As a viewer of Two and a Half ...
Question: As a viewer of
Two and a Half Men and
The Big Bang Theory, both
Chuck Lorre sitcoms, I feel qualified to say what in the world are the Emmy voters thinking?
The Big Bang Theory is the most creative and funniest new sitcom in years, and they pass it over for
Two and a Half Men? Then they compound it by nominating Charlie Sheen for best actor while passing over the funniest new sitcom actor in years,
Big Bang's
Jim Parsons?
Men is no more than one sex joke after another, and Charlie just has a new conquest ever week, while Jim Parsons has the difficult role of being the new Felix Unger and the difficullty of learning all the science stuff every week. It really is a shame that the Emmy voters chose the wrong Chuck Lorre sitcom to recognize, because
Big Bang could have used the recognition to help build its audience. Sometimes I think it's the best show on TV that people have missed. I wish more viewers would find it, because they simply don't know what they are missing.
Answer: True, if we were still doing our "Best Show You're Not Watching" features, I'd definitely nominate
The Big Bang Theory. But the Emmys are traditionally slow to notice shows that don't explode out of the gate or aren't championed in the media — I've raved about this one, and I know a number of other critics like it, but it hasn't got the buzz of more "hip" shows like
30 Rock or
The Office. This show is what we call a "sleeper," whereas
Two and a Half Men is currently CBS's signature sitcom, its highest rated, and one that has previously been invited to the Emmy party, which usually means it will keep getting nominated even if that means shutting out something else more deserving. (If you ask me, I would have dropped
Entourage this year to make room for
Big Bang.) I'm hoping that without the disruption of a strike this year (please, please),
Big Bang will continue to grow — despite being asked to kick off the night for CBS in one of the most overcrowded time periods of the week — and that Parsons at the very least will get more credit for creating a side-splittingly funny character worthy of CBS' golden age of '70s hit sitcoms.
