@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

Not a "Grammar Issue" here. Just a persnickety character correction issue. "Obsessive I know more than you do about the show" police checking in

The episode was good. Will makes a decent Prof. Proton, although Will strikes me as unavoidably sarcastic no matter what he does. Can’t wait to see if Gino the Neutrino shows up.

Sheldon is a big stick in the mud. Howard would certainly go to the dueling piano bar with Amy even if Bernie had to tag along with Stuart watching the kiddies. Maybe Amy should have described the dueling piano show as a physics example, an Einstein like thought experiment with the pianos as particles or atoms or portions thereof that are variously attracted to, repelled by and bonded all to the tune of “Tiny Dancer”, “Piano Man” and “Uptown Funk”.

The novel parts were a good change of pace until I wondered why Leonard would even do that. The only member of the group that should write a mystery novel is Raj, considering his murder mystery parties, that no one else in the group including Leonard seem to like, and Rajs' enjoyment of the novels of John Grisham. What was the point of that anyways? If there was something to learn it is what? That girls are mean? That is well known already. Penny, Bernie and Bev are all like Lucy pulling the football away from poor Charlie Brown Leonard. What a blockhead! I thought that a more intriguing tag to all that would be if in a fourth part it is not Penny, Bernie, or Beverly that play the mean boss but Leonard himself as he discovers that it is he is his own mean boss. Lenny is perhaps meaner to himself than the gals. Good Grief! But not really, Leonard has it pretty good but does he know it? All this self-examination is tiring.

Speaking of Lucy and the football, this was just this past Sunday:

http://www.gocomics.com/wizardofid/2018/02/04

@Gothish520 said:

So, fun episode. Always good to see Beverly, usually good to see Wil Wheaton (except for that bowling episode when he was just horrible).

Loved the novel scenes, liked Howard more than usual, loved the final scene.

I'm hoping Amy and Sheldon get married this season. I want a full season of them already married.

Agreed, really fun episode. I especially liked the reenactments of Leonard's horrible writing.

Also good to see Will because I was going into Wheaton Withdrawal.

@znexyish said:

The episode was good. Will makes a decent Prof. Proton, although Will strikes me as unavoidably sarcastic no matter what he does. Can’t wait to see if Gino the Neutrino shows up.

Sheldon is a big stick in the mud. Howard would certainly go to the dueling piano bar with Amy even if Bernie had to tag along with Stuart watching the kiddies. Maybe Amy should have described the dueling piano show as a physics example, an Einstein like thought experiment with the pianos as particles or atoms or portions thereof that are variously attracted to, repelled by and bonded all to the tune of “Tiny Dancer”, “Piano Man” and “Uptown Funk”.

The novel parts were a good change of pace until I wondered why Leonard would even do that. The only member of the group that should write a mystery novel is Raj, considering his murder mystery parties, that no one else in the group including Leonard seem to like, and Rajs' enjoyment of the novels of John Grisham. What was the point of that anyways? If there was something to learn it is what? That girls are mean? That is well known already. Penny, Bernie and Bev are all like Lucy pulling the football away from poor Charlie Brown Leonard. What a blockhead! I thought that a more intriguing tag to all that would be if in a fourth part it is not Penny, Bernie, or Beverly that play the mean boss but Leonard himself as he discovers that it is he is his own mean boss. Lenny is perhaps meaner to himself than the gals. Good Grief! But not really, Leonard has it pretty good but does he know it? All this self-examination is tiring.

While I don't think that Leonard is mean to himself, per se, I think you are on to something. He doesn't take good enough care of himself (well, except when he built the hugging machine), and doesn't stand up for himself enough. He was conditioned by his mother to be "talked down to", to the point that he seems to crave it. I think he needs a psychologist...but not his mom!!

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

Factual error--Yes

Grammatical error--No.

I misremembered; thanks for the catch.

@znexyish said:

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

Not a "Grammar Issue" here. Just a persnickety character correction issue. "Obsessive I know more than you do about the show" police checking in

True. But, don't consider it "persnickety" either.

Think…

--Correcting factual errors is a different kettle of fish—such flip-ups should ALWAYS be pointed out.

--Correcting grammatical errors, unless they “do damage” to meaning of what the person has written—definitely falls under the"persnickety" umbrella.

Since my writing is notoriously grammar-indifferent, I think some folks are not reading my posts for content; but, JUST BECAUSE they know there is always the chance they’ll find something they can POINT OUT.

--Seems I’m an Enabler. 😜

@Gothish520 said:

So, fun episode. Always good to see Beverly, usually good to see Wil Wheaton (except for that bowling episode when he was just horrible).

Loved the novel scenes, liked Howard more than usual, loved the final scene.

I'm hoping Amy and Sheldon get married this season. I want a full season of them already married.

*WHY?! WHY?! WHY?!*

Why is it that even in pretend-pretend Stuart has to come off as a loser?!

Not only was he "Hans the Janitor" (not hating on janitors); but, did Leonard also have to make him look like one of the “Mario Brothers”?!

Is that how his friends see him now?

Would it have been too much for Leonard to suit-him-up and make him a success--whatever?

Hat’s off to the wardrobe team. Thought all the other (not Stuart) “costumes” were great. Especially liked Howard’s.

Did anyone else initially think the victim on the floor was Sheldon? I figured that since Sheldon was the only male in the group unaccounted for, it had to be him on the floor. Since there have been many times when Leonard wanted to kill him in “real life”; Sheldon-as-victim just seemed natural.

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

@Gothish520 said:

So, fun episode. Always good to see Beverly, usually good to see Wil Wheaton (except for that bowling episode when he was just horrible).

Loved the novel scenes, liked Howard more than usual, loved the final scene.

I'm hoping Amy and Sheldon get married this season. I want a full season of them already married.

*WHY?! WHY?! WHY?!*

Why is it that even in pretend-pretend Stuart has to come off as a loser?!

Not only was he "Hans the Janitor" (not hating on janitors); but, did Leonard also have to make him look like one of the “Mario Brothers”?!

Is that how his friends see him now?

Would it have been too much for Leonard to suit-him-up and make him a success--whatever?

---

Hat’s off to the wardrobe team. Thought all the other (not Stuart) “costumes” were great. Especially liked Howard’s.

---

Did anyone else initially think the victim on the floor was Sheldon? I figured that since everyone else was in the room, it had to be Sheldon on the floor. Since there have been many times when Leonard wanted to kill him in “real life”; Sheldon-as-victim just seemed natural.

I could tell from the hair that it wasn't Sheldon, but I did wonder WHO it was!

@Lemons said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

@Gothish520 said:

So, fun episode. Always good to see Beverly, usually good to see Wil Wheaton (except for that bowling episode when he was just horrible).

Loved the novel scenes, liked Howard more than usual, loved the final scene.

I'm hoping Amy and Sheldon get married this season. I want a full season of them already married.

*WHY?! WHY?! WHY?!*

Why is it that even in pretend-pretend Stuart has to come off as a loser?!

Not only was he "Hans the Janitor" (not hating on janitors); but, did Leonard also have to make him look like one of the “Mario Brothers”?!

Is that how his friends see him now?

Would it have been too much for Leonard to suit-him-up and make him a success--whatever?

---

Hat’s off to the wardrobe team. Thought all the other (not Stuart) “costumes” were great. Especially liked Howard’s.

---

Did anyone else initially think the victim on the floor was Sheldon? I figured that since everyone else was in the room, it had to be Sheldon on the floor. Since there have been many times when Leonard wanted to kill him in “real life”; Sheldon-as-victim just seemed natural.

I could tell from the hair that it wasn't Sheldon, but I did wonder WHO it was!

Yeah. At first I was thinking disguise--but, then realize that didn't make any sense. What would be the point?

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

@znexyish said:

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

Not a "Grammar Issue" here. Just a persnickety character correction issue. "Obsessive I know more than you do about the show" police checking in

True. But, don't consider it "persnickety" either.

Think…

--Correcting factual errors is a different kettle of fish—such flip-ups should ALWAYS be pointed out.

--Correcting grammatical errors, unless they “do damage” to meaning of what the person has written—definitely falls under the"persnickety" umbrella.

---

Since my writing is notoriously grammar-indifferent, I think some folks are not reading my posts for content; but, JUST BECAUSE they know there is always the chance they’ll find something they can POINT OUT.

--Seems I’m an Enabler. 😜

Excellent point about grammatical errors. I'm pretty particular about some things, and there are grammatical errors that bug me - things like saying "I could care less" instead of "I couldn't care less", or irregardless becoming an actual word simply because so many people started saying it, etc., but if someone types there instead of their or your when they mean you're, I'm not going to lose my shyte. And it irks me when someone gloms onto those small and pretty common errors and uses it to attack the offending poster. If I can figure out what you're trying to say, I'm not going to jump down your throat just because you made an error.

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

@znexyish said:

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

Not a "Grammar Issue" here. Just a persnickety character correction issue. "Obsessive I know more than you do about the show" police checking in

True. But, don't consider it "persnickety" either.

Think…

--Correcting factual errors is a different kettle of fish—such flip-ups should ALWAYS be pointed out.

--Correcting grammatical errors, unless they “do damage” to meaning of what the person has written—definitely falls under the"persnickety" umbrella.

---

Since my writing is notoriously grammar-indifferent, I think some folks are not reading my posts for content; but, JUST BECAUSE they know there is always the chance they’ll find something they can POINT OUT.

--Seems I’m an Enabler. 😜

I just like to use the word "persnickety" from time to time.

I suspect it was supposed to be Sheldon even if Jim Parsons is now too much of a star to lie on the floor himself.

@znexyish said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

@znexyish said:

@Knixon said:

@FormerlyKnownAs said:

When the guys were talking about casting the role of Leonard’s book detective, Dr. Logan Dean, Leonard said that he based the character on himself. Howard said in that case the person to play Dean would be “a young Paul Giamatti”. I like Giamatti, but Leonard didn’t seem to care for the idea.

"Grammar police" checking in. Raj said "a young Paul Giamatti," not Howard.

Not a "Grammar Issue" here. Just a persnickety character correction issue. "Obsessive I know more than you do about the show" police checking in

True. But, don't consider it "persnickety" either.

Think…

--Correcting factual errors is a different kettle of fish—such flip-ups should ALWAYS be pointed out.

--Correcting grammatical errors, unless they “do damage” to meaning of what the person has written—definitely falls under the"persnickety" umbrella.

---

Since my writing is notoriously grammar-indifferent, I think some folks are not reading my posts for content; but, JUST BECAUSE they know there is always the chance they’ll find something they can POINT OUT.

--Seems I’m an Enabler. 😜

I just like to use the word "persnickety" from time to time.

For me it's "picayune" —such a fun-word.