Ashton Kutcher replacing Charlie Sheen in Two and a Half Men

[Heisenberg]

Ashton Kutcher to join 'Two and a Half Men'
CBS, Warner Bros. lock in actor before Wednesday upfrontBy Andrew Wallenstein

Ashton Kutcher is poised to step in for Charlie Sheen on "Two and a Half Men."

The actor has been lured to the Warner Bros. TV as part of an 11th-hour scramble to get the hit sitcom back on air in time for CBS' upfront on Wednesday. Both the network and studio declined comment.
Kutcher first surfaced as a contender for the role in a report earlier today posted on the Broadcasting and Cable website. The selection of Kutcher comes after Warner Bros. and "Men" exec producer Chuck Lorre were in hot pursuit of Hugh Grant, only to see the deal fall apart at the last minute.



CBS was likely hoping to keep Kutcher's hire under wraps until Wednesday, when the network could trot out the actor to an audience full of advertisers at the network's upfront presentation at Carnegie Hall. Without nailing down a new cast member, the Eye faced the prospect of pushing "Men" to midseason or even cancellation, which could have lost the network and studio untold millions on top of the billions the program has fetched in advertising and syndication revenues to date.

Kutcher is no stranger to hit TV. The former model's career began on the long-running Fox series "That '70s Show" in 1998, in which he played a dimwitted stoner teen. He moved on to host the breakout MTV unscripted series "Punk'd," which also marked the begin of Kutcher's producing career on TV. Through shingle Katalyst, he's produced a string of series for TV including The CW's "Beauty and the Geek." Kutcher has had mixed success at the boxoffice, where the actor has struggled to transition into a leading man as flops from "The Butterfly Effect" to "Killers" can attest. He has had his share of strong openers, including the recent romantic comedy "No Strings Attached" opposite Natalie Portman. The actor also has a busy side career as an investor in digital-media properties.

Kutcher has established himself as a Internet star of sorts, with over 6 million followers on Twitter. With TV networks increasingly involved in harnessing the forces of social media for marketing to younger audiences, that massive following is an added bonus for CBS.

Well that's... interesting. Pretty nice payday i suppose.

 

[Matt]

Desperate move for both Kutcher and CBS. Honestly, CBS should've fired the show runner over Sheen. Sheen may be bat **** crazy but based on the little bit that I've seen, he was the star.

 

[Donut]

I wonder how long before Sawyer comes in

 

[enterthemadness]

I love this move. Either a trainwreck or the show will be better. Show hasn't been good for years..watchable, but not good.

 

[Sawyer]

CBS.... just ****ing cancel it.

 

[enterthemadness]

i wonder how long before sawyer comes in

3...2...

 

[O'Haire]

Just when you think the piece of crap couldn't get any worse.

Just end it.

 

[Heisenberg]

Aside from the fact that I don't think Ashton Kutcher has any merit as an actor, I have absolutely no idea how CBS plan on continuing the show, logistically speaking. Do they acknowledge Charlie (the character) has left and have Kutcher play a new character, loosely keeping some credibility in the title "two and half men"... is he playing Charlie, as I can't even begin to understand how that would work. I really don't know why Lorre didn't cut his losses and go and develop something else. Doing T&AHM without Sheen is like continuing 24 without Bauer or The Sopranos without Tony... baffling.

 

[enterthemadness]

Aside from the fact that I don't think Ashton Kutcher has any merit as an actor, I have absolutely no idea how CBS plan on continuing the show, logistically speaking. Do they acknowledge Charlie (the character) has left and have Kutcher play a new character, loosely keeping some credibility in the title "two and half men"... is he playing Charlie, as I can't even begin to understand how that would work. I really don't know why Lorre didn't cut his losses and go and develop something else. Doing T&AHM without Sheen is like continuing 24 without Bauer or The Sopranos without Tony... baffling.

I found him good as the dummy on That 70's show and good when serious in Butterfly Effect and alright in that Diaz comedy...When In Vegas or whatever...

 

[jonathancrane]

While I am not a major fan of Kutcher's work, he can easily fill the role. Sheen's role and portrayal was one dimensional: there were no arcs of development or shading to the character. The character was just a sarcastic womanizer, a type. Personally, I believe Rob Lowe would have made the character interesting, but I cannot speculate on the quality of Kutcher's performance as there is nothing to base it upon.

However, the idea of moving on following the departure of a lead character is not new in television: Happy Days, That Seventies Show, or heck, even Deep Space 9 moved on when one of the lead characters departed. This show could conceivably return to its height, but the main factor is going to be the writing. If they can do use him well, then they could easily top Sheen...but, as some have pointed out, the writing has been inconsistent lately, so it remains speculation, for the moment.

 

[chaseter]

I will continue to never watch this show. Thanks CBS!

Also...thanks for keeping Ashton Koosher busy so he doesn't make ****** movies.

 

[Phatman]

Only one emoticon expresses my feelings for this:



If they had some Juevos, they'd just cancel this nine-year old show and let BBT lead off Mondays at 9 followed by Mediocre and Molly.

 

[KalKai]

aplusk ashton kutcher
what's the square root of 6.25?

 

[Sawyer]

 

[Heretic]

I think either Rob Lowe or John Stamos could have just taken over the role, same character, and the show could have kept going...

Although I agree that the network should have kept Sheen over the producer.

I'm kind of hoping that they start the first episode like
"Where's Charlie?"
"Vegas"
"Still?"
"He said he was 'winning'..."

and just move on from there...

 

[KalKai]

 

[Sawyer]

I think either Rob Lowe or John Stamos could have just taken over the role, same character, and the show could have kept going...

Although I agree that the network should have kept Sheen over the producer.

I'm kind of hoping that they start the first episode like
"Where's Charlie?"
"Vegas"
"Still?"
"He said he was 'winning'..."

and just move on from there...

Offensive.

Both deserve better than this trash. And considering that Lowe is already on a vastly better comedy, double offensive.

 

[enterthemadness]

Offensive.

Both deserve better than this trash. And considering that Lowe is already on a vastly betterno body watches comedy, double offensive.

Fixed it for ya...

 

[Sawyer]

You didn't fix anything, you just made it more awful.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

General rule of thumb with TV. Usually shows that people don't watch? Like 70 percent of them are genius that NOBODY watches. Because the American Public likes ****** TV.

Never seen Parks and Recreation myself, but it stars Amy Poehler, Rashida Jones, Aubrey Plaza, Rob Lowe, and I guess Aziz Ansari. (I can find him REALLY annoying like 60 percent of the time, but he can be funny.) So it can't be too awful.

 

[jthom19802]

There was not a chance in he** they were going to choose Sheen over Lorre. Lorre has been ridiculously successful in the sitcom world and currently, three of CBS' most popular shows are co-produced and written by CHUCK LORRE PRODUCTIONS. That, and he is the creator of two of them (including 2 1/2). The CREATOR. Look at his resume:

Roseanne (although not really his) produced over 200 episodes

Grace Under Fire produced over 100 episodes

Cybill produced over 75 episodes

Dharma & Greg produced over 100 episodes

Two & A Half Men is a season from hitting 200 episodes (for CBS)

Big Bang Theory is half a season away from hitting 100 episodes (for CBS)

Mike & Molly was given 13 episodes, then picked up for full season of 26 after eight episodes, and it has reportedly been renewed for a second season already (for CBS)

Lorre isn't and never was going anywhere. Sheen really over-estimated his pull with CBS. He failed to realize that none of Lorre's shows for CBS were really ever concerned with having a huge star, and they have all been successful without one. CBS was doing him a favor to be honest (not that Sheen didn't make a buttload of money for them). That show never needed Charlie after the writing for Jon Cryer started far and away blowing Sheen's character out of the water.

I like AK. He's a smart guy who gets typecast sometimes, I'll give it a shot to see how they write him in. If the writing for him is half that of Jon Cryer, the show will be fine (although the older that kid looks the more it slowly slips for me).

 

[jthom19802]

General rule of thumb with TV. Usually shows that people don't watch? Like 70 percent of them are genius that NOBODY watches. Because the American Public likes ****** TV. .

+1. I'm looking at YOU Friday Night Lights.

 

[Heretic]

Wow...Chuck Lorre has brought a lot of absolute crap to tv.

 

[dsfjr1190]

The show was never anything special. But when I did watch, I watched for Charlie Sheen. I have no interest in the continuing adventures of Alan "I'm not gay, I swear" Harper and his annoying kid, now accompanied by Kelso.

 

[jthom19802]

Wow...Chuck Lorre has brought a lot of absolute crap to tv.

You'll get no argument there; point being is that it's been a lot of very successful crap.