pow•er \ pau(-ə)r \ n. & v. The ability or capacity to perform or act effectively. • A specific capacity, faculty, or aptitude; often used in the plural (powers of persuasion). • Strength or force exerted or capable of being exerted; might (see synonyms at strength). • The ability or official capacity to exercise control; authority. • A person, group, or nation having great influence or control over others (the western powers). • The might of a nation, political organization, or similar group. • Forcefulness; effectiveness (a novel of unusual power).
Who controls and influences this disastrous and dying industry? While some may argue “soap power” is an oxymoron, we beg to differ.
In soaps, it’s not the size of your power, but how you use it that matters.
Our criteria? Power sources include: influence, autonomy, buzz, publicity, ratings impact, talent, vision and groundbreaking achievements.
Which is why TVGuide.ca chose General Hospital head writer Robert Guza as daytime’s most powerful and influential player in 2010.
This past year, the polarizing scribe brilliantly returned the venerable soap back to its character-driven roots and former glory by penning riveting storylines and balancing his superlative ensemble cast resulting in an addictive psychological drama where the lines of justice and injustice are blurred realistically. After a decade of upsetting and frustrating critics and fans with his unimaginative reliance on violence and rewarding criminals instead of its heroes, it’s certainly about time Guza awoke from his one-dimensional coma.
Moreover, Guza’s soap secured myriad of mainstream headlines and magazine articles thanks to James Franco’s groundbreaking stints on the sudser. Also, earlier this summer, GH topped the Daytime Emmy Awards with 18 nods (though Guza, last year’s winner for Outstanding Writer, was unfairly snubbed). In addition, ABC is showing more and more confidence in its favourite golden child by recently revamping Port Chuck’s sets, finally investing in a new modern opening, and attracting boldface names in short-term story arcs (Martha Byrne, Michael Learned, Bradley Cole, and most recently, Brad Rowe).
| And, of course, last but certainly not least, the eight-time Emmy winner is gearing up for the highly anticipated arrival of his secret weapon and beloved muse, soap opera superstar and ratings queen, Vanessa Marcil Giovinazzo next month.
The last time Marcil appeared in Port Charles the Emmy winner significantly boosted the soap’s ratings. She is expected to have the same impact this year but this time around she’s not just visiting for tea and a bulletproof vest. Yes, the former Las Vegas stunner has signed a one-year contract and is expected to stick around even longer.
After a seven-year absence, ABC is so psyched that the Alphabet network is devoting its entire daytime soap lineup to airing classic Brenda Barrett episodes the day before her comeback on Aug. 11, along with an unheard of promotional bonanza on SOAPnet. Definitely an unprecedented move for an unforgettable and irreplaceable actress. |
 |
While his name instills a variety of passionate emotions and vitriol from fans and critics — ranging from love to hate to fear and/or a variety of those feelings — there is no doubt that the former
Santa Barbara, Melrose Place, Loving and
Sunset Beach icon is on fire these days. Most importantly, while other scribes must deal with relentless network creative interference, it’s clear that Guza is the only, if not among the few, head writers who have the luxury of the most powerful asset in soaps today — creative autonomy.
TVGuide.ca spoke with the scribe master to discuss Marcil Giovinazzo’s timely return, James Franco’s homoerotic performance, whether or not Michael was raped in jail, and why General Hospital will be the last soap standing.
Next week, TVGuide.ca reveals the rest of our 2010 Most Powerful Players list!
TVGuide.ca: Congratulations on being named TV Guide Canada’s most powerful player for 2010. Not bad for someone who didn’t even make the list last year!
Robert Guza: [Laughs] Yes. You’ve been slagging us for years — but that’s OK [laughs]. It’s like being named the tallest pygmy in the tribe. It’s still slim pickings, but I do appreciate it …
TVG: I’ve been hard on you because I knew you were capable of better. OK, so what happened, mister? Did someone give you smelling salts? Something definitely changed in your writing this past year.
RG: I don’t know. It’s hard because for us [writers] it’s a continuum. I’ve been doing this for a long time. It’s not like there’s a breaking point where you see the light or whatever. We’ve had a great deal of freedom from [ABC Daytime President] Brian Frons and the network. I really feel like we’ve been able to tell our stories this past year, year and a half. That’s probably the key thing. Feeling that support, particularly when daytime has struggled, has been enormously empowering. We took some chances and went some places that, oh, I don’t know, four or five years ago we couldn’t have gone. I absolutely thank Brian and [executive producer] Jill [Farren Phelps] for that. We work so well together now. Initially, we were all on Santa Barbara, the three of us. We really do have a shorthand. I trust them, and [vice versa]. If I know they have a note, it’s something I really have to think about. Listen, I know this all sounds Pollyanna, but it really is true. Right now we’re enjoying a really good working relationship.
TVG: Even David Chase and Alan Ball can be accused of slightly running off course on The Sopranos and Six Feet Under, if only for a for a moment or two, even though they wrote the two best drama series ever on TV. Why does it seem like a dramatic series can’t maintain a creative high for more than two years, with the exception of Sex and the City and Mad Men?
RG: Well, they sure did have some great run-ups up until those [brief plateaus]. But I see what you’re saying. Yes, inevitably these stories will ascend, climax, and then wane. For instance, take an umbrella storyline, which will drive your entire show for a long time; inevitably, you’re going to hit that down point. The key though is to have something prepared on the upswing at that time. Didn’t we talk about the Claire Labine situation [at the Tech Emmys?]
TVG: Yeppers.
RG: She’s a classic example. Stone’s death was a great story — but that’s all she had. As a result, not only did the show dip in the numbers, there was nothing to pick the story up. It took her a while to get things back up, but [in her defence] it’s the nature of the beast.
 |
TVG: I can’t remember the last time a daytime head writer turned one A-story into another A-story into another A-story, as you have beginning with Claudia’s murder last November culminating in Michael’s imprisonment and Franco’s reappearance this summer. You still haven’t played all those beats left to drum up. Luckily, your actors are taking their cues appropriately and doing all the emotional artithmetic themselves. Your show is more show-not-tell these days, which makes the show so much more captivating and compelling to watch because I’m playing all the subtext out in my head.
RG: Well, that’s very perceptive of you to see that. We try, boy, we try. That’s one of the thing we talk about here at GH — instead of going from A to B to C, in the increasing degree of importance, we try to get to A to A to A. But boy, it’s hard. |
TVG: For years, GH has been known as the Maurice Benard show, but this past year, you’re spreading the wealth by giving each actor on your show their own moment. It began with Maurice Benard blasting Claudia, Steve Burton calling Michael a bitch, Jonathan Jackson finding out about Liz and Nikolas’s affair, Laura Wright lying on the stand to protect Michael, Dominic Zamprogna finding out he’s Sonny’s son, Nancy Lee Grahn running over Kiefer, and Lexi Ainsworth surviving teen dating abuse not just once but twice. Is that a new goal of yours, to utilize your ensemble more fairly?RG: You gotta do that. We have an amazing cast on our show. I’m not doing my job if I’m not giving any of those people their own beats to play. You really have to. And frankly, when you talk about the economic realities today, and trying to trim down cast and so forth, we can’t do that on our show because our actors are so valuable. When you have an A-team like we do, you have to let them show their stuff in their venue.
TVG: Your storytelling is more balanced now, too.
RG: It’s because of the stories. I fixated on the idea of the Dante story that became the umbrella story for what you’re seeing now. The trick was not to make it Sonny’s story but Jason’s, Carly’s and so forth. I think that’s what our turning point was and what you’re seeing. Dante’s story has allowed us to tell these umbrella stories that we have to tell with this cast.
 |
TVG: Dante and Lucky have brought a new moral compass to the show.
RG: We’ve really tried so hard to do that too. When you have all these mob guys or anti-heroes on a show, what tends to happen is your authority figures all become clowns. We decided to reinforce the police department right away with the best people we could find, one would be Dante and the other was Lucky. We’re going to make them honourable, good guys but we’re also going to make them really good at what they do. Not the 10-millionth scene of Jason being arrested refusing to talk and having him being released! I’m pretty pleased with how that has played out. And that’s largely because of Dominic Zamprogna and Jonathan Jackson. |
TVG: It’s poetic irony that Sonny and Luke’s sons grew up to be the good guys.RG: It’s not necessarily like father, like son on our show! But then again, there are some similarities in the characters. Tony Geary’s gone on a long summer vacation again but I’m dying to get Luke back involved in some stuff with Lucky again. In the interim, we’re going try to Luke-ify Lucky. It’ll be cool. I think you’ll like it. We’re not removing Lucky’s moral compass, because that’s who he is, but we’re going to focus on the fact that Lucky is part Luke and part Laura. And that’s the real attraction with Lucky. It’s going to be a fun ride. When Luke returns, I hope we’ll be firing on all cylinders with Lucky.
TVG: Obviously David Chase is one of your favourite writers and/or idols?
RG: Yes. He’s extraordinary. I watched every single episode of The Sopranos.
TVG: [Sarcastically] No, you don’t say! I would never have known.
RG: [Laughs] Seriously, I thought it was amazing the way he humanized [his narrative] environment. And I dearly, dearly loved the juxtaposition of the mundane, even banal, with the cataclysmic and the fantastic. He would have Tony running around in that bathrobe and then cars crashing into college campuses at the same time. It was so striking to me. Of course, he had a spectacular cast as well. You could do anything with those actors. But yes, David Chase and Alan Ball are high, high on my list. I loved The Wire, too.
TVG: What did you think of The Sopranos’ controversial finale?
RG: I loved it. Then again, there is very little that David Chase could do that I wouldn’t like so I’m not objective. The finale was absolutely consistent with the series. I didn’t feel cheated. The only thing I felt cheated about was I wanted the show to go on forever. I thought it was conceptually wonderful.
TVG: How important are the ratings to you? Do you lose sleep over them? Ironically, as your show has become more and more creatively sound, the ratings have dipped ever since James Franco’s arrival in November.
RG: You look at them in the sense that you’re trying to reach as many people as possible. We’re not just writing for ourselves — or the 15 people in a loft in Greenwich Village. To that extent, yes, I look at them, but I’m not worried about GH going off the air or losing my job or anything. But I really do want to reach as many people as possible. And all soaps are. I’m not trying to pat ourselves on the back but we’re really responsive to fans. We do focus groups and a lot of research. We monitor the emails and phone calls. If the numbers are down, and we can explain it, then we can react. And that’s the tricky part because sometimes you can’t explain the ratings. Like you said, sometimes the show is doing really well creatively but the numbers are down. If we can’t explain it, well, it’s very frustrating. That’s happening more and more lately where we can’t quite figure out why the numbers are just OK and not great. Especially when the focus groups are saying the show is great.
|
TVG: How much stock do you put in the focus groups? Those 12 housewives from Texas …
RG: It’s not like that. What you do is you look for trends, you look for patterns. You listen to what the 12 women in Texas said but you also look at what the landscape said. After a while, you know. You have dedicated fans who come up to you and talk to you. You look for patterns [to emerge] from a bunch of different venues. Take Dominic, for example. We knew very quickly that he was going to take. I believe, and you’ll have to check, but our research department said he’s one of the fastest rising popular characters in the history of daytime. And we knew that because we could see people responding so passionately, saying, “Who is this guy?!” And then when we made him Sonny’s son, well, that shot him through the stratosphere. Had New York-phile Tom Pelphrey said yes to the role, we may not have ever seen Dominic. Now, we’re all like, “Tom who?” Once we got to know Dominic, we tailored the role to his strengths like the vulnerability that he brings to the role. Had Tom played the role, Dante may have turned out differently. I don’t know ... |
 |
TVG: We just need to cut Dominic’s hair … he’s not Justin Bieber!
RG: … and tell Jonathan Jackson to shave that stuff off his face! Hey, if you can make that happen, you’re a better man than I [laughs]!
TVG: In a few sentences, what’s the identity of GH today?
RG: [long pause] Wow. It’s almost like love amongst the ruins. Love against the backdrop of violence, despair, and death. The one thing we’ve always had, and let’s not forget the mob has been a part of the show’s history since Luke was a runner for Frank Smith’s mob, what it gives us is high-stakes drama. You and I could have dinner at some little Italian restaurant in New York but it’s just not dinner because at any moment someone could run in and kill us because our families hate each other. Once you find the romance in that backdrop, the story is automatically amplified given the circumstances these people are living in. I’ve always found that fascinating.
TVG: Can we continue to expect the hospital to introduce us to short-term characters and story arcs that impact the larger canvas, à la Michael Learned’s Shirley? It reminds me of what Six Feet Under did by profiling a stranger’s death in the prologue of every episode, which set up a theme for the entire hour. It’s also a smart way to refocus on General Hospital, you know, the heart and soul of your show.
RG: Yes, we’re going to keep doing them. I love them. Obviously we have Adrienne Barbeau coming in. I love this idea of star casting and letting their circumstances dictate what happens to our principals. Any other name actors or actresses interested in doing relatively short, three-to-six month stints, call us. Michael Learned told me on her last day, “I understand I can come back as Shirley’s evil twin!” I said, “Michael, any time. We’ll do it.”
 |
TVG: One of your most polarizing loving triangles is Liz/Jason/Sam. Rumours on the Internet insist that Brian Frons forced you to pair JaSam back together. Is that true?
RG: No, not at all. What we’ve always liked about Sam is that she has never wanted to change who Jason is. He is the way he is and she loves him for who he is. That’s what, as writers, we kept coming back to. We didn’t have that kind of relationship on the show, which is why [I resurrected it]. Brian had nothing to do with that decision at all. He applauded it and was certainly behind it, but no, Brian doesn’t dictate stuff like that.
TVG: Are Sonny and Jason each other’s soulmates/true loves?
RG: I know we always joke about it but they kind of have to be, right? Look at all what they’ve been through. That love story is the drive of the whole show; certainly in the last 15 years. That’s a fascinating complex relationship, which is beautifully, beautifully portrayed by these two actors. It’s an endlessly evolving love story. |
TVG: At the same time, I love how you juxtapose how different Sonny and Jason are in the parenthood department — especially when it comes to Michael. Jason is always the one who has to protect and sacrifice for Sonny’s children while the cowardly Corinthos sits back. It would be interesting to do a special episode on what would it be like had Michael been raised a Quartermaine instead of a mobster’s son.RG: We’ve talked about this. Instead of us preempting our regular shows with a best-of show, let us do a special out-of-time episode. And that was one of our projected shows — what would have happened had Michael grown up a Quartermaine. It’s a good idea. I think I may do more of those. We tend to let those ideas slide because we’re so focused on driving current story that we often forget these whimsical ideas sure are a lot of fun.
Actually, one of the other things I want to do, and I’m going to do it one day, is I’m going to age all the kids. I want to do GH 20 years from now. It would be a makeup nightmare. We’d get a makeup Emmy award/nomination for it because we’d want to make it [realistic]. But I think it would be fun to see Morgan, Michael, Josslyn and little Emma in their 20s and their parents are in the 60s or 70s! Sort of what they do at the end of movies sometimes where they explain what happened to the characters in the future. It would be fascinating to write and watch, I think.
TVG: Lost really made that technique popular, first with their flashbacks and then later with their flash-forwards. Later, Desperate Housewives and Mad Men really utilized that technique to their advantage. Do you think soaps would be wise to employ the flash-forward device to keep their narratives relevant and fresh?
RG: We’ve messed with time before, that whole thing with Metro Court. But you have to be careful because there is such strong, strong identification with these shows. When James Franco shows up in public, fans say, “Hey, James you were great in fill-in-the-blank movie.” When Steve Burton is out in public, fans go, “Jason, why are you with Sam?” Soap fans don’t separate [fact from fiction], which is why you can’t mess with time too much or the audience gets turned off. Like you say, you have to meet that balance where you refresh the medium, material and creative people but you don’t go so wacked-out that you turn off the audience. It’s a tough line to walk.
TVG: Speaking of James Franco, was it your idea or James’s to play Franco’s homoerotic tendencies/undertones concerning Jason?
RG: We were deliberately trying to create a character whose sexual orientation was extremely ambiguous. Arguably, Franco is in love with Jason — not Maxie and not the other people he’s dealing with. We wanted to keep [his sexuality] as a strong undercurrent. Having said that, James’s performance has added to what’s been on the page, for sure.
TVG: One of the your most controversial but also bravest storylines is whether or not Michael was raped in jail. I know you haven’t revealed whether Michael was raped or not yet, but I’m assuming he was based on Steve Burton’s knowing performance and the writing. Burton really stole the storyline as he supported Chad Duell. The way Steve played those scenes, it was obvious to me that Jason knew Michael was raped.
RG: No question that Steve Burton is one of the most underrated and most extraordinary actors working today. I’m surprised, year after year, when he doesn’t get Emmy nomination [even though he’s already won an Emmy as Outstanding Supporting Actor in 1998]. What Steve does so well, much of the time, is play so much with so little words. You don’t see that in daytime so much.
As for what happened with Michael in jail, I really wanted to make it clear that Jason asked the guard to get Michael tested for HIV. I told Steve, 'you know, Jason knows what happened to Michael.' Now the dilemma for all these characters — Jason, Michael, and Dante, who starts to figure out what happened — is how you handle Michael. How does Michael handle it? Do you wait for Michael to come clean about it? Will he unravel before he tells the truth? This story is not remotely over.
TVG: We’re so accustomed to soaps moving at such a fast, unrealistic pace — characters marrying and divorcing in mere months — that I respect how you’re taking your time with this story. Especially considering Michael’s parentage and gender. When men are raped, they tend to keep quiet. Fans demand soaps be more realistic, and when you give it to them, they complain!
RG: Look, you’re a good looking 18-year-old boy, and you’re Sonny Corinthos’s kid — come on! Seriously, this storyline will continue to roll out and boil for, oh, I don’t know … The truth won’t come to light for months yet. But it will be a very prominent storyline. Our challenge is to keep it that way. We’re going to deal with the repercussions. Not only for Michael but also for Jason, Dante, and later Carly and Sonny.
TVG: Why didn’t you show up at the Daytime Emmys to collect your Emmy for Outstanding Writing last year?
RG: Well, when people tell you you’re not going to win, why show up [laughs]? Maybe if someone told me I was going to win, maybe I would’ve. No, seriously, I get really uncomfortable at those things. It’s hard for me.
TVG: How many Emmys do you have now?
RG: A few, eight, which isn’t bad. It’s mostly a testament to longevity — if that means anything.
TVG: Were you surprised when GH, the odds-on fave, didn’t win Best Drama Series this year?
RG: You know what? B&B had a really good reel. It was a strong show. They went for pure emotion. I thought if we had lost, it would be to B&B. It was a very good show.
TVG: Maybe the days of blowing up hotels are over [cough]! But having said that, the Carnival episode was more emotionally driven than your previous stunt submissions.
RG: We tried … That’s all we can do is try. You can’t compete with movies and nighttime. But what we can do is produce a cataclysmic event like that and then roll out the emotion for weeks. That’s the real advantage daytime has. In a movie, it’s over in two hours. I can have you twitching, turning and agonizing over a particular incident — if you do it right. That’s a real luxury [we have].
TVG: I’ll be shot if we don’t talk about our beloved Spinelli. His recent depression storyline over Jason’s imprisonment and Maxie’s unforgivable betrayal was Bradford Anderson’s 2011 Emmy reel. Story-wise it was very fascinating and heartbreaking to watch. Is Spinelli manic-depressive? Depressed? Does he have Aspergers? How much of that is on the page?
RG: Oh, we definitely wrote all that. You have to understand that Bradford Anderson is an extraordinary actor. It’s one thing for us to be in our little offices typing something out on a piece of paper but when you have someone of Bradford’s calibre bring Spinelli’s depression to life so wonderfully, well, it [resonated more powerfully than we had hoped]. It was certainly our intention to deal with Spinelli’s profound depression. You talk about Aspergers, but in addition, Spinelli’s essentially, well not literally, but almost bi-polar. When Spinelli’s up, he’s really up. When he’s down, it’s the end of the world. Bradford does an amazing job meditating between the two extremes. As for Spinelli’s next resurrection, well, let’s say, you have not seen Spinelli put someone on a pedestal until you have seen Spinelli worship Brenda Barrett!
 |
TVG: Oooh, I can’t wait. I loved Spinelli and Maxie’s non-wedding. Very original.
RG: I loved it, too. Thank you. I have to give credit to my associate Elizabeth Korte — it was her idea. We got a lot of mileage out of them calling each other non-husband and non-wife. It was a great idea. They were good together.
TVG: It was very timely considering the whole Prop 8 fight at the time.
RG: That part just lucked out for us but we did talk about that. Let me say Kirsten Storms did a wonderful job with that storyline. She’s another one that doesn’t get a lot of credit for the work she does.
TVG: Is Spixie over?
RG: No. Not in the sense you mean. |
TVG: How far do you write ahead? Some writers, like B&B's Brad Bell, literally write week to week.RG: Yes, Brad is fond of that. Listen, sometimes I can literally tell you what will happen a year from now. In six months, I can tell you what will happen in detail. In three months, I can tell you scene by scene. There are varying degrees. You work from long-term story arcs, which are more vague in definition to much more specific stuff in the scripts. Right now, I’m writing stuff that will tape in the middle of August and will air in December. We’re actually not that far ahead. There are some shows that are way more far ahead than we are. We work from a perfectly precise template. If you ever get down here, you’ll see that we have all these dry-erase boards where we put long-term story on one board, a week on another board, and individual days on one board. I’m not talking about Bradley because he’s very good at what he does, but personally I need to know where I’m going to know where we are. That’s they way I have to work.
TVG: The advantage to the way Bradley works is if a story isn’t working he can quickly move in a different direction but I prefer your way of writing. Even when I was on your ass, I couldn’t say GH was a badly written show. Your breakdown and script writers are some of the best and most diverse in the business.
RG: They are the best. They all make me look good.
TVG: But it’s a team atmosphere on GH, right?
RG: Of course. No one person can do this. In particular with our team, we’ve worked together so long, that we know each other so well — and they know the characters and history of the show very well. I’m very confident to give them stuff to run with [on their own]. We also have spectacular outline writers, who work from notes that I work up with Elizabeth Korte. It’s that kind of process where every step of the way the writing gets refined and reworked. Ultimately, what you see on the air is a team effort in every sense of the word.
TVG: Back to story, what does Sonny really sell?
RG: Illegal tchotchkes! [Laughs] Illegal china dolls. We talk about this all the time. We never spell it out. It’s so lame. What are in those boxes and ships?!
TVG: Freaky toy monkeys, perhaps! Have you ever thought of including beeped-out cursing in your dialogue? They do it on The View … It would add more realism to the mob world.
RG: We did that in one show a few years back. We didn’t bleep it, but a character said the word, “Bleep.” I don’t know ... In terms of the language, I go back and forth — sometimes I think it would be really nice to have characters talk like real people do. I mean mobsters don’t talk like our mobsters talk. They just don’t. But by the same token, I don’t think we miss the flavour or intensity with our dialogue, either. It’s not up to us. It’s up to Standards and Practices and ABC Daytime. I couldn’t just decide to do it on GH.
TVG: Thanks Janet Jackson!
RG: Yes, we have gotten away with less after that [incident].
|
TVG: You’ve been accused of being misogynistic in your storytelling. However, with Sonny’s current storyline, I think you’re addressing why Sonny is so sexist, which has kind of blown my mind to be honest. Did your wife, Meg Bennet, take away your sexual privileges? Where did this come from?
RG: Well, it’s the evolution of the character. The character got to this place. He’s become self-absorbed, especially in the way he has treated women over the years. To Maurice Benard’s credit, he was great in pointing it out to us and asking us to deal with it. To have a natural growth, well, I don’t want to say that, because it’s the anti-growth, but to get Sonny to this place, well, sometimes [it takes years for someone to be called on their shit].
TVG: Sonny needs a visit from Lorraine Bracco! The growth has come from the people in Sonny’s life. It’s pretty astounding to see on a soap. Daytime is very sexist despite their predominately female audience.
RG: It’s always good when you can do that … when you can speak through the mouths of your own characters. |
 |
TVG: My colleagues and I used to joke that you’d be outside of Vanessa Marcil Giovinazzo’s window singing every night, “Vanessa, can you hear me? Please come back!” Did you party like it was 1999 when she finally signed on? Actually, I’m glad she waited because I think now is really the perfect time for her to re-join your team.RG: I do, too. It really couldn’t be a better time. Vanessa and I have been talking ever since she left. We talked every six months. A couple of times it seemed close but she had other [irons in the fire]. But this time, it all fell into place. She really wanted to do it and we really needed her. She just got married. And she’s in town. I was thanking every lucky star out there when she agreed to return. The thing you should know, and maybe you can clear this up with your readers, is there is this perception out there that she’s coming on for a short run like six months. She’s on here for at least a year. I’m not sure with contract outs and all that, but more than likely she’s here for quite a bit longer. She did sign a contract. This isn’t a short-term deal. Not at all.
TVG: In Night Shift, you hinted that a burned patient at General Hospital could have been Brenda, and in Night Shift 2, Sri Rao teased us with the possibility that Brenda was the mother of Jagger’s child. Are you going to address that at all?
RG: I don’t think we’re going to call back to that because that means we’ll have to reference characters that aren’t on GH right now. I love Antonio Sabato Jr., but we have Sonny, Jason and Jax. Unless Brian Frons gives me another hour in the day, well, I can’t fit them all in. So, no, not in the first year. I have no intention of tying that all in. We’ll talk when we get further down the line. Right now, we don’t need Jagger.
|
TVG: Is there any hope Emmy winner Lesli Kay will reprise her role as Lois now that her daughter Brook Lynn is back and sexier than ever?
RG: I love Lesli. We spoke at the Tech Emmys. Same thing … I have 45-plus characters on this show. Who are we going to lose? At some point, you’re going to hit a saturation level. I love Lesli Kay. She did a great job for us, as did Rena Sofer before her, but I just don’t have the screen time.
TVG: Is Luke Spencer a functioning alcoholic?
RG: Are you asking me, Tony Geary or Luke Spencer [laughs]?
TVG: I’m asking Mr. Guza.
RG: He certainly has the behaviour of a functioning alcoholic. If you were to ask Luke, he would say, “No, I just drink too much!” |
 |
TVG: When all is said and aired, how would you like to be remembered?RG: By the work — always. My personal life doesn’t get in the press at all, nor should it, but you always want to be remembered for what you [accomplished]. If you created good work that touched people, then that’s great, if it didn’t, then I’m sorry, I really tried.
TVG: Would you say GH is the best writing you’ve done?
RG: Yes — always! It’s more me than anything I’ve ever done, partly because of the nature of time. Because of the nature of this medium, it’s a very first-draft medium, so you get so intensely involved, so you absolutely get more involved in the show more than anything else.
TVG: Why haven’t you pursued primetime TV with more vigor?
RG: I have! But it’s so boring because it takes forever. I did some movies before that but think I have the attention of a four-year-old!
TVG: [Joking] No comment [laughs]!
RG: I can’t stand all the notes and standing around. That’s why I love theatre and done an endless amount of it because it’s immediate. I need adrenaline.
TVG: A lot of us in the soap press think GH will be the last soap standing — and could traverse into an ABC primetime show. Thoughts?
RG: I actually do, too! It’s very tentative right now in terms of can we do it. I think we can. GH is different than the rest of the soaps in that way. It’s not a classic soap in that sense. I think it probably could. I’m not sure if we could make money doing that, but the problem is, do we want to write one GH episode a week? What would we do for the rest of the week? As it is now, we’re shooting six to eight different parts of shows in one week! That’s extraordinary! To take seven days to shoot one show, I don’t know what I would do! I would be chewing my nails. I’d be bored to tears.
TVG: Do you dream of these characters?
RG: [Sighs] Yes, I do. What normally happens is, when you dream of something, you think it’s the best idea ever, that you have to write it down. But then you wake up and think, “That’s the most ridiculous thing ever!” But I do it all the time.
TVG: Where do you think daytime serials are headed?
RG: I’m optimistic, I have to say. I don’t believe daytime is going away in the next five years. And maybe even longer. What we ultimately have to find, and this is for all of TV, is that we have to deal with the whole notion that TV is no longer appointment TV. And deal with what that means. And that could mean cable. But going back to cavemen sitting around a fire, I don’t think we’re going away. Even if you look at what’s happening in primetime, you’re still seeing serialized storytelling in a lot of them. And that’s a good thing.
TVG: Do you think working within the constraints of daytime makes you a better writer?
RG: I think working within the constraints within the genre is much more challenging and rewarding just like the genre of fiction and movies before us. Because there was so much they couldn’t do or say that they had to be more inventive in what they wrote. It’s pretty cool to suggest things to the audience instead of spoon-feeding them. I don’t feel like I have constraints on GH. I wish I could say, “I wished I could be more graphic in the sexuality or more explicit in the language.” Very rarely do I feel that. In many ways, I feel the restraints actually help us.
TVG: As an artist, what do you know for sure after all you’ve experienced and accomplished?
RG: Oh, good lord!! Um, I can answer that — the audience will always surprise you. They always keep you on your toes.
TVG: Well, I’m proud of you — just don’t screw this up!
RG: I’m trying not to! But I’m sure you’ll let us know when we do!
TVG: You can count on that.
Want to dish the soaps with Nelson Branco? Join The Suds Report discussion Facebook group today.
 |
Nelson Branco is a Toronto freelance entertainment journalist, who regularly contributes to Hello! Canada, The National Post, The Los Angeles Times' theenvelope.com, TV Guide USA, tvguide.com, Inside Entertainment, OUT, and fab magazine, along with spearheading the soap coverage for TVGuide.ca's popular daytime TV hub. After graduating from Ryerson University in 1997, he moved from Toronto to New York in 1998 to take on the roles as senior news editor at Soap Opera Update. Branco first freelanced for Soap Opera Weekly as an intern in 1994, and after leaving Soap Update to help create and launch Bauer Publishing's In Touch Weekly in 2003, Branco continued to freelance occasionally for its sister publication, Soaps In Depth. Most recently, he helped create and launch Canada's first celebrity magazine, Weekly Scoop in 2005 as its news and entertainment director. Branco is also a contributor to a new TV show titled Planet Soap to air in Canada and America. |
