Amazon.com Widgets

Was "Two and a Half Men" better with Charlie Sheen?

  • You can't Replace a Legend.

    Although it wasn't liked by everyone, and certainly caused a fair share of controversy during it's run, it was a very intelligent and highly entertaining show that definitely had a lot going for it. The characters and acting were brilliant, and the writing was very clever, and it always managed to be it's own thing.

    The show was never afraid to be controversial which it was on a regular basis, and this just made it a lot of fun. It never got stale and was always on top form, and even when the quality dropped it the final seasons, it still managed to remain superior to any other sit-com on TV, but this all went wrong in 2011.

    Although Charlie Sheen's behaviour was worthy of dismissal, the producers signed the show's death wish when he was sacked. Imagine Everybody Loves Raymond, without Raymond, or Frasier, without Frasier, it just doesn't work, it's like having the show Friends without the six friends there's no point anymore, and pulling the rug out from under the writers like that will leave them desperately scrabbling around for ideas.

    This happened for Series 9, Walden Schmidt showed promise to start with, but the writing became very forced and awkward and the characters became bland, that is when they decided to show up at all. Alan became a joke of a character, only existing for someone to suffer, and the already intolerable Jake just became annoying.

    As for all of these new characters they felt the need to randomly draft in, they are rubbish. They are as deep as a piece of cardboard, and about as interesting. There was no dynamic between Alan and Walden, it was no longer worth watching.

    They tried their best with Walden, but Charlie WAS Two and a Half Men. And you just can't replace a legend.

  • Charlie is simply better

    Charlie is simply better, because he IS Charlie Harper. And all about the stuff with Allen and Jake is even more familiar than with the new characters.
    And it's even more realistic with the "old" actors. I wish, Charlie would come back to the sitcom, I'm watching the old episodes on DVD,instead of the new ones on TV.

  • Way much better

    This is not even close. Clearly C.S was the main character and when you take that out the show is gonna go to shit. The show is not as entertaining as it was before. At first I thought Charlie sheen (c.S) was gonna come back like a boss he is, but never happen :(

  • It was Sheen and Lorre's show not Cryer's or Kutcher's.

    Charlie Sheen is not a nice guy in his personal life, but many of the greats rarely are. He knows how to act. Putting in a cute-boy who's popular with the ladies wasn't going to cut it and that's what they did with Kutcher.

    And since when did straight man Jon Cryer start referring to himself as the "co-lead" during the Sheen years? Yikes. Talk about prostituting yourself endlessly to get a paycheck... Spouting the network's lines.

    No this show needed to go off the air when Sheen got himself fired.

    Watch the US super-stations and see which episodes they run - hint, not the Kutcher era, but the Sheen years. That tells you who's watching which seasons in reruns.

  • Contrast is lost

    There was a contrast between Charlie Sheen and Jon Cryer. Not so much between Ashton Kutcher and Jon Cryer. Yes, Ashton's character is still a successful and rich guy like Charlie. But this guy has similar sort of sissy/gayish style much like Jon; as a result, the show lost that funny contrast. Too bad.

  • Contrast is lost

    There was a contrast between Charlie Sheen and Jon Cryer. Not so much between Ashton Kutcher and Jon Cryer. Yes, Ashton's character is still a successful and rich guy like Charlie. But this guy has similar sort of sissy/gayish style much like Jon; as a result, the show lost that funny contrast. Too bad.

  • Of course it was better

    Sheen seemed to have this natural chemistry with Angus t jones en Jon Cryer (jake and Alan) which really showed in the episodes. But even the build-up to punchlines or the overly careless attitude towards Alan and his mother came across much more natural and of course funny. The replacement of Charlie was an impossible affair. Any actor would have failed in replacing Sheen in this case.

  • Charlie Is a legend

    Charlie Sheen played the womanising, charismatic comedian actor like no one else. He is an established performer who turned Two and a Half Men into the big success that it is. Kutcher does not compare, and cannot replace Charlie. It is a disappointment to watch the show without him. Kutcher is a different type of comedian.

  • I love sheen

    I think the show is total garbage now. All about dicks and pot. There is no serious side to characters on the show anymore; its all one-liners that are disgusting and dumb. Lacks substance completely. No real story line to follow anymore; it's gone too crazy and is past the point of realistic.

  • Yes Get C.S Back :)

    Ashton just fine, I meant he is an actor it his job to do. But, in a sitcom a character more less the main character cannot be replaced. Watching Ashton acts in Two and a Half Man it's like watching 70's Shows, because it's Ashton, he is 70's show character.

  • I never liked Sheen.

    I know my opinion is not a popular one, but I don't care. I NEVER liked Sheen. In fact I thought the show was terrible the first few times I saw it. I could not understand how a man child withoud any real charisma would get so many hot girls, and treat them so badly and get away with it, hell it was even sold as being cool instead as being wrong (the only moral guy was played for laughs, as if having morales is funny). The kid was terrible too. It was like the show was promoting being a selfish lazy and mean. I ended up watching it, because it was between shows I did love and grew to like Alan for being sort of Normal. Sheen however always seemed to act like he was it all, and I hate that kind of behavior. I prefer guys like Alan over Sheen any day. I felt Sheen was making this to much his show, and not because he was good, but because he was demanding. Like a child with a tantrum wanting all the attention. Even when you wanted to focus on other characters, the show rarely gave you the chance to do so. Instead of a show about TWO and a half man. It was only after Sheen left, that the show felt more balanced between 2 main characters for me. Also the lazy rude kid was not around as much. After a while, instead of just having it be time filling, I started to look foreward to episodes. Now I even love it. So there it is. I did not like Sheen, and after he left it felt more balanced and less Sheen obsessed. It gave better lessons. (not this constand need to sexualise females) However I do not agree with the final episode. I might not be a fan of Sheen, but tv shows are supposed to be made by pro's and your not supposed to let personal fights with actors influence your work. It was uncalled for to have Sheen ''cameo'' in such a bad way. A show is not about Winning. It has no place there. The personal ishues with director and actor should have been kept out of this, because it does not make sense for Charlie to end as he did. For all his flaws he did love his brother and that final was just messed up, ignoring the former seasons. I just wanted to have that said. Not being a fan does not mean you have to bash, and the way Charlies character was handeld after he left was uncalled for. They should have just let him die a more normal way, and have him rememberd in a good way. Not this weird bashing awkward way.

    So I might love the later seasons more, the final is the worst episode by far.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.