Big Bang Actors To Earn $1M Per Episode 442
Cludge (981852) writes with a snippet from the BBC: "And rich they will be: With The Big Bang Theory commissioned until 2017, the show's three biggest names, Jim Parsons (Sheldon), Johnny Galecki (Leonard) and Kaley Cuoco (Penny) are guaranteed to earn $72m (£42.6m) each over the next three seasons. Unsurprisingly, the cost of producing the sitcom has spiraled." I wonder what that works out per line?
Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Insightful)
The argument against is that BBT is, essentially, Nerd Blackface.
The argument for BBT is that the material and situations are relateable, especially with the mainstreaming of geek culture (Dr. Who, BSG, Marvel films).
Meh. It's funny. I watch. I read the vanity card at the end. I think they're all good actors - at least within the scope of the show.
Re: (Score:3)
Even early on, I recognized a very real effort to make the science real (and there have been articles stating as much). For this, I can tolerate the sharks they have jumped (such as introducing the girls and allowing Raj to speak to girls and what not). It became less nerdy and turned mainstream once it became popular -- it's very much a more traditional sitcom these days......but it's one of the more scientifically accurate shows on TV these days. Especially over the more "scientific" dramas that we lov
Re: (Score:2)
I think the Raj speaking phobia joke played itself out, pure and simple. They had painted themselves into a box with him, especially as the direction of the show went from a Leonard/Sheldon/Penny-third-wheel show to a compare-and-contrast of all of their relationships...Leonard/Penny, Sheldon/Amy, Howard/Bernadette, Raj and the chick from Garfunkel and Oats...
Re: (Score:3)
"Adding the girls took it from a show about nerds and nerd culture "
Clearly, female characters are incompatible with nerd culture.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pullleeeze. To even suggest that is to suggest that the persecution of nerds is equivalent to the persecution of African American minorities in the United States. Certainly nerds are persecuted, particularly in high school, but they are in no way equivalent. Besides, it's not like the show doesn't make fun of people who are "smart and good looking".
Tell that to the parents of any "nerd" that has committed suicide due to the bullying. Go on. Straight to their face.
Re: (Score:3)
Pullleeeze. To even suggest that is to suggest that the persecution of nerds is equivalent to the persecution of African American minorities in the United States. Certainly nerds are persecuted, particularly in high school, but they are in no way equivalent. Besides, it's not like the show doesn't make fun of people who are "smart and good looking".
Tell that to the parents of any "nerd" that has committed suicide due to the bullying. Go on. Straight to their face.
Tell that the families of thousands of blacks who were lynched simply because racist white guys wanted to. Go. Straight to their face.
Re: (Score:3)
If the minimal rigors of (gasp) public education are enough to convince one to put an end to it, then they are probably better off leaving this world.
Dude - people don't kill themselves because "learning is hard," they do it because of the way other people have treated them. Or a chemical imbalance.
Sometimes it amazes me how ignorant the educated can be.
Re: (Score:2)
My view is that suicide is a result of a mental illness. People go through all sorts of traumas, from bullying to severe medical conditions to grinding poverty and don't kill themselves. Those that do are ill, and I would consider suicide to be on a par with dying of a disease. Just my view - I believe it takes more than circumstances alone.
Re: (Score:2)
I tentatively agree. I believe in the reality of mental disease, but I also believe in character and challenge. It would be pathological to medicate a problem away, and it would be pathological to expect a human environment to be free of cruelty.
I do not know if there is a solution, or even if my beliefs are mutually consistent. Any more thoughts?
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps for the young and healthy.
For the unhealthy, suicide can be a logical exit.
Geeky, if you were going to be in severe pain for the rest of your life and drugs wouldn't help- you wouldn't be able to sleep more than 2 hours at a stretch without being woken up by the pain-- how long before suicide would seem like a rational way out.
Not everyone's pain is physical.
Re: (Score:2)
i wasn't talking about learning, dumbass. i meant the rigors of "bullying".
and you wanted to give an example?
The way your previous post was worded, it's perfectly reasonable for someone who actually understands English to presume you were implying the educational aspect, o Childish One. That you felt compelled to immediately attack with a playground epithet makes me wonder if you ever actually finished school yourself, from both a literally standpoint, as well as a metaphor for your intelligence level. The fact that you don't capitalize anything kind of leads me to think the forme
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Funny)
As a self professed nerd/geek, the "Nerd Blackface" doesn't offend me, and I certainly don't feel "persecuted" by it. But I can't stand it in a TV show, and so I pretty much stopped watching after half an episode. That, and after many modern examples of sitcoms and half hour comedy shows without laugh tracks, I absolutely cannot stand shows with laugh tracks anymore.
(cue laugh track)
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4, Informative)
I agree on the annoyance of laugh tracks, but TBBT is filmed in front of an audience, and it's the audience's actions you hear, not canned laughter.
Re: (Score:2)
The audience's actions being prompted by people with cue boards, etc., of course.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember. There is selection bias.
Live studio audiences for {Network_Comedy_Show} is composed primarily of uberfans from flyover states on vacation in sunny California, those willing to wait hours in line just to gush over seeing a C-list celebrity do a cameo with Kaley Cuoco 40 times until they get it right from all angles.
Of course they laugh like hyenas. The stand-up comedian that warms them up doesn't hurt either.
I had a friend attend a BBT taping. He reported it was the funniest thing he had ever seen -- but of course he went to the taping, because he thinks the BBT is the funniest thing, so... there you go.
Re: (Score:3)
In Modern Family, it's the handheld camera that will flag a joke. There will be a pause in the conversation for the audience to "get it", and the camera will twitch or zoom in and out slightly to tell you there's something to get.
Although, I'll admit that this is less irritating than a canned laugh track, it's still a "tell".
Side issue: Why isn't Modern Family considered "gay blackface"?
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Insightful)
We're talking about a fictional example, but Sheldon is highly successful, and seems quite happy with his life. He doesn't need to be medicated just because he doesn't meet stereotypical norms.
Re: (Score:2)
In reading this dialog, E-Rock points out the facts; if a person is happy, causing no harm to himself or others, then why should we change that person to our own liking.
What I think frightens most people about the Character Sheldon is his bluntness, his desire to be as perfect as possible, and I think, his ability to like himself entirely without shame (I think that ability is the hardest for most people to achieve).
And don't forget that Sheldon is very selfish in a very perfect way, a good example of this
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Funny)
Sheldon is one disfiguring accident away from being a Batman villain.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Insightful)
We're talking about a fictional example, but Sheldon is highly successful, and seems quite happy with his life. He doesn't need to be medicated just because he doesn't meet stereotypical norms.
This. The Sheldon character holds down a high paying job and manages to interact with an admittedly small circle of friends. He's already doing better than a good segment of the population. That his personality quirks should be wrung out of him through therapy and/or medication is more than a little offensive.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4, Interesting)
The Sheldon character holds down a high paying job and manages to interact with an admittedly small circle of friends. He's already doing better than a good segment of the population.
Do you really think that an IRL Sheldon without script immunity would be able to do the same? The TV Sheldon also seems to be a pretty crap physicist, given to conspiracy theories, junk science, and an inability to distinguish between fiction and reality.
Script immunity, reasonable point. Nevertheless...
I personally know a highly paid programmer who believes in witchcraft and astrology. I had a hard time understanding that someone with such a logical mind would believe in something so illogical, but apparently it's more common than one would think. It's what puts the the "quirk" in "quirky", I guess. Otherwise brilliant people who have strange blind spots in areas where you'd think they'd know better. You really don't know anyone like that?
My dad worked with a guy very much like Sheldon. He was brilliant, and so dedicated to his work that he would rarely and only under certain circumstances acknowledge the existence of others. Arguably someone with even more intense quirks than Sheldon. Although admittedly, Dad said that the guy had a "handler", a guy almost as brilliant as him who acted as confidant, kept him out of trouble, and acted as interpreter to the more normal people.
Re: (Score:2)
.
Citation needed.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No, GP is right about how the characters are treated. I've only watched a few episodes, but it looks like the main character (Sheldon) has some serious issues that need to be addressed with medication or counseling. To use it as a form of entertainment for others is just insulting to those who have those kinds of problems,
Then you won't be reading slashdot any more either, right? Because the Sheldon Cooper characterizes epitomizes a significant fraction of the posts here - myopic, minimal empathy and a retreat to 'logic' that is really just selfish rationalization.
Perhaps you haven't watched many sitcoms but the standard sitcom character is a stereotype that is greatly exaggerated for comedic effect. If they didn't do that with the characters it wouldn't be a situational comedy as all humor is rooted the misfortune of othe
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh please. I don't think many of you have ever seen a sitcom before.
Sam Malone had a sex addiction problem. Monica Gellar had severe OCD. Roseanne had anger management issues.
That's what's hilarious about the folks who cry about BBT - they take it so seriously because it hits a lot closer to home than they would like folks to believe and they simply don't have the ability to laugh at themselves.
Did folks criticize Mary Tyler Moore Show for not being an accurate enough representation of life in a network news room? Probably, if they worked in one and didn't have a sense of humor.
As to TFA, I'm very glad for them - they earned this - this show is going to bring in billions because of the syndicated deal, the hell is merchandised out of it as well (I was at a LCBS yesterday and they had an entire section of BBTS merch), and they are getting a small cut now. Is everyone on TV overpaid to some extent, sure. But comparatively, these are not outrageous salaries, particularly in this current climate of a hit TV show being as rare as it is, particularly on networks. If the entire industry is going to rake in such money, I'm glad that the folks in front of the camera who are largely responsible for my enjoyment of the show as opposed to executives who just sit and approve shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Now if they could just put it on Netflix or Amazon Prime, I might actually try to watch an episode. People keep telling me I'd like it but I can't currently get it.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, to be fair to the above responders, we aren't used to seeing posts from Tarzan, the Lone Ranger, or Spongebob. And when those guys do post, they explain they don't get reception in their area, for obvious reasons.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
One comment I've read sums it all: "Arrested Development was a smart show about dumb people. BBT is a dumb show about smart people".
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Insightful)
The argument against is that BBT is, essentially, Nerd Blackface.
That wouldn't be my argument against it. My argument is that it's not a good show. I don't find the characters relateable. I don't think it's particularly funny. It seems like someone took a very bland, unoriginal sitcom and attached a geek gimmick to try to make it interesting, but in my mind it fails. It's not interesting, and the geek gimmick doesn't really work.
If you wanted to talk about it's problem with relation to "geek culture", I don't feel like it's right to say it's like "nerd blackface". I would argue the problem is more like, if you had a bunch of kids thinking that they understand urban black culture because they're listening to rap music, but the rap music they're listening to is Vanilla Ice.
Sorry, no, you don't understand geeks and nerds and "geek culture" from watching Big Bang Theory. You don't understand comic books and Doctor Who from learning the references that the show uses. From the episodes that I've seen, the characters don't seem like authentic geeks and nerds. Not really. It mostly seems like a crappy "Friends" ripoff where the characters are all wearing nerd costumes and talking in nasal voices. I don't think it's mainstreaming geek culture, but more like jumping on the bandwagon of geek culture that has managed to mainstream itself.
That's my take. I don't require that anyone else agrees.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4)
I would argue the problem is more like, if you had a bunch of kids thinking that they understand urban black culture because they're listening to rap music, but the rap music they're listening to is Vanilla Ice.
Well most people would see that as satire and not that the elements of geekdom are to be taken literally as 100% true. There is a category for shows like that: documentaries. I would argue most TV shows does not follow subjects faithfully. Since you mentioned "Friends", I don't think people really believe that New Yorkers spend all of their time hanging out in a coffee shop. Chuck probably does not represent a true government agent any more than Will Smith was your average Bellaire teen.
Personally I thought one of the funniest episodes was "The Alien Parasite Hypothesis" where Howard and Raj decide to settle a dispute by wrestling. In real life, two people angry at each other would have actually wrestled regardless of lack of skill instead of the hilarity of two nerds circling each other endlessly.
Re: (Score:3)
Since you mentioned "Friends", I don't think people really believe that New Yorkers spend all of their time hanging out in a coffee shop.
Yeah, but nobody was trying to say, "Friends is a great show because it's finally New Yorkers' chance to feel represented." People do seem to be latching on to "Big Bang Theory" as some sort of recognition, appreciation, or celebration of geeks and "geek culture".
Re: (Score:3)
Dharma & Greg: "The show starred Jenna Elfman and Thomas Gibson as the title characters, whose characters were complete opposites: Dharma's world view being more spiritual, 'free spirit' type instilled by "hippie" parents, contrasted with Greg's world view of structure, social status requirements, and "white collar duty" instilled by his generations of affluent parents/ancestors." (from wikipedia)
Two and a Half Men - same basic "mismatched cohabitants" schtik.
BBT - Mismatched cohabitants combined with
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:5, Interesting)
This is exactly what's great about The Big Bang theory, and especially discussions on Slashdot about it, there are always a bunch of geeks who will sit and say they don't relate to it and it doesn't represent "proper" geeks, all the while completely oblivious to the fact they're sounding exactly like Sheldon hence disproving their own theory that it's not representative. If you sat Sheldon down in front of a show like the Big Bang Theory this is probably exactly what he'd say:
"That wouldn't be my argument against it. My argument is that it's not a good show. I don't find the characters relateable. I don't think it's particularly funny. It seems like someone took a very bland, unoriginal sitcom and attached a geek gimmick to try to make it interesting, but in my mind it fails. It's not interesting, and the geek gimmick doesn't really work. "
It's like a kind of circular ignorance of what makes the show great. I'd say that contrary to your assertion people watching Big Bang Theory exactly understand geeks and nerds, because when they think of Sheldon and what he'd have to say about it, they'd imagine exactly the sort of holier than thou, no true geek (aka no true Scotsman) argument you've made.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a great, clever argument, since it basically closes off my options. No matter what I say, you can just respond, "Oh you, you're such a Sheldon! That's exactly what he'd say!" In reality, you're only illustrating the sort of dumb ideas that the show inspires. It makes people think they understand-- like I said, in about the way that a bunch of rich white suburban teenage boys, a couple of decades ago, might think that they understood inner city black culture because they bought a Starter jacket and listened to Vanilla Ice. And it's not a "no true scottsman" argument and more than it would be to say, "in fact, Vanilla Ice was not a true inner-city black person".
But fundamentally, it's not a "no true geek" argument. Really, it's a "these characters are weak, poorly written, and representative of nothing" argument. It's a "I've tried watching this show, and found it painfully unfunny" argument.
Re: (Score:3)
Jesus, you're dumb. Not "everyone else", just you.
Part of my point here is actually that "geeks" and "nerds" are people, and not just a set of stereotypes. You don't get to claim to understand who I, as a person, am, just because you watch a show with a poorly formed stereotypes that share relatively cosmetic features with me.
I've been called a geek and a nerd, and not been happy about it. I've then reached the point where I'm like, fuck it, I'm a geek. Fine. You have this stereotype, and I apparentl
Re: (Score:3)
In this case it's not even that people think they understand geeks/nerds from watching this show... it's that they think they ARE geeks/nerds because they watch this show. "I love BBT! I'm such a nerd!"
Yeah, there's something about that aspect of it that annoys me when people talk about the show, and the Vanilla Ice comparison was the best thing that I could come up with. You don't understand black inner-city culture because you listen to rap. You're certainly not part of that group because you like a crappy version of rap.
So yeah, there's something in the appropriation of "nerd culture", but also the extremely poor way in which it's done. "I'm understand you, and I'm just like you, because I watch a
Re: (Score:2)
any show with a laugh track (with the conspicuous exception of maybe Seinfeld) that has a laugh track is not funny. It's condescending.. "Hey dummy, this is funny, laugh!"
Side note, there are two reasons to watch that show, and neither of them have to do Kaley Cuoco's acting ability. :(
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the "I know black people!" thing happens all the time, but I see your point. OTOH, "nerds" have pretty damned good prospects after high school, so crying oppression is a bit incredible.
Re: (Score:2)
Making fun of someone is still making fun of someone. Just because they can get a good job later on doesn't make it better.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe. But it ends, is my point. It ends, and one is rewarded relatively richly afterward (relative to one's intrinsic ability, of course, and subject to the vagaries of fortune).
The discrimination against blacks (to whatever extent it is, and for whatever reason) is much more persistent.
Re:Nerd Blackface (Score:4, Insightful)
If you were paying attention you would notice that they are not making fun of nerd culture as distinct from not-nerd culture. The basis of the humorous situations typically turn out to be the kind of things that really happen to anyone: poor communication in relationships, one spouse making significantly more money than another, existential crises over career shifts, overbearing parents, etc. The closest they get to a distinct nerd situation is when the PhDs mock Wolowitz for only having a Master's degree.
There may be the meta-criticism that they are mocking nerds for not recognizing that their problems as problems anybody could have... then again *you* failed to recognize this as well.
Not unheard of (Score:3)
Seinfeld was in the $600,000 to $1,000,000 range (depending on the actor) back in the late 90's
Re: (Score:2)
The friends cast was paid that much too, then they wanted more so they cancelled the show.
Re: (Score:2)
...they wanted more so they cancelled the show.
That's untrue. They only reason that there was a tenth season is that they got the $1M per ep they asked for (a ridiculous sum at the time, of course, and one I don't think they expected to get). Schwimmer and Kudrow said they wanted season nine to be the last season, but that amount of money is hard for anyone to turn down.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Seinfeld was in the $600,000 to $1,000,000 range (depending on the actor) back in the late 90's
The cast of Friends was making $1M/episode as well.
Re: (Score:2)
What's sad about people making a lot of money? Just because one person makes lots of money doesn't mean anyone else should be sad as a result. Envious maybe. Perhaps even jealous. Unequality is not a bad thing - it's natural.
Over paid (Score:2, Insightful)
for what they do. VASTLY overpaid.
Re: (Score:2)
For an interesting thought project, work backwards to how much the advertisers must be paying the networks to support those kinds of salaries for the actors. Do not forget to factor in production costs, everyone working below the line, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
So $3m/episode for the main stars. The other stars aren't making anywhere near that, and factoring in production costs, say we double the amount to $6m. Average show has 8 minutes of commercials and presuming 30-second ads, that's $375k/commercial (or probably less)
Coincidentally, ads were $326k last fall [businessinsider.com] so my $6m/episode may not be that outlandish.
This also doesn't factor in any other money they make from merchandise sales, syndication ($1.5m/episode several years ago), and "goodwill" for other shows tha
Re: (Score:2)
Using this source https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_pub... [fcc.gov]
We can guess that there must be between 400 to 500 broadcasting stations
Now the quoted figure 326K for 30 seconds, should be for the nationwide broadcast of ads that the local and regional broadcaster cannot use (BB's own time).
So thinking that about 200 stations buy BB, and they give up the 30 second, that would 200 x 326 that's about 65 million gross income per episode.
I think that the number 326K is the NYC, CHI, LA top rates. I would guess that the nati
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I both agree and disagree with you.
On other hand, they are making the production company and NBC a ton of money.
On the other hand, the writers are getting much less than the actors, and I think that at least 60% of the money being made by the show is because of the actors.
The rationale, however, is that the writers are (in theory) easier to replace than the actor, because the public don't see them.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think the production company dips into their own pocket, or that the price of advertising goes up to make the difference?
Consumers pay those bills. Every time you buy something, you are paying those outrages salaries.
It's not life risking, it's not overly hard, they are off a great deal of the year.
If it was actually funny they wouldn't need that laugh track to tell you when the joke is.
Compared to almost every other job on the planet, they are ridiculously over paid.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think the production company dips into their own pocket, or that the price of advertising goes up to make the difference? Consumers pay those bills. Every time you buy something, you are paying those outrages salaries.
It's not life risking, it's not overly hard, they are off a great deal of the year.
If it was actually funny they wouldn't need that laugh track to tell you when the joke is.
Compared to almost every other job on the planet, they are ridiculously over paid.
The price of advertising is already at its maximum. If the network could charge one dollar more for a 30-second spot, they would. The advertisers won't pay more just because the stars now get paid more.
I don't think you understand the concept of value. No one is arguing that what they do is "life risking", but that's not the point (and what "life risking" profession gets paid millions?). What they do is get millions of people to watch a TV show 24 times a year, and that is extremely valuable. If the netwo
Re: (Score:2)
"The advertisers won't pay more just because the stars now get paid more."
false.
"I don't think you understand the concept of value."
I actually do.
"so this obviously (well, maybe not to you) makes great sense for all parties involved."
except the consumer. Anyone who buys a product, regardless if the watch the show, pays and gets no say.
" Have you tried acting/making people laugh week after week for years?"
No, but there are 100,000 of actors that do. Those actors are not special.
" It is incredibly difficult"
M
Re: (Score:3)
"so this obviously (well, maybe not to you) makes great sense for all parties involved." except the consumer. Anyone who buys a product, regardless if the watch the show, pays and gets no say.
I wanted to break this out because I find it fascinating that you feel this way.
Ignoring the fact that you can vote with your dollars and not buy said product, how exactly do you feel that you are entitled to a say in how a company that you buy a product from spends its money? The vast majority of companies are not monopolies (if they were, they wouldn't need to advertise so much) so you have a choice when you buy a product. For most essentials you can even choose generics that don't have much ad cost b
Re: (Score:2)
good actors are hard to find consistently, and a blend of actors whom work decently well together is rarer yet.
That's why Mash, Happydays (until Ron Howard left), dukes of hazard, loveboat, and many other shows lived season after season ( Chico and the man were my favorite )
I can not even think of how many shows per year fail just after the pilot, or even after first broadcast.
Wrong measure (Score:5, Insightful)
You are using the wrong measure.
The cast of BBT are not being paid that much because they are good at acting.
They are being paid that much because collectively, they enable the BBT show to continue being produced, which show generates substantial amounts of income for their corporate overlords through advertising, merchandising, syndication and whatnot.
The "hundreds of thousands" of other better actors you allude to sadly do not have this earning potential and hence, do not have this kind of paycheck.
Quality of acting is irrelevant.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, most of us are if you think about it.
"... and perchance I may think myself so much better than I am, and I know not that. No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main... And therefore never [ask] for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."
"There's not anything to keep up with" (Score:2)
"People have so many choices on TV now, so no one's asking for you to marry us. You can enjoy our show without a weekly appointment."
And that, my friends, and part of the reason people keep turning on to watch it.
Uncoceivable (Score:2)
Is this considered
Re: (Score:3)
This is the first time I've seen (and hopefully the last) BBT discussed on /.
Shouldn't they be starving to death? (Score:5, Insightful)
After all... it's a show about and for people and culture who promote file sharing. Sorry, piracy.
Checking Piratebay it is obvious that it is heavily shared, with thousands of seeds.
Why isn't this show being canceled due to everyone involved with making of it dying from starvation?
I was told that sharing... sorry, pirating of video directly hurts people who make these shows.
I demand that someone does something about it!
Like... take them all behind the shed and shoot them in the head.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a show about people who promote file sharing.
In fact except Penny all the main characters have exceptionally well-paying jobs.
What AC above said... (Score:2)
n/t
I'd love to be wrong, but ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yawn (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't get the controversy. I like the show. It makes me laugh. I don't care what the actors get paid. It's none of my business. I think the comparisons to "black face" are in error. Poking fun at people because of their behavior is not the same as poking fun at people because of their skin color. It's just a sitcom. They come and go. It hasn't jumped the shark yet (not for me, anyway). When it does I'll probably stop watching. And if CBS should cancel it tomorrow, I won't care. My life does not revolve around characters on a tv show, nor does it revolve around the actors and writers. They're getting $1million per show... yawn.
Re: (Score:2)
I do get the controversy.
I like the show; when it takes its character and setting seriously, it brings some good humour to the table, and some interesting plotlines.
Of course, there's a "however..." in this. Too many episodes focus on the outside view of geek culture, making it more a case of laughing at geeks instead of laughing with the characters about things that are relatable.
And then there is their wildly inconsistent characterisation. Especially Penny swings from 'willing to accept Leonard's idiosync
Re: (Score:2)
Especially Penny swings from 'willing to accept Leonard's idiosyncracies', to the mainstream standard 'grow up and throw your toys away' attiturde.
Wildly inconsistent perhaps; but that's women for you. Show nails it. (*ducks*)
In all seriousness, people aren't that rigid and conflicting emotions are common -- what bubbles to the surface today may not be the same as tomorrow. For example I usually tolerate my kids rooms being messy until the days I don't, and then make them clean them up thoroughly - dustin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Family Guy makes fun of america through their stupidity.
Friends only made funny of people when they weren't being 'cool'
Cosby didn't make fun at the expense black people
" The only thing that defines "geek culture" is that it is not mainstream."
Thank you. Being into something a lot that is mainstream is not being a geek.
Someone tattoo that on Will Wheaton's forehead, PLEASE.
Pay scale (Score:2)
Incredible! Think how much the writers will be making, seeing as their talent is the real reason for the show's success.
Compare with sports (Score:2)
Entertainers get paid according to the market value of the entertainment they provide. Full stop. Personally I'm happier seeing them get it for making me laugh than to see someone make more than that kicking a football / hitting a golf ball / swinging a tennis racket (etc). Top footballers (soccer...) earn silly money [thisismoney.co.uk], and I'm sure it's the same with American football, baseball, basketball etc...
If people stopped paying to watch them, stopped spending a fortune on the satellite and cable packages, the rewar
I hate that fucking show (Score:3)
Re:They are the rich (Score:4, Interesting)
They've made quite clear that Sheldon is paid well by the university, and that he's got piles of un-cashed checks laying around.
Only Penny is ever in need of cash.
Re:They are the rich (Score:5, Insightful)
Only Penny is ever in need of cash.
OMG, so that's why they named her Penny, rather than something like Trillian.
Re: (Score:3)
You never know. He might have and those are just pay stubs. It all could just be a colossal misunderstanding on this part.
A fictional character can be as much of a dufus as the rest of us.
Re:They are the rich (Score:4, Funny)
Sheldon doesn't trust banks because he believes that ATM machines will be the first wave of the robot uprising.
Re: (Score:3)
Why the HELL doesn't Sheldon just set up autodeposit?!?
Maybe all those uncashed checks are $ 2.56 each, from Dr. Knuth.
Re:They are the rich (Score:4, Insightful)
And the show really isn't that funny.
Penny has nice tits though.
Re: (Score:3)
Santa isn't real, but I still like to open presents.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless you believe you have a realistic chance of "unwrapping" Kaley Cuoco's tits, I'm not sure there's any distinction to be made...
Re:It's not that much (Score:4, Interesting)
considering Miami Vice was pulling these kinds of numbers in the '80s. Granted, it was only for one actor, but still.
Yes, and if you remember, the other lead actor was paid less well because he was rather less white, and he was rather pissed off about it, understandably.
These star actors cost a lot, yes, but they also brought in a lot of money. So I suppose it was, and still is a sound investment.
Re:It's not that much (Score:4)
Yes, and if you remember, the other lead actor was paid less well because he was rather less white
If you think PMT was less-well-paid because he wasn't white, then you don't understand anything about TV. If people tuned in to watch PMT more than Don Johnson, he would have been paid more than Don Johnson. The truth is, Don Johnson and hot girls in bikinis were about the only reasons to tune into that show. Just about any decent actor (white or not) could have played Tubbs, and we wouldn't have cared.
Re: (Score:3)
Don Johnson had actually been on one good movie. 'A Boy and His Dog'.
So he rated more.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and if you remember, the other lead actor was paid less well because he was rather less white, and he was rather pissed off about it, understandably.
Which is why I find it interesting that Simon Helberg and Kunal Nayyar's names were conspicuously absent from the list of million-dollar-an-episode actors. You know, appearances and all.
Re: (Score:2)
considering Miami Vice was pulling these kinds of numbers in the '80s. Granted, it was only for one actor, but still.
I think all 6 stars of Friends were pulling in $1M/episode at the end of its run. What was once outrageous is now common place. I guess that is progress of sorts.
Re: (Score:2)
Two and a Half Men star Charlie Sheenearned $1.25 million an episode at the end, with his comedy co-star Jon Cryer getting paid $550,000. Hugh Laurie earned $400,000 (£255,000) per ep in season 7.
I'm consistently disappointed by TBBT, so this 1M/ep is rather surprising. Not worth it, other than to rely on a working formula...TV seasons are akin to movie sequels, in this aspect and they have nothing to replace it with.
Re: (Score:2)
The Simpsons cast has been pulling this down (and more, now) for quite some time. And the main cast of Friends did too, for a shorter time, but still. the main thing they both had going for them was they stuck together. It is an ensemble cast, and the cast negotiated as a unit. "Take all six of us, and pay us all he big bux, or we all six walk".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Chuck Lorre has $600,000,000 already. (back in 2011 anyway, probably more now)
I imagine Bill Prady is pretty rich too
Re: (Score:2)
I think you mean episode 3 or 4.
Re: (Score:3)
I assumed it was a laugh track too, but they film in front of a live audience.
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen the show in person, there are indeed people there laughing. It's no secret there are paid people mixed into the crowd to get them going. Very few sitcoms use laugh tracks, they use professional audience members.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Absolutely.
And we need *REAL* policemen playing the parts on those detective shows. And we should have *REAL* secret agents on programs like Marvel's Agents of Shield... Oh, and we need *REAL* aliens on shows like Doctor Who...
<eyeroll />
Re: (Score:2)
One of them is a real scientist with a PHD.