Pardon me, but that WSJ article is the most (self) masturbatory piece of garbage I've read in a long time. It feels more like JF trying to save what's left of his reputation - after the 'great experiment' on GH failed (using ratings as a measure of successful).

Not only did GH NOT bring in new viewers, they managed to lose viewers during the reign of Franco/Franco. It makes it a hard sell to offer yourself as a bankable actor to producers if you can't pull your 'fans' in to watch your 'performance art' in daytime. Just My Opinion.

Edited January 6, 201015 yr by NorrthCafe

Every time I read that Franco's layer quote, I remember Donkey telling Shrek, "you're so wrapped up in layers onion boy, your afraid of your own feelings." LOL!

James Franco's goal was not to get viewers for GH so from that perspective his experiment has not failed. He believes that he is creating art. I think that it is pretentious prattle to cover the fact that he is bored with his career. He better be careful that industry doesn't get bored with him. He would not be first hot young actor to find himself shut out of coveted roles. Hollywood financiers investing millions in movies do not like unpredictability in starring actors.

Edited January 6, 201015 yr by Ann_SS

Every time I read that Franco's layer quote, I remember Donkey telling Shrek, "you're so wrapped up in layers onion boy, your afraid of your own feelings." LOL!

James Franco's goal was not to get viewers for GH so from that perspective his experiment has not failed. He believes that he is creating art. I think that it is pretentious prattle to cover the fact that he is bored with his life. He better be careful that industry doesn't get bored with him. He would not be first hot young actor to find himself shut out of coveted roles. Hollywood financiers investing millions in movies do not like unpredictability in the actors.

It's also very intriguing to see all this influence Carter has on him...

Franco strikes me as a bit of a dilettante.

Yes. He disappointed me in that regard.

He wants to be this profound, edgy, artsy avantgarde actor/writer, but has no depth to carry it out.

Advice: stick to Spiderman.

It would be interesting if Franco was the sort of artist who really didn't care if he had an audience paying attention to his art. It's possible that he really does only care about the art itself - I can believe that. If it wasn't his goal to draw viewers in, I can only believe that it was the goal of JFP and the other members of the "rah-rah" team who talked about Franco as if he was the second coming. In that sense, if they're making money by drawing an audience in, they failed. They drove more viewers away. It was difficult not to feel bad for the actors who show up every day to try to spin the stuff thrown at them into gold. JFP, IMO, made it seem as if GH was 'complete' with Franco on board.

I kind of understand Nancy Lee Grahn's little rant now towards him. I believe she called him a "pretentious piece of work" who didn't seem to take his stint at GH seriously. She ultimately had to take it back because she had so many people feeling it was based on sour grapes, that she did not happen to be one of the chosen few who got to work with him. But imagine someone like Nancy who has respectibly spent her career on soaps only to have someone come in and disrupt things with his entourage, being catered to, and desribe his stint as some sort of project that is some "greater/better form of art" so to speak than anything done before. I'd find it pretentious and condescending in a way too.

Edited January 6, 201015 yr by JaneAusten

It would be interesting if Franco was the sort of artist who really didn't care if he had an audience paying attention to his art. It's possible that he really does only care about the art itself - I can believe that. If it wasn't his goal to draw viewers in, I can only believe that it was the goal of JFP and the other members of the "rah-rah" team who talked about Franco as if he was the second coming. In that sense, if they're making money by drawing an audience in, they failed. They drove more viewers away. It was difficult not to feel bad for the actors who show up every day to try to spin the stuff thrown at them into gold. JFP, IMO, made it seem as if GH was 'complete' with Franco on board.

And I think THAT's where the fail in all this is. Franco didn't pimp his appearance. He didn't tell people to tune in. He's just doing his thing. It was TIIC who went BSC falling all over themselves. I doubt he would've cared if they promoted him or not.

I kind of understand Nancy Lee Grahn's little rant now towards him. I believe she called him a "pretentious piece of work" who didn't seem to take his stint at GH seriously. She ultimately had to take it back because she had so many people feeling it was based on sour grapes, that she did not happen to be one of the chosen few who got to work with him. But imagine someone like Nancy who has respectibly spent her career on soaps only to have someone come in and disrupt things with his entourage, being catered to, and desribe his stint as some sort of project that is some "greater/better form of art" so to speak than anything done before. I'd find it pretentious and condescending in a way too.

JMHO, Nancy Lee Grahn needs to loosen the [!@#$%^&*] up.

Edited January 6, 201015 yr by marceline

I kind of understand Nancy Lee Grahn's little rant now towards him. I believe she called him a "pretentious piece of work" who didn't seem to take his stint at GH seriously. She ultimately had to take it back because she had so many people feeling it was based on sour grapes, that she did not happen to be one of the chosen few who got to work with him. But imagine someone like Nancy who has respectibly spent her career on soaps only to have someone come in and disrupt things with his entourage, being catered to, and desribe his stint as some sort of project that is some "greater/better form of art" so to speak than anything done before. I'd find it pretentious and condescending in a way too.

I totally agree. Nancy Lee Grahn has spent the majority of her career on soaps, in GH and Santa Barbara both. I am sure it is something she takes seriously, because I'm pretty sure it's been paying her bills for over 20 years. So for Franco to come in and get ALL this promotion and then totally crash in the ratings, and then for him to go around saying it's an "experiment", and then going on SNL and saying that he drew the idea to appear on GH out of a wheel and that it was a random dare? That has to be insulting to all those people who really take the soaps seriously. I mean when he pulled out that wheel on SNL, he pulled out a card saying "Do another Spiderman movie", to which he replied "Oh..Sometimes they DO have good ideas!"....Obviously he is just kidding, but it was offensive.

Look at Susan Lucci. I am SURE more people know who she is than James Franco. And Luke and Laua's wedding got 30 million viewers. More than almost ANY show (including primetime) gets now. Has James Franco ever been in a movie outside of SPider Man that made even 30 million dollars? I dont think he is a big movies star, and I think that this was some sort of ploy. He joins GH and all the sudden the headlines read 'MAJOR MOVIE STAR JOINS DWINDLING SOAP OPERA!!!"...And it gave HIM publicity. I have heard more about him since he has been on GH then i EVER did before. EVER. And for that he should just be thankful, not going around acting like he is so amazing for going on a soap opera. Cause all he has done is hurt the ratings, and offend the people that take soap operas seriously. If I was Nancy Lee Grahn, I would have tweeted the exact same thing.

Edited January 7, 201015 yr by SoapBoy94

You know what the SNL stuff didn't bother me at all. They poke fun at just about everything. So if what happened on SNL is what caused her little rant, well too bad. But I didn't take it that way. She just sounded put off in general. I figured she must have read that nonsensical WSJ stuff and reacted to it, that being the source of her rant. And IMO she probably said what a lot of the folks at GH, who work their butts off daily were thinking.

Franco, he got the advantage here. All the press from this that he originated was all crap like that WSJ interview which talked very little about GH. In fact he didn't pimp it at all, It was all about his project. And in the end what will GH gain out of this. Nothing. He'll make this film, take it to some festival like Sundance, where that audience will recognize the value in it. No one else is going to give a rats arse. And more power to him to get ABCD to help partially fund it.

Edited January 7, 201015 yr by JaneAusten

I love that this thread has 5 pages and the GH thread barely has 5 replies.

I love that this thread has 5 pages and the GH thread barely has 5 replies.

Hey who says no one cares about Franco right?

I love that this thread has 5 pages and the GH thread barely has 5 replies.

Hey who says no one cares about Franco right?

James Franco's impact is the most interesting thing about GH at the moment. I'll watch later and see if I can find anything worth commenting on.

Edited January 7, 201015 yr by Ann_SS

So if I understand it right, James Franco (the actor) will now do a real gallery exhibition of Franco (the fictive soap character) pseudoart? Does it mean there will be some "real" Franco work too? Like the recreations of murder scenes? Or he will just present his own real work (as is the work of James Franco - the actor) under the name of fictive soap artist? This is getting pretty crazy. Of course, the most crazy will be if there are some postmodern nobs deluded enough to buy some of his stuff.

So if I understand it right, James Franco (the actor) will now do a real gallery exhibition of Franco (the fictive soap character) pseudoart? Does it mean there will be some "real" Franco work too? Like the recreations of murder scenes? Or he will just present his own real work (as is the work of James Franco - the actor) under the name of fictive soap artist? This is getting pretty crazy. Of course, the most crazy will be if there are some postmodern nobs deluded enough to buy some of his stuff.

It now makes sense why his name in the show is Franco also.

You know what the SNL stuff didn't bother me at all. They poke fun at just about everything. So if what happened on SNL is what caused her little rant, well too bad. But I didn't take it that way. She just sounded put off in general. I figured she must have read that nonsensical WSJ stuff and reacted to it, that being the source of her rant. And IMO she probably said what a lot of the folks at GH, who work their butts off daily were thinking.

Franco, he got the advantage here. All the press from this that he originated was all crap like that WSJ interview which talked very little about GH. In fact he didn't pimp it at all, It was all about his project. And in the end what will GH gain out of this. Nothing. He'll make this film, take it to some festival like Sundance, where that audience will recognize the value in it. No one else is going to give a rats arse. And more power to him to get ABCD to help partially fund it.

The SNL stuff didnt bother me personally, but I see how it could bother NLG or other soap actors. Cause SNL never mentions soaps anymre, and then Franco comes on and disses them? I know it was in light fun, but if i was on GH or whatever soap I might take it as offensive. Maybe not so much so, had Franco had not been such an ass throughout his whole appearance. He manipulated his whole appearance on GH to his benefit, which I guess is the name of the game, but the fact that I havent heard any really positive comments about the show or his time on it, bugs me. He is getting all these interviews all the sudden, and all he says is "experiment" and "dare"...Like really? I just think he is an ass in general, and I feel bad for ABC cause they fell right into his trap.

And I bet whatever movie he is making about a soap opera will tank.