The real difference between British and American sitcoms.

[Vault101]

I'm not sure that's the case.

Then again, when I looked up demographics for TV shows, and I had trouble finding any specific information for women as a discrete group. The groups were basically men 18-34, men 35-39, men overall, kids, and people overall.

I'm not saying women don't like it...a fair amount would

but I found two and a half men sexist before I was even thinking about what was "sexist"

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not saying women don't like it...a fair amount would

but I found two and a half men sexist before I was even thinking about what was "sexist"

My first thought was "stupid." I honestly never got to "sexist."

I'm just saying the appeal of the show may not be married to any specific male appeal, but it's hard to find meaningful data. Not just Two and a Half Men, either.

 

[Vault101]

My first thought was "stupid." I honestly never got to "sexist."

I'm just saying the appeal of the show may not be married to any specific male appeal, but it's hard to find meaningful data. Not just Two and a Half Men, either.

most of the female charachters are there to be antagonistic or window dressing, Charlie is seen as cool while Alan clearly not "man" enough is a laughing stock

the show has wide appeal in that kind of dumb wide appeal thats quite male centric

Charlie is kind of seen as "ohhhh he's a jerk but he's still really cool" it was years ago but I think one of my guy freinds at the time thourght he was totally cool

I just thourght it was dumb but at times I felt something was "off" about it...and I didn't notice because up untill then I was used too and never questioned how women were portrayed in thease kinds of things

 

[Denny Crane]

Simple:

British humour is laughing at yourself.

American humour is laughing at other people.

 

[Compatriot Block]

I prefer to judge each show on its own rather than as part of one country's collection. I'm not trying to be confrontational or snooty, but I never understood why some shows' good and bad qualities are attributed to their "American-ness" or "British-ness" rather than the talent of the writers and actors. Being created in a certain country doesn't make it more likely to be good or bad, and I've seen good and bad shows from all over.

If I find a show funny, I think "Wow, that show is good," rather than "Wow, X's shows are way worse than this."

 

[Lieju]

if thats true then why the fuck was Australia subjected to years of Two and a Half men? huh? huuuuuh? (we got two broke girls too)

because it's considered the "best" of American sitcoms. Or, alternatively, we were having a little fun with the rest of the world.

Also it might be cheap for broadcasting companies in other countries to license, it might be because the star is well-known, or they might buy a bundle of shows. 'You want this good one? Ok, if you buy all this crap too.'

 

[Something Amyss]

most of the female charachters are there to be antagonistic or window dressing, Charlie is seen as cool while Alan clearly not "man" enough is a laughing stock

the show has wide appeal in that kind of dumb wide appeal thats quite male centric

Charlie is kind of seen as "ohhhh he's a jerk but he's still really cool" it was years ago but I think one of my guy freinds at the time thourght he was totally cool

I just thourght it was dumb but at times I felt something was "off" about it...and I didn't notice because up untill then I was used too and never questioned how women were portrayed in thease kinds of things

Yeah, I know some of the show. Alan's wife is an emasculating monster and Alan's an emasculated victim (because men who have feelings are also bad) victim, though ironically as much Charlie's as his wife's. And she's so memorable I can't even tell you her name....

At the same point, it's so absolutely braindead that I wrote it off with the 50,000 other stereotypical things in the show. I mostly didn't process it because I feared my brain would liquefy and dribble out my nose.

Also it might be cheap for broadcasting companies in other countries to license, it might be because the star is well-known, or they might buy a bundle of shows. 'You want this good one? Ok, if you buy all this crap too.'

All technically true, but I'm now going to stick with my "practical joke" theory. In fact, I'm pretty sure that 2.5 men isn't watched by anybody, and is part of some Trading Places-meets-The Producers-meets-Brewster's Millions wager to pawn off the worst possible show on the world, successfully, for one American dollar. Somewhere in America, some very rich people are drinking very expensive champagne and twirling their mustaches gleefully.