PDA

View Full Version : One and a Half Men and a Kutcher, or, Oh dear God no why WHY


Magus
05-13-2011, 08:31 PM
Words fail to express: (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2011/0513/Ashton-Kutcher-joins-Two-and-a-Half-Men.-Will-the-show-do-better-or-worse)

The announcement Friday that Ashton Kutcher will join the cast of the hit comedy “Two and a Half Men” ends speculation that CBS and Warner Bros. might let the TV show die, after its principal actor, Charlie Sheen, was fired in March.

But it is unlikely, many observers say, that Mr. Kutcher take over Mr. Sheen’s character on the show. Rather, Kutcher’s presence will give the writers a chance to go in new directions.

“Sheen’s character was getting a little thin,” says Robert Thompson, founder of the Bleier Center for Television and Popular Culture at Syracuse University in New York. “As good as Charlie Sheen was, his TV alter ego, Charlie Harper, had begun to wear out. You can only do so many stories with a drinking, drugged-out womanizer.”

The change in the central character raises the question: Will “Two and a Half Men” be as successful going forward? Over eight seasons, the show has enjoyed strong ratings and has been a “tent pole” commodity, meaning it has helped attract other talent and series to the CBS lineup.

A look at TV history suggests that “Two and a Half Men” could go either way. “8 Simple Rules” did not recover well from the sudden death of John Ritter in 2003. But after wide speculation that “Cheers” would fade with the exit of Shelley Long in 1987, the show did even better when Kirstie Alley came on the show. Similarly, when David Caruso left “NYPD Blue” in 1994, critics were worried the show would suffer. It didn’t.

Sheen himself helped extend the hit show “Spin City” when he replaced its Golden Globe-winning star, Michael J. Fox, in 2000.

“The ultimately interesting point in all this is debated in television and theater classes across America all the time,” says Fordham University communications professor Paul Levinson, author of “New New Media.” “Is it the overall characters or the overall story that is most compelling to audiences?”

Commenting on “Two and a Half Men,” he adds, “If Ashton Kutcher succeeds in the absence of Sheen, it will weigh in on the side that characters are less important than the overall story. If he doesn’t succeed, it will be evidence that overall, characters are more important.”

But others argue that a TV show has so many dynamics – writing, characters, star power, chemistry, guest stars, and duration – that it is extremely difficult to sort out the variables.

Already, however, a number of analysts say that “Two and a Half Men” will do better with Kutcher because of the writing and supporting cast.

“Everyone is underestimating how much American audiences love this entire cast coming into our living rooms,” says Gwendolyn Foster, professor of film studies at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. “They would have been incalculably stupid to throw away one of the most popular ensemble casts ever.”

However popular Sheen was, she adds, Kutcher has all the demographic attractions a TV executive could want. “He is popular with old people, young people, middle-aged people, blue state, red state ... it doesn’t matter,” she says. “He has that amazing combination of good looks that women adore and that men don’t find threatening.”

It is not known what CBS will pay Kutcher, although Sheen was the highest-paid actor on TV, earning just under $2 million per episode.

This year, many have become concerned that the real-life Sheen had become too close to his on-screen persona. The termination letter from CBS to Sheen’s lawyer read in part: “For months before the suspension of production, Mr. Sheen’s erratic behavior escalated while his condition deteriorated. His declining condition undermined the production in numerous and significant ways.”

The announcement about Kutcher comes just in time for next week’s all-important “upfronts” in New York, in which networks roll out their new ideas, casts, and shows for the fall so that marketers can buy commercial air time before the television season begins.

Kutcher first gained recognition as Michael Kelso on the hit TV comedy "That 70's Show," which aired for eight seasons. He went on to star in a variety of movies, including “What Happens in Vegas” with Cameron Diaz and the recent “No Strings Attached” with Natalie Portman.

“I can’t wait to get to work with this ridiculously talented ‘2.5’ team and I believe we can fill the stage with laughter that will echo in viewers’ homes,” Kutcher said in a statement.

Kutcher will join Jon Cryer, Angus T. Jones, Holland Taylor, Marin Hinkle, and Conchata Ferrell this summer to work on the ninth season of the show.

Let me just repeat one of the assertions of this story:

However popular Sheen was, she adds, Kutcher has all the demographic attractions a TV executive could want. “He is popular with old people, young people, middle-aged people, blue state, red state ... it doesn’t matter,” she says. “He has that amazing combination of good looks that women adore and that men don’t find threatening.”

Ahem. Methinks it is not that Ashton Kutcher is popular with all these vast and numerous groups...methinks the cherubic Ashton is popular with the dear professor as her fantasy boy toy.

At least we can all look forward to the eventual cancellation of this show and the therefore absolute rock bottom Kutcher's career will have reached, for when one cannot even work on a sub-par sitcom, one has nothing left but camera commercials. And when one has nothing left but camera commercials, one has nothing left.

Let me repeat one more quote here, just to solidify in your minds the depravity that is Ashton Kutcher:

“I can’t wait to get to work with this ridiculously talented ‘2.5’ team and I believe we can fill the stage with laughter that will echo in viewers’ homes,” Kutcher said in a statement.

2.5. He calls the show 2.5. Oh dear God why does this thing exist, this person, argh

Flarecobra
05-13-2011, 08:49 PM
I detect various degrees of bias.

RobinStarwing
05-13-2011, 08:53 PM
I detect various degrees of bias.

Me too but even I'm wary of this change. Kutcher is no Sheen (Thank the Goddess!) but if people don't like him in it, the show will tank and fail.

Bard The 5th LW
05-13-2011, 09:09 PM
Good thing I never watched the show at all!

Overcast
05-13-2011, 10:30 PM
They keyline I believe, is how the replacement is worked in. When they say that Sheen had become too much like his character they say that like it is a bad thing. His character was a jerk, made to be jerk, always hedonistic asshole. If Kutcher's past work are any indicator even if he isn't playing an idiot he will be playing a playful guy, a genuinely nice guy. Now Sheen was the polarity to the anal retentive nature of the off end. I don't really know HOW they plan to work Kutcher in, and how his on screen chemistry will work in the dynamic.

Specterbane
05-13-2011, 11:14 PM
Charlie will be killed off al-la soap opera parody style, straight man will take on jerk-brother-esc role as a way to deal with his grief, and Kutcher will be the new guy renting a room to pay for former straight man's alimony.

This is my 100% true, clearly super informed, not at all fictitiously facetious prediction that should be taken as the obvious and clear truth of the matter that is to come as the name changes from 'Two and a Half Men' to '2.5 Men'.

Amake
05-13-2011, 11:51 PM
“Sheen’s character was getting a little thin”
I cannot roll my eyes hard enough.

I've actually watched quite a few episodes of the show, which I'm not proud of. I blame certain friends who work hard and actively seek out the most braindead entertainment they can when they come home to relax, and me having somewhat of a compulsion to watch a movie or TV show episode to the end once it's started. But anyway I can say with authority that the show was the absolute of bottom of the shit barrel unfunny, repetitive, incredibly sexist waste of time ever shown on prime time television.

So we should ask, when Ashton Kutcher meets "2.5", who is really getting sullied?

Overcast
05-13-2011, 11:59 PM
Nothing, it is a sitcom, everyone knows sitcoms are the lowest form of television entertainment. Surprised you didn't come expecting this level of awful.

Krylo
05-14-2011, 12:01 AM
Also, Kutcher was in "Dude, Where's My Car."

Aerozord
05-14-2011, 12:05 AM
when I watched a few episodes my thought was, wow what a talented comedic cast they have... shame they have no clue how to properly apply them and the entire things is just lacking
Nothing, it is a sitcom, everyone knows sitcoms are the lowest form of television entertainment. Surprised you didn't come expecting this level of awful.

no thats reality TV, and sitcoms can be awesome. My current favorite sitcom is Bob's Burgers

Overcast
05-14-2011, 12:12 AM
That doesn't count, it is animated. Animated shows are a completely different animal.

Aerozord
05-14-2011, 12:28 AM
That doesn't count, it is animated. Animated shows are a completely different animal.

no they aren't, its just americans treat it as such. The series covers the same kind of situational event you could see in a live action series. Thats what I like about it, not taking the Simpson or Family Guy route of relying on absurdity for its humor.

but fine want live action,

I Love Lucy has aged well in my opinion and still better then most shows on TV right now

Overcast
05-14-2011, 12:43 AM
Does Bob's Burgers use a "live studio audience"? Poorly created false sets? The dynamic of sitcoms is through and through of a quality that tells you exactly how low you are aiming. While the art of Bob's isn't grand, it has a personality to it, and so does the show itself.

Aerozord
05-14-2011, 12:52 AM
Does Bob's Burgers use a "live studio audience"? Poorly created false sets? The dynamic of sitcoms is through and through of a quality that tells you exactly how low you are aiming. While the art of Bob's isn't grand, it has a personality to it, and so does the show itself.

no that is not what makes it a sitcom, thats what you dont like about sitcoms, a sitcom is a situational comedy, a show with a humor focus framed by events often triggered by the characters and how they handle them. Take the same script but remove the audience and improve set quality and its still a sitcom

Overcast
05-14-2011, 01:01 AM
But they are universal pitfalls of sitcoms. And why Bob's Burgers is a different animal. In its animation it feels less artificial.

Archbio
05-14-2011, 01:48 AM
Nothing, it is a sitcom, everyone knows sitcoms are the lowest form of television entertainment.

Pure, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u8KUgUqprw) unadulterated (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcrcGyPmyAQ) nonsense. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEPhpBjy-0&t=3m24s)

greed
05-14-2011, 01:57 AM
Arrested Development was also a sitcom. But yeah even today Parks and Recreation kinda invalidates your point Overcast. 30 Rock and Community aren't terrible either (something I never thought I'd say about a Chevy Chase project). Then there's the horde of good British sitcoms throughout history (Yes Minister/Prime Minister is the best political TV show ever and it was a sitcom).

Amake
05-14-2011, 02:08 AM
I like sitcoms. Community, Scrubs, How I Met Your Mother and even Friends are among my favorite things put on Television. (Though sometimes I like to daydream about how Barney's character would work as a woman to avoid gagging at HIMYM.) I have extremely low standards for my entertainment. I mention this so you can see where I'm coming from when I say 2½ Men sucks all the balls.

Point of interest: Can someone name a comedy show that is a work of fiction, and that is not by any definition a situation comedy?

Overcast
05-14-2011, 02:15 AM
I only agree to being wrong for Seinfeld and HIMYM(And maybe the British ones, but fuck I never watched em.). The rest of those shows either seem so separated from the typical sitcom that I don't think of them when the word sitcom comes up. Or they are Friends, which I never liked.

Archbio
05-14-2011, 02:23 AM
That's a terrible definition of "sitcom." I don't think we'll be going with that.

---

It's terrific that the Three Half Men people manage to find the courage to pretend that bringing in Kutcher is anything more than just finding a substitute for the most vital component of their horrid piece of shit show: having a recognizable "big star" name attached to it. One is as good as the other, really.

Mondt
05-14-2011, 02:25 AM
Haters gonna hate on mindless TV. Two and a Half Men is at the top of my list when it comes to 'My Brain Is Fried, Couchlock' time. That and That 70's Show. Hopefully this will be like a beautiful marriage of the two...

But I know it won't. =(

Art of Hilt
05-14-2011, 04:06 AM
“The ultimately interesting point in all this is debated in television and theater classes across America all the time,” says Fordham University communications professor Paul Levinson, author of “New New Media.” “Is it the overall characters or the overall story that is most compelling to audiences?”

Commenting on “Two and a Half Men,” he adds, “If Ashton Kutcher succeeds in the absence of Sheen, it will weigh in on the side that characters are less important than the overall story. If he doesn’t succeed, it will be evidence that overall, characters are more important.”


WHAT STORY

THERE
IS
NO
STORY

Aerozord
05-14-2011, 11:34 AM
The rest of those shows either seem so separated from the typical sitcom that I don't think of them when the word sitcom comes up.

Overcast, thats not how words work, you dont just get to make up a definition. Of course you think they all suck when your personal definition requires them to suck, because according to you, if it doesnt' suck, then its not a sitcom.

According to the definition of sitcom, those shows are sitcoms. Media calls them sitcoms, audience calls them sitcoms, reviews call them sitcoms, they simply are sitcoms. If you dont like those shows ok, but dont remove them from the genre just because you'd be proven wrong otherwise.

Its like me saying all men are idiots, and when someone brings up Einstein I hit them with "he's so removed from what a typical man is I dont think of him as one"

Overcast
05-14-2011, 12:13 PM
I already said I was proven wrong even so, and quite a few of those shows are called just comedies and not situational comedies. Regardless it isn't worth getting this huffed over.

Bells
05-14-2011, 01:07 PM
Let me just drop my 2 cents:

They replace Sheen with Ashton and act like nothing ever happenned = Show dies out in 1 season

They kill Sheen's character (considering his lifestyle, plausible) his brother gets everything (would be a semi-decent twist) and now has to take care of another sponge (Ashton) = could work just enough to push to season 10.

May i remind you guys that some shows Flop or Float depending on MANY factors? Scrubs was great up to season 4/5 and then it just dragged on... and that show had Dr Cox from start to end!

Magus
05-14-2011, 07:58 PM
My favorite sitcom until I exhausted all the re-runs was Curb Your Enthusiasm. I also liked, oh...Becker back when it was on. Bob's Burgers is pretty hilarious.

For a sitcom to appeal to me it has to try something different, it can't just retread all the old stuff.

Bells
05-14-2011, 09:41 PM
And yet, The Big Bang Theory is hated for some reason...

...besides the constant product placement...

Drownball-Champ
05-14-2011, 09:56 PM
And yet, The Big Bang Theory is hated for some reason...

...besides the constant product placement...

BBT has grown on me. I didn't care for it the first few times I watched it.

I look forward to seeing what they do with Kutcher. I'm happy with him being in over the rumored John Stamos.

Overcast
05-14-2011, 10:14 PM
I watched Big Bang Theory and realized that is what the world thought physics or math majors were like. And then I looked at all my friends that entered the field and realized it was a LIE, and every time I watched it the pathetic progression of the characters just made it seem more distasteful every episode.

Magus
05-15-2011, 08:37 PM
Did they ever bang that chick, anyway? That was the entire point of the original reason for the double-entendre title, after all.

Bells
05-15-2011, 08:47 PM
there is a whole Ross-Rachel thing going on there.

BloodyMage
05-15-2011, 08:56 PM
And yet, The Big Bang Theory is hated for some reason...

...besides the constant product placement...

Big Bang Theory is hated?

Bells
05-15-2011, 11:34 PM
I understand the early seasons got quite a bit of flak due to the way the showed Geek and Nerd culture AND Academic life on the fields they main characters portrait, dunno if that initial feeling went away as the show went on... all i know is that i still haven't found a single episode that didn't made me laugh