Why ending ‘Big Bang Theory’ is the right move
The decision to end “The Big Bang Theory” doesn’t add up in dollars, but it makes perfect creative sense.
CBS was interested in a deal to extend the hit comedy, with the stars under contract just for the coming season. However, the network, studio and Chuck Lorre Wednesday announced that the series will end next May. Entertainment Weekly reported that breakout star Jim Parsons put the brakes on a deal because he was ready to leave.
Whatever the reason, it’s the right move. After more than 250 episodes, “Bang” is still TV’s top-rated comedy – “Roseanne” briefly took that honor, but look where that is now – and likely will remain so. There was plenty of money to be made for everyone involved, and the departure will leave CBS, which successfully launched “Bang” prequel spinoff “Young Sheldon,” with a huge scheduling hole. (Don’t shed any tears. Although fans will soon be Penny-less, nobody connected to this money machine will leave penniless.)
Creatively, however, “Bang” is showing its age. Although long defying the decline that eventually afflicts long-running comedies, it started to flounder last season.
For almost its entire run, “Big Bang,” created by sitcom master Chuck Lorre and Bill Prady, has been a well-oiled laugh factory. The initial story of two awkward scientific geniuses and their apartment neighbor, a Cheesecake Factory waitress with much sharper social skills, began with promise and took off from there, growing into a larger, talented ensemble that wove in character depth and emotion, without getting maudlin, while still delivering the jokes.
The initial cast – neighbor Penny (Kaley Cuoco) was on her own dealing with across-the-hall roommates Sheldon (Jim Parsons) and Leonard (Johnny Galecki) and their scientist pals Howard (Simon Helberg) and Raj (Kunal Nayyar) – was male-centric, but the show brought more balance introducing two brilliant women as female scientists: microbiologist Bernadette (Melissa Rauch) and neuroscientist Amy (Mayim Bialik).
They weren’t just grafted on for appearances. The writers and actors brought depth to Bernadette and Amy, integrating them smartly into the cast and creating new opportunities as the eternally immature guys took baby steps to grow up. Leonard eventually married Penny; Bernadette and Howard got hitched and became parents; and Amy and man-child Sheldon took their marital vows in last season’s finale.
Over the years, as Steven Molaro took a more prominent role as an executive producer, the show added a layer of emotion that gave the humor more depth. Fans strongly bonded with the characters, a great sign, with laughs coming from their idiosyncratic personalities as well as the jokes.
I remember being on set for a Season 6 episode where the band of friends tried to soften the blow of Howard’s feelings of abandonment by his father. There was a sweetness to their support, punctuated by a hilarious and ridiculous effort from emotionally dense Sheldon.
“Big Bang” maintained that balance over the years as its longevity surpassed most other sitcoms, especially those shot in front of a studio audience. By the time it closes shop in May, the series will have racked up a record 279 episodes for the studio-audience format, more than classics “Frasier” (11 seasons, 263 episodes), “Friends” (10 seasons, 236 episodes) and “Seinfeld” (nine seasons, 173 episodes).
Past hits have ended for various reasons; stars and producers are eager to pursue other opportunities or the financial factors no longer make sense.
But there’s an underlying, unavoidable reason why all these shows end. Over time, they all lose some creativity, often simply resulting from repetition. What once was fresh can seem stale.
“Bang” upheld its quality for many episodes past a sitcom’s expected sellby date, but it hit a wall last year. The season-long lead-up to the “Shamy” wedding, a truly joyous union of two great characters, started seeming more like a meandering walk than a wedding march. It just felt like “Bang” was spinning its wheels. Repetition and sameness may please obsessive Sheldon, but they don’t do much for comedy.
With one and especially two more seasons beyond the upcoming one (Sept. 24, 8 EDT/PDT), “Bang” was in danger of veering toward comedic entropy (a term Sheldon and Leonard would understand), degrading and losing energy and moving toward flatness.
With just one season to go, however, I have faith the talented producers, writers and actors can generate a funny sprint, with pratfalls, to the finish line. “Big Bang” writers are famous for not plotting too far ahead, so there’s time to plan a satisfying conclusion, and there’s no longer any danger of the dreaded penultimate season, a deadening period for many otherwise stellar series as everyone anticipates the grand finale.
“Big Bang” hasn’t received its awards due over the years; Jim Parsons has been an Emmy magnet, winning four trophies as lead actor in a comedy, but the series has never won for best comedy. It was worthy of that honor.
But awards don’t determine a show’s quality and “Big Bang” stands with the best in its genre. Now, without being weighed down with two extra seasons (and, yes, the accompanying stacks of money), it has a chance to go out with … a sharp, funny flourish. (Did you think I’d say bang? Bazinga!)
For almost its entire run, “Big Bang,” has been a well-oiled laugh factory.