Jump to content

[Spoilers] Season 11 Discussion Thread


Tensor
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, JE7 said:

There is nothing to diagnose, he is just "quirky" 

Just ask TPTB

I understand that is what the TPTB say. Myself and many others see autism. I wish they would just give him the diagnosis. I suppose they don't so they don't have to be boxed in somehow. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Sah said:

I understand that is what the TPTB say. Myself and many others see autism. I wish they would just give him the diagnosis. I suppose they don't so they don't have to be boxed in somehow. 

Laughing at a "quirky" person is acceptable, laughing at a person with a disorder is not.

If they diagnose him most of the jokes surrounding him now become off limits 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tensor said:

I'd like to know what data you used to base your claim for too much Lennyl, or for that matter what exactly too much Lenny means.   

I’m not sure that’s a question that could be answered with data points. It’s entirely objective. How much garlic is too much garlic? Depends entirely on who you ask, and it’s impossible to be right or wrong. It’s all a matter of personal taste. 

  • Like 3
  • Penny Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gbb said:

I’m not sure that’s a question that could be answered with data points. It’s entirely objective. How much garlic is too much garlic? Depends entirely on who you ask, and it’s impossible to be right or wrong. It’s all a matter of personal taste. 

A person's individual feelings may be subjective, but how did they arrive at that?   In the case of garlic, while one person may think three cloves is too many, and another may think it's not enough, there is an actual number there.    There are actually numbers that indicate there was more Sheldon and Penny than Lenny in the early years.  Since that's the case, then why is the complaint about too much Lenny, and not too much Sheldon and Penny?  All I was asking for was the reasoning behind the "too much Lenny".  If the answer is "any Lenny, is too much Lenny" then there is the reasoning, and the reason the too much Sheldon and Penny wasn't a problem.  

  • Like 5
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Tensor said:

A person's individual feelings may be subjective, but how did they arrive at that?   In the case of garlic, while one person may think three cloves is too many, and another may think it's not enough, there is an actual number there.    There are actually numbers that indicate there was more Sheldon and Penny than Lenny in the early years.  Since that's the case, then why is the complaint about too much Lenny, and not too much Sheldon and Penny?  All I was asking for was the reasoning behind the "too much Lenny".  If the answer is "any Lenny, is too much Lenny" then there is the reasoning, and the reason the too much Sheldon and Penny wasn't a problem.  

So he was right in his kind of way. :shy:

misc_422.gif.90e48bd3da1552b799e539a3f60d9b3c.gif

Edited by veejay
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all things can be reduced to numbers and data points. People like what they like, they don't need to explain or justify it nor should they have to.

Demanding that someone justify their likes or dislikes with "hard data" to "prove" it is just ridiculous 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sah said:

I do not think Leonard has had it easy either. By all appearances he has hard life. I can't imagine having Beverly as a mom. I love that Leonard is a friend to Sheldon even when he is a pain in the ass. He is a very compassionate, kind person.

I don't think Sheldon finds the world constantly oppressing because people don't get him. I think he has trouble decoding and understanding the world around him. He sees things as black and white. Very concrete. His career in physics is concrete. He excels at it because of this. The other stuff is not concrete there is shades of grey. This is where it is hard for him to understand. The shades of grey. I wish they would give him the actual diagnosis. It would make it easier I think. I spent years in Occupational Therapy as a kid being taught social skills in a very, very direct manner. I still today have some trouble with these issues. I wonder what Sheldon would be like if he had worked with an OT as a kid.

Well, see if they retcon YS, I guess. I do think he does battles, but you are probably right to think he doesn’t feel oppressed. He has stated that  “social convention is stupid”. We are all idiots to him and he is homo novus, doing his best amongst the labradoodles. 

My only literary experience of what he might be like if he were real is “The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time” a 2003 mystery novel by British writer Mark Haddon. That was an affecting read.

But as he isn’t diagnosed and his creators say he isn’t  anything really except a funny character. Which is why I can bag him, and not be bagging those who stan* him.

(*trying out a new hip^ term)

((^don’t know new hip term for hip))

:) 

Font crisis. Arrghh

Edited by Nogravitasatall
FONT crisis
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JE7 said:

Not all things can be reduced to numbers and data points. People like what they like, they don't need to explain or justify it nor should they have to.

Demanding that someone justify their likes or dislikes with "hard data" to "prove" it is just ridiculous 

I was just asking why.  Several people have the mistaken impression that there was all this Lenny in the early years, when that wasn’t the case.  If the too much Lenny was based on this mistaken impression, then there is data to show it’s wrong. Like I said, I was just wondering why.  If they don’t want to answer I’m not demanding that they do. If their reasoning is any Lenny is too much, I admit there isn’t any data for that.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, vonmar said:

Season 8 Episode 3 from Seat 42F

 

TBBT-8x03-41.jpg

I've always admired how well actors deal with green screen scenes. Look at it, a blank wasteland, yet when we see the finished product, they have breathed life and realism into it. I have to laugh at the handsome carpet though - surely not a common feature of American baseball parks? LOL!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Nogravitasatall said:

One of my problems with the show is that it promotes Shamy who both act without empathy and oft show little regard for human dignity (I haven’t forgotten the toilet scheduling of Leonard) - and who don’t get ethics clearance when they experiment on their lab-rat, and presumed, friends.  

Also, I have the inkling (but not the sound argument at hand) that the sexual history jokes will be at sometime as archaic and unsettling as Amos & Andy and Benny Hill. It might take while, but there seems to be a vibe around the regard for women and their targeting for exploitation because of their sexual history or even just because they are women. Or maybe not. When we get ms joie in  friends re-imagined and she is cheered and loved by millions for her pantless exploits we will know.  What are the chances.

With regard to the romance - they still have it - but it’s not for me. It’s fine enough, I guess, but they changed the product without changing the wrapping. Well done them for the cleverness of executing that. The science was a hook, device or gimmick, by the way (like the camisoles). Science was never popular broadly in the home market, so that dissipated. There are stats for that, despite the best work of Degrasse Tyson et al.

Now it’s a tremendous and respectable vehicle for stunt casting. Which is nice. And useful.

Times are changing certainly, but I don't know that full sexual parity will be reached in my lifetime, if ever.  IMO, responsible enjoyment of a natural activity should not be the basis of judging a person's worth. But I do strongly adhere to a belief in equal praise or blame within a sexual group, as well as between the sexes. IOW, if it's okay for Jane, it's okay for Judy.

I totally agree that the science concept was bait and not the fish. Still, anything that encourages an interest in the sciences and strips away the notion that it is a strictly rarefied pursuit has broader value. My favourite proponents, cheerleaders if you will, would be Stephen Hawking and Brian Cox. They showed that a hard core physicist could also be steeped in good humour and popular culture. 

Their video clip at a Monty Python event, commenting on "The Galaxy Song"  made me weep with laughter. (You will be so missed Stephen.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPOa72dsrGw

Now, surely even an "Ordinary Joe" would find that funny? 

  • Like 1
  • Koala Face 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chrismo said:

Actually there was no Lenny in seasons 1,2,4 and parts of 3 and 5.

With the exception of when Leonard was with Pryia, There was a "Lenny", albeit was a best friends Lenny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 3ku11 said:

Theirs barley any Lenny in this show anymore anyway. So not sure why you would b watching or not watching for them. They carried the show first two seasons. But beyond that Sheldon took the steering wheel. In s6 their story was at its peak. Show has resorted to sitcom tropes and clichies ova the years yes. Penny is a walking Stereotype.

And THIS is so very annoying. She was originally the typical busty blond, yes. But the writers went from downgrading her to drunken tramp, followed by the sitcom cliche - bitchy, demeaning wife to a thoroughly decent guy. Why?!  Happily, this series has righted the ship to an extent.

6 hours ago, Gbb said:

I’m not sure that’s a question that could be answered with data points. It’s entirely objective. How much garlic is too much garlic? Depends entirely on who you ask, and it’s impossible to be right or wrong. It’s all a matter of personal taste. 

Well said. As useful as Tensor's screen time breakdowns are, in the end its true that too little or too much is completely determined by one's interests, experiences and preferences.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JE7 said:

Not all things can be reduced to numbers and data points. People like what they like, they don't need to explain or justify it nor should they have to.

Demanding that someone justify their likes or dislikes with "hard data" to "prove" it is just ridiculous 

I totally agree - liking is not quantifiable. To be clear, when I say too much Lenny or too much Shamy, I am referring to the change in balance between the original concepts of the show (science/nerd interests and sex).

There once was a more equitable distribution of those elements, followed in subsequent series by a very strong emphasis on relationships over the characters' careers and hobbies.

6 hours ago, Tensor said:

I was just asking why.  Several people have the mistaken impression that there was all this Lenny in the early years, when that wasn’t the case.  If the too much Lenny was based on this mistaken impression, then there is data to show it’s wrong. Like I said, I was just wondering why.  If they don’t want to answer I’m not demanding that they do. If their reasoning is any Lenny is too much, I admit there isn’t any data for that.  

I don't see that anyone thinks there was excessive Lenny in the early seasons. I have been trying to make exactly the point that the BALANCE in the early seasons is what made the show different. Over time, that apple cart got upset, so what started as a well-worn trope came to the fore, evolving into a cliche which dominated the stories.

1 hour ago, Chrismo said:

Actually there was no Lenny in seasons 1,2,4 and parts of 3 and 5.

We can stipulate that there was no "Lenny", as in a committed couple during those periods. However, "Lenny" as a generic concept can refer to the desire between them. From the pilot, it was a constant undercurrent of the show.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sah said:

I do not think Leonard has had it easy either. By all appearances he has hard life. I can't imagine having Beverly as a mom. I love that Leonard is a friend to Sheldon even when he is a pain in the ass. He is a very compassionate, kind person.

I don't think Sheldon finds the world constantly oppressing because people don't get him. I think he has trouble decoding and understanding the world around him. He sees things as black and white. Very concrete. His career in physics is concrete. He excels at it because of this. The other stuff is not concrete there is shades of grey. This is where it is hard for him to understand. The shades of grey. I wish they would give him the actual diagnosis. It would make it easier I think. I spent years in Occupational Therapy as a kid being taught social skills in a very, very direct manner. I still today have some trouble with these issues. I wonder what Sheldon would be like if he had worked with an OT as a kid.

Though I see why a specific diagnosis is not stated, I also wish it were sometimes. While it's true that laughing at him would then often be off-limits, it might also temper some of the very harsh opinions of him.

Sheldon's synesthesia wasn't named either, and it was a missed opportunity to reinforce the idea that some people's perceptions are expanded, enhanced, or simply different. If he sees prime numbers as pink, his view of a formula or even a restaurant bill will differ greatly from the average person's.

Sah, have you seen "The Good Doctor"? I have been following it and I think it's a wonderfully written show. The plots are satisfying and it really does help me to better understand the main character's journey through the ordinary world.  Sheldon has been re-written to be a complete ass, so Dr. Murphy has replaced him as my quirky character of interest.

 

Edited by GivesAWhit
Additional commentary
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GivesAWhit said:

I totally agree - liking is not quantifiable. To be clear, when I say too much Lenny or too much Shamy, I am referring to the change in balance between the original concepts of the show (science/nerd interests and sex).

And see, I get that and have no hard data to refute it. But it does give me insight.  

1 hour ago, GivesAWhit said:

There once was a more equitable distribution of those elements, followed in subsequent series by a very strong emphasis on relationships over the characters' careers and hobbies.

Again, if that's your feeling,  I don't have numbers to show any different.  But, again, that does give me insight.

 

1 hour ago, GivesAWhit said:

I don't see that anyone thinks there was excessive Lenny in the early seasons. I have been trying to make exactly the point that the BALANCE in the early seasons is what made the show different. Over time, that apple cart got upset, so what started as a well-worn trope came to the fore, evolving into a cliche which dominated the stories.

The excessive Lenny in earlier seasons has been brought up before.  Mostly as a justification as to why there is so much Shamy at this time.  As in, "it's OK to have so much Shamy now, since there was so much Lenny in the early years."   This has been repeated by different posters at different times, and I was just trying to find out the why's of the "there was too much Lenny in the early seasons".  

  But, again, define balance.  Different people have different definitions of that.   So people have different opinions on what a balanced show should look like.  You've given your answer.  I don't fully agree with it, but then you probably don't agree with my feelings on the matter, and that's fine.   

 

1 hour ago, GivesAWhit said:

We can stipulate that there was no "Lenny", as in a committed couple during those periods. However, "Lenny" as a generic concept can refer to the desire between them. From the pilot, it was a constant undercurrent of the show.

As was the dichotomy between Sheldon and Penny. In fact, there was much more of this, than a generic concept of Lenny.  But ya know, I never hear anyone say there was too much of that in the early seasons, or how that dichotomy threw off the balance.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tensor said:

 

 

As was the dichotomy between Sheldon and Penny. In fact, there was much more of this, than a generic concept of Lenny.  But ya know, I never hear anyone say there was too much of that in the early seasons, or how that dichotomy threw off the balance.  

But people ironically have complained about too much Sheldon and Penny in later seasons. I remember the love of it in the 200th episode and the staring into each others eyes.

Edited by Chrismo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tensor said:

And see, I get that and have no hard data to refute it. But it does give me insight.  

Again, if that's your feeling,  I don't have numbers to show any different.  But, again, that does give me insight.

 

The excessive Lenny in earlier seasons has been brought up before.  Mostly as a justification as to why there is so much Shamy at this time.  As in, "it's OK to have so much Shamy now, since there was so much Lenny in the early years."   This has been repeated by different posters at different times, and I was just trying to find out the why's of the "there was too much Lenny in the early seasons".  

  But, again, define balance.  Different people have different definitions of that.   So people have different opinions on what a balanced show should look like.  You've given your answer.  I don't fully agree with it, but then you probably don't agree with my feelings on the matter, and that's fine.   

 

As was the dichotomy between Sheldon and Penny. In fact, there was much more of this, than a generic concept of Lenny.  But ya know, I never hear anyone say there was too much of that in the early seasons, or how that dichotomy threw off the balance.  

I think addressing this will clarify what I mean by balance. Interactions between Leonard and Penny featured mainly his longing for her and her repressed attraction to him (romance driven). The interplay between Sheldon and Penny was mainly based on his pedantic view of the world and her dismissal of that view. (The science/nerd/weird guy factor.) There was a sprinkling of social friction as well, due to Sheldon's complete lack of understanding of usual behaviour.

So, while the science/nerd balance could easily be maintained in Sheldon-Penny scenes, as the series went on, far fewer Leonard-Penny scenes included that aspect.

Penny's visit to Leonard's lab was a splendid example of the balance I'm talking about. It showed a fascinating look at holograms, culminating in unbridled sex, for those who enjoyed that side of the show. Does that help at all? 

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GivesAWhit said:

 

So, while the science/nerd balance could easily be maintained in Sheldon-Penny scenes, as the series went on, far fewer Leonard-Penny scenes included that aspect.

 

 

 

And even less nerd scenes in the last 3-4 years which really has nothing much to do with Leonard and Penny.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Tensor locked and unlocked this topic
  • Tensor locked this topic
  • Tensor unlocked this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • 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.