Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Charlie Sheen...my idol.

leandroc76 said:
We need an upvoting system like Reddit. Here's a +1 for you.

Who the hell are we to judge?

Who said we have to live til 105 years old?

I have met crazier "normal" people who weren't even on drugs!
Click to expand...

Exactly! He is doing what he wants. Why does he have to do what other people want?

Also, the more we talk about him, the more he wins. If people continue to talk about him, he will just keep winning. There really is not anything else to discuss, but the media seems to enjoy rehashing his choices for some reason.

Congrats on the win, Charlie.
 
Thomas Veil said:
I would like to see them pull off a change of actor for once, without changing the character. I think it's an insult to the audience's intelligence that networks think we can't accept someone else in the role. They always go for the knee-jerk reaction, which is to kill off the character. Give us some credit, and a chance for another actor to make the role his own. It's not like it's unheard of. How many James Bonds have there been??
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:

"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."

This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.

For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.

On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
 
svenn said:
Exactly! He is doing what he wants. Why does he have to do what other people want?

Also, the more we talk about him, the more he wins. If people continue to talk about him, he will just keep winning. There really is not anything else to discuss, but the media seems to enjoy rehashing his choices for some reason.

Congrats on the win, Charlie.
Click to expand...


Children removed form his custody.
Fired from #1 sitcom on TV.
Going on the Internet and melting down nightly.

Winning, indeed. :rolleyes:
 
Thomas Veil said:
I love Maher, but most lame comedy ever? What about Me and the Chimp, It's About Time, Captain Nice, The Lucy Show, Family Matters, Webster, and Glenn Beck?
Click to expand...
What you did there. I see it. :D


Thomas Veil said:
I would like to see them pull off a change of actor for once, without changing the character. I think it's an insult to the audience's intelligence that networks think we can't accept someone else in the role. They always go for the knee-jerk reaction, which is to kill off the character. Give us some credit, and a chance for another actor to make the role his own. It's not like it's unheard of. How many James Bonds have there been??
Click to expand...

On top of the replacements already mentioned, this is not uncommon with soap opera characters (one notable example is on Days Of Our Lives, with the character of Jack Deveraux).
 
Macaroony said:
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.

On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
Click to expand...

I'm the opposite. I had no problem with Catwoman changing from Julie Newmar to Eartha Kitt in the Batman TV series because the style and tenor of both the show and character didn't change.

I do have a problem with the modern Batman movie franchise where each movie is a revisioning deopending on which director got up on which side of the bed so every movie has a different feel and you have the Joker played completely differently by Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger, Catwoman by Michelle Pfeifferand Halle Berry, and every Batman as well by Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale. It's like multiple cover versions of the same song by different atrists and you're expected to like and buy them all, which is ridiculous.
 
The man is trying so hard to be Lindsey Lohan..

He's really whacked. Reminds me of the ending of Sunset Boulevard, with Gloria Swanson descending the stairs.. "Alright Mr Demille, I'm ready for my closeup!"
 
Last edited:
Sheen just keeps getting worse. I wonder how long it will take for him to hit bottom.

Of all the amazing claims that Charlie Sheen has made over the past few weeks, about Adonis DNA and mercury surfboards and AA Nazis and lions and tiger blood and bears, this one might be the most surprising: On Wednesday, he called into "The Dan Patrick Show" to announce, "This could be my final interview."

Three weeks have passed since Sheen first contacted the radio program, launching an unexpected press tour that's included a number of radio stations, morning-show interviews, late-night talk-show appearances and his own self-produced Ustream show, "Sheen's Korner." ("Hey, it's must-see TV," he quipped, sounding a little exhausted.) Earlier Wednesday morning, he even appeared on KRTH-FM (101.1) in Los Angeles. But Sheen later told Patrick, "[This] is where it all began and where it all ends, you know?"

Asked what brought such an abrupt end to his interviews, he said, "All they do is glad-hand me to get into my home, then they vilify me. ... At the end of the day, it's about ratings and commerce. They act concerned, but their behavior is completely the opposite." Sheen said that made him feel "bitter."
Patrick, however, seemed genuinely concerned about the actor. "Are you OK?" he asked Sheen.

"I'm better than OK," Sheen insisted. "I'm me. I'm winning." But he didn't sound convinced.

Patrick also asked if he was personally responsible for Sheen's very troubled interviews. "I wouldn't say you caused all of it," Sheen deadpanned. "Maybe 97 percent."

The actor also denied accusations that he'd been "flubbing my lines" or doing cocaine on the set of "Two and a Half Men." But he accepted that heds been axed from the show, and he said he thought that John Stamos and Rob Lowe, both rumored as possible replacements for his character, would be fine substitutions. (He'd previously slammed Stamos in the press.) "I think they're both fabulous," he said, "and my apologies to John. I was rude to him earlier, John Stamos. That was unnecessary. And Rob's an old friend, a brilliant actor, a beautiful man."

'The interview sounded a bit like a downbeat closing statement for Sheen -- until the very end, when he slightly amended the terms of his retirement from the press tour. "I won’t do any interviews except you," he told Patrick. "How 'bout that?"
Click to expand...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/enter...e-my-final-interview-20110309,0,1562534.story
 
Ah, the fun never stops......

FoxNews.com said:
Sheen filed a lawsuit Thursday against Warner Bros. and "Two and a Half Men" producer Chuck Lorre for $100 million, plus punitive damages, TMZ reports.

Sheen, 45, is demanding he get paid for the eight "Two and a Half Men" episodes that were canceled this year, and he's also suing to gain lost wages and benefits for the show's crew.

Sheen's lawyer Marty Singer drafted the suit, and, according to TMZ, writes in the preamble: "Chuck Lorre, one of the richest men in television who is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, believes himself to be so wealthy and powerful that he can unilaterally decide to take money away from the dedicated cast and crew of the popular television series, 'Two and a Half Men,' in order to serve his own ego and self-interest, and make the star of the Series the scapegoat for Lorre's own conduct."

The suit blames the show's cancellation on "Warner Bros. capitulating to Lorre's egotistical desire to punish Mr. Sheen."
Click to expand...

Poor Charlie, I never knew that he was completely innocent of all this and just a poor victim.:rolleyes: While I feel bad for everyone else on the show loosing out financially, I hope Time Warner fights this and that Charlie doesn't get a penny out of it. Honestly, I just wish the earth would swallow this idiot up.


http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...heen-suing-half-men-100-milion/#ixzz1GES5CWCR
 
When you think about it, it's kind of sad. He's not only ruining himself, he's also affecting the people he works for and with costing them tons of money, which he'll probably spend to get wasted some more, just because he's Charlie Sheen.

Gloria Steinem said it so nicely; if he had an air force, he'd be Gaddafi.
 
emaja said:
I have stayed out of this one for a while, but now he has gone from "sick" to "awesome" with this video on Funny or Die.

http://FunnyOrDie.com/m/5cwg
Click to expand...

leekohler said:
I don't even know what to say...
Click to expand...

Honestly, me neither. I don't know whether to shake my head incredulously or LMAO. Did Charlie get paid for this?

iJohnHenry said:
Say nothing.

It's the only way to kill him.
Click to expand...

Won't happen. Chuck Norris can't even kill Charlie Sheen; the Adonis DNA-infused tiger blood is like Kryptonite to Norris.
 
Thomas Veil said:
And that's what bugs me. That's the only time I can think of on TV where they actually pulled a switcheroo instead of having the character killed or sending him or her on a long trip to visit Aunt Edna in Schenectady.
Click to expand...

D'oh, how could I forget Zev Bellringer in LEXX played by Eva Habermann. Who became Xev Bellringer played by Xenia Seeberg.

Not really the same though as simply dropping a new actor in the same role without skipping a beat, as being sci-fi they could regenerate her in a different body. And what a body. Both of them. I preferred Zev myself, sad to see her go.

Dr Who has been using this technique for decades. ;)

Also, slightly different situation as well, every time they make a TV series out of a successful movie they swap the actors in the same roles. Nearly all of them in most cases. M*A*S*H and Stargate for example. Radar and Father Mulcahy were the only two to remain the same in M*A*S*H I think. And only the two characters from the planet of Abidos in Stargate if I recall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back