texas, he received very little encouragement for his interest in science, possibly contributing to his general sense of alienation from others).
Furthermore, the show has also spent much less time focusing on the geeky boys themselves in order to look at the women in their lives - women who are smart, but by no means stereotypically geeks (Amy Farah Fowler comes close, but she is MUCH more socially aware than Sheldon. Bernadette is brilliant but shows no signs of social ineptitude, and Penny is kind of a jock/popular girl). And in fact, the female lead has undergone great character growth, moving from a hapless, irresponsible party girl to someone interested in a committed relationship with a sweet, caring (but not flashy) guy... and returning to college to earn her degree.
And finally (and this needs to be pointed out): THE MAIN CHARACTERS ALL HAVE ATTRACTIVE GIRLFRIENDS/WIVES WHO LOVE THEM FOR WHO THEY ARE. That, by itself, shows that the show is not concerned with portraying the "geek as loser" stereotype.
I know people are going to respond with contrary opinions, and that's fine, but I'd appreciate it if they'd take the time to cite specific evidence instead of just relying on vague generalities.
4 episodes out of what, 5 seasons? Pretty small sample size you've got there.No stop. Stop right there. You're going into the same argument people have made about Twilight. "You've only read snippets," or "You haven't read the whole book so you can't judge it." No it doesn't work like that. I took the challenge and read Twilight, it was worse than I've heard and I wish I haven't read it. So I'm not gonna take your challenge of, "You only saw a few episodes." I have seen 13 and that was not of my free will. My belief this is a bad show only grows with each passing episode.
Have you ever heard of the Three Episode Rule? A show has 3 episodes to interest an audience or establish a interesting premise. There are outliers that suddenly change and improve drastically at like episode 22 or something but generally you can judge a show for it's worth just by watching three episodes. Big Bang Theory only needed 1 to establish itself and many people did not like it. And the most damning of all of the show is that the many people who do not like it have seen more than 3 episodes, enough to pass judgement.
TL;DR plot advancement and character development =/ a good show.
I've given The Big Bang Theory it's chance. I expected nothing and I'm still disappointed.
1) The first season of Star Trek: TNG was pretty weak. By your standard, we could watch a dozen season one eps and fairly judge the program as "bad"
2) What, exactly, are your criteria for a good show? You say that plot advancement and character development aren't among them (though MOST people include those as criteria), so what, in your mind, makes a show good? Be specific, so that way we can accurately measure whether or not TBBT measures up.
I hate to say it, but I'm beginning to think that a lot of people who find BBT offensive are a bit over-sensitive about their own hobbies/social demographics. And I think another large group of people who find it offensive don't really understand the mechanics of the humor of the show (which is why I've yet to see someone else point to specific episodes and analyze the jokes to support their claim - they're just going on gut reaction, not thoughtful reflection).
I don't know who's over-sensitive, but I, for one, am not offended that you enjoy TBBT, and I wouldn't be crass enough to claim that the only reason you like it is because you don't understand the jokes.
Also, the reason that you don't see a lot of people analyzing why they don't like the show is probably because, well, they don't like the show enough to analyze every minute of any given episode. You'd have to be pretty fanatical for that and, again speaking from personal opinion, I simply don't care about the show enough to do that.
I just find it vaguely ironic that a show that is, supposedly, aimed at my demographic is a show that I don't care about but my mom loves. Swing and a miss?
Of course, I don't really find TBBT offensive. I just don't think it's a show that really appeal to the 'nerdy' demographics (whether it's supposed to or not). I think it's aimed at the non-nerdy demographic who are vaguely embarrassed that they enjoy RPGs and World of Warcraft. This is a show they can watch and go "Hah, I get all these nerdy references, but I'm no Sheldon so it's okay." And it gives the non-gamers an avenue to talk to their gamer friends/etc. about a hobby that they might not otherwise understand. I don't think that's offensive or exploitative of the character types presented on the show though. No more offensive than any other "feel-good" sitcom.
But in short: You're not wrong for enjoying TBBT. Just don't invite me over for a TBBT marathon. :p
And finally (and this needs to be pointed out): THE MAIN CHARACTERS ALL HAVE ATTRACTIVE GIRLFRIENDS/WIVES WHO LOVE THEM FOR WHO THEY ARE. That, by itself, shows that the show is not concerned with portraying the "geek as loser" stereotype.
Sooo... just because they have a hot girlfriend that's 'character development'?
A few quotes from an episode in Series 6 - Episode 13:
- Penny: I know. The four of them work at a major university. They’re all super smart. How can they still be into something made for 12-year-olds? *Laugh Track*
- Stuart: Oh, hey. Could you please stop staring? They’re just girls. It’s nothing you haven’t seen in movies or in drawings. *Laugh Track*
- Policeman: I think I have all I need here. You guys need me to call someone? I’m guessing your moms? *Laugh Track*
As I said - most of the 'jokes' are about laughing at the man-children.
The fact that they've outgrown a large portion of their insecurities and unsavory foibles is character development.
The most prominent advancements being Howard dropping his offensive horndogginess, moving out of his mother's house, and getting married, and Sheldon getting over some of his neuroses little by little.
While outside characters still poke fun at them (at first glance they are still the stereotypical awkward nerd group) much of the show's recent episodes focus on how they've grown as people, and many of the early episodes showed how they NEEDED to grow.
And a bit of context on those quotes would be nice. I dunno if I've seen that one.
Well actually I think the Policeman one was in reference to the time they got lost in the desert while dressed up in Star Trek costumes because they decided it would be a good idea to go out in the middle of bumf@~@ nowhere to snap pictures of themselves and got their ride jacked with their phones inside.
My point is you don't need the context on the quotes. The laugh track explicitly states what the writers 'think' is funny. In this case they are:
- Comic books are for 12 year olds - hilarious!
- Geeks and nerds stare at women - guffaws aplenty!
If you want to see an episode of a TV show that actually treaks geeks and nerds with a great deal of respect and plays off what makes them cool as well as their quirks - go and watch The Phineas and Ferb Episode - Nerds of a Feather.
But as has been stated a googlezillion times in this thread, that isn't a laugh track. It's the studio audience.
And they laugh at EVERYTHING. If I were going to point out one obnoxious thing about the show that would be it.
It's every other line, whether it makes sense or not.
You do realise that it is general practice to flash a big 'laugh' sign in front of studio audiences to show when they should be laughing?
And sweetening is used to tune the laughter response to what is desired by executives?
A laugh track (even with a 'studio audience') is not genuine and impromptu - it is staged and manufactured.
It's still not technically the same thing.
Regardless, I'm not sure what this has to do with anything really. It's not my job to convince you to like something you're dead set against. I just popped in to point out that no, "They got gurls, hurr" was not the extent of the character development as you seemed to believe.
I have watched Big Bang Theory... and I did laugh at times. Some of the jokes that they make are funny... some of them are cringeworthy.
My only opinion is that BBT should not be held up as a great show... it's low-brow humour that derives the majority of it's jokes by the 'point-and-laugh' technique. And that's by making out that the main characters are man-children with laughable hobbies and a complete lack of social skills.
Is it reflective of geeks in nature - in some cases yes. Does it have the capacity to make people (including neeks and gerds laugh) - yes. Should we laud the program because of it's exploitative nature - no.
Big Bang Theory is to Nerds as Jersey Shore is to whatever those sort of people are.
Who's lauding it?
I've seen a few camps so far: The "It's a decent show, I think it's funny" camp, the "BBT is everything that is wrong with TV" camp, and the "Community is a work of art" camp.
Maybe I missed it but I don't think anyone ever said that BBT was a great show that should be held up as the standard for TV comedies or for TV in general.
And the word you were looking for I believe is "Guido".
Isn't the character development solely that 'they got girls'? That's where all their foibles have been softened. (Apart from Raj, whose character development seems to be as an alcoholic).
Leonard, has a relationship therefore he becomes more comfortable around ladies.
Howard get's married, therefore he doesn't have to act like a horn-dog all the time.
Sheldon has to accept more people in his life.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sheldon: "I've never played D&D with girls before."
Penny: "No one has."
LAUGH MACHINE'Nuff said.
This one was one I hated....sitting on the couch with my wife(who doesn't play), she looked at me and laughed like my hobby is a nerd-joke. She is fine with me playing but finds it funny when my hobby is made-fun of. I am 42 with a small herd of kids, worked construction, played football in high-school, have 11 years of martial arts training but because of a past-time that I love to engage in I get made fun of by a whole slew of people who think that "D&D people don't include girls".
I know it's just a "light ribbing" but this is where all the BS of the world stems from. It's OK to make fun of people who are different and to basically treat them as sub-normal. When can we bully them? Ostracize them? Make them feel less human with our scorn? Where is the line that is crossed that makes it into a real issue of dehumanization? Who decides how much "just joking" a person should take and when they should just have a thick skin for the teasing?The world is on an anti-bullying kick and yet there is so much on TV that it is disgusting any more.
I love watching BBT because of the cool character traits that the cast displays through their characters. I just roll my eyes at the inept attempts to make them non-humans by picking on their fun-time activities.
I get made fun of by a whole slew of people who think that "D&D people don't include girls".
Are these people your friends?
If so, why?
If not, why do you care what they have to say?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And finally (and this needs to be pointed out): THE MAIN CHARACTERS ALL HAVE ATTRACTIVE GIRLFRIENDS/WIVES WHO LOVE THEM FOR WHO THEY ARE. That, by itself, shows that the show is not concerned with portraying the "geek as loser" stereotype.Sooo... just because they have a hot girlfriend that's 'character development'?
A few quotes from an episode in Series 6 - Episode 13:
- Penny: I know. The four of them work at a major university. They’re all super smart. How can they still be into something made for 12-year-olds? *Laugh Track*
- Stuart: Oh, hey. Could you please stop staring? They’re just girls. It’s nothing you haven’t seen in movies or in drawings. *Laugh Track*
- Policeman: I think I have all I need here. You guys need me to call someone? I’m guessing your moms? *Laugh Track*
As I said - most of the 'jokes' are about laughing at the man-children.
That quote comes from an episode where the three female characters take the time to read and discuss comic books, enjoy them to varying degrees, and end up getting into the same silly comic-book arguments that even the nerds do (e.g. "Can Hulk lift Thor's hammer?")... showing how easy it is to get wrapped up in that kind of speculation (and that it's not limited to nerds).
The boys' misadventures in cosplay are not played primarily for comedy - the people who are rude to them come off quite poorly, and the viewers are meant to sympathize with the dispirited characters.
If you pay attention to the context of the entire episode, the picture becomes clearer. Taking individual, isolated jokes and using that to form a judgement of the show is going to overlook how all of the components fit together to create a more complex narrative.
I've seen a few camps so far: The "It's a decent show, I think it's funny" camp, the "BBT is everything that is wrong with TV" camp, and the "Community is a work of art" camp.
Funny how the camps you agree with are all clever and level headed, while the camps you disagree with are silly extremists.
I think you missed the "if you don't like the show it's because you're not smart enough to get it" camp, as well as the "TBBT isn't a particular clever nerd-humour show" camp which, I suppose, is your second camp if you really want to twist everything you disagree with into an extreme negative.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My point is you don't need the context on the quotes. The laugh track explicitly states what the writers 'think' is funny. In this case they are:
- Comic books are for 12 year olds - hilarious!
- Geeks and nerds stare at women - guffaws aplenty!
Please do go on about how hardcore comic book/video game fans have mature, healthy relationships with women. In the meantime, I'll just leave these here:
Tomb Raider Cosplayers sexually harassed
Black Cat cosplayer sexually harassed
An online campaign to stop the constant sexual harassment cosplayers are subjected to at conventions
If you pay attention to the context of the entire episode, the picture becomes clearer. Taking individual, isolated jokes and using that to form a judgement of the show is going to overlook how all of the components fit together to create a more complex narrative.
I have nothing more to say if you think that episodes of the Big Bang Theory actually contain a complex narrative. Kudos to you if you think that... I've seen many episodes of the show... and I'm yet to see anything that resembles a 'complex narrative'.