Hey, guys, I have been having this huge debate with my friends over which show is better, Big Bang Theory or Two and a Half Men and I want to hear your thoughts and opinions on this matter.
>>67286231
Both are horrific. It's like trying to figure out with pile of shit doesn't smell as bad.
>>67286472
*which
>>67286231
every copy of both these shows should be tossed into a bonfire
>>67286231
They are both the same.
>>67286231
Both are horrendous, but I'd say Big Bang Theory has some actors who have a decent sense of comedic timing. Two and a Half Men is absolutely dreadful top to bottom.
>>67286231
Looking back I could tell exactly when charlie sheen caught hiv during that show, his eyes started looking really weird and he started looking like a reptile or something.
I enjoyed 2 and a half men more. But that's just my opinion.
>>67287413
I've completely forgotten until now Charlie Sheen came out saying he had HIV, anyone else?
2 and a half men was decent on air comedy before it turned into DUDE SEX LMAO. Big Bang theory was like that from its inception so I never liked it. Cheap sex jokes are not funny. How do people find it funny? Its not even like thats what she said jokes. They just turn the laugh track on whenever an actor says anyting related to sex or reproductive organs.
Two and a Half Men could occasionally be funny. Big Bang Theory was never funny.
>>67286231
ZIMBOBWE
Not to follow the meme-mind but both shows are honestly really bad.
TBBT is at least a bit more varied as far as topics go.
>>67287364
I'm paraphrasing, but some other anon on here put it best
>The Big Bang Theory is a show filled with talented actors who somehow manage to make their characters likable despite the terrible writing
Reminder that Big Bang is better than Seinfeld
>>67286231
i assume this is bait.
anyway both really lowered the bar for television comedy. the most generic, obvious, and unfunny jokes with forced laughtracks tricking sheep into thinking this garbage is watchable.
total shame people eat it up
>>67287872
for millennial bernfags, maybe
tahm was better. the episodes where charlie was hammered were gold. also hot chicks.
Two and a Half Man before Charlie left is definitely better than Big Bang Theory.
But that's not saying much. Neither of them is great.
Two and a Half Men with Charlie > Early seasons of Big Bang Theory > shit > later seasons of Big Bang Theory > Ashton Kutcher Two and a Half Men > literally the worst thing in the world > Two and a Half Men Finale
>>67286231
They are both utter garbage
Big Bang is far better. They have better actors and a better grasp of their characters and what they want to do with them.
I would argue Big Bang has great character interaction and acting, but is trapped by its nonstories and bad jokes. It's reasonably well written if you can accept the idea of a character-driven comedy in which the characters don't develop and almost none of the jokes are funny.
>>67286231
Both are derived from Chuck Lorre's personal experiences on why women are confusing, otherworldly and frightening creatures.
Both have had some good episodes, but not many. Two and a Half Men maybe more, Alan is a great character. When he burned down his girlfriend's house, much hilarity ensued.
Both shows are shit but Two and a Half Men knew it was stupid and didn't take itself seriously. Plus it had hotter chicks.
Two and a half men, by far.
>>67291598
Le le le. I hate popular shows. Lel kek lol. Am I in da sekrit kkklub naw, gays?
