Jump to content


 

Popular Pages on the Main Site:   Next Episode | Official Merchandise | Sheldon Quotes | Latest News | Episode Guide

Welcome to The Big Bang Theory Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Should Alex Become A Main Character On Bbt?


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1
Dayton Lavon Kitchens

Dayton Lavon Kitchens

    New Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts

Alex,  Sheldon's assistant this last season has been on the show occasionally.    I'm wondering if she should become a regular.    Perhaps eventually paired with the luckless Stuart.    True, the cast is already pretty large for a half hour comedy and it could grow somewhat cumbersome, but they have integrated Amy and Bernadette into the show without difficulty.

 

Most importantly,  overall the show has in my opinion gotten steadily better with the increased role of female characters in the cast.



#2
3ku11

3ku11

    Senior Executive Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,117 posts

No she shoulden't all the characters and the cast right now is like 6-7, anymore main characters would take away from the overall quality of the show, as that would mean air time would spread to thin. Amy and Bernadette were brought in as a neccessary inclusion, gf's for Howard and Sheldon. Alex served her purpose last season, to cause Penny to realize she does have insecurities in her relationship with Leonard, it was a plot device really, their is no reason for her to return, let alone in a main character capacity, regular reoccuring sure but thats it.I don think the show has gotten steadily better, it was awesome from the begginning but like I said, Amy and Bernadette were neccessary changes  but I cannot see any more female casts been added to the cast, theirs no reason for it at this point of the series. I think the female cast additions made the show better, but I don't think the inclusion of more female cast members would make any difference to the overall quality of the show, just as adding a male cast member regardless of the character would make a difference JMO. Besides I dont think Alex was that popular after hitting on Leonard haha. 


Edited by 3ku11, 29 October 2013 - 07:14 AM.

  • BlackWhiteRose, mjc45, Nogravitasatall and 1 other like this

#3
Convict13

Convict13

    Where are we? Damfino!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,573 posts

No, there are enough characters, but in saying that I think for her to pop up from time to time would be good, I liked her.


  • BlackWhiteRose and mjc45 like this

#4
HollyAndOatmeal

HollyAndOatmeal

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Arrested Development has 9 cast members, so it's perfectly reasonable to think that adding one more character to this show wouldn't necessarily take away the quality of it.  I know it seems scary to some, but not to all.



#5
Tensor

Tensor

    Ratings Guru

  • Global Moderator
  • 3,705 posts
The problem this runs into is the same one as Sheldon's mother, Leonard's mother, or Penny's father. They are all working on other projects. Margo Harshman, the actress that plays Alex, currently has a recurring roll as McGee's girlfriend, on NCIS. One of the funnier headlines, in an article announcing her role, was "Hofstadters loss is McGee's gain"
  • mjc45, BangerMain, stardustmelody and 1 other like this

#6
Martin Pollard

Martin Pollard

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 497 posts

Occasional recurring character, yes. Main character, no. The show is already juggling seven main characters, and with only 20 minutes to fill, it's often a struggle to find meaningful things for them to do (Raj, in particular, often gets the short end of the stick). They can't have everyone become part of the core cast. ;) Plus, as Tensor said, Margo Harshman has a recurring role on NCIS and possibly has other projects lined up as well, and doesn't have time to devote to TBBT in anything other than an occasional guest appearance. And IMHO, using the large cast of a TV series that lasted only three seasons on network television (and one on Netflix) as an example doesn't exactly bolster the argument. ;)


  • Convict13 and Carlos like this

#7
HollyAndOatmeal

HollyAndOatmeal

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Occasional recurring character, yes. Main character, no. The show is already juggling seven main characters, and with only 20 minutes to fill, it's often a struggle to find meaningful things for them to do (Raj, in particular, often gets the short end of the stick). They can't have everyone become part of the core cast. ;) Plus, as Tensor said, Margo Harshman has a recurring role on NCIS and possibly has other projects lined up as well, and doesn't have time to devote to TBBT in anything other than an occasional guest appearance. And IMHO, using the large cast of a TV series that lasted only three seasons on network television (and one on Netflix) as an example doesn't exactly bolster the argument. ;)

Use all the winky faces ya want, AD is a critically acclaimed sitcom.  Everyone that's a true fan of the show knows why it didn't last longer than 3 seasons on Fox.  The critics loved it, and fans who watch it in reruns love it.  So, yes, using a critically acclaimed half hour sitcom that had such a mass following that it ended up coming back for another season (and possibly more) on Netflix is a very good example to use...IMHO. 

 

ETA:  This is from the show's wiki page: 

Throughout its original run, Arrested Development received overwhelming critical acclaim.[2] It is widely regarded as one of the defining comedies of the 2000s and has been praised by many critics as one of the greatest comedies of all time.[83][84] In 2007, the show was listed as one of Time magazine's "100 Best TV Shows of All-TIME."[3]

Tim Stack of Entertainment Weekly praised the series, saying "Is it beating a dead horse to once again state that this underappreciated gem is the best sitcom on TV? Too bad. Arrested Development is the best sitcom on TV!"[85]

David Bianculli from the New York Daily News stated "If you're not watching this series on Fox, the least you can do is buy it on DVD. You'll love it, and it's such a dense show (in the best sense of the word) that it rewards repeated viewing. Like Scrubs and the British version of The Office, it is the sort of show that truly deserves to be seen uninterrupted, several episodes at a time, for maximum enjoyment. The laughs-per-minute quotient here is insanely high, making it great value as a home library purchase."[86]

Alison Powell of The Guardian said "As Hollywood agents worry about the demise of the town's lowing cash cow, the multi-camera, staged sitcom, here to save the day is Arrested Development, a farce of such blazing wit and originality, that it must surely usher in a new era in comedy."[87]

Gillian Flynn of Entertainment Weekly named Arrested Development the best television show of 2005 and said in her review that "As oddball as Arrested is, it's also humane. A flawless cast—from Will Arnett's breathy, bombastic Gob to Jessica Walter's boozy Lucille—grounds it, aided by Ron Howard's affable narration. Of course, the center of sensibility is good son Michael (Jason Bateman) and his even better son, George Michael (Michael Cera). Bateman and Cera give the best reacts around—the former all weary exasperation, the latter adorably bunny-stunned. Together, they're the sweetest, awkwardest straight men on the smartest, most shockingly funny series on TV...which is likely canceled, despite six Emmy wins. It's a perversion not even the Bluths deserve."[88] In 2012, Entertainment Weekly listed the show at No. 2 in the "25 Best Cult TV Shows from the Past 25 Years," praising its "fast, delirious, interlocking jokes that don't pander to the masses; winky gags (e.g. fake preview scenes for the following week's episode); and a cast of absurd characters."


Edited by HollyAndOatmeal, 29 October 2013 - 10:05 AM.


#8
Martin Pollard

Martin Pollard

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 497 posts

Use all the winky faces ya want, AD is a critically acclaimed sitcom.  Everyone that's a true fan of the show knows why it didn't last longer than 3 seasons on Fox.  The critics loved it, and fans who watch it in reruns love it.  So, yes, using a critically acclaimed half hour sitcom that had such a mass following that it ended up coming back for another season (and possibly more) on Netflix is a very good example to use...IMHO.

 

You speak from the viewpoint of the unabashed fanboy, and that's fine. The show's hardcore fans love the show, that's true, but the harsh truth is that all the critical acclaim in the world didn't translate into viewers, and it's that which speaks towards the success or failure of a television show. Perhaps your devotion to the show blinds you to the possibility that there are aspects to it that didn't attract (or even actively turned off) viewers. So no, I don't think that using Arrested Development is a good example of a successful comedy with a large ensemble cast, because quite frankly, it wasn't all that successful, despite the protestations of the critics and the fanboys.



#9
Shamyfan

Shamyfan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 463 posts
I dont want her as a main character. I didnt care for her at all when she was on TBBT. She was after Leonard, made Penny jealous...more lenny drama. Im sick of lenny drama.

Its already strecthing that with Lucy being a possible cast member.

Trying to fit 7 ppl in 19-21 min is hard let alone 8 ppl.

#10
HollyAndOatmeal

HollyAndOatmeal

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 123 posts

You speak from the viewpoint of the unabashed fanboy, and that's fine. The show's hardcore fans love the show, that's true, but the harsh truth is that all the critical acclaim in the world didn't translate into viewers, and it's that which speaks towards the success or failure of a television show. Perhaps your devotion to the show blinds you to the possibility that there are aspects to it that didn't attract (or even actively turned off) viewers. So no, I don't think that using Arrested Development is a good example of a successful comedy with a large ensemble cast, because quite frankly, it wasn't all that successful, despite the protestations of the critics and the fanboys.

It won an Emmy for best comedy series.  I can't help it if it was a great show with a large cast.  I don't make the rules :)


  • Nogravitasatall likes this

#11
stardustmelody

stardustmelody

    Philosopher and Astronomer of the Court

  • Valued Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,012 posts

I actually liked Alex and would not mind seeing her come back on a recurring basis.  I always thought they might go somewhere with she and Raj because they both shared an interest in astrophysics, but I am glad to see Margo is on NCIS for now (even though I am a McAbby fan through and through).   ;)   I still don't mind her being Sheldon's assistant.   I think she was over her Leonard obsession by the time she last aired so that is good as well.   I honestly felt she had more potential as a character than Lucy.  While I like Kate a lot, I felt her role stunk.   Lucy was written far too narrow that there was not much they could have done with her in the long-run.   It is unfortunate they wrote her so poorly because she could have been fun to see if the role were different.   I liked her being quirky, but not so narrow that she could not integrate well with the rest of the group without changing all of the characteristics they built in the character.   Now that Kate has her own series, I doubt she will be back for more than the one episode this season.  Maybe she will return in the future, but for now, I think she will only be back the one time.  

 

Alex had more potential to fit into the group and make for interesting dynamic overall.   For example, would she and Penny ever get along if Alex was no longer a perceived threat?   Would Amy and she ever get along or would Alex find Amy to be just as weird as Sheldon.  Would she see his is happier with Amy and therefore support them?   Would  she and Raj have ever gotten together?   I mean there were so many ways they could have gone with her and it was nice to see a girl be  perceived as "attractive" and intelligent on the show.   She had a much better written character than Lucy for long-term potential.

 

I do agree that 20 minutes goes very fast and with seven full time members and a fair number of recurring characters, the time flies.


Edited by stardustmelody, 29 October 2013 - 11:44 AM.

  • Convict13 and Chrismo like this

#12
djsurrey

djsurrey

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts

I disagree on this one. I think Lucy has more potential of eventually fitting in. Penny could become friends with Lucy but I don't think there is any potential for Penny to become friends with Alex.


Edited by djsurrey, 29 October 2013 - 11:49 AM.

  • Sursonica and Susana Alcira Cairó like this

#13
bigbangsheldon

bigbangsheldon

    chloe

  • Chat Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,054 posts

No thank you.



#14
Chrismo

Chrismo

    Senior Executive Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,377 posts

I disagree on this one. I think Lucy has more potential of eventually fitting in. Penny could become friends with Lucy but I don't think there is any potential for Penny to become friends with Alex.

Lucy didn't like groups. Raj just learned to talk to women. It would be like starting over for Raj. He couldn't be part of the group. Penny wouldn't like Alex. But Alex does have something in common with Raj. I don't see how the group,including Penny, could deny his chance for love even if it was with Alex. I couldn't see Alex as a regular but I could see her on recurring basis. I don't watch NCIS but it doesn't sound like she is a regular on the show?



#15
Shamyfan

Shamyfan

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 463 posts
I like Kate but don't care for her character Lucy.

The things the writers made lucy do made me not care for her.

I felt bad for raj. (Even though I don't believe the whole raj getting over talking to girls they pulled in the last ep s6). He has been in love w that deaf chic and nothing happened after she dumped him. Anywho...

Maybe next season. They will give Lucy some life to her like they did with Amy.

Margo IRL might be nice but don't care for the character

#16
Cecilia

Cecilia

    Post-Modern Rationalist Shamy Cynic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,177 posts

I like Alex and I wouldn't mind if she became a regular. I know that I would like to see her again sometime.



#17
SRAM

SRAM

    Wandering Gypsy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,158 posts
I don't like Alex as a main character but I would like to see her on the show again. I liked her in the Valentine episode and the way she interacts with Sheldon is funny. I would like to see Raj go out with her once or even bring her to a takeout night at Sheldon and Leonard's. I still think there is some comedy with how Penny deals with her. I still want to see the guys and girls do a paintball episode and Alex could be with Raj. I would also like to see Sheldon get her doing crazy things for him.
  • Cecilia likes this

#18
3ku11

3ku11

    Senior Executive Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,117 posts

I never watched AD but I dont think its fair to undermine a show regardless of your reasons behind it, AD was never a ratings juggernaut like Friends, Seinfeild, or TBBT but it was critically acclaimed, and from what ive heard very quirky, clever, and witty, and had a fast paced dialogue. IMO Friends was the most defining sitcom of the mid 90's to late 2000's, but who am I to say AD wasent. I say this because the success of Friends brought out TBBT, HIMYM, MF, and you could even argue AD but thats JMO. Alex was a more interesting character then Lucy, Lucy was more unique but she had a limited capacity in to what she could bring the show, she was quirky but their are already enough quirky characters on the show, I thought their would be more potential for comedy with Alex and Sheldon, thought it was funny the way she would react to him, kinda makes me forget how normal people react to him who are not his close friends, ala Leonard, Penny, Howard e.t.c. I thought she and Raj would become an item too, but I heard some where that was the plan, but the actress has other commitments right now, so its obviousley not possible at this point. Although Raj can talk to women without the aid of alcahol, it does not neccessarily mean he is very confident, he still lacks the experience of having a girlfreind, and apart from the cultural differences this is probably the reasons why he keeps striking out, maybe Pennys set up well work this time haha. AD did have 9 characters and it worked for that show, but TBBT being a mult-camera tradational sitcom, its in a different format, and its a different type show to AD, different type of comedy so needs specific characters who fill those roles, you could argue too TBBT is one of the most unique sitcoms ever with all the nerds, with AD and other sitcoms like HIMYM, have pretty archetypical characters, its not everyday you see a sitcom with 4 nerds and their hottie neighbour who becomes part of their world, as Howard would say "One of us, one of us, one of us..." haha. 


Edited by 3ku11, 29 October 2013 - 07:00 PM.


#19
Nogravitasatall

Nogravitasatall

    ... And absolutely no clue

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,395 posts
I dont know that Alex was quirky enough. She was like a control normal, bouncing off Sheldon's weirdness. Too much like Penny, who had that role. And they dont really do love triangles, so the momentary threat was enough to give the required nudge. And Raj needs to experiment more. Give him a chance to have some fun.

#20
djsurrey

djsurrey

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts

 

"...I thought their would be more potential for comedy with Alex and Sheldon, thought it was funny the way she would react to him,..."

I thought it was funny too, except there was no reason at all for her to stand for his treatment of her.  In fact when he told her he wanted her to do his "sensitivity" course because he really did not have the time it kind of went too far. Asking her to take his course would give her more than enough reason to leave. She made a complaint and to have it thrown back at her like that was kind of intolerable.


Edited by djsurrey, 29 October 2013 - 07:39 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users