Here is an article from Forbes Magazine where Chuck Lorre discusses why his sitcoms are so successful while most others are not.

Lorre On Laughter
Lacey Rose, 09.11.07, 6:00 AM ET


What does Chuck Lorre know about sitcoms that others don't?

At a time when comedies are floundering in the ratings, Lorre's Two And A Half Men has become a CBSstaple. The show averaged more than 14 million viewers per week last season, making it television's most popular situation comedy by a wide margin. And it isn't a fluke: his resume includes Roseanne, Dharma & Greg and Grace Under Fire.

Next up: The Big Bang Theory. Rolling out on Sept. 24, the sitcom revolves around two brainiacs who know everything about quantum physics and nothing about women.

Lorre spoke with Forbes.com about his ability to grab ratings, how television has changed and why he'd never dumb down a show about physicists.

Forbes.com: You have the top-rated sitcom at a time when comedies don't seem to be sticking. What makes your show work, and work well?

Lorre: For me personally, comedy always begins by caring about the character. You fundamentally have to root for them, you have to care about their relationships and you have to get invested. Going back to Jackie Gleason, Archie Bunker, Dick Van Dyke and Mary Tyler Moore, people loved those characters. Their lives became something you could care about and then laughter was possible.

What's the biggest mistake people are making in the comedy genre?

I don't know, and I don't want to comment on them. I just know for me, when I'm lucky enough to get a show on the air, the first priority is to care about your characters. As a writer, you must love your characters. Even the antagonistic toxic characters, you have to love them and find a way to care for them as well. You have to protect them. Every week you have to make sure you don't sell them out.

How do you know how to do that from week to week?

You don't. It's a judgment call. You're guessing; every week you're guessing. You try to guess right more than you guess wrong, but at the end of the day, there's no science to this. You're guessing and you're praying. It's "I hope I'm right, I hope I'm right," and when you're wrong, you have to admit it and fix it. That's what rehearsals are for.

Do you think that as a viewing public, we're still laughing at the same things we were decades ago with sitcoms like I Love Lucy and All in the Family?

Yeah. You're laughing at the human experience. I think what provokes you to laugh is what provokes anyone else to laugh. I mean you and I are not different in our experience of mother, father, brother, sister, lover, boss. I mean we all respond to all of these things: traffic, illness, education, heartache, sex. They're hot buttons to press because we all have them in common.

What do you draw from when you're creating stories week after week?

Well, with Two and a Half Men, we've been able to draw more from our own lives because we're all John Cryer [Alan Harper], but we wish we were Charlie Sheen [Charlie Harper]. So there's a certain amount of wish fulfillment in Charlie. But marriage, divorce, raising children, relationships, sex, mothers--these are things that we can draw from and exaggerate on. But you always start with what you know--you may go off in a weird direction, but you start with what you know.

You have The Big Bang Theory up next--a comedy about physicists. Why should viewers tune in for this?

Well, this series really began with conversations I had with [co-executive producer] Bill Prady about his life as a computer programmer before he got into television. We talked a lot about the people that he worked with, who had extraordinary ability intellectually and mentally, but had difficulty working in the world that we all know. Their world is not one I know, but that idea of feeling like you're on the outside looking in is certainly universal. It's that feeling that everybody got a book on how to live this life, and they failed to give you a copy. These guys, especially Johnny Galecki's character, feel it deeply; they want to be part of everything but they can't. They're distanced from it--and I think you can care for them because we all feel that way. I know I do.

There's a great moment in Stardust Memories where Woody Allen is on a train where everyone is glum and down, and another train is going in the other direction where everyone is having a party--beautiful people, singing and dancing. [Woody's character] just watches and there's this sense of "I'm in the wrong train. Why aren't I on that train?" That's the human condition. And when you touch on that, there's a chance of laughing.

You've been in this business for many years. Can you touch on how the television landscape has evolved? Specifically, how has both getting a show on the air and then getting an audience to tune in changed?

It's really hard now. There are very few opportunities for comedies anymore. Thank God for CBS that they'll still put on shows like this. The competition is ferocious, which I think is a good thing at the end of the day. Competition just makes everyone bring their game up. Sure, sometimes it just gets silly when you're up against the National Football League, Heroes, 24 and "Dancing with Amputees." So if you really want to ask people to give their time to you, you better deliver. There's just a lot more choices.

Has it changed the way you tell a story? With trigger-happy executives at the helm, do you feel a certain pressure to get out as much of the story as you can while it's still on the air?

You know, I used to try to go for the throat, because I was very insecure. But I just don't think that's what this medium is good for, especially in comedy. I think it still goes back to crafting characters that you care about, and trusting that the audience will enjoy them. Or hoping. And I guess it's just trusting that the audience is really smart. You don't have to go out and beat them over the head.

They'll see through you if you try to dumb it down?

Never do that. You do that and you're pandering. Write the best show that you can write, and then pray.

http://www.forbes.com/business/2007/09/10/television-comedy-cbs-biz-media-cx_lr_0911lorre.html

Very nice! And now, for those of of you who like 2-for-1 deals, another Chuck Lorre article, from Canada's Maclean's magazine, at Maclean's.ca:

No one wants 'Friends' anymore

Sitcoms about 'nice' characters don't cut it now. Viewers prefer pain and humiliation

JAIME J. WEINMAN | September 3, 2007 |

Today's most successful sitcom producer is a guy who used to write for My Little Pony. Chuck Lorre is the creator of the sole hit multi-camera sitcom on the networks -- Two and a Half Men -- and he'll have a new one, The Big Bang Theory, in September. But he's most famous for using TV to settle scores. He includes angry essays or "vanity cards" at the end of his productions, and the New York Post reported last week that he was considering writing a CSI episode about "the murder of a hated sitcom diva" -- his revenge for being fired by stars like Cybill Shepherd. How does this downbeat attitude translate into popular TV comedy? Maybe because his shows are full of pain, conflict and obscenity -- all the things modern audiences want.

The secret of Lorre's success is that his angry streak endears his work to audiences that don't want good-natured shows like Friends. In the Jack Bauer era, darkness sells, even on a sitcom. Lorre told Maclean's that "there's a difference between charming and amusing and clever and truly funny," and he doesn't let his shows display too much charm, focusing instead on the comedy of humiliation. The Big Bang Theory is about scientists who are socially ******** and make fools of themselves over a new female neighbour ("We take great intellect and slam libido into it," Lorre says). Two and a Half Men started with a painful divorce and features a hero (Charlie Sheen) described by Lorre as "debauched." Characters aren't rewarded for being good; the uptight brother on Men (Jon Cryer), Lorre says, "plays by the rules with a passion, and he's punished for it."

If the men on Lorre's shows don't have a great time, the women come off even worse. Men blames the heroes' problems on their mother, and made vicious fun of a woman with a crush on Charlie. Lorre says that he and co-creator Bill Prady want the heroine of The Big Bang Theory to be the "voice and eyes and ears of the audience," but in the pilot, she comes off as an airhead for the heroes to lust after. But this kind of thing may be an advantage when hits like Entourage and Rescue Me are out-and-out misogynistic. And Lorre points out that his shows have plenty of appeal for their majority-female audience: "We generally punish Charlie mercilessly for his cavalier attitude toward women and sexual relationships," he says.
Lorre adds that "Charlie's struggling to break free of his shallow relationships," and that this season will see him dating a woman who's "a municipal court judge." That structure -- taking a slightly misogynistic hero and teaching him an occasional lesson -- may be another clue to why Lorre's work clicks with today's audiences. Nineties hits like Friends were about clean-living people who never grew up, but if you look at the most successful shows today, they're often about debauched, unfulfilled lives. When Lorre says that "we're growing Charlie up, and it's a struggle," he's figured out that you can get the men to watch by presenting characters with decadent lifestyles, and then bring in women viewers by forcing those characters to grow up a little.
Another aspect of Lorre's successful formula is being as dirty as possible. Lorre, who often gripes about the jokes that were censored by CBS, likes to pack his shows full of R-rated double entendres (in The Big Bang Theory, a joke is built around the different meanings of the word "douche"). Lorre says that while it's harder to get this kind of material on the air today -- "Janet Jackson ruined everything" -- he denies that he's doing this kind of material just to push the limits of censorship: "If it provides our audience with a belly laugh it's worth fighting for, and for no other reason." But it does contribute to the appeal of these shows, which is that they look like family sitcoms but are really for grown-ups; Cryer told AOL.com that Men pleasantly surprises people once they "realize it's as naughty as it is."

Having a winning formula doesn't mean that every show will be a winner, and it's too early to tell whether The Big Bang Theory will be a hit. But then again, critics complained that Two and a Half Men was too reliant on sitcom clichés, and it's about to shoot its 100th episode as Lorre's flagship property. Even if Big Bang doesn't make much noise, Lorre's found a successful sitcom method for a post-sitcom world. "We're doing something very simple and noble," he says, "and that is to make adults laugh, and give people a respite from all the drama." And his success is teaching the world that the more pain a show has, the more adults will laugh at it.

The both of you found great articles. I admire Lorre and I love the type of shows that he makes.

Very nice! And now, for those of of you who like 2-for-1 deals, another Chuck Lorre article, from Canada's Maclean's magazine, at Maclean's.ca:

No one wants 'Friends' anymore

Sitcoms about 'nice' characters don't cut it now. Viewers prefer pain and humiliation

JAIME J. WEINMAN | September 3, 2007 |



If I'm not mistaken, that is the Jaime Weinman who posts at our WKRP board and used to have his own WKRP website that was a fountain of info.

Thanks for the articles. I'm really excited for The Big Bang Theory- all of the promos look hilarious- nice way to round out CBS' already funny Monday night line-up (I'm watching HIMYM as we speak)...

I really wouldn't put Dharma And Greg in the "success" pile, but the guy does make hit shows.

;)

I really wouldn't put Dharma And Greg in the "success" pile, but the guy does make hit shows.

;)

But it is a cult classic or else why wouldn't they play it in syndication endlessly?

But it is a cult classic or else why wouldn't they play it in syndication endlessly?

That is true.

I just never liked it.

;)