Jump to content
The Big Bang Theory Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Tripper

817 The Colonization Application (March 5)

Your Episode Rating  

83 members have voted

  1. 1. How would you rate this episode?

    • Excellent
      43
    • Very Good
      25
    • Good
      7
    • Okay
      5
    • Bad
      0
    • Very Bad
      3


Recommended Posts

Did anybody else notice that when Leonard goes to the closet to get Penny's be-lated Valentine's gift, that nothing is actually hanging in the closet? Just thought that was humorous.

Because that's not his closet, it's just a general store cupboard in the main room, his closet is in his bedroom ala " The Cooper-Hoftstadter Polarisation"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

And, of course, you can have nudity and rather realistic simulated sex on the pay cable movie and show channels such as HBO, Showtime, etc. There are also pay hard core sex.

Well, now we're getting somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Big Bang Theory Season 8 Episode 17- The Colonization Application- Review
 
Filler galore! In previous episodes, I have lamented the poor quality of filler plots. However, this episode was pretty much all filler, so that was never going to bode well for me.
 
Sheldon and Amy getting a turtle was a silly idea and the whole idea of Sheldon not telling her this and that was a strange way to advance it. I think it would have been much funnier to have Sheldon and Amy actually buy the turtle; we could do with another pet on this show. The Mars mission and Shamy breaking up and then inevitably making up again just made this whole plot seem pointless and as if the show was just going through the motions.
 
I suppose the only thing briefly in favour of the Shamy plot was that it wasn't the worst storyline in this episode; the Lenny body paint fiasco was just marginally worse. It was just a very uninteresting plot to be honest, and the timeslot and family nature of the show does not exactly lend itself to sex jokes about Leonard and Penny, so I think the writers made a poor decision including it as there were few funny gags they could make about this scenario which were suitable for the show.
 
The best plot (and that really isn't saying much) was the Raj/Howard/Emily storyline, mostly due to Howard's jokes to Raj over the phone. Kunal and Simon made the best of something mediocre here, whilst Melissa Rauch might as well have had the week off.
 
Best Line: Raj: 'you called my Apple Pie crust doughy. But the truth is, you were right and I was just angry at myself'

 

Performance of the Week: I'm going for Kunal Nayyer. One of the most underrated actors in television.

 

Score: 6/10.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My response was, "Only if he names the cat Schrodinger."

The cat wasn't (and wouldn't have been, even it it existed) called Schrodinger, because Schrodinger was the name of the scientist.

It's like Frankenstein, who was the creator of, and not the monster itself.

Also, would their children really be Martians? 

If an American couple move to England, for their work, and have a child while living there, isn't the child still American?

By that reasoning, wouldn't Shamy children, born on Mars, be both human and American?

Edited by Stephen Hawking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, would their children really be Martians? 

If an American couple move to England, for their work, and have a child while living there, isn't the child still American?

By that reasoning, wouldn't Shamy children, born on Mars, be both human and American?

Actually if they're moving there long-term then yes, that child in your example would probably get the British citizenship and thus wouldn't be American as such. I mean, in the end it's a technicality that is handled differently by country. Some are following the principle of Jus Soli (citizenship matches the place of birth) and others Jus Sanguinis (citizenship matches the parents' citizenship) or a mix of both. How that would be handled on planet Mars is of course anyone's guess. lol

Edited by April

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That raises another, space related conundrum.

As our space journeys become longer, a time must eventually come, when births take place in transit.

What nationality/planetality (I've just created a new word. :icon_biggrin: ) would those babies have?

Edited by Stephen Hawking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually if they're moving there long-term then yes, that child in your example would probably get the British citizenship and thus wouldn't be American as such. I mean, in the end it's a technicality that is handled differently by country. Some are following the principle of Jus Soli (citizenship matches the place of birth) and others Jus Sanguinis (citizenship matches the parents' citizenship) or a mix of both. How that would be handled on planet Mars is of course anyone's guess. lol

According to American law children born overseas of American parents have dual citizenship (American and the country of their birth)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Penny and Leonard moved on the Z axis, wouldn't they have spread paint length-ways, along the sheet?

Surely, to show no movement, they would have to move on the X axis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

On 6/12/2016 at 2:04 PM, Stephen Hawking said:

If Penny and Leonard moved on the Z axis, wouldn't they have spread paint length-ways, along the sheet?

Surely, to show no movement, they would have to move on the X axis?

Not quite Steven, think of it this way.    

x-axis  (Left and right)  (Length)

⬅️-------------➡️

y-axis  (forward and backward)  (width)

⬆️

⬇️

The z-axis (Up and down)   Normally you would think of the z-axis, as the height or how tall  something is.

When it's written on a piece of paper, (or a screen, like here) the y-axis is not considered up or down.  To really understand the axis, think of it as standing on a floor.     Then the forward and backward of the y-axis, and the height of the z-axis is easier to understand.  So, when Leonard mentioned moving in the z-axis, he was thinking of moving up and down.   

 

  • Penny Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tensor said:

 

 

 

Not quite Steven, think of it this way.    

x-axis  (Left and right)  (Length)

⬅️-------------➡️

y-axis  (forward and backward)  (width)

⬆️

⬇️

The z-axis (Up and down)   Normally you would think of the z-axis, as the height or how tall  something is.

When it's written on a piece of paper, (or a screen, like here) the y-axis is not considered up or down.  To really understand the axis, think of it as standing on a floor.     Then the forward and backward of the y-axis, and the height of the z-axis is easier to understand.  So, when Leonard mentioned moving in the z-axis, he was thinking of moving up and down.   

 

Thanks for the clarification. I was confused as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.