The future of Two and a Half Men is, as of press time, uncertain, but its loose-cannon star’s place on that show is not. Variety broke the news Monday afternoon that Charlie Sheen has been fired. Still, I can’t imagine that CBS is going to give up its cash cow without a fight – Two and a Half Men is one of the most highly rated sitcoms on broadcast TV and a reliable ratings winner for CBS. Even prior to Sheen’s formal termination, CBS had started to do some creative thinking: Marc Malkin of E! Online reported that CBS chief Les Moonves has approached actor John Stamos about joining the series – not as Sheen’s character, Charlie Harper, but as a new, Sheen-esque character.
Stamos flatly – but playfully – squashed the idea on Twitter: “Contrary to rumors, I am not replacing Charlie Sheen on Two and a Half Men. However, Martin Sheen has asked me to be his son.”
I’m not saying this is a good idea, but this is what I predict will happen: Jon Cryer will become the series’ central character. A new, Sheen-esque character will come on to play the naughty counterpart to Cryer’s fastidious Alan Harper, but the character’s behavior will purposely be patterned after Sheen’s real-life antics. A case of – to use the term very generously – “art” imitating life.
Now I hear there’s a letter-writing campaign afoot to encourage CBS to bring back Two and a Half Men from its forced hiatus. Really? Nine seasons of mediocre (but bizarrely awarded) television just isn’t enough?
Comparatively, six episodes of AMC’s The Walking Dead was just right.
I’m not sure how I missed The Walking Dead when it first aired last year. So I looked forward to a marathon screening last week, thinking I might peek at the first two episodes and save the rest for later. I ended up watching the entire marathon into the wee hours of the next morning.
It’s been a long time since I’ve been that absorbed in a series and felt that sense of astonishment as it was ending. The Walking Dead is compelling stuff, with appealing characters and makeup and special effects that are totally gnarly (damnit, Charlie Sheen!). You feel every moment of the characters’ journey, which is to remain alive in a post-apocalyptic world overrun by flesh-eating zombies. But like all good TV – like all good storytelling – The Walking Dead is much more than its log line. The series examines that phrase “quality of life,” turning it over and over, to look at it up close. What does it mean to be alive? But more importantly, as the characters confront their own mortality daily, The Walking Dead asks: How do you want to die?
The business model of modern broadcast TV is geared toward multiple seasons with an eye toward the 100th episode. That’s when a series can go into syndication to make even more money. But new media has changed media consumption. Perhaps there will always be an audience for shows like Two and a Half Men. You can read your e-mail or make dinner with the show running in the background and still catch the story, such as it is. But there is also an audience for investment TV – those series that demand your attention, are watched intently, and play even better in a marathon viewing: shows like Treme, The Wire, The Sopranos, Mad Men, and The Walking Dead, among others.
Six well-wrought episodes: I don’t need more. Sure, I’ll tune in to the second season of The Walking Dead. I do wonder what was whispered to Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln) in the final scenes of the last episode. Maybe that will be revealed in the next season. But I would have been equally content – actually, more – if The Walking Dead ended after its first season. Like reaching the end of my favorite novel, my response wasn’t to pine for a sequel. I was too busy savoring what I’d just experienced. Less is more, from this viewer’s point of view. Now, if there’s a business model to make that attractive to broadcast and cable networks, all the better.
The Walking Dead: Season One (Starz/Anchor Bay) was released on DVD and Blu-ray March 8.
This article appears in March 11 • 2011.