The Big Bang Theory Forums

Thursday 8:00 PM on CBSIn Season

Amy & Bernadette Shouldn't Be Main Characters

  • Avatar of GreenLantern00

    GreenLantern00

    [1]Feb 8, 2012
    • member since: 12/14/10
    • level: 2
    • rank: Sweat Hog
    • posts: 13

    I wouldn't mind them if they were supporting characters but they're just not strong enough to carry storylines or jokes on their own.



    It's annoying how they're being forced down our throats.



    The writers should think about the girlfriend/boyfriend characters in friends who got their point across but were never promoted to main character status.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of rphjose

    rphjose

    [2]Feb 8, 2012
    • member since: 02/09/09
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 75
    I agree completely.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of bennett10

    bennett10

    [3]Feb 8, 2012
    • member since: 08/18/11
    • level: 4
    • rank: Thighmaster
    • posts: 85

    Agreed.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of stylecutter

    stylecutter

    [4]Feb 9, 2012
    • member since: 01/08/05
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 346

    I think Raj should no longer be a Main Character. He doesnt do anything useful anyway.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of bronbrons27

    bronbrons27

    [5]Feb 9, 2012
    • member since: 06/11/09
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 1,727
    Yeah I agree as well. I also like the Friends comparison, whereby even recurring boyfriends/girlfriends like Richard, Mike, Janice, Emily etc never became main characters. It was always just the six of them.

    I think the Big Bang Theory should be the same. I don't like that Amy and Bernadette are in every episode now, I preferred it in season 4 when they were usually just in every second episode. We need more scenes/storylines of just the four guys and Penny. They're the essence of the show.

    But unlike what stylecutter said, I still think Raj should be a main character.....
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of MJPollard

    MJPollard

    [6]Feb 9, 2012
    • member since: 09/10/05
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 42

    I disagree, and since I've already explained my reasoning (multiple times) in another thread, I won't bore you with the same thing here.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [7]Feb 10, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    The dames are messing up our nerds! They're whipped & becoming emasculated! I seriously wonder if somebody within the show got a gf or married and was pestered with "so when is this show going to turn into "Friends" / add girlfriends?!? Comic books are dumb!"

    Descent of the end. They've gone too far with Amy & Bernadette to just cast them off.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of jekyll

    jekyll

    [8]Feb 10, 2012
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 86
    • rank: Agent 86
    • posts: 6,738

    Melissa Rauch and Mayim Bialik are the best things that could have ever happened to the show. It allows for so many more stories/interactions and helpsdelay/preventover-reliance on increasingly desperate Sheldonisms to carry plots and generate laughs, which as a natural evolution will become more weird and pronounced until they're almost a parody of the original character. It'svirtually inevitable as sitcoms pass five or six years.


    Go back and rewatch Will & Grace if you don't believe me. At the start Karen made drug jokes and Jack did his high-pitched squeaky angry voice every few episodes; a few years later it was several times per episode since the law of diminishing returns demands more frequency and/or more outlandish behavior to get the same laughs. By six seasons into King of Queens Douggot dumber anddumber and Carriegot meaner and meaner.


    Five characters just isn't a lot, even for a half-hour show.A few more to share the load, the better.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [9]Feb 10, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282

    jekyll wrote:
    Melissa Rauch and Mayim Bialik are the best things that could have ever happened to the show. It allows for so many more stories/interactions and helpsdelay/preventover-reliance on increasingly desperate Sheldonisms to carry plots and generate laughs


    I completely disagree and as do many other fans who've watched from Day 1. They're changing the winning formula to the show's success and that's a very bad idea. I honestly don't give a flying crap about their lady friends & relationship troubles & this of all shows I hoped to escape that dreaded "Friends" syndrome. I liked this show BECAUSE was weird and different (like just "Arrested Development" & "Community"), even tho I don't fit the comic book / Sci-Fi geek profile, but I appreciated for what it was, and the science edge to it.


    jekyll wrote:
    Go back and rewatch Will & Grace


    Oh god, HELL no. What a nauseating bowl of gruel that show was. That show was a bad joke gone on WAY too long. It's kind of like mixing a bunch of soda pops into the same glass - it SEEMED like a good idea when it started, but it turns out... blech. And it was actually disappointing that Sean Hayes ended up just playing a parody of his real-life self. Just saying. I *thought* he was a good actor.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of MJPollard

    MJPollard

    [10]Feb 10, 2012
    • member since: 09/10/05
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 42

    jekyll wrote:


    Melissa Rauch and Mayim Bialik are the best things that could have ever happened to the show. It allows for so many more stories/interactions and helpsdelay/preventover-reliance on increasingly desperate Sheldonisms to carry plots and generate laughs, which as a natural evolution will become more weird and pronounced until they're almost a parody of the original character. It'svirtually inevitable as sitcoms pass five or six years.


    Go back and rewatch Will & Grace if you don't believe me. At the start Karen made drug jokes and Jack did his high-pitched squeaky angry voice every few episodes; a few years later it was several times per episode since the law of diminishing returns demands more frequency and/or more outlandish behavior to get the same laughs. By six seasons into King of Queens Douggot dumber anddumber and Carriegot meaner and meaner.


    Five characters just isn't a lot, even for a half-hour show.A few more to share the load, the better.


    Thank you, Jekyll. I've noticed that, almost without exception, the people complaining about Amy and Bernadette are people who simply don't want any change. At all. Ever. I've stated numerous times that for a show to maintain longevity, it simply has to adapt and change in order to remain fresh. "Four geeks and a girl," with the same kinds of season 1/2 shenanigans repeated endlessly, would have gotten old and stale very fast; adding Melissa and Mayim to the cast made it a more diverse show, and expanded the comedic situations without sacrificing the core that made the show great. Those who insist that the show must remain how it was in seasons 1-2 ad infinitum are welcome to their opinion, but thankfully the producers decided to do things that actually keep the show fresh and on the air. :-)

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Jasmine_

    Jasmine_

    [11]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 07/09/06
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 279

    MJPollard wrote:


    jekyll wrote:


    Melissa Rauch and Mayim Bialik are the best things that could have ever happened to the show. It allows for so many more stories/interactions and helpsdelay/preventover-reliance on increasingly desperate Sheldonisms to carry plots and generate laughs, which as a natural evolution will become more weird and pronounced until they're almost a parody of the original character. It'svirtually inevitable as sitcoms pass five or six years.


    Go back and rewatch Will & Grace if you don't believe me. At the start Karen made drug jokes and Jack did his high-pitched squeaky angry voice every few episodes; a few years later it was several times per episode since the law of diminishing returns demands more frequency and/or more outlandish behavior to get the same laughs. By six seasons into King of Queens Douggot dumber anddumber and Carriegot meaner and meaner.


    Five characters just isn't a lot, even for a half-hour show.A few more to share the load, the better.


    Thank you, Jekyll. I've noticed that, almost without exception, the people complaining about Amy and Bernadette are people who simply don't want any change. At all. Ever. I've stated numerous times that for a show to maintain longevity, it simply has to adapt and change in order to remain fresh. "Four geeks and a girl," with the same kinds of season 1/2 shenanigans repeated endlessly, would have gotten old and stale very fast; adding Melissa and Mayim to the cast made it a more diverse show, and expanded the comedic situations without sacrificing the core that made the show great. Those who insist that the show must remain how it was in seasons 1-2 ad infinitum are welcome to their opinion, but thankfully the producers decided to do things that actually keep the show fresh and on the air. :-)




    Thank you two! I don't like how "elitist" people get when complaining about the changes in the show. What if they weren't there since day 1? They're doing a good job, so I don't get why can't they be promoted to main characters. As stated above, the "4 guys & 1 girl" formula was getting old and preventing character development. It can't be compared to "Friends". In Friends, there were 3 main guys and 3 main girls, so there was balance - and 4 of them became 2 couples. The other love interests were eventual lovers that wouldn't last long anyway. And Amy and Bernadette are not being forced down anyone's throats... no way. They're there because most of the audience is answering in a positive way - otherwise be sure they would be kicked out in no time.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of jekyll

    jekyll

    [12]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 86
    • rank: Agent 86
    • posts: 6,738

    drudager wrote:
    jekyll wrote:
    Go back and rewatch Will & Grace


    Oh god, HELL no. What a nauseating bowl of gruel that show was. That show was a bad joke gone on WAY too long. It's kind of like mixing a bunch of soda pops into the same glass - it SEEMED like a good idea when it started, but it turns out... blech. And it was actually disappointing that Sean Hayes ended up just playing a parody of his real-life self. Just saying. I *thought* he was a good actor.


    But that's exactly my point. Sean Hayes' fate can very easily be shared byJim Parsons if the show goes on long enough (and all indications are it will match, if not go beyond, W&G's run). Whoever has the quirks has to have them magnified to get the same effect, and Sheldon has quirks in spades. Now with seven stars—three leads and four supports—they can spread stuff around and not rely too much on any one character. They can even push Sheldon to the background once in a while as a B-plot; it's a good thing for the show overall.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of jekyll

    jekyll

    [13]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 86
    • rank: Agent 86
    • posts: 6,738

    drudager wrote:


    jekyll wrote:
    Melissa Rauch and Mayim Bialik are the best things that could have ever happened to the show. It allows for so many more stories/interactions and helpsdelay/preventover-reliance on increasingly desperate Sheldonisms to carry plots and generate laughs


    I completely disagree and as do many other fans who've watched from Day 1. They're changing the winning formula to the show's success and that's a very bad idea. I honestly don't give a flying crap about their lady friends & relationship troubles & this of all shows I hoped to escape that dreaded "Friends" syndrome. I liked this show BECAUSE was weird and different (like just "Arrested Development" & "Community"), even tho I don't fit the comic book / Sci-Fi geek profile, but I appreciated for what it was, and the science edge to it.


    Did the science edge disappear when I wasn't looking? Both Amy and Bernadette have doctorates in the sciences and participate in the science-related humor. One female star really isn't enough. BBT was incredibly lucky to lock down Melissa Rauch as she was breaking out and woo back Mayim Bialik to series television.


    Anyway, the formula is tweaked, but pretty much the same and just fine. BBT wouldn't have been the first show to beat American Idol and be continuing to increase its audience if it were broken(it's on pace for its first yearly top ten ranking and added 1.5M viewers from its season 3 average). Adding some girls isn't what kills shows; characters who never evolve or change are what kill shows.


    Do you want a show where Howard gets more and more pathetic and reliant on his mother, or one whereHoward shows he can grow a bit and settle with a nice girl, even if he's projecting the mother role on her a bit for now? Do you want a show where Sheldongets weirder and creepier until he's a near Howard Hughes, or one where Sheldon slowly adapts to having found a bit of a kindred spirit where he can explore some social normalcy while still maintaining a healthy set of phobias and irrational dislikes? If the first half of each scenario is more appealing, then Amy and Bernadetteare useless; if the second half is more appealing, then they're great additions.

    Edited on 02/11/2012 4:51am
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of jekyll

    jekyll

    [14]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 86
    • rank: Agent 86
    • posts: 6,738

    MJPollard wrote:
    I've noticed that, almost without exception, the people complaining about Amy and Bernadette are people who simply don't want any change. At all. Ever. I've stated numerous times that for a show to maintain longevity, it simply has to adapt and change in order to remain fresh. "Four geeks and a girl," with the same kinds of season 1/2 shenanigans repeated endlessly, would have gotten old and stale very fast; adding Melissa and Mayim to the cast made it a more diverse show, and expanded the comedic situations without sacrificing the core that made the show great. Those who insist that the show must remain how it was in seasons 1-2 ad infinitum are welcome to their opinion, but thankfully the producers decided to do things that actually keep the show fresh and on the air. :-)


    This is nothing compared to the venom over Chelsea on the Two and a Half Men board. You'd think the show had been irrevocably ruined because they had Charlie attempt to settle down with a girl for ¾ of a season. But you're right; there's just people who think the original stars of a show should be the only ones ever and adding anyone destroys it.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [15]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    Well OF COURSE the producers are going to evolve the show - they're in it for the long run & make this franchise go as far it can go & makes as much money as possible. The show isn't as funny as it used to be. We're seeing full episodes dedicated to their relationships & it's boring. It's only going to get worse once they bring marriage & children into it; it's a cliche sitcom death sentence. It almost never happens, but I'd rather see a show end with some restraint before it comes a complete parody of itself. But that won't happen with the BBT. They got the ratings & they'll probably keep going for at least another 3 or 4 seasons.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [16]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    jekyll wrote:

    Do you want a show where Howard gets more and more pathetic and reliant on his mother, or one whereHoward shows he can grow a bit and settle with a nice girl, even if he's projecting the mother role on her a bit for now? Do you want a show where Sheldongets weirder and creepier until he's a near Howard Hughes, or one where Sheldon slowly adapts to having found a bit of a kindred spirit where he can explore some social normalcy while still maintaining a healthy set of phobias and irrational dislikes? If the first half of each scenario is more appealing, then Amy and Bernadetteare useless; if the second half is more appealing, then they're great additions.



    I think you know the answer to this. But I also think there's only so many episodes any show can make & I think the BBT is closer to the end its useful life rather than the beginning or zenith. American sitcoms never know when to quit while they're ahead, and the product suffers greatly because of it. Ratings don't always accurately reflect the viewer, either. It doesn't measure long-time fans being replaced with new ones. I would say when I usually start watching a show, I try to stay to the very end, but usually I stop watching the last few seasons because it's just too tweaked. This show had some really great original ideas & plots and it's just sad they're going down the safe, generic, & easy cliched relationship road.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [17]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282

    Jasmine_ wrote:
    don't like how "elitist" people get when complaining about the changes in the show. What if they weren't there since day 1? They're doing a good job, so I don't get why can't they be promoted to main characters. As stated above, the "4 guys & 1 girl" formula was getting old and preventing character development. It can't be compared to "Friends". In Friends, there were 3 main guys and 3 main girls, so there was balance - and 4 of them became 2 couples. The other love interests were eventual lovers that wouldn't last long anyway. And Amy and Bernadette are not being forced down anyone's throats... no way. They're there because most of the audience is answering in a positive way - otherwise be sure they would be kicked out in no time.


    You say "elitist" like it's a bad thing. I'd rather be an elitist than some fringe casual fan who doesn't really care about anything. I disagree that Amy & Bernadette aren't being shoved down our throats - it's like they're on ALL the time now. I wouldn't take too much stock on audience reactions, either. They're just happy to be there to see a show, and honestly, most audience reaction is vastly fabricated & they clap like trained seals.


    Yes, I am making the "Friends" comparison - 3 guys & 3 gals vs 4 guys & 3 gals with two stable & main relationships right now - close enough - and eventually you know they're going to hook Raj up with someone. And you KNOW the Leonard & Penny relationship was the premise of the whole show like Ross & Rachel were. Slowly but surely the parallels are lining up, and you can throw in Leslie & Priya for good measure as well.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of jekyll

    jekyll

    [18]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 05/24/02
    • level: 86
    • rank: Agent 86
    • posts: 6,738

    drudager wrote:
    American sitcoms never know when to quit while they're ahead...
    It's not that they don't know when to quit; it's that they can't quit. Networks pay the studios less than what a show costs to make, so when there's a hit that the studios can make last until around 100 eps and go to reruns, they'll make it as long as the network wants it, because they pretty much have to. The studios lose millions of dollars on all the shows that only goa few years and rely on milking the rare hit to turn a profit. You hear about the $250 millionthey get from selling Seinfeld syndication packages; you don't hear about all the shows they lost $5 and $10 million dollars on to get that.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of drudager

    drudager

    [19]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 07/07/11
    • level: 13
    • rank: Regal Beagle
    • posts: 1,282
    jekyll wrote:

    drudager wrote:
    American sitcoms never know when to quit while they're ahead...
    It's not that they don't know when to quit; it's that they can't quit. Networks pay the studios less than what a show costs to make, so when there's a hit that the studios can make last until around 100 eps and go to reruns, they'll make it as long as the network wants it, because they pretty much have to. The studios lose millions of dollars on all the shows that only goa few years and rely on milking the rare hit to turn a profit. You hear about the $250 millionthey get from selling Seinfeld syndication packages; you don't hear about all the shows they lost $5 and $10 million dollars on to get that.



    I was just thinking about this after I posted on here: people to go work in Hollywood so they can make a ton of dough, and not much else. It just feels like any other industry, and that's why a lot of shows suffer in the end. Pilots are still relatively cheap to make, right? Plus actor salaries don't start becoming huge until it becomes a hit years later. And of course they have a yearly budget within that they set aside for all the pilots. I'm sure all the Networks are making a healthy profit given how large their billion dollar sports TV deals are.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Jasmine_

    Jasmine_

    [20]Feb 11, 2012
    • member since: 07/09/06
    • level: 9
    • rank: Door Number 2
    • posts: 279

    drudager wrote:
    You say "elitist" like it's a bad thing. I'd rather be an elitist than some fringe casual fan who doesn't really care about anything.


    Yeah, I say "elitist" like it's a bad thing. It's like these people don't want the characters to move on with their lives. It's like they just liked the show because there were 4 nerd guys that couldn't get girls (and they identified themselves with the characters because of that) and now that things are changing them feel kind of jealous. THOSE are the kind of selfish fans who don't really care about anything but themselves. ¬¬


    :
    I disagree that Amy & Bernadette aren't being shoved down our throats - it's like they're on ALL the time now. I wouldn't take too much stock on audience reactions, either. They're just happy to be there to see a show, and honestly, most audience reaction is vastly fabricated & they clap like trained seals.


    They're in every episode now that they're main characters, but it took some time. They were featured here and there, and since it worked, they were promoted. And people who think the audience is that passive should read some modern communication theory to understand better how things work when it comes to mass media. The audience does give positive and negative answers when some TV show isn't going well. The producers can't do whatever they want and people will swallow with no reaction. That's why some series last longer and some others don't.


    :
    Yes, I am making the "Friends" comparison - 3 guys & 3 gals vs 4 guys & 3 gals with two stable & main relationships right now - close enough - and eventually you know they're going to hook Raj up with someone. And you KNOW the Leonard & Penny relationship was the premise of the whole show like Ross & Rachel were. Slowly but surely the parallels are lining up, and you can throw in Leslie & Priya for good measure as well.


    I was talking about how Friends could work without adding no additional main characters for so long, and how that wouldn't work for TBBT. In Friends there was balance (3 guys/ 3girls), and in TBBT there wasn't, in the begining (4 guys/1 girl). Now, as you pointed, it's 4 guys/ 3 girls, and the writers have more options for different plots and character development. Now of course there are some paralels, but it was settled since day 1 that TBBT was not going to be just about science the whole time. Love relationships were ALWAYS a big deal in this show, and series like that always have their cliches.


    I must say that I hate some of these cliches though (the Raj/Penny thing, for example, was as unnecessary as Joey/Rachel). TBBT can do so much better.

    Edited on 02/11/2012 3:07pm
    Edited 5 total times.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.