There were a number of articles about the show this week. Some tributes and some analysis. I, of course find the analysis amusing. How much was the appeal due to geek-related references? Was its throwback multi-camera style a help or hindrance? Were the addition of two women characters responsible for its ultimate ratings climb?
Here's why THE BIG BANG THEORY was popular:
It was FUNNY.
It had actual JOKES.
It was a comedy that strove to make you LAUGH.
It wasn't niche, it wasn't dark, it wasn't redefining television.
People tune in a comedy because they want to laugh. THE BIG BANG THEORY delivered. They weren't aiming at smiles, or wry nods of the head. They sought to entertain.
Was it a perfect show? No. The stories were often paper-thin and not all jokes worked despite the audience's orgasmic reaction to each one. But a lot of jokes DID work. And the cast was terrific. The sets were pleasant to look at. The pace was brisk. Personally, I thought the jokes were better and sharper earlier in the run, but they were also fresher. All long running series suffer from recycling material.
But Chuck Lorre assembled a funny cast and a room of very funny writers.
That formula seems like a no-brainer but no one else seems to be doing it. Either the cast is attractive but not funny or the writing doesn't really pop. And again, when I hear showrunners proudly claim they don't write jokes to me what they're saying is they CAN'T write jokes.
So congratulations to THE BIG BANG THEORY. Scientists will tell you that sometimes the most obvious solutions are the ones right in front of us.
from By Ken Levine
Comments
Post a Comment