Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Why "The Big Bang Theory" still works and "Glee" doesn't

Today comes news both that CBS has picked up "The Big Bang Theory" for another three seasons, while over on Fox,"Glee" had record-low viewership last night.

Until a few years ago, I had never watched "The Big Bang Theory," which isn't all that odd, since I don't watch a lot of network prime-time TV shows. However, my mother-in-law first got my wife, then me, hooked on it, and since it had just come out in syndication with multiple episodes on every night, it was pretty easy to get caught up.

And having seen all but the first few episodes of this season (I was out of the country), and most of the reruns multiple times, I can say ... the show isn't as funny as it used to be.

But I can also say it doesn't matter all that much.

I still find the show funny, but not the consistent laugh riot it used to be. However, what makes up for it is that I care about Sheldon, Leonard, Howard, Raj, Amy, Penny and Bernadette. What once was a series of weekly hijinks involving four dorky guys and the pretty blonde neighbor has matured (as much as a sitcom can "mature") into a show about lives and relationships that happens to still include a lot of laughs.

For example, this moment wasn't particularly funny, but if you're a fan, tell me you didn't say "YES!" at least a little bit when it happened.

)

And then there's "Glee," which I used to enjoy almost as much as I like "The Big Bang Theory" now. Sure, it was completely implausible -- unless your high school had a full band that could appear out of nowhere on a whim -- but it combined an enjoyable silliness with terrific singing.

Now, I forget that it's even on.

To be fair, "Glee" has the same problem as any other show set in high school, namely that the characters graduate. But instead of ending the show after the New Directions won the national championship or the main characters graduated, the producers and Fox decided to soldier on, and it's hard to blame them. After all, the show was doing well.

The problem is that instead of just bringing in new characters such as Jake, Marley and Kitty (who were clearly meant to be the next generation of Finn, Rachel and Quinn) to replace the graduates, they brought on a bunch of new characters to go with the ones who hadn't graduated yet and couldn't let go of the old ones. Rachel and Kurt went to New York, where Santana soon joined them, and others such as Finn (until Cory Monteith died) returned on at least a semi-regular basis.

The result is an overstuffed cast where neither the old favorites nor the newcomers ever have much chance to shine, and in the case of the latter group, it means there's less opportunity for viewers to care about them. For one, I'd like to hear a lot more Melissa Benoist (Marley, which is another part of the problem; I don't have to look up who plays Rachel).


)

Which brings us back to "The Big Bang Theory." If it's true that next season is the final one for "Glee," it looks like it could limp to the finish, especially since co-creator Ryan Murphy said Monteith's death forced him to change his plans for how the show ends.

If Chuck Lorre and Bill Prady have an endgame in mind for the "The Big Bang Theory," I wonder if they have an idea how long it will take to get there ... and whether that will mesh with CBS' plans and all parties' pocketbooks if the show stays successful. The temptation for any show to stay past the sell-by date is strong when the ratings are high and the money is rolling in.

No comments:

Post a Comment