# Big Bang Theory 9/27/12 "The Date Night Variable"



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

Man I enjoy this show. I'm glad it's back.

My heart about stopped during Sheldon's speech. I was hoping they were taking him in a more serious direction. But what happened was both slightly disappointing and hilariously predictable. 

And I continue to assert that Simon Helberg is HOT. HOOOOTTTT.

I'm almost at the place where I don't even care about Leonard and/or Penny any more. I was almost disappoined when they'd cut to their story.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

So did they shoot the space station scenes on the Vomit Comet?

Or was it just hollywood trickery?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

My money's on trickery. Lots of floating and sliding, but very little rotating.

Besides, I don't think they could possibly fit vomit comet rides into their budget.


----------



## johnperkins21 (Aug 29, 2005)

Hank said:


> So did they shoot the space station scenes on the Vomit Comet?
> 
> Or was it just hollywood trickery?


Looked like he was suspended by wires to me.


----------



## TheDewAddict (Aug 21, 2002)

Very fake. Notice the wires in the background all hang down in the middle, and there were headphones hanging off the laptop that he spoke with Bernadette on. They built a set, then suspended him on wires to make it look like he was floating. 

I was glad to see the Russian cosmonaut, he's hilarious.


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

The zero gravity scenes may have been Hollywood trickery but it was done very well for a sitcom.
That spinning pen caused me to wonder if it was real though.

I don't think Leonard and Penny are _getting_ tedious, I think they've _been_ tedious for years. 
One more example of how 95% of teevee relationship issues could be solved if people would just talk to one another.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

TheDewAddict said:


> I was glad to see the Russian cosmonaut, he's hilarious.


Yeah, I like that guy.

Previously, I had seen that actor in mostly tough guy / Russian Mafia type roles, and while he was perfectly fine, it was all very cliche and pedestrian.

But between his stint in BBT, and his supporting role in _Bent_ (a cute sitcom that NBC burned off over the summer, presumably in lieu of picking it up for a full order), he's shown himself to be a very good comic actor.

I hope showbiz gives him more chances to showcase his creative side.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

I think they did a good job with the zero-G shots. I kept looking to see if any cables or other loose stuff was floating (it wasn't). Also, Howard was wearing a hat. I ran across some space station footage last night on NASA where a female astronaut's hair was poofed out and floating.

Plus, the cost would probably have been prohibitive to rent the Vomit Comet.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> So did they shoot the space station scenes on the Vomit Comet?
> 
> Or was it just hollywood trickery?


I vote fake.

If you have AMC, look for Apollo 13, which has been running a lot recently (there are several showings coming up soon). They shot a TON of footage on the VC, and did some other floating scenes with the actors sitting on a see-saw.

The BBT scenes are all very static. It looks to me like Simon Hedberg was sitting on a chair, which was then taken out of the shot with some very crude CGI.

We also spotted the hat -- as RGM1138 says, the hair is a dead give-away.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

It's certainly faked.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I agree with Murgatroyd: he was definitely sitting in a rolling chair or on a rolling stool. It was obvious when he "floated" across the cabin after the first phone call. They probably painted it green and green-screened it out.

The episode was not bad, but not that good either. So over the whole mother vs. Bernadette plotline, and not too excited about AFF and Sheldon as it doesn't seem to go anywhere. How often can they go back to the same gag? That relationship needs to move, or end. Penny is still funny. Leonard should never be allowed to wear "skinny jeans". Raj was the best part.

One good thing: I was happy to see Howard actually doing work on the space station, and not simply being pathetic and throwing up constantly.


----------



## Idearat (Nov 26, 2000)

madscientist said:


> One good thing: I was happy to see Howard actually doing work on the space station, and not simply being pathetic and throwing up constantly.


I'd expected him to be working on the toilet.


----------



## ciscokid (Jan 14, 2003)

Actyually, I believe he was green screened. He was sitting on a pivoting stool and the background was added later! Very simple and CHEAP special effects!


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

Whatever they did was good, for a sitcom. Good enough that I didn't spend too much time thinking how crappy it was.

And I love the cosmonaut. I wasn't aware he was actually an actor, but he's got GREAT comic timing. What awesome casting.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

YCantAngieRead said:


> Whatever they did was good, for a sitcom. Good enough that I didn't spend too much time thinking how crappy it was.
> 
> And I love the cosmonaut. I wasn't aware he was actually an actor, but he's got GREAT comic timing. What awesome casting.


Yep, that's what I thought. Really, I didn't think too much about it. I enjoyed the episode. I thought the whole thing with him fighting with mom and Bernadette from space was funny.


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

"Go sports" made me laugh.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

I didn't watch it 
I haven't watched in awhile

did they tone down the laugh track yet ?

it seems to me that over the last few seasons, the laugh track has gotten turned up both in volume and in frequency of use

it's just been so annoying I can't watch that show anymore 
and it use to be one of my favorite shows

also, I haven't liked what they've done with Amy.
She used to be like Sheldon; non emotional, very logical, dedicated to her work

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g9OszJFIzg[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_MTFpg3nCU&feature=related[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxIbrGKjok8&feature=related[/media]

now she's almost a bi-sexual, horny, drunk


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

jamesl said:


> now she's almost a bi-sexual, horny, drunk


She met Penny.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

YCantAngieRead said:


> And I continue to assert that Simon Helberg is HOT. HOOOOTTTT.


Especially with the beard...but I love guys with beards.



YCantAngieRead said:


> "Go sports" made me laugh.


Yes, especially the second time he flashed it!



jamesl said:


> [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g9OszJFIzg[/media]


Thanks for that clip. I had forgotten it. The guy's look at the end was priceless and then Howard's line "good god what have we done". Perfect.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

jamesl said:


> I didn't watch it
> I haven't watched in awhile
> <snip>
> also, I haven't liked what they've done with Amy.
> ...


Not sure if I get this...If you didn't watch this episode, and you haven't watched "in a while", then how do you know what they've done with Amy and why do you care?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

jamesl said:


> I didn't watch it
> I haven't watched in awhile


Just watch it. You have so many requirements that it would not be fair to you for us to impose our standards.

It's a 23 minute show. Won't take long for you to discover your answers.

Good luck!


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

jamesl said:


> also, I haven't liked what they've done with Amy.
> She used to be like Sheldon; non emotional, very logical, dedicated to her work
> 
> now she's almost a bi-sexual, horny, drunk


You say that like it's a bad thing?


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

YCantAngieRead said:


> Man I enjoy this show. I'm glad it's back.
> 
> My heart about stopped during Sheldon's speech. I was hoping they were taking him in a more serious direction. But what happened was both slightly disappointing and hilariously predictable.


I knew it was going to be a quote, I just couldn't figure out from where


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jamesl said:


> I didn't watch it
> I haven't watched in awhile ...


Then I certainly hope this is your last post in a BBT thread...

We liked it...especially Howard's discussions with his mom...


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

Hank said:


> Not sure if I get this...If you didn't watch this episode, and you haven't watched "in a while", then how do you know what they've done with Amy and why do you care?


why do I care ?

seriously ?

I said "it used to be one of my favorite shows"

I would like it if they went back to the original concept instead of going with this "lowest common denominator" garbage

and why does anyone care about TV shows ? 
they care because they enjoy watching them and they get disappointed when the show "jumps the shark", or just goes overboard with the nonsense

and you act as if the changes to Amy's character are recent 
they are not 
they have been doing this nonsense with her for awhile


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

Hank said:


> Not sure if I get this...If you didn't watch this episode, and you haven't watched "in a while", then how do you know what they've done with Amy and why do you care?


I think they just wanted to layout their inability to focus and be easily distracted by a laugh track and saw their opening.

Or

Maybe "in a long while" means since TBS last aired an episode.


----------



## marksman (Mar 4, 2002)

jamesl said:


> why do I care ?
> 
> seriously ?
> 
> ...


How do you know they are still doing it? You are complaining about things you say you have no knowledge of...we get it.

Please please please watch tbbt and talk about it with us? Pretty please? Please!

Not one of my favorite episodes of the show. I hope Howard will not be in space any longer. Seems like they dried that sponge quickly. I feel like they wrote the end of last season without any thought moving forward and got stuck with this episode as a result.

I hope aff goes wild and just starts banging all sorts of dumb jocks and indie hipsters and skateboard technicians.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

jamesl said:


> I would like it if they went back to the original concept instead of going with this "lowest common denominator" garbage


The "original concept" was dying... how many more shows could they do with 4 geeks in an apartment? The inside geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd who aren't geeks or techie people (i.e. most women). To keep the ratings up and the show on the air, they had to introduce female counterparts for the rest of the guys (except poor Raj) to keep it interesting and high in the ratings. If they didn't, a lot of people would have grown bored and tired with the "original concept" and stop watching.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

Hank said:


> The "original concept" was dying... how many more shows could they do with 4 geeks in an apartment? The inside geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd who aren't geeks or techie people (i.e. most women). To keep the ratings up and the show on the air, they had to introduce female counterparts for the rest of the guys (except poor Raj) to keep it interesting and high in the ratings. If they didn't, a lot of people would have grown bored and tired with the "original concept" and stop watching.


I would also mention that this is the very reason that TV shows do the on again off again relationships, because it produces drama and it keeps lots of people engaged in the show.


----------



## loubob57 (Mar 19, 2001)

I loved when Howard told his mother she had "ruined space".


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

SeanC said:


> I would also mention that this is the very reason that TV shows do the on again off again relationships, because it produces drama and it keeps lots of people engaged in the show.


It's funny you say that, because I really like the state of the Leonard/Penny thing now. It's neither of the two previous extremes "she's way hot and will never talk to me" or "we're a lovey-dovey couple boo-boo/sweetums". I really like the tension and ambiguity of it now. Especially with the last episode with Raj calling them on it.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I would much rather have what Penny and Lenoard have now than the "will they or won't they" crap we see in all sitcoms. Just have a relationship and get on with relationship troubles.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> The inside geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd who aren't geeks or techie people (i.e. most women).


Hank, I call foul. There are plenty of girl geeks and girl techie people, and comments like yours simply serve as male whitewashing of techie history.

The relative scarcity of girl geeks vs. guy geeks is insignificant when compared to the number of geeks/fans/techies vs. mundanes.

I think it's far more likely that they ungeeked the show to make it appeal to the larger group of non-techies -- both male and female. C.S.I., which also started out as a "hey, techie people get to be the stars" show, also got watered down.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

murgatroyd said:


> Hank, I call foul. There are plenty of girl geeks and girl techie people, and comments like yours simply serve as male whitewashing of techie history.
> 
> The relative scarcity of girl geeks vs. guy geeks is insignificant when compared to the number of geeks/fans/techies vs. mundanes.
> 
> I think it's far more likely that they ungeeked the show to make it appeal to the larger group of non-techies -- both male and female. C.S.I., which also started out as a "hey, techie people get to be the stars" show, also got watered down.


I expected a response like this from someone, which is why I said "most women" and not just "women" or "all women". I never said there aren't plenty of female geeks, but their percentage to all females is still quite low compared to geek males and all males. I said "most women" which i think is a reasonable description. I'm not whitewashing anything.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

I agree with both of you.

I think the show was de-teched to appeal to the masses, but there are WAY fewer female geeks than males.

In most of my computer engineering classes I was the only woman. Of all my friends, I'm the only woman up to date on anything tech-related whereas a handful of my male friends are.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

I'm actually at a technical conference this week. There are at least 100 people here, likely more. During lunch I walked around to see how many women are here. There was just one.

I'm also just making a personal observation here, but she was trying very hard to look/dress like a male. If it weren't for her not so obvious breasts, I would not have even noticed she was female. Not that that means anything, its just an observation.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

Ever go to tech conference? 95% white guys, 4% non-white guys, 1% female. Numbers may not be exact, but they're pretty close by my observations.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Enjoyed the episode. Having Howard in space was fun, but like someone else said, I hope it doesn't last too long. The fighting with Mrs. Wolowitz and Bernadette was grating. That he's doing it over the open transmission lines for all of NASA to hear is pathetic.

Although I did like Howard's mom complaining that he'd been gone a week and she hadn't even gotten a measly postcard.


----------



## DeDondeEs (Feb 20, 2004)

ciscokid said:


> Actyually, I believe he was green screened. He was sitting on a pivoting stool and the background was added later! Very simple and CHEAP special effects!


Yeah if you looked on his pants they were oddly wrinkled, my first thought he had some sort of harness on that was bunching his pants up. But I now agree with the green stool theory. Wait, that didn't sound right....


----------



## jehma (Jan 22, 2003)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Ever go to tech conference? 95% white guys, 4% non-white guys, 1% female. Numbers may not be exact, but they're pretty close by my observations.


I'm surprised it's so white. It must depend on the specific tech area. My office has a large percentage of Chinese and Indian engineers. I may be the only technical white female who isn't right out of school out of a few hundred people.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Ever go to tech conference? 95% white guys, 4% non-white guys, 1% female. Numbers may not be exact, but they're pretty close by my observations.


Wow! 

Where did you find a tech conference with that many women?


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

Update: there are two women here


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Ever go to tech conference? 95% white guys, 4% non-white guys, 1% female. Numbers may not be exact, but they're pretty close by my observations.


I think it kind of depends on the tech area. I used to attend the RSA Conference every year, and I'd say there were about 15% women. Still a low number, but there were quite a few. I'd imagine in tech related to certain industries there are more women than in others. I'd imagine tech in relation to pharmaceuticals or other health care functions have a fair amount of women (my experience working on both sides of the fence, on the pharma side and software side), but when I worked for the financial sector in tech, there were a lot less women involved on the tech side.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

Good return episode. The cosmonaut stole the show.

Include me in the camp that prefers to see Leonard and Penny in a relationship, albeit a rocky one, rather than the endless "will they or won't they" tedium.

As to the "weightless" special effects. "Howard" was shot on a completely green set, with nothing in it besides him that wasn't green except for objects that he was directly interacting with (e. g. the laptop). The entire "space station" set was green screened in. To make him "float" he rolled across the green set on a green-painted rolling stool as the camera was tilted and rolled a little bit as he moved to add to the "floating" effect. Cheap but effective. (All this is my guess, based on observing the effect on the show, no inside knowledge, but I'd bet I'm right.)


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

To be more specific, I'm referring to desktop/server support, attending MacWorld, TechEd, TechNet, and a number of other large and small conferences.

It's a really strange, almost surreal, feeling being around so few women. It's like attending a boys-only school or boys-only summer camp.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Sorry, I call foul too...

Maybe the women don't have to be tech people to enjoy and "get" the show/jokes. Don't have to be IT guys, engineers or astronauts. Some of us are not and yet, gee we still find it funny and we still can understand the humor without it being explained to us like we were in 5th grade. I get that there are not a lot of women at your conferences, or in the community, but I enjoyed the show when it was just 4 guys and 1 gal. I am still enjoying it now with the mixtures and changes because that is normal, life changes, dynamics move around and change, and that is one think that I like about TBBT - it's relationships are not set in stone stagnant.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

If the only people who liked this show were geeks and techies, it wouldn't be one of the highest-rated shows on TV. There's no way to say what the ratings would have been like if they'd have stuck with the smarter jokes and limited characters from S1, but there's no arguing that the changes they have made have been fantastic for business.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

TiVo'Brien said:


> It's a really strange, almost surreal, feeling being around so few women. It's like attending a boys-only school or boys-only summer camp.


You obviously didn't go to college with me.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Hank said:


> I expected a response like this from someone, which is why I said "most women" and not just "women" or "all women". I never said there aren't plenty of female geeks, but their percentage to all females is still quite low compared to geek males and all males. I said "most women" which i think is a reasonable description. I'm not whitewashing anything.


But Hank, when you place the blame of them de-geeking TBBT on women alone, you are reinforcing the same old crap stereotype that has allowed men to pretend women can't do math and science for well over a century.

Everybody "knows" women can't do this stuff because men systematically erase the history or downplay the importance of the women who did, just like no one talked about the contributions of black or Japanese-American soldiers in WWII for decades, or how US women astronaut candidates were bounced from the Mercury program.

It's especially ridiculous to say they had to de-geek the show to make it more appealing to women, when the most-sought-after demographic in TV is still 18-49 year-old MEN.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

Robin said:


> In most of my computer engineering classes I was the only woman.


Sure, because all the other women who might have been in the class with you had been turfed off before you got there.


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

I've been watching since day 1. I are a stoopid, geeky but not in a good way wimmen folk.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

busyba said:


> But between his stint in BBT, and his supporting role in _Bent_ (a cute sitcom that NBC burned off over the summer, presumably in lieu of picking it up for a full order), he's shown himself to be a very good comic actor.


Hmm, I don't remember who he was in Bent. BTW, it was burned off in *spring*. I only looked it up because it seemed so long ago, that I actually thought maybe they burned it off *last* summer. heh.

I thought the weightless effects were excellent for a TV show.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> If the only people who liked this show were geeks and techies, it wouldn't be one of the highest-rated shows on TV. There's no way to say what the ratings would have been like if they'd have stuck with the smarter jokes and limited characters from S1, but there's no arguing that the changes they have made have been fantastic for business.


Penny was one dimensional and pretty awful in s1.



verdugan said:


> You obviously didn't go to college with me.


Or me.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

murgatroyd said:


> But Hank, when you place the blame of them de-geeking TBBT on women alone, you are reinforcing the same old crap stereotype that has allowed men to pretend women can't do math and science for well over a century.
> 
> Everybody "knows" women can't do this stuff because men systematically erase the history or downplay the importance of the women who did, just like no one talked about the contributions of black or Japanese-American soldiers in WWII for decades, or how US women astronaut candidates were bounced from the Mercury program.
> 
> It's especially ridiculous to say they had to de-geek the show to make it more appealing to women, when the most-sought-after demographic in TV is still 18-49 year-old MEN.


Whoa! Simmer down now! You're reading WAY too much into what I wrote, and projecting a ton of issues on me for stuff I didn't actually say. I neither said or implied any of these things. All I said was "The inside geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd who aren't geeks or techie people (i.e. most women)." That's all I said. I wasn't placing the blame solely on women, you just read it that way. I wasn't re-enforcing any stereotype, you just read it that way. What I was saying was that if you lined up 100 random men, and 100 random women, and 100 random jokes geek/tech/science from BBT, a statistically significant number men would get the jokes over the women. I'm not projecting any stereotypes. I'm not saying NO WOMEN ARE GEEKS. I'm saying that for the most part, in the tech and science fields, women are in a significant minority. THAT DOES NOT MEAN I'M SAYING WOMEN ARE DUMB AND CAN'T DO MATH OR SCIENCE. That what a stereotype is, and that's NOT what I'm saying. You're just hearing it that way because you want to.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

murgatroyd said:


> It's especially ridiculous to say they had to de-geek the show to make it more appealing to women, when the most-sought-after demographic in TV is still 18-49 year-old MEN.


I don't have facts to back this up, but I seriously doubt that is true. 18-49 year old men is not a demographic, it's almost an entire gender.

eta: This somewhat dated (2007) article has some interesting conclusions:



> A new survey of a group of marketing executives shows that 88 percent of them say the baby-boomer audience is still the most sought-after demographic.
> 
> However, other target groups ranked almost as high. Generation X tied Hispanics for second (86 percent), followed by women (85 percent) and Generation Y (84 percent).


I don't see "18-49 year old men" at the top of that list.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Robin said:


> Penny was one dimensional and pretty awful in s1.


Indeed, here's the article where they discussed how it changed and they started down the better path.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2010/01/how_degazing_saved_the_big_ban.html


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Hank said:


> What I was saying was that if you lined up 100 random men, and 100 random women, and 100 random jokes geek/tech/science from BBT, a statistically significant number men would get the jokes over the women.


I think that would depend on where you pull the 100 men from. Not all men are geeks and math savvy.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

Watched it last night and was underwhelmed. I had hoped that when AFF told Sheldon they were through that they were finally writing her character out of the show.  Wish they would do the same with Howard's mom and the squeaky blonde.

Not sure I want to see Raj & Comic Book Guy hook up. I like comic book guy and hope he's in more episodes though. I really hope they have more "guys only" episodes this season.

Wassup with Sheldon's hair?


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

betts4 said:


> I think that would depend on where you pull the 100 men from. Not all men are geeks and math savvy.


Sure there are exceptions, for instance at ComicCon I would expect the statistics to even out, and I'm sure there are many other ways to get different results.

But I think Hank's point still stands, if you pulled 100 men and 100 women from a neutral location, then statistically more men would get the geek jokes then the women.

I don't think there is anything wrong with saying that, nor do I think it implies that women are less capable in anyway.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

Just like if you polled 100 men and 100 women on which detergent cleans dishes best, most men would not know.


kidding, kidding


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

Hank said:


> Whoa! Simmer down now!


In other words, "Calm down little lady. It's not your fault you don't you don't understand the jokes".


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

Robin said:


> Penny was one dimensional and pretty awful in s1.


That's because she was still Bridget Hennessy from "8 Simple Rules". I remember thinking at the time that Kaley Cuoco must be a horrible actress if that's the only part she can play, and then wondering if instead they cast her because they wanted that part, so she was just giving it to them.

I am not an AFF fan (I find her grating and think she doesn't actually help Sheldon at all), but Penny is far more interesting than she was in the first season. The article referenced before pointed out that she was used as a prop, her role being something unattainable for the guys to stare at, and her personality didn't really exist yet. That's a fair assessment, I think.

I often wonder how much of the Charlie Sheen insanity over on "Two and A Half Men" is responsible for Chuck Lorre spending more time on BBT and changing the show to more of an ensemble than it was previously.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

Bob_Newhart said:


> Wassup with Sheldon's hair?


That really bothered me, especially since the consistency of his hair cut has been a plot point.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

It looks like a ventriliquist's dummy's do.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

SeanC said:


> Sure there are exceptions, for instance at ComicCon I would expect the statistics to even out, and I'm sure there are many other ways to get different results.
> 
> But I think Hank's point still stands, if you pulled 100 men and 100 women from a neutral location, then statistically more men would get the geek jokes then the women.
> 
> I don't think there is anything wrong with saying that, nor do I think it implies that women are less capable in anyway.


Really? So out of a 100 guys what percentage would get the geek jokes? Well, the ones that were geeks for sure. Just as the women that are geeks would get the jokes too.

BUT, what I am saying is that not every guy is a geek. I know many guys that would just look at me funny and not get the jokes...why? well because they are MEN that cheer for the Ravens and the O's and drink beer and paint their stomachs, then there are the others that are MEN that grow gardens, plant trees and hug trees. They are not going to get the geek jokes.

So what I am saying is - it depends on where you are pulling your 100 men vs 100 women from. Now, if you want to qualify and say they are just from the science or engineering groups, maybe it would work.

Remember that episode on the Simpson's when Lisa was upset because her dad was such a dutz and her brother was leaning that way and yet her mom showed her that the FEMALES from that side of the family were all intelligent and creative.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Robin said:


> Or me.


But you would use a  instead of my


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

tiams said:


> In other words, "Calm down little lady. It's not your fault you don't you don't understand the jokes".


Maybe I should have said "Edith, stifle yourself!" instead.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

betts4 said:


> So what I am saying is - it depends on where you are pulling your 100 men vs 100 women from. Now, if you want to qualify and say they are just from the science or engineering groups, maybe it would work.


SeanC and I are just saying take a totally random sample of people,lets say 18-49 american tv watching adults. No other subgroups or any pre-selection.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

Claiming that TBBT is over the heads of almost every woman is utterly ridiculous.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

> Originally Posted by Hank
> The "original concept" was dying... how many more shows could they do with 4 geeks in an apartment? *The inside geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd who aren't geeks or techie people (i.e. most women). *To keep the ratings up and the show on the air, they had to introduce female counterparts for the rest of the guys (except poor Raj) to keep it interesting and high in the ratings. If they didn't, a lot of people would have grown bored and tired with the "original concept" and stop watching.


It's that phrasing that is not correct.

Yes. The geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd that aren't geeks or techie people.

You didn't need to qualify it - i.e. most women. What I was trying to show you is that there are a lot of men out there are not geeks or techies and don't all get the jokes, but still enjoy the show. And a lot of women. That doesn't have anything to do with how many women are at your conference or even in the field. That bugged me a little too.

Anyway, whatever and let's just move on.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

tiams said:


> Claiming that TBBT is over the heads of almost every woman is utterly ridiculous.


Who said that?


----------



## MikeCC (Jun 19, 2004)

tiams said:


> Claiming that TBBT is over the heads of almost every woman is utterly ridiculous.


That straw man was built very quickly.

Um. Just _where _did anyone claim that? Not that we really need to go further down that path. I think the question you just posed is a clear indicator that your perception of what was said does not jibe with what actually was said.

Edited to add:

Loadstar hit the Enter key 60 seconds before I did.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Hank said:


> I don't have facts to back this up, but I seriously doubt that is true. 18-49 year old men is not a demographic, it's almost an entire gender.
> 
> eta: This somewhat dated (2007) article has some interesting conclusions:
> 
> I don't see "18-49 year old men" at the top of that list.


Actually, males 18-34 and males 18-49 are the most sought after demographic for advertisers, but that's simply because they're the hardest to attain. Advertisers can find decent samplings of women or older people or kids at other times of the day/week, but 18-49 men are generally only found in large groups during primetime, which is why the advertisers are so interested in that demographic during primetime shows.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

betts4 said:


> You didn't need to qualify it - i.e. most women. What I was trying to show you is that there are a lot of men out there are not geeks or techies and don't all get the jokes, but still enjoy the show. And a lot of women. That doesn't have anything to do with how many women are at your conference or even in the field. That bugged me a little too.


Needs clarification. My original comment was in reference to the origin of the show, when the tech and geek jokes *was* the show. It would not have lasted long in that format. Yes, there are a lot more people now that enjoy the show specifically because the writers toned down the geek jokes and introduced other characters to make the show more accessible to everyone. But if they didn't do that, I'm not sure how many more seasons of jokes about routers and ComicCon it would have lasted.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

The huge gender gap in the Science and Tech fields is no secret. A cursory google search to support this idea turned up more links than I cared to sift through.

It's not a point to take offense to IMO.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Hank said:


> Needs clarification. My original comment was in reference to the origin of the show, when the tech and geek jokes *was* the show. It would not have lasted long in that format. Yes, there are a lot more people now that enjoy the show specifically because the writers toned down the geek jokes and introduced other characters to make the show more accessible to everyone. But if they didn't do that, I'm not sure how many more seasons of jokes about routers and ComicCon it would have lasted.


I guess the thing is, I am not a techie. I am somewhat a geek in that I know about comics and such, but I also know from going to the Star Wars collector's club meetings in DC, and going to Star Trek conventions for 30 years and hanging out with those type of guys that the ratio is about 60/40 for women that would "get" the jokes. I don't have an iPhone but get the jokes about it.



MonsterJoe said:


> The huge gender gap in the Science and Tech fields is no secret. A cursory google search to support this idea turned up more links than I cared to sift through.
> 
> It's not a point to take offense to IMO.


I think if Hank hadn't thrown the "i.e. women" in there it wouldn't have been so bad. Again, sure there is a gap in those fields but those fields are not the only ones that would get the jokes even if they were aimed that way. And some of us that get them are women.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

I'd say about 99% of the women I know wouldn't get 1/2 to 3/4 of the techie/dorky jokes easy! 

I know I miss a few, but have to explain some to my Wife.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

MikeMar said:


> I'd say about 99% of the women I know wouldn't get 1/2 to 3/4 of the techie/dorky jokes easy!
> 
> I know I miss a few, but have to explain some to my Wife.


I'm sorry. I really will drop it here. It's just that even in season one, the show wasn't just about the techie/geek jokes, it was about 4 guys trying to get along and have fun. A geeky orientated Friends or such. Maybe I am just more a geek than I thought.


----------



## MonsterJoe (Feb 19, 2003)

betts4 said:


> I think if Hank hadn't thrown the "i.e. women" in there it wouldn't have been so bad. Again, sure there is a gap in those fields but those fields are not the only ones that would get the jokes even if they were aimed that way. And some of us that get them are women.


Right - but you're taking offense because your experience is to be surrounded by people who do fit the demo. Women who understand geek at cons is kind of a given, ya? That skews your perception of the reality, which is that most people (and a larger % of which are women) don't go to cons and don't understand the stuff that makes these nerds funny 

I work for a software company as a developer...that's pretty nerdy. But the nerdiness on this show often rises above my own education. I understand that something is funny without maybe understanding why it is funny...just like you said you do.

I agree that if I were Hank, I probably wouldn't have specifically pointed out "women" in general, because that tends to get people in a lather, but statistically, it's probably true.

In a strange way, this is similar to that debate here about how if you don't think 30 Rock is funny, you clearly must not be intelligent. (I don't think 30 Rock is funny)


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

MonsterJoe said:


> In a strange way, this is similar to that debate here about how if you don't think 30 Rock is funny, you clearly must not be intelligent. (I don't think 30 Rock is funny)


Oh, maybe we should have a beer together. I didn't find 30 Rock all that funny either.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

betts4 said:


> Maybe I am just more a geek than I thought.


You go to conventions. You are geekier than you think.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

loubob57 said:


> I loved when Howard told his mother she had "ruined space".


My favorite line, too! I think that I would only love this show half as much if it weren't for Howard's mother.

Bernadette looked particularly beautiful to me in those video shots.

I didn't even think about the fakesness/notfakeness of the space shots. Now I feel like I need to watch the episode again.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

betts4 said:


> Oh, maybe we should have a beer together. I didn't find 30 Rock all that funny either.


Nor I....let's have a party!!

I find most of the actors/actresses on 30 Rock to be obnoxious...both on the show and in "real life"...


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

betts4 said:


> I guess the thing is, I am not a techie. I am somewhat a geek in that *I know about comics and such*, but I also know from *going to the Star Wars collector's club meetings in DC*, and* going to Star Trek conventions for 30 years* and *hanging out with those type of guys* that the ratio is about 60/40 for women that would "get" the jokes. I don't have an iPhone but get the jokes about it.
> 
> I think if Hank hadn't thrown the "i.e. women" in there it wouldn't have been so bad. Again, sure there is a gap in those fields but those fields are not the only ones that would get the jokes even if they were aimed that way. And some of us that get them are women.


(Bolding mine)

Evidence of geekdom!

Sorry Betts, but you're a true geek. Like it or not.


----------



## Wilhite (Oct 26, 2003)

Bob_Newhart said:


> Not sure I want to see Raj & Comic Book Guy hook up. I like comic book guy and hope he's in more episodes though. I really hope they have more "guys only" episodes this season.


I'm pretty sure that I saw Kevin Sussman credited in the opening credits for this episode. Does that mean a larger part for him this year or have they always done that in the past when he has appeared in an episode?


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Wilhite said:


> I'm pretty sure that I saw Kevin Sussman credited in the opening credits for this episode. Does that mean a larger part for him this year or have they always done that in the past when he has appeared in an episode?


He was promoted to series regular this summer.


----------



## TiVo'Brien (Feb 8, 2002)

Wilhite said:


> I'm pretty sure that I saw Kevin Sussman credited in the opening credits for this episode. Does that mean a larger part for him this year or have they always done that in the past when he has appeared in an episode?


Speaking of him, where do you guys think the Raj/Stuart thing is going? Their planned outing had an ambiguously gay date feel to it.

NTTAWWT.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

TiVo'Brien said:


> Speaking of him, where do you guys think the Raj/Stuart thing is going? Their planned outing had an ambiguously gay date feel to it.
> 
> NTTAWWT.


That was the joke. Raj has such bad interpersonal skills that he didn't realize that he unintentionally set up a date with Stuart. He was just looking to hang out, to have someone to do stuff with while Howard is in space (and possibly after).

Stuart picked up on it after Raj left, but shrugged it off saying "I could do worse."


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> That was the joke. Raj has such bad interpersonal skills that he didn't realize that he unintentionally set up a date with Stuart. He was just looking to hang out, to have someone to do stuff with while Howard is in space (and possibly after).
> 
> Stuart picked up on it after Raj left, but shrugged it off saying "I could do worse."


I thought that whole scene was strange, because it seemed that when they poured the drinks and started talking, they both suddenly realized they were bordering on something homosexual, and that's when Raj put the drink down and said he'd better go. But then he asked Stewart if he wanted to hang out and that he'd pay, to which Stewart replied, "I could do worse." So to me it seemed like they did the same joke twice in a row.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I thought that whole scene was strange, because it seemed that when they poured the drinks and started talking, they both suddenly realized they were bordering on something homosexual, and that's when Raj put the drink down and said he'd better go. But then he asked Stewart if he wanted to hang out and that he'd pay, to which Stewart replied, "I could do worse." So to me it seemed like they did the same joke twice in a row.


Well, it would be stranger than usual to keep doing that joke with Raj and Howard, now that Howard is married. But they could never just let a joke go! So I guess they're going to transfer it to Raj and Stuart now.


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I thought that whole scene was strange, because it seemed that when they poured the drinks and started talking, they both suddenly realized they were bordering on something homosexual, and that's when Raj put the drink down and said he'd better go. But then he asked Stewart if he wanted to hang out and that he'd pay, to which Stewart replied, "I could do worse." So to me it seemed like they did the same joke twice in a row.


Totally agree here. It was odd.


----------



## SeanC (Dec 30, 2003)

Yep, struck me as odd too.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

betts4 said:


> It's that phrasing that is not correct.
> 
> Yes. The geek and tech jokes only go so far, especially with the crowd that aren't geeks or techie people.
> 
> ...


Thank you!


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

I think Raj might be aware. I think he might just not care any more.

I could be wrong, though.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

Any port in a storm


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

betts4 said:


> Really? So out of a 100 guys what percentage would get the geek jokes? Well, the ones that were geeks for sure. Just as the women that are geeks would get the jokes too.
> 
> BUT, what I am saying is that not every guy is a geek. I know many guys that would just look at me funny and not get the jokes...why? well because they are MEN that cheer for the Ravens and the O's and drink beer and paint their stomachs, then there are the others that are MEN that grow gardens, plant trees and hug trees. They are not going to get the geek jokes.
> 
> ...


Uh. Then it wouldn't be random.

Come on. A random sample is a pretty common term. You are stilling the sample. That ain't random.

And you are losing geek points for arguing this.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

betts4 said:


> I guess the thing is, I am not a techie. I am somewhat a geek in that I know about comics and such, but I also know from going to the Star Wars collector's club meetings in DC, and going to Star Trek conventions for 30 years and hanging out with those type of guys that the ratio is about 60/40 for women that would "get" the jokes. I don't have an iPhone but get the jokes about it.


Two iPhones go into a bar. I forget the rest.


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> Two iPhones go into a bar. I forget the rest.


Help me out here. I remember this, but not what it's from.

And I have never understood why it's funny.


----------



## scooterboy (Mar 27, 2001)

Hank said:


> Totally agree here. It was odd.


What a sexist remark!


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

scooterboy said:


> What a sexist remark!


Frankly, I was going for racist, but sure, I'll take sexist!


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Bob_Newhart said:


> Watched it last night and was underwhelmed. I had hoped that when AFF told Sheldon they were through that they were finally writing her character out of the show.  Wish they would do the same with Howard's mom and the squeaky blonde.


Wow, AFF + Bernadette are great additions to the show.. and I definitely am usually one of the kinds of people who hate when they make such radical changes to a show.


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

mattack said:


> Wow, AFF + Bernadette are great additions to the show.. and I definitely am usually one of the kinds of people who hate when they make such radical changes to a show.


Yep.


----------



## ronsch (Sep 7, 2001)

jamesl said:


> I didn't watch it
> I haven't watched in awhile
> 
> did they tone down the laugh track yet ?
> ...


Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't BBT one of the few shows with a live audience & no laugh track?


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

ronsch said:


> Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't BBT one of the few shows with a live audience & no laugh track?


You are 100% correct, I don't know when folks started improperly referring to a sweetened audience mix as a "laugh track" but it seems to come up a lot in sitcom threads here lately.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Sometimes it seems that people don't understand the difference between one camera and three Camera sitcoms.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Turtleboy said:


> Sometimes it seems that people don't understand the difference between one camera and three Camera sitcoms.


How many one camera shows are there left?


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

RGM1138 said:


> How many one camera shows are there left?


I assume you meant 3 camera, because the "one camera" shows are

Modern Family
30 Rock
Parks and Recreation
Community

The 3 camera shows are:

BBT
Two and a half men
How I met your mother

The real question is for people who complain about the BBT's "laugh track" is, give me an example of a three camera sitcom filmed before a live audience *without* what you call a "laugh track."


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> The real question is for people who complain about the BBT's "laugh track" is, give me an example of a three camera sitcom filmed before a live audience *without* what you call a "laugh track."


Not the point.
Point is augmented and 'directed' laughter is annoying.
IMO "sweetened" is too watered down a term for what they do.
If it intrudes enough for me to notice it it's too much.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Turtleboy said:


> I assume you meant 3 camera, because the "one camera" shows are
> 
> Modern Family
> 30 Rock
> ...


Well, you're distinguishing between live audience and 'closed set' shoots. But, many shows do use more than one camera at a time for coverage.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

The term "laugh track" has a specific meaning in the industry, but in the general public, it's used to refer to the laughter the audience hears after a character makes a joke. It's pointless to argue over the semantics of the phrase. When someone says they don't like "laugh tracks," they're simply saying they don't like to hear audience laughter in their show, whether it's from a live audience, or recorded, or sweetened, or augmented, etc.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> The term "laugh track" has a specific meaning in the industry, but in the general public, it's used to refer to the laughter the audience hears after a character makes a joke. It's pointless to argue over the semantics of the phrase. When someone says they don't like "laugh tracks," they're simply saying they don't like to hear audience laughter in their show, whether it's from a live audience, or recorded, or sweetened, or augmented, etc.


This. But, I think a lot of shows with live audiences when edited probably have laughter "enhanced" electronically, so that you get some hybrid of live laughter and a laugh track.

I really don't get the "I won't watch" because of a laugh track thing. Honestly, I've been watching TV for 50 years, and I don't even notice a laugh track if the show is funny. In fact, I find some shows are better with a laugh track. I remember MASH, during the later seasons had some episodes where they didn't have a laugh track and frankly, the show seemed to be missing something.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

RGM1138 said:


> Well, you're distinguishing between live audience and 'closed set' shoots. But, many shows do use more than one camera at a time for coverage.


No, the industry terms are "multi camera" and "single camera." Multi-cam shows are shot on a stage with multiple cameras at the front of the stage filming the action. They're typically performed like a play, whether with a live audience or not, and the entire taping takes a couple hours.

Single camera shows are shot like a movie. They may shoot on location or on a sound stage, but the crew sets up lighting to film a scene from one direction, then the change the lighting to film a scene from another direction, etc. In scenes where two characters are talking to each other, it's virtually impossible to get close ups on both of them with proper lighting at the same time. Instead, they shoot multiple takes from one angle, then change everything up and shoot multiple takes from another angle. Sure, they may use more than one camera for coverage, but the industry still refers to these as "single camera" shows. And instead of being able to tape the show in a couple hours, it's common for these shows to film for 5-8 days per episode.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> The term "laugh track" has a specific meaning in the industry, but in the general public, it's used to refer to the laughter the audience hears after a character makes a joke.


I don't know that is true. I think more people than you think distinguish the difference between a laugh track (pre-recorded laughter track) and a live studio audience laughter.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> I don't know that is true. I think more people than you think distinguish the difference between a laugh track (pre-recorded laughter track) and a live studio audience laughter.


Maybe in professional reviews and industry-related journalism. But not on internet forums and message boards. People complain about audience laughter and don't care how it is generated. They're complaining about the difference between The Office (no laughter) and The Big Bang Theory (laughter), not the difference between The Big Bang Theory (live audience) and How I Met Your Mother (recorded laughter).


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

LoadStar said:


> I don't know that is true. I think more people than you think distinguish the difference between a laugh track (pre-recorded laughter track) and a live studio audience laughter.


I agree. The inferred meaning of "track", to me, indicates something pre-recorded and not live-recorded.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

I recognize the "man with booming guffaw" on the BBT's laugh track from some early "Three's Company" and "Alice" episodes.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bob_Newhart said:


> I recognize the "man with booming guffaw" on the BBT's laugh track from some early "Three's Company" and "Alice" episodes.


Actually I think he goes back to I Love Lucy. I always wonder, in my warped mind, how many people on laugh tracks are actually dead


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> Actually I think he goes back to I Love Lucy. I always wonder, in my warped mind, how many people on laugh tracks are actually dead


Here's an interesting article that I found. I was incorrect about a few things that I posted.

http://nymag.com/arts/tv/features/laughtracks-2011-12/


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Bob_Newhart said:


> I recognize the "man with booming guffaw" on the BBT's laugh track from some early "Three's Company" and "Alice" episodes.


As the article Turtleboy points out, and others who have been in the audience confirm (as much as they can), Chuck Lorre swears he does not "sweeten" the laughter on his shows, and that it is all live studio audience.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

YCantAngieRead said:


> Help me out here. I remember this, but not what it's from.
> 
> And I have never understood why it's funny.


Siri commercial with John malkovich.

Reference to two iPhones left in bars prior to release of those models. Wound up leaking the features.


----------



## Fish Man (Mar 4, 2002)

LoadStar said:


> I don't know that is true. I think more people than you think distinguish the difference between a laugh track (pre-recorded laughter track) and a live studio audience laughter.


I certainly do.

There was a trend in the early 70's to record live audience reactions to a sitcom either performed before them or the video played to them and leave the laughter recorded from the audience *totally alone.* No tweaking, fiddling or "sweating" whatsoever. I think "All in The Family" was the first show to do this, maybe not. But it was definitely *one* of the first. Other Norman Leer shows such as "Sanford and Son" and "The Jeffersons" also followed this practice.

I did not mind the laughter on these shows at all because it was absolutely genuine and sounded genuine. It gave me the feeling of watching a live comedy play (because, in effect, I was watching exactly that, just captured on video).

However, there's been a more recent trend of "sweetening" laughter recorded from a live audience. It really and truely sounds to me like the laughter on BBT is about 20% live audience and 80% "sweetening". At this level, it may as well be a laugh track.

I really like the show, but I do wish they'd either try it "All in the Family" style, where they didn't fiddle with the live captured audience laughter, or simply drop the laughter (like "The Office", "Parks & Rec", etc.)


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> Siri commercial with John malkovich.
> 
> Reference to two iPhones left in bars prior to release of those models. Wound up leaking the features.


LOL. Okay, now it makes sense. Thank you.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

Fish Man said:


> I really like the show, but I do wish they'd either try it "All in the Family" style, where they didn't fiddle with the live captured audience laughter, or simply drop the laughter (like "The Office", "Parks & Rec", etc.)


Is there an example of a show filmed before an audience without any laughter at all in the audio track, where they edited it out?


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

No. That does not exist.


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

nsfw language


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

YCantAngieRead said:


> LOL. Okay, now it makes sense. Thank you.


First time I saw it I burst out laughing. A non iPhone friend was confused.


----------



## Fassade (Apr 8, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> Is there an example of a show filmed before an audience without any laughter at all in the audio track, where they edited it out?


Not quite what you asked, but some people (usually people who dislike a particular show) drop out the laugh tracks from sitcoms and place the results on YouTube. Three from TBBT:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKS3MGriZcs[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzSTQMx8vSs[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHsSnUUAjQ8[/media]

It is not really a fair to the show, because the show uses the laughter to help set their pacing.

Just for the heck of it, the same treatment to a clip of Friends:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLvB_ybcKt0[/media]


----------



## Cearbhaill (Aug 1, 2004)

Turtleboy said:


> Here's an interesting article that I found. I was incorrect about a few things that I posted.
> 
> http://nymag.com/arts/tv/features/laughtracks-2011-12/


That was a _really_ interesting article.
As is the wiki on Charles Douglass.
I remember seeing skits about those old laff boxes back on shows like Sid Caesar or Milton Berle or some old comedy show.
I swear!


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Turtleboy said:


> Is there an example of a show filmed before an audience without any laughter at all in the audio track, where they edited it out?


I've never seen an example of this, but when M*A*S*H was first shown on BBC2 in the UK, the laugh track was removed and it made it a MUCH better show. When Sky TV re-ran the show WITH the track, it lost all its appeal.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

betts4 said:


> It's just that even in season one, the show wasn't just about the techie/geek jokes, it was about 4 guys trying to get along and have fun. A geeky orientated Friends or such. Maybe I am just more a geek than I thought.


I don't want to stir up the old argument here (instead, I'll start a new one  ).

In the early season, the show was about 4 guys hanging out with the hot girl across the hall. The fun thing for me was that the four guys were fans and scientists. They were recognizable as people I could meet at any con.

And when they brought in AFF and Bernadette (and Leslie Winkle), they were also scientists. But who remembers that now?

That's part of the reason the show seems a little flat for me compared to the early seasons. It's not because they introduced AFF and Bernadette, but because AFF and Bernadette have lost their academic flavor, too.

We still get girl techies represented on TV (usually as the lab rats on CSI, CSI:LA, NCIS, etc.) but it's not the same. TBBT used to be the show where the techies were the norm and the mundane girl was the oddball, and now it's just an ordinary fun show about a group of friends.


----------



## MikeMar (Jan 7, 2005)

Yeah, I did like when Sheldon was AFF's lab assistant 

Or when Bernadette would reference her crazy biological weapon level germs and bacteria stuff


----------



## mdougie (Mar 9, 2009)

AFF has followed a believable development. She never had friends before and now she does. Her besty is her primary relationship. 

Sheldon is a place holder.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

MikeMar said:


> Yeah, I did like when Sheldon was AFF's lab assistant
> 
> Or when Bernadette would reference her crazy biological weapon level germs and bacteria stuff


Exactly. And in a Hollywood where we have Danica McKellar (she's a math geek) and Mayim Bialik (who actually has a PhD in neuroscience), it would be nice to see women like them represented.


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

I actually like that they have a "geeky" girl on the show who ISN'T into sci-fi. That's completely where I fit, and it's nice to be represented.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

YCantAngieRead said:


> I actually like that they have a "geeky" girl on the show who ISN'T into sci-fi.


That is TOTALLY unrealistic.


YCantAngieRead said:


> That's completely where I fit, and it's nice to be represented.


CLEARLY, you don't exist.


----------



## DavidJL (Feb 21, 2006)

Hank said:


> So did they shoot the space station scenes on the Vomit Comet?
> 
> Or was it just hollywood trickery?


Did a quick scan through the thread so I may have missed if this article was already posted:

http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-100412a.html


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

DavidJL said:


> Did a quick scan through the thread so I may have missed if this article was already posted:
> 
> http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-100412a.html


If I read one more person saying that this show is dumbed down, I'm going to point them to this article.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

LoadStar said:


> If I read one more person saying that this show is dumbed down, I'm going to point them to this article.


Huh?!?

Not only did that not have anything to do with whether the show is dumbed down (it's about how the set designers are determined to be realistic)...they got the Latin wrong.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Huh?!?
> 
> Not only did that not have anything to do with whether the show is dumbed down (it's about how the set designers are determined to be realistic)...they got the Latin wrong.


I think the fact that they were determined to get as many details about a spaceflight to the ISS as accurate as possible, even down to a uniform patch that 99% of people won't even see, shows how "geeky" they really (still) are behind the scenes.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

LoadStar said:


> I think the fact that they were determined to get as many details about a spaceflight to the ISS as accurate as possible, even down to a uniform patch that 99% of people won't even see, shows how "geeky" they really (still) are behind the scenes.


And I say it shows that they have a very superficial commitment to realism (i.e., set dressing), which doesn't extend to the way the characters behave. And that's a change.

But I guess there's no point in even participating in these discussions. I'm clearly no longer the target market for this show.


----------



## YCantAngieRead (Nov 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That is TOTALLY unrealistic. CLEARLY, you don't exist.


LOL.



DavidJL said:


> Did a quick scan through the thread so I may have missed if this article was already posted:
> 
> http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-100412a.html


What's weird is that he looks superimposed on the chair.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And I say it shows that they have a very superficial commitment to realism (i.e., set dressing), which doesn't extend to the way the characters behave. And that's a change.
> 
> But I guess there's no point in even participating in these discussions. I'm clearly no longer the target market for this show.


I'm personally of the belief that the show hasn't changed as much as people's personal perceptions of the show.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I remember MASH, during the later seasons had some episodes where they didn't have a laugh track and frankly, the show seemed to be missing something.


I don't remember exactly when, but it's been told many times on retrospective shows/interviews that at some point (I *think* actually fairly early) that they negotiated with CBS to not use a laugh track during scenes in the operating room. So then, as Alda has told many times, they started doing more and more scenes in the operating room.

There were also other shows like the "newsreel episode(s)", that didn't have a laugh track.



DevdogAZ said:


> They're typically performed like a play, whether with a live audience or not, and the entire taping takes a couple hours.


Wow, even a half hour show really takes a couple of hours? I thought it was an hour, maybe 1.5 hours.



Steveknj said:


> Actually I think he goes back to I Love Lucy. I always wonder, in my warped mind, how many people on laugh tracks are actually dead


I think we need a term like the "Wilhelm scream" for these. (I don't recognize many of the laughs, but I do seem in the past to have remembered a woman's laugh on many different shows.)


----------



## ronsch (Sep 7, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That is TOTALLY unrealistic. CLEARLY, you don't exist.


+1



LoadStar said:


> I'm personally of the belief that the show hasn't changed as much as people's personal perceptions of the show.


+2


----------



## mdougie (Mar 9, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And I say it shows that they have a very superficial commitment to realism (i.e., set dressing), which doesn't extend to the way the characters behave. And that's a change.
> 
> But I guess there's no point in even participating in these discussions. I'm clearly no longer the target market for this show.


When did the show ever have a commitment to realism?

a super hot codependent alcoholic wanna be actor involved with smart codependent professionals who can't live alone?

How has that premise changed at all


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

LoadStar said:


> I'm personally of the belief that the show hasn't changed as much as people's personal perceptions of the show.


Maybe we aren't "geeky" enough to notice the change. 

I think "geeks" ARE a target audience, but not THE target audience. If they were the only target audience, the show would have been canceled a long time ago due to poor ratings. Even the original Star Trek, part of the geek's main playbook only lasted what, two seasons?


----------



## Bob_Newhart (Jul 14, 2004)

our work is done.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

mattack said:


> Wow, even a half hour show really takes a couple of hours? I thought it was an hour, maybe 1.5 hours.


I was being generous with the time to allow for set changes and re-takes. I'm sure you're right that the vast majority of 30 minute multi-cam shows film in much less than two hours.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

I went to tapings of Friends and Seinfeld and each was close to three hours.


----------

