Big Bang or big disappointment?

What do you get if you cross four science geeks with a hot blonde? The answer is The Big Bang Theory, the hottest comedy this side of Two & A Half Men (and brought to you by the same production company, no less).

The Big Bang Bang Theory is arguably the most popular show in the country: new episodes of the show dominate Wednesday night's ratings - last week, Big Bang beat out Two & A Half Men to be the most watched evening show and the third most watched show of the day*; a repeat of an old Big Bang episode was the fifth most watched show the previous Sunday**.

But here's the thing: The Big Bang Theory isn't very good.

I mean, it isn't all bad. The show does have a few things going for it. Jim Parsons, who plays Sheldon Cooper, is a comic genius, a man who doesn't get nearly as much credit as he should for fleshing out his character on a fairly two-dimensional show; in a perfect world, Parsons' career would be on the same upward trajectory as that of someone like Jason Segel.

Big Bang also does a decent job of working in the various "geek culture" references that are a staple of the world in which the show is set, even if it does occasionally rely too heavily on geekdom (as in last night's The Flaming Spittoon Acquisition, in which nerdy behaviour was the driving force in both the major and minor plotlines).

When it comes to obscure scientific equations, superhero name-drops and Star Trek merchandise, the adage that "less is more" stands true. Except when it comes to Wil Wheaton cameos. There is no such thing as too much Wil Wheaton.

Still, there is plenty of stuff that Big Bang gets horribly wrong.

The show is too reliant on stereotypes. Penny isn't just an attractive neighbour - she has to be a dumb blonde with a sassy attitude who drinks, hooks up with random guys and likes buying shoes. Howard isn't just a socially awkward engineer - he has to have a terrible haircut, wear Star Trek shirts under his clothes and be too reliant on his mother. Raj isn't just a scientist from India - he has to be the stereotypical immigrant, complete with a thick accent, an awkward adoption of local culture, and parents who want to marry him off.

Then there is the high frequency of certain plotlines. How many times has Sheldon taken on some crazy mission which ends up alienating him from the rest of the gang? How many times will a potential relationship be foiled by Raj's inability to speak to women unless drunk? And do we really need a dozen variations of the "Penny still likes Leonard" and "Leonard still likes Penny" story every single year?

Even individual scenes are so predictable that I could probably recite them from memory. When Sheldon storms across the hallway, you know a "[knock knock knock] Penny, [knock knock knock] Penny, [knock knock knock] Penny" is coming. If Howard opens the door to his house, you can guarantee his mum will yell out "HOWARD, WHO IS IT" before making some toilet-related comment at the top of her voice.

Big Bang might have passed 100 episodes, but only about 20 of those feature original ideas. The rest are variations on the same old themes and/or jokes about Sheldon being intellectually superior to everyone else.

At its best, The Big Bang Theory can be really entertaining, as proven by several new episodes this year. Last week's The Ornithophobia Diffusion, in which Sheldon deals with a rogue bluejay on his windowsill, is a good example. But most of the time, Big Bang is little better than a show like Two & A Half Men: predictable, repetitive, and reliant on easy jokes - and on a clogged Wednesday night in which something had to go, it might be the one getting dropped.

What about you: are you a Big Bang Theory fan? Do you agree that it isn't a great comedy? Or do you think I'm being unfair - perhaps you think it's a really great show? Post your thoughts in the comments section, below.

(*) http://www.throng.co.nz/2012/04/tv-ratings-4-april-2012/

(**) http://www.throng.co.nz/2012/04/tv-ratings-1-april-2012/