The Truth About Charlie Sheen’s Rants & ‘Two And A Half Men’

Published 4 years ago by , Updated August 13th, 2013 at 11:21 pm,

charlie sheen two and a half men chuck lorre The Truth About Charlie Sheens Rants & Two And A Half Men

Unless you live under a rock and are cut off from modern civilization (if so, you’re probably not reading this article), you’ve probably caught wind of Hollywood’s favorite, and latest story: The saga of Charlie Sheen, Chuck Lorre and Two and a Half Men.

Whether it be Good Morning America, CNN, Nightline or even your local newscast, the world is abuzz with the happenings of one hit CBS sitcom, its star and its creator. While most of the attention has been focused on Sheen’s outrageous statements, the core issue behind this matter (as it pertains to TV fans) seems to have been missed completely.

Contained within Sheen’s numerous and bizarre interviews lies a core set of grievances that are fueling the star’s purpose for granting so many outlets interview opportunities. Of course, when those grievances are wrapped in a proverbial set of continuous one-liner revelations, they tend to be scrapped for a headline that is more sensational than intrinsically informative.

While one can’t completely vilify news outlets for shaping interviews to capitalize on Sheen’s buzz-worthy (and bizarre) behavior, the responsibility to convey a subject’s earnest protests is still implied – even if they’re supplemented with titillating comments.

These have been Sheen’s continuous points of contention:

  • He has no “morals clause” in his contract – his personal life has nothing to do with Two and a Half Men, as long as it doesn’t directly impact the literal production of the series.
  • He has always showed up to the set on time, delivered his lines impeccably and remained a consummate professional while working.
  • He is ready and willing to work – it is Lorre, CBS, and Warner Bros. that decided not to continue with the production of Two and a Half Men.

Like it or not, every one of the above points is absolutely correct. Without actual documentation, many might believe that this is more of a speculative statement, but the simple fact that Two and a Half Men hasn’t been shut down up until now proves that Sheen’s criticisms on the current events are, in fact, true.

Whether or not Sheen has a substance abuse problem is not the issue (with respect to the future of Two and a Half Men). The fact is, whatever his extracurricular activities may be – no matter how illegal or immoral – Sheen’s lack of inhibitions cannot (contractually) be the reason for Two and a Half Men to cease production. But that’s exactly what has happened.

This situation would almost be identical to the numerous stories of people being fired for posting inappropriate personal photos on Facebook – except for the fact that most (if not all) of those people do have some variation of a morals clause in their employment contract. Sheen does not have such a clause (although the next time he’s hired for a job someone might consider adding one) – and therefore his personal life cannot be taken into account – again, contractually speaking. The only thing that would cause Sheen to infringe on his contract and give CBS and Warner Bros. the right to blame Sheen for shutting down Two and a Half Men would be if his personal choices impacted his ability to competently perform, or if he showed up to work under the influence – neither of which have ever been proven to have happened.

For all intents and purposes, Sheen is a functional addict. While friends, family members and co-workers may not like this about him, the network cannot use professional resources to impose their sensibilities or intentions on an unwilling person without some sort of legal backing. Ever since Two and a Half Men began production, Chuck Lorre has attempted to get Charlie Sheen into Alcoholics Anonymous. Whether it’s the implied ideology (of an intensive rehab program like AA), or the fact that Alcoholics Anonymous only has a success rate of 5%, Sheen was not interested in Lorre’s offer.

This isn’t the first time that Chuck Lorre has had to deal with a star struggling with a substance abuse problem. In 1996, when Lorre was reveling in the success of his hit ABC series Grace Under Fire, the show’s star, Brett Butler, began showing signs of an addiction to painkillers. Following an incident in 1997 where Butler exposed herself to Jon Paul Steuer, the 12-year-old actor playing her son (Steuer subsequently left the series and was replaced by a much older actor playing the same part), ABC and Carsey-Werner Productions took a more active role in helping Butler kick her addiction. In the months that followed, Butler was forced to begin her second round of treatment.

Unfortunately, that treatment didn’t last long and Butler relapsed around Christmas that year. Two months later, ABC became tired of Butler missing call times and skipping filming days, so they abruptly canceled the series on February 17, 1998. As I’m sure you derived from this previous sentence, it was Butler’s constant absence from production that caused ABC to end the series, not her drug addiction. While Butler’s addiction and outrageous behavior most certainly gave ABC the right to terminate her contract – especially since she did have a morals clause – they waited until it directly impacted Grace Under Fire in such a way that production wasn’t possible.

Of course, while Lorre’s intent to help Sheen is admirable, he hasn’t exactly acted as professional as a black and white view of the situation might lead people to believe. On the February 28 episode of Mike & Molly, Lorre decided to replace his typical anecdotal message at the end of the episode with a long, rambling statement directed at Sheen:

“I understand that I’m under a lot of pressure to respond to certain statements made about me recently. The following are my uncensored thoughts. I hope this will put an end to any further speculation.”

“I believe that consciousness creates the illusion of individuation, the false feeling of being separate. In other words, I am aware, ergo I am alone. I further believe that this existential misunderstanding is the prime motivating force for the neurotic compulsion to blot out consciousness. This explains the paradox of our culture, which celebrates the ego while simultaneously promoting its evisceration with drugs and alcohol. It also clarifies our deep-seated fear of monolithic, one-minded systems like communism, religious fundamentalism, zombies and invaders from Mars. Each one is a dark echo of an oceanic state of unifying transcendence from which consciousness must, by nature, flee. The Fall from Grace is, in fact, a Sprint from Grace. Or perhaps more accurately, ‘Screw Grace, I am so outta here!’”


One can’t deny Lorre’s annoyance with Sheen continuously insulting him in interviews, but rebutting someone with an odd message at the end of a television show isn’t the most appropriate way to respond to someone you believe has a substance abuse problem. With Monday’s Mike & Molly message, CBS and Warner Bros. have allowed Lorre to convolute everyone’s implied intentions and concerns even more, by allowing the Two and a Half Men creator to attack Charlie Sheen directly on primetime television.

mike and molly The Truth About Charlie Sheens Rants & Two And A Half Men

To help you better understand why Sheen is upset with Lorre, CBS and Warner Bros., I’ve created a handy list:

  • Chuck Lorre – For focusing on his personal life, continuously trying to get him to join Alcoholics Anonymous and for convincing CBS and Warner Bros. to suspend Two and a Half Men.
  • CBS and Warner Bros. – For focusing on his personal life, allowing Lorre to convince them to shut down Two and a Half Men when the actual production of the series was never impacted by his personal life and for not paying the crew when the show is shut down.

(After CBS and Warner Bros. decided to pay the crew, Sheen then became upset with the fact that the network and studio wouldn’t acknowledge that he was behind their decision to pay the crew – after seeing how Conan O’Brien had to fight for his crew to be paid, Sheen might be correct once again.)

Despite Chuck Lorre, CBS and Warner Bros.’ concern for Charlie Sheen’s well-being (even going so far as setting up a pseudo intervention at his house), they should have never used professional resources to force resolutions to these concerns on someone who’s fulfilling their contractual employment requirements (even if that person is spiraling downward personally). On top of that, the moment that the network cited Charlie Sheen’s personal life as the reason for Two and a Half Men getting shut down, they opened themselves up to litigation based on contracts that they not only created, but also agreed to.

The notion that Chuck Lorre, CBS and Warner Bros. would simply be enabling Charlie Sheen’s behavior (or possible addiction) if they were to continue Two and a Half Men may have some merit, but addiction doesn’t happen overnight and from Sheen’s own admittance, he has been doing this for many years prior to coming onboard the TV series. Considering Lorre has been attempting to get Sheen into Alcoholics Anonymous for quite a long time (and Hollywood loves its gossip), everyone on Two and a Half Men – including CBS and Warner Bros. – knew what was going on.

Trying to help your fellow man overcome an addiction is an admirable endeavor, and as any episode of Intervention has shown, the tough-love approach can be effective when it comes to those unwilling to accept help. However, that all said, the personal and professional lives of Charlie Sheen are mutually exclusive when it comes to Chuck Lorre, CBS and Warner Bros – they are his employers, not his family.

Even if Charlie Sheen does need help, and even if Chuck Lorre, CBS and Warner Bros. believe that they’re doing what’s best for him and Two and a Half Men, the moment they crossed that line of acceptable professionalism, one statement became absolutely correct…

When it comes to Two and a Half Men, Charlie Sheen is right, Chuck Lorre is wrong and CBS & Warner Bros. had no legal grounding to shut down production of the series and cite Sheen’s erratic personal life as the cause.


Follow me on Twitter @anthonyocasio
Follow Screen Rant on Twitter @screenrant

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. Glad I read this (should have read it sooner). Changes my whole opinion on this entire subject.

  2. Just so we understand the basis for this article, do you have personal knowledge of what is in Mr. Sheen’s contract for Two and a Half Men? Furthermore, are you an attorney who is qualified to give legal opinions about how a contract should be interpreted in the State of California?

    I am not asking these questions to be a jerk, just to understand how much credibility you have and how much weight I should give your opinions.

  3. Wow. My first comment in weeks, and I’m glad it was on this one:

    Sheen has always amused me, but some people need to realize that personal and professional problems are two separate problem areas.

    They need to be kept that way, and trying to combine them makes the “combinee” (“combiner?”)look like an ass.

    • Politicians should be afforded the same courtesy

      • Not really… actors are selling an ability to portray a character; politicians are selling themselves (in OH so many ways) – do you really want cokeheads and pedophiles making laws that effect our children? Probably only if you’re a cokehead or a pedophile.

  4. This article sheds light on the issue and I like it. And, some people may think this is wrong, but I also like the fact that Charlie Sheen is honest about his issues. Everybody knew that man had problems and yet he’s still getting work. Obviously he’s doing something right.

  5. I just saw the 20/20 interview tonight and while Sheen does seem a bit out there with his quirky zingers, he is 100% correct about the base issues. Lorre needs to grow a thicker skin, shut up and be happy he is making MILLIONS instead of being an overgrown child throwing a temper tantrum.

  6. I think the issue is a legal one whether we like Sheen or not. The fact of the matter is, CBS knew what they were getting when they hired Sheen, and frankly they only started taking strong action against him once they were being insulted by him . I think the real question is whether or not Sheen and the crew will be paid for the remaining episodes which were canned. I think CBS should at least pay Sheen and the crew for the remaining episodes.

  7. Once you start publicly eviscerating the people you work with, challenging them to fights and couching your language in threats of physical violence and going to war, fangs and claws out, how you are going to destroy them, etc. it doesn’t take all that amazing of a lawyer to say that that kind of thing will affect the show’s production. If your behavior makes people afraid to be around you, it doesn’t matter that you’re still perfectly willing to show up on time and read your lines… Your personal behavior is affecting the production of the show.

    Not to mention whether or not the lack of a morals clause has any bearing on whether you can be publicly abusive to the producer of the show or the network without them dissolving your contract. Getting coked up in private on your own time and publicly attacking your boss are two separate things.

    I think there’s a likelihood that, barring some close examination of the contracts and laws involved, you don’t really know what you’re talking about.

    • Sheen’s contract was never “dissolved.”

      No one from the production of ‘Two and a Half Men’ has ever said that they’re afraid to be around Sheen or that he was anything less than professional. In fact, they even said that Sheen was “great” and that he “[nailed] it.” “It” being the filming of an episode following his public actives.

      You’re also forgetting the fact that Chuck Lorre is the one that began with the public statements. On the January 17 episode of “Two and a Half Men,” Lorre included this vanity card about Sheen:

      Do not attempt to replicate what you saw in tonight’s episode of Two and a Half Men … Please keep in mind that we employ a highly-paid Hollywood professional who has years of experience with putting his life at risk. And sadly no, I’m not talking about our stunt man.

      This was almost a month before Sheen said anything about Lorre.

      • They didn’t cancel the rest of the season until after Sheen went publicly crazy attacking them. You may have been right up until that point, but Sheen didn’t quietly take his case to court… He threatened the producer, insulted the network, and dropped violent references all over the airwaves. Then they pulled the plug.

        Let’s say you park legally and yet still get a ticket. If you go to court, being in the right you may win. If instead you smash the parking meter, verbally assault the ticketing officer and resist arrest, you might still be in the right about the parking violation, but that doesn’t get you off the hook for everything else you did. Sheen has taken that second route.

        Sheen’s a man with a public history of accusations of violence. He’s been ranting like a madman for days now, using violent metaphors constantly and expressing his hatred for his show runner. He has publicly insulted the network and studio and producers. And after all of this, they decided that they shouldn’t go on with the rest of the episodes. To ignore all of that and assume the only issue relevant is a lack of a morals clause seems more than slightly shortsighted. His ability to function with an addiction is no longer the sole issue.

        Does the studio have a legal case to break that contract after Sheen publicly threatens the show’s producer? Does that somehow not effect the production of the show? Would a lawyer really have trouble arguing that Lorre had every right to be afraid of this unhinged man now, or that going to work with him would be an unreasonably hostile work environment?

        We’re not dealing with what Sheen might have been able to argue and win before his meltdown. He may very well have won had he gone the reasonable route. His show was cancelled after he flipped out though, and so the flipping out is very much relevant.

        • A voice of reason, thanks. With or without a morals clause you cannot go around calling your bosses and company foul mouthed words out in the open whether it be in the cafeteria or like say in a business magazine interview and get away with in the real world.

          Sheen happens to be a tv star and he feels he’s above the rules that apply to everyone else. Pfft.

        • I didn’t know Lorre visited screen rant.

  8. I’m just wondering if CBS is looking at this as a lose-lose scenario. Charlie Sheen WILL sue and CBS could possibly settle for $___ million dollars.
    Charlie Sheen could be arrested since the whole world THINKS he’s on drugs and will be watching him like a hawk. CBS then loses $___ million in advertisements for each episode they need to cancel…not to mention the bad press.

    I just wonder in the end if the 2nd blank could be larger then the 1st, CBS will just cut their losses and move on with a new character or a new show…

  9. To be honest I to disagree Chuck Lorre and CBS haven’t commented yet so to say that we know the full story is bull. Think about it Charlie’s drunken nights and messed up rants have had a negative P.R. storm raging for months, honestly I’m surprised that they waited this long.He stalled production when he went into rehab there by effecting the production of the show. His rants were the last straw, they told him what would happen if he went on the attack and he did. The cast and crew are out of work till who knows when. Did he ask the rest of the cast and crew if they would be okay with him risking their jobs? No, he just went off and acted like a self absorbed man/child. He was selfish he should have handled this behind closed doors and not on the radio. Charlie Sheen nailed the coffin shut on Two and half Men, and now he wants us on his side while he goes down. All I can say is good luck and have fun, because that’s what you do best.

  10. I’m with Awesomesauce as far as wondering what access the writer has to Sheen’s actual contracts.

    I don’t even watch this show, and I’m sick of hearing about Charlie Sheen’s problems. As far as I can see, he’s just another over-indulged, over-rated punk who chooses to live this car-wreck of a life just to get attention. He’s just another Andy Dick, and I won’t miss him when he’s gone.

  11. I don’t care what Charlie Sheen does in his personal life. That’s up to him. He’s a great comedy actor and I have been looking forward to 2 and another man. Just bang some heads together and get on with it – egos, egos, egos!

    • Charlie Sheen is an adult. A reckless and irresponsible adult, but an adult nonetheless.

      If he chooses to sleep with hookers and get stoned on week long benders away from his employment that’s up to him. The guy likes to party ferchrissakes and I can’t fault him. He’s the wrong side of 40 and he’s got colostomy bags, ear hair, cancer and baldness to look forward to.

      He does his job, and does it well. It must be hugely frustrating therefore to have your employer patronise you with cod spirituality in an effort to get you to clean up. Me, I’d be straight in Chuck’s face telling him to back off and mind his own bidniz!

      • Except for the fact that he has 2 young boys in his house while he parties with crack and pornstars. Yeah, the guy really deserves our sympathy. I was glad to hear that he had his kids taken away from him.

        I’ve always been a fan of Charlie Sheen. 2 1/2 Men is one of my favorite shows, and I really loved the first Major League movie. However, that doesn’t excuse you from publicly threatening your boss and impacting the welfare of a few hundred people that work on “Men.” Charlie Sheen is a horse’s a$$ and CBS was, IMO, completely justified in cancelling the remainder of the season. I even think they’d be justified in replacing Sheen and continuing the show.

        • His personal life is just that, his personal life. These problems have been going on long before Chuck Lorre was in the scene. It isn’t news to anyone that he has had a horrible habit of drug and alcohol problems, but from my understanding he has never let that effect his job.

          Consider this. Lorre has been patronizing Charlie for awhile now about his drinking habit and so has CBS and Warner Bros. Those people aren’t in the position to try and help him, they are not his family. I would be pretty pissed to if my boss was questioning my personal life.

        • Charlie partied away from his kids in a hotel room for a week. It’s called taking a vacation at the bottom of a beer glass.

          His 2 girlfriends may not be ideal parent material, but neither are they unhinged lunatics.

          I have not heard of any incident where his kids have been put at risk because of his antics. Unless I hear any different the kids belong with their father when it is his turn vis-a-vis visitation rights.

  12. I don’t like Two And A Half Men, I don’t find it funny at all. However, as this article states, Sheen is quite right. As long as he turns up for work and does his job, his private life should have no impact on the show whatsoever.

  13. I think that if people see the personal life to an actor and they dont like it, they will not watch the things he do. i know many that used to like two and a half men, but that stopped when they heard all about Sheen. i used to like it as well, but it go to so repetitive that it wasnt funny anymore. I think this whole thing is ridiculous and im not on Sheen’s side.

    • I don’t think thats true, people will watch the show regardless of what Sheen does.

    • Magnus that’s not always true in fact it’s a rare breed of person that actually stops watching things because of the actors personal life. Most people don’t care about it. I hate Sean Penn as a person, but I’ll still watch his films if they are good.

      I think Mel Gibbson is probably one of the biggest piles of trash in hollywood, but I’ll watch every film he puts out because he’s a great actor and his films tend to be great.

      It’s actually rare for someone to boycott things based on the actors life. I mean it happens all the time, but it’s very small amount of people who are actually doing it and the ratings for two and a half men are proof of that. Sheen has been in the news for his issues for a few years now and the ratings up until production stop were great.

      • you two are probably right. i was just basing it on some of the people i know. and they are girls lol perhaps that has something to say.

  14. Yes that is exactly how I saw it all along. Good article.

  15. I think Chuck Lorre needs a shrink.

    • Or he needs a night out on the town with Sheen?

      • He´d end up in a coma…

        • But it would be one hell of a ride…

          • Indeed.

  16. This contractual talk isnt the point, it’s too bad Sheen’s behavior is being excused and the wrong argument entirely is being presented in this op-ed.

    But let’s pretend for a second Sheen didnt go off the deep end and start bashing his employers in public (which is why he got suspended and rightfully so).

    Is there really such thing as a morals clause that protects you while committing criminal felonies? lol

  17. Or should I say in the absence of. Does an employer really need to spell out in writing that if you commit criminal behavior you’re suspended or fired?

    Just curious…

  18. Rules: No profanity or personal attacks

    Isn’t it a shame that we don’t get 2 million per comment yet we still have to follow some rules of civility and respect for those who participate in this experience and those who provide the vehicle for us to do so.

    WE empower Mr. Sheen’s conduct by creating this sense of entitlement to self destruct while we pay him to do so.

    • “WE”?

      We do not pay him that obscene amount of money, the studio do. And if he wants to self destruct, he can, he has free will.

      • Free will has consequences.

        • Of course it does. But the simple fact is this, Sheen has been turning up for work everyday and doing his job, what he does outside of his work hours (however stupid) is up to him and cannot be dictated by anyone other than himself.

          • Actually, he’s not allowed to “do whatever he wants”.

            A person who speaks ill of their employer in a public forum and chances are they get reprimanded or terminated. Why do you feel he’s entitled?

            Furthermore, his bosses already gave him numerous chances in the past with the drug bs, when they could have just cut him loose because of the snowballing liability with this guy.

            Again, I ask, does it have to be stated in a contract that if you commit felonies and create dangerous liabilities that you will be reprimanded?

            Sheen is ungrateful, spoiled, and has a warped sense of entitlement and it’s always been this way as far as I can tell – this is not a new state of mind for him. He’s been popping off at the mouth with idiotic remarks for a few years.

            Drug abuse, paranoia, domestic voilence, increasingly violent rhetoric,…..yeah, the studio is beholden to accept that? lol ok.

            • Tell you what, you can think what you want and I will think what I want.

          • or the police…..prostitution, drug posession, drug use, child endagerment, death threats, etc. It’s one thing to let loose after a hard day at the office but this is obscene behavior and should not be condoned in any way by anyone, let alone a public figure.

  19. What’s funny is Im betting most people sticking up for Charlie Sheen are the same types who always whine on about not seeing warning signs and stepping in to “do something” when a nut like this cracks all the way and hurts someone.
    Oh wait, he’s already done that a few times. To women, anyway.

    Carry on…

  20. If Lorre want Sheen to get sober, maybe they should write scripts in which his character doesn´t drink all the time…

    Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

    • “Cocaine is God’s way of telling you you have too much money.” – Robin Williams



      • Ha! He used to be funny…

      • I don´t do cocaine, I just like the smell of it.

  21. If Charlie Sheen is that of a mess I wonder how the show manages to get through 8 seasons.

    • Because, on set at least, he’s a professional.

  22. He’s drug free now. He seems pretty damn convincing and while the effects (or just his actual zany attitude) is still there, Two And A Half Men has always amused me and I would like to see it back on the air.

  23. Nice article. But it boils down to if the studios want to shut down production they can do it.
    They OWN the show.

    If my employer decides to shut down the business I work for, I can go to the media and make a complete a** of myself and give good points as to why they shouldn’t close but guess what? it won’t matter because I don’t own it.

    Was it a mistake to publicly blame Sheen? Of course, and they will probably “pay” for it, but it is still within their power to cancel the series.

    • I’m not so sure that “they will probably ‘pay’ for it.” Here’s the analogy that keeps coming to mind:

      I work for a company. I party hard on the weekends, but come into work and get things done when I need to. Because of me, the company is doing quite well. But then my partying gets a bit much, and my boss reprimands me. Maybe he does it privately at first, maybe not, but eventually he comes out to the community in an effort to get me help. I turn around and call him a bunch of names and threaten him with physical violence. I get suspended as a result. My boss and I continue to exchange heated words in public. I refuse to apologize or take back my threats of violence.

      In this scenario, do you really think I could convince a jury that my suspension was unjustified, and that my boss had no right to suspend me without pay? Note that it has nothing to do with a “morals clause” in the contract.

      I don’t know, maybe in California the labor laws will allow the employee to win, but I don’t think that would fly in my state.

      • Here is the problem with your argument.

        You said that it’s not effecting your work and your boss reprimands you for it. He has no right to do that what so ever. It’s illegal for a job to punish you for your personal life if it does not effect your work and you just said in your analogy that it doesn’t effect your work yet your boss punishes you anyway. He has no right.

        • No, that’s not quite right. In my scenario, I was not “reprimanded” or punished in any way, at least not at first. My boss tried to talk to me, and went to the community as well. *Maybe* that was wrong of him, but it wasn’t illegal or a breach of my contract. If I had ignored him, I would still be working.

          The only time I was punished, in this analogy, was after I retaliated against my boss and publicly threatened him.

          You may be right that my boss would not have had the legal right to suspend me, punish me, whatever, as long as I kept showing up and doing my job. But I’m fairly certain that he would have the right to do all of those things if I’m telling people that he is a liar and I want to fight him.

          • Sorry, just re-read my analogy and you are right that I did say I was “reprimanded” early on. In my head, it was different. I meant to say that my boss spoke to me but that it had no direct consequences to my job.

            My bad.

          • Well in that case the problem with your argument is it doesn’t fit this situation.

            Production was suspended because of his personal life and not because he was insulting the producer. He didn’t insult the producer until after production was delayed and the reason for the production delay that was given was his personal life. That pissed him off and then he attacked.

            So if in your situation you were not punished until you attacked then it doesn’t fit this situation.

            Sheen had a crazy personal life that had no effect on his job. The producers stepped in and suspended production citing him as the reason. He then in anger insulted them for their decision and the main reason he was mad according to him was that the other crew member were being robbed of their cash. They decided after Sheen attached that they would pay the crew, but gave sheen no credit so he attacked again. Then they cancelled the rest of the season.

            So what started all this? Was it sheen attacking the producer? No. He was punished (as was the entire crew) for his personal life and long before he insulted the producer.

            • Fair enough. I admit that I haven’t been following the Sheen timeline that closely. Before Ocasio posted this, I really haven’t cared.

              So let’s look at it from the facts you’ve just presented. Sheen did some crazy things, and the producers decided to take a break from production. My understanding of contract law is that if the producers had agreed to a production schedule that they were now unilaterally changing, this could be a breach. Therefore, if this meant that Sheen would have lost money because of the changed schedule, like he had a trip planned or something, he could sue for damages.

              However, I don’t see anyone claiming this to be the case. My understanding of the TV industry is that production gets delayed all the time, when someone gets sick or the studio demands script changes, for example. Mr. Sheen does not appear to be claiming that the delay in production affected him financially. His only complaint at that time, as far as I know, was that he was being publicly humiliated. Just as Ocasio points out that he believes there is no “morals clause” in Sheen’s contract, I believe that there is no “no public humiliation by the boss clause.”

              So I don’t think the delay has any real legal consequence. The real issue appears to be the cancellation of the season, which occurred after the attacks and threats by Mr. Sheen against his boss.

              • Actually in a lot of his interviews Sheen cited his anger toward the producers as being because they were and I quote “They are taking money away from my family and my second family) The second family was him referring to the crew.

            • Production wasn’t halted until after he started calling into random radio shows and bad mouthed his employers though. He first started calling into the radio shows last Thrusday afternoon, CBS didn’t cancel the rest of the season until Thursday night. Prior to all that, everything was set to resume this week as normal. You’d have an argument if they cancelled the season while he was on his “home rehab”, but they didn’t.

              • Production was originally halted after Sheen’s trip to the ER. Sheen entering “rehab” afterwards albeit briefly did directly effect the production of the show.

                • It was halted to accomodate Charlie, it wasn’t cancelled until after his radio rants.

                  • In what world was it that this happened?

                    It was NOT halted to accommodate charlie. He was against the halt and spoke out against it. It was the major spark behind his radio rants.

                    • It was halted while he was doing his at home “rehab” that was required after his 36-hour binder. The season hadn’t been cancelled yet when he was off for that. And if I remember correctly, one of the reasons for his first radio interview was because he was told by the executives the only way he could get out of shooting was if he spoke out about his feelings of the executives and he wanted to try to call their bluff.

                    • Production temporarily halted while Sheen’s in rehab

                      As a result of Sheen’s decision to seek treatment, production on his CBS sitcom Two and a Half Men has been shut down.


                      Sheen attacks CBS and show:

                      “I was told if I went on the attack, they would cancel the show,” Sheen claimed to host Alex Jones in an interview for his radio show, “The Alex Jones Show,” referring to his CBS bosses.


                      If you can show me where CBS or Lorre made any character attacks or threats to shut it down prior to these antics, be my guest. Bottomline, all of this fallout is from the bomb Charlie Sheen set off.

  24. Sheen is a POS in his personal sure, but this article is correct.

    I’ve been saying all this for a week now and no one will listen. Nice to see someone else who knows what they are talking about.

    • Here’s the problem with what you, the author, and a lot of other people are saying: The contract does not exist in a vacuum. You may not realize it, but there are legal concepts that apply to a contract as well as the terms of the contract itself. (For example, you can create an ironclad contract with a hitman to kill your wife, but you’ll never get a court to help you enforce it or award you damages if he fails.) I can’t speak to the specifics of California law, which is exactly why I am very wary of these blanket statements about the validity of the producers’ actions.

      So until I see the opinion of a California attorney who has personal knowledge of Sheen’s contract, I’m not going to rush to judgment.

      • That was going to be my post, has Anthony read Sheens contract?? If not then you can’t say he is wrong to shut production down.

        • Even though I specifically said this multiple times in the article, I will say it one more time:

          CBS & Warner Bros. can shut down the show whenever they want, but they didn’t simply shut the show down. In the statement that was released, Sheen’s conduct was stated as the reason for doing so.

          I am not saying that CBS & Warner Bros. doesn’t have the right to shut down “Two and a Half Men,” nor am I saying the Sheen doesn’t need help.

          Everyone went about this the wrong way and, because of that, Sheen’s core grievances (which I laid out in the article) are correct.

          • Anthony, I’m with you totally on this, as are most of the people posting here. But some are defiant that their view is the correct one. You did a great article that laid out all the facts as they currently stand, there aint much more you can do than that.

          • Right, and I appreciate your *opinion*. However, you are presenting it as a legal truth, and I don’t believe that you can do that unless you 1) have personally read Mr. Sheen’s contract, and 2) have expertise in California contracts law. I have neither, but I know enough to know what I don’t know.

            My *opinion* is that you are wrong, and the show’s producers probably do have the right to shut down a show because they don’t feel they can work with the star (yes, and explicitly state that he is the reason for the shut-down). However, I freely admit that I could be wrong, for the reasons I keep repeating.

            I ask you again, do you have personal knowledge of the contract? Do you have legal training that would qualify you to give opinions on California contract law?

          • Unless of course Sheen has been regularly violating the terms of his contract and the studio was more lenient until he went off the deep end.

  25. i was a big charlie sheen fan until he went on his rants, and this after he stalled production and was given a chance to rehab, which he outright rejected and slammed those who seek help. its a pure OUTRAGE to defend some self-centered and self-inflicted junkie for his actions. those of us that work in the real world would never get such breaks….. the sad thing is that charlie sheen at some point will be old news or dead as a result of his alleged invulnerability to drugs!

  26. Anthony did indeed lay out the facts correctly,
    But somehow, even after the show comes back,sheen will burn himself out And there will be more legal problems for him.
    Its inevitable.

  27. People fail to understand that a personal and professional distinction does not apply to those who intentionally put themselves in the limelight. If you want to be a famous actor then you need to accept that you really don’t have much of a personal life. What you do in your spare time impacts the persona you portray to those around.

    If you want to be a drunk and a druggie then don’t become an actor. Bottom line is it’s immoral and illegal and famous people like Sheen get away with it simply because they have money. They had every right to suspend the show and stop rewarding sheen for his absurd and illegal behavior.

    • They werent rewarding Sheen for his behaviour! They were rewarding (I call it paying) him for his work on a tv show, which is the most watched show in the US or something like that, if they want to pay him that much that is their problem.
      As someone said earlier, Sheen is well know for his behaviour, and has been acting like this for years, it has never hurt the shows ratings and it never will. Sheen bascially plays himself in the show anyway.

  28. Bottom line is simply that Hollywood is either filled up with jerks, or is flowing over with ego. I suspect it is a great combination.

    No question that Hollywood is making some very good series and movies – just as there is no question that too many people in Hollywood is too full of themselfes.

  29. I just want to say. I support Charlie Sheen. The man is an amazing actor and that is all that should matter to CBS/Chuck Lorre. Especially because they are in a binding contract that apparently has nothing in there about his personal life.

    Charlie is under attack right now, but he is playing it cool – which is one thing I admire about him. His estranged wife – Brooke Mueller – took his kids without cause and apparently obtained a restraining order. All because he has two beautiful nannies, that apparently he sleeps with in one bed haha.

    So between the wife and CBS, I feel bad for the man.

    • Sin,

      “Without cause”? Are you kidding me?


      • yea, I’d want my kids living with a soon to be EX that had drinking/partying/drug problem…good parenting there Sheen!

        • Umm.. He has the same problems.

          • He´s talking ´bout him.

      • I know I said this below, but I want to say it again.

        He’s made mistakes, but he is trying to get better. He said himself that he would’ve passed a drug test (unlike her). Obviously that means he’s making an effort. And how is a mother that has her kids taken away in the middle of the night considered responsible? I think she’s nuts.

        • Sin,

          Well then he gets his kids back AFTER he’s gotten better. Blatantly obvious you are not a parent.


          • Lol yeah I’m 21 years old. Not even close to being a parent. But, seriously. She took her kids in the middle of the night when they were about to go to bed. Am I the only one who thinks that is nuts?

            • Maybe she thought that was her best opportunity to get the kids out without an ugly fight/conflict.


    • Sweet Jeebus. You better no future wife of yours reads this post.

    • Wow! If you believe the mother had no cause, then you have the right computer name.

      • Indeed he does Kahless. For those that don’t know, my post up there was pure sarcasm.

      • My screen name is actually from a Nine Inch Nails song called “Sin”. Just thought I’d let you in on that.

    • You need to move to Hollywood. You have the idiocy it takes to make it there. Geez.

      • Idiocy? It’s called brains. Something you might not have.

    • Lol. I’m just going to respond here since it seems everyone had the same reaction to what I said. She didn’t have any cause. He’s trying to fix himself. And from what Sheen says he’d pass a drugtest, unlike her. He’s just the celebrity who got caught. Just because she never got caught doesn’t mean she’s doing drugs.

      Look, obviously we can’t know the whole story and likely never will. But, I am entitled to my own opinion, alright? In my mind, I understand he’s made some big mistakes the past month or 2. But, he’s trying to fix himself and that woman does NOT have the right to just have her kids taken out without no notice at all in the middle of the night. He was putting his kids to sleep then his estranged ex-wife ended up having them suddenly taken away. How is that responsible? She couldn’t have waited until the next morning or afternoon?

      There you go guys. Let me have everything else you got. I will counter it all.