GH: Did James Franco hurt or help?

[EricMontreal22]

The thing is, I rather loved his era at Loving. Of course he was only co headwriter, and I was really young when it aired and haven't had a chance to rewatch it at all, but... (Likewise though I loved B/E at both Loving and even, mostly, at The City and look how dull they were at AMC, so...)

[JaneAusten]

Guza isn't going anywhere. And this Franco stuff has actually been poked fun of by the mainstreamers so his chanced of going anywhere based on this story or any other poorly written story on GH is unlikely. The problem is that as good as a writer as he might have been, writers get stale. He should be rotated out just for that reason or a coheadwriter put in place.

And as crappy as Pratt is at least he's done some stuff outside of daytime. He was an instrumental part of Desperate Housewives along with Ugly Betty. Ask yourself why ABC never afforded Guza these chances, Perhaps because he's become a one dimensional boring writer.

I think Guza saw this Franco stuff as his chance to shine. He did write all this himself. All it is is a bunch of intellectual blabber with the least intellectual character on GH. If we're lucky, maybe he so impressed James Franco with his writing prowess, Franco will introduce him to some of his connections in the indie fulm comunnity and Guza can go off and write nonsensical blabber for those filmmakers.

[EricMontreal22]

Pratt also head wrote (I dunno why I should even give him the credit) the highest rated two years of Melrose Place. It sorta makes sense for clueless soap execs to be gaga for him cuz of that--(although of course writing an OTT primetime soap like Melrose is completely diff than writing for daytime, etc etc)

[JaneAusten]

Despite the complete mess AMC is(and that's not just Pratt it's a combination of 3 writing teams that decimated it), I actually find Pratt a better writer than Guza. But being better than horrible means he's just bad.

[dragonflies]

If they hadn't made his storyline all about Jason, it might have gone over better. Franco's storyline sucks IMO

[JaneAusten]

I honestly have no issue with it being all about Jason. And Jason is overall a popular character and well liked by fans(yeah I know onliners hate him). The story itself is boring. It's intellectual blabber as I said. Sadly, most viewers as Carl said prefer the slashing and blood and guts of Claudia's demise than this. The only things that have impacted GH's uplift were The Carnival and Claudia's gruesome murder. That says a lot to me about the viewers the show is catering to in this day and age.

But Franco's story is not on all the time. There are 2 other FB storylines going on. The LL2/Niz suckage and the Borlivia/Dante crap. None of these stories are remotely interesting. It's like every story on GH where everyone is raving when these stories start and by the time they play out for a couple of months people tire of them and they suck.

[Mr. Vixen]

I see what youre saying. I never really thought about Guza one way or another until recently, when I realized that he keeps writing the same stories over and over, and just switches the characters involved. And the mob has been overwhelming this past year, and he has made so many bad choices in writing that i would just like to see them rotate writers. then, maybe, guza wouldnt be so intollerable.

[Ann_SS]

I can't tell which one is worse, Pratt or Guza. They both tell illogical stories that unravel not long after they start. For example, it made no sense for Kendall to confess to killing Stuart just like it made made no sense for Jason to cover up Michael killing Claudia when it was justifiable homicide. I did notice that characters started waving guns around and threatening to shoot people when Pratt arrived at AMC. I won't miss Pratt, but I am grateful to him for casting JL as Liza.

[Cyberologist]

As a serious Franco fan who has seen nearly all his movies (except Milk) since his James Dean, I think he is a non factor mainly because the storyline didn't make much sense IMO. I didn't care that Jason was being stalked. He's banging a stalker so the impact was missed for me and the storyline was poorly executed. I wanted a more romantic Franco....he's a hottie and I wanted to see some hot.

I didn't expect to see "such a dreary looney tunes character." I read somewhere Franco wanted "Franco" to be dark but Guza made him almost unbearable for me to watch...they had him stepping on throats, tying women up, stalking, basically a misogynist asexual jerk. I agree the settings were amped up...and was visually well done...I definitely got the feeling of his weirdness...

Do I feel he helped the show? According to the ratings no. I really thought he would. I think Guza, Phelps thought he would too they were all in the press and I think they are surprised he didn't. Since I've always known who James Franco is I didn't realize he wasn't well known to a lot of soap fans.

Did he help and bring some additional attention to the genre? I read many articles online, eg Wallstreet Journal, many were stressing the project he was working on and his next movie. I think he created some buzz but since the storyline is tanking thus far that created some buzz as well.

Did it benefit, cause damage, or was it a non factor.

Franco was set to pimp and prop the pets, Guza said so flat out. "The major characters" so I guess they aren't so major especially since these are the characters that has kept GH at the bottom of the barrel for over a year (for the most part). GH got to a #3 again during Le Carnival but has resumed its mid to bottom of the barrel position hitting #6 again (now twice in a row). Even his debut didn't do much for their #s. According to the EW article unfortunately they thus far have only gained 5% in the women demo they were aiming him for.

I believe Franco came on to help an ailing Burton who hasn't pulled in any decent #s on his watch as male "lead" I dont' think GH has many leads (Burton's/Benard/Geary ?) and I think soaps should rotate lead story meaning you lead one storyline/support another. I don't think this genre should designate "any leads"

Burtons' greatest claim to fame was calling out Michael as a bitch recently. But what I've seen he well acted this storyline even though its pretty run of the mill as GH stories go (Jason is doubting himself/his judgement for a minute but I've seen him do this before). Frons lauded that Burton has been in the storyline that the audience wants to see but he's been pulling in low #s on pivotal moments in this storyline. I don't think (Franco's) guest appearance is by happenstance I think it was arranged (his and Burton's agent whom they happen to share).

I agree; I too think the publicity surrounding his appearance did more for him professionally than it did for anyone or anything else. If the storyline would have been more interesting but since Guza isn't a storyteller and shouldn't be in this genre of storytelling the storyline was made fun of in some of the articles I read online. He's incapable of drawing a story to a satsifying close, he either drops it, gives it the bum's rush or it loses steam because he drags it out...he hasn't a clue about pacing/momentum.

However since its Frons who has the final word, I don't know if changing a headwriter would do much good since he won't just let their vision fly without his orchestrations. As for their mob-centric storylines being a hit, they have been in mob mode heavy duty for quite some time and it hasn't done much...I think they are telling hospital stories with Robin/Elizabeth/Patrick/Lisa and now Steven Lars. I like mob tales and am I huge fan of them but Guza is (has been for years) telling the same ole' mob story with the same outcome.

[NorrthCafe]

I think he definitely hurt the show. It became even clearer to fans that there was no hope for their long time faves. TIIC are so committed to the mob storyline that they took a big screen actor, paid him gobs of money, heavily promoted his appearance on the show... and then threw him in to continue making saints of the Suckpranos. "Franco" (they couldn't even come up with an imaginative name for him) was the 'bad evil awful killer'. Sonny and Jason are 'kind loving warm and generous' killers. Maxie had to be pimped out to 'Franco'. Sam and Carly had to become victims. More crap praising Michael for killing Claudia... There's no hope for GH. None.

Does NO ONE behind the scenes see a problem with a psychotic killer being obsessed with Jason (and how bad did it suck having Jason blather on about Franco's obsession with him)? We're to believe that a man who is an international traveler and a recluse would come to PC just to track Jason Morgan down? He's heard about Jason's feats of murder all the way in Paris, or wherever he was holed up????

So if Jason's actions titillate a serial murderer, what makes Jason a good guy? TIIC may as well have gone all the way and named the character Franco Guza...then the obsession line would have made sense.

[marceline]

Did they pay him gobs of money? I was under the impression Franco wanted to do a soap and he was drawn to GH because of the mob. It's not like they pursued him. I'm curious now. How much did they pay him?

[Cyberologist]

He's returning in the Spring of 2010 to add another layer in a special eppy so?

A Star, a Soap and the Meaning of Art

Why an appearance on 'General Hospital' qualifies as performance art

by James Franco

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107104574570313372878136.html#printMode

[JaneAusten]

You know what this all sounds like pompous BS I'm sorry. This is the kind of stuff i meant when I said it almost sounded as if he was talking down to actors in some sense if they don't see all this as some artistic process then they are wrong. I get what he's saying but tell me 90 percent of the people who read this did or really cared. Perhaps WSJ readers do who knows. And I don't agree with him anyway but of course I'm not an actor. To me acting is a craft. And the result is the art. That's what greats like Brando, Olivier, Pacino have said but I guess JF knows better. This whole thing rubbed me the wrong way. Of course that's me.

[Sylph]

Yes. It's Lady GaGa-esque impenetrable art bollocks. Complete bullsh!t.

[JaneAusten]

You know what I really tried and no lying to see this Franco stuff as something different. That maybe they were trying to do something really not mainstream and deep. I think that's what they were going for honestly. And who knows maybe from that point they succeeded,

But you have to know your audience too. I am not saying soap viewers are less educated or stupid or idiots but people watch soaps for specific reasons and listening to some intellectual gobbly gook(if that's what they were trying to do) is not it. It's no differnt then developing films to appeal to a certain demo. Would this intellectual schtick worked in Avatar or a film like ET? Or would it have worked on The Simpsons or South Park?