Top Ten Things I Learned While Reading Nelson Branco's New Column 

Portions in italics come from Nelson Branco's newest column.

• 1. The mere sight of Ron Carlivati's name causes amnesia.

Four simple yet powerful words effortlessly erased the past three hellish months from my memory: "Written by Ron Carlivati."

• 2. Screenshots make good art.

(Still talking about the magic of seeing Ron's name): I'm going to ask Lauri Hogan, One Life to Live's charming publicist for a screen grab of that iconic still so I can frame and hang it in my office full of my favourite art, books, and TV and film memorabilia.

• 3. Daytime goes better with wine.

On the night of May 5th, I gathered a couple of my friends, some who've never watched OLTL until I forced the soap snobs to watch Carlivati's Llanview, over a delicious bottle of wine (okay, a handful) to watch his May 2nd debut along with that day's episode (‘cause one eppy would not be enough for us who were jonesing for a hit of magic after enduring the past few arduous months).

• 4. Move over, messiah - there's a new sheriff in town.

Within the first four minutes of his return, characters woke up, grew back their hearts, souls, and most importantly, their brains. It was akin to a resurrection - and it wasn't even Sunday.

(Sure, Jesus resurrected Himself and that Lazarus dude, but, Ron brought back a whole town, complete with new body parts.  I'd say that puts Ron ahead, at least until the rapture.)

• 5. Who needs porno when you have OLTL?

My friends and I gasped for air when we realized we'd purposely forgotten how orgasmic his writing is as a strategy to survive the writers' strike.

• 6. Nelson may be a witch.

Another reason Mr. C's absence was heartbreaking was because Carlivati had just begun penning his magic for a mere six months before we were reminded how soulless this soap used to be. It was surreal to watch because I questioned whether or not I actually conjured up Mr. C!

• 7. Nelson is on parole.

OK, my parole officer isn't going to like this one bit, but I'm currently plotting to fly down to New York City and kidnap Tuc Watkins (David).

(Okay, so we already knew this one.)

• 8. The highest compliment you can pay to young actors is to compare them to Megan Mullally and Sean Hayes. Also, character and actor names are interchangeable.

Jason Tam and Brittany Underwood: OLTL's Jack and Karen
Brandon Buddy (Cole) and Kristen Alderson (Starr) are the Will and Grace to the increasingly fascinating Jason Tam (Marco) and Brittany Underwood's (Langston) Jack and Karen. When Todd tried to "kill" Marco and Langston, Tam and Langston proved once again they are the most promising young couple to watch on all of daytime.

• 9. Strasser and McKinsey: Overlords of Time and Space

Now that Beverlee McKinsey (ex-Iris, Another World; ex-Alex, Guiding Light) is entertaining God and co. with her theatrics, Strasser has inherited her former AW nemesis' throne.

(This is fascinating, since Strasser left her role as AW's Rachel for the second and final time in the summer of 1972, several months before McKinsey began playing Iris.  McKinsey did appear on AW earlier in the year as Steve's sister, Emma--for a whopping three episodes.   Hardly enough time to build a rivalry--in fact, I'm not sure they even shared scenes together.  Apparently, Strasser and McKinsey are not only among the finest actresses ever to grace daytime, they are also powerful enough to violate the space-time continuum.

By the way, the above information was gleamed from the book, "Eight Years in Another World," written by Harding LeMay, the celebrated author who helmed Another World from 1971-1979.  During his tenure, LeMay was able to move AW up in the ratings by entire points-not one-tenth of a point in a certain demographic, but entire points.  However, while LeMay received many accoldates and superlatives for his work, "orgasmic" wasn't one of them.  Also, LeMay never titled his episodes.  So what the heck does he know?)

• 10. Nelson Branco is not an actual columnist, but an elaborate parody.  Therefore, he will hereby be referred to on this blog as "The Elaborate Parody Known as Nelson Branco."

....

(What, you need an example for this one?)

---

For a positive, non-deranged view of Carlivati's Llanview, try Soaps by Remote.

Continuing our look at the various attempts at daytime damage control that are occuring lately, we come to Bob Guza, Jr.  For years, it has seemed that Guza is the Head Writer for Life at General Hospital.  No matter how low the ratings sink, or how loud fan dissatisfaction grows, Guza is gonna keep giving you shallow mob stories, keep giving you shootouts and explosions, keep focusing on the same few people, keep assassinating characters (literally and figuratively), and, of course, keep killing off Quartermaines.

But these days, Guza must be feeling some heat.  The ratings are at embarrassing all-time lows, the writers strike underscored how safe his job isn't, and the backlash in the wake of Michael's shooting has reached all-time highs.  The backlash was helped by an interview Guza gave to Entertainment Weekly where he claimed that Michael getting shot was his way of showing consequences for Michael carrying a gun.  While I don't think this was Guza's intention, it sounded as though he was saying that Michael had it coming for carrying a gun.  Guza was subsequently laughed into orbit.

Guza returned in the May 6^th edition of Soap Opera Weekly to try another attempt at spin.  In this interview, Guza attempts to clarify his thoughts and re-frame the story as an exercise in showing the terrible effects of the mob lifestyle.  Unfortunately, Guza barely gets two paragraphs into the interview before he steps on a rake while shooting himself in the foot. 

Guza is asked if the shooting Michael story was in the works before the strike:

GUZA: We knew we'd do it at some point.  Let me preface this by saying that this show has long been accused of being too violent, and of glorifying violence.  Let's take them separately, because they are different issues.  In terms of being too violent, that's fair.  But we are a show whose central characters are mobsters and have always been mobsters.  Tony Geary's character came on this show as Frank Smith's runner from the mob.  So this is not something that started with me.  Is it too violent?  Yeah, probably.  But it is the nature of the characters and the stories you have to tell.  But the question of glorifying it is a different issue, and you and I have talked about this a lot.  We work very hard around here to show the consequences of violence to our characters.  We want to say, ‘If you choose this lifestyle, it is going to come back to haunt you.'  Sonny is arguably one of the most haunted characters in all of daytime, precisely because he doesn't die but the people around him do.

WOW.  How did he cram all that graham?  How did he fit so much wrong into one paragraph?  Where to start?  Well, let's start with the easy ones first. 

General Hospital's central characters HAVE NOT always been mobsters.  You know who the central characters were?  HINT: Look at the title of the show.  That's right!  Doctors and nurses!  Yay!  You got it in one.  Honestly, if this show had always been about mobsters, would they have called it General Hospital? Wouldn't something like Bullets and Dames or City of Crime been more effective?

Next, notice how Guza says the show has always been about mobsters, and then immediately cites Tony Geary.  Repeat after me-General Hospital existed before Gloria Monty.  General Hospital existed before Gloria Monty.  General Hospital existed before Gloria Monty.

Notice too that, as Luke phased over from being a short-term villain to a full-fledged daytime hero, something happened.  What was it, oh, yes, HE GOT OUT OF THE MOB!  See, back in the ancient era that historians refer to as the 1980's, mobsters were bad.  Mobsters were treated as villains. 

And, contrary to Guza's spin, they weren't the main characters back then either.  At this point, GH had switched to cops and robbers fare, and it was the cops, the secret agents, and the all-around good guys who dominated the show.  Thus, any mobster that was deemed to have leading man value had to get out of the mob, because anything else could be seen as glorifying organized crime, and that would be wrong.  Oh, the eighties.  They were so quaint.

But the whole relentless focus on the mob?  The whole "let's take a clinically disturbed mobster and his brain-damaged henchman and make them heartthrobs and the focal point of the show"?  The whole dumbing down of law enforcement?  The whole thing where the mobster's family and friends are constantly put in danger, and the mobster pounds his fist and throws a water glass, and then goes right back to business as usual?  And we're still supposed to care about him?

That started with you, Guza.

Next, notice Guza's casual dismissal of the show's violence.  "Is the show too violent?  YEP!  But we're writing about mobsters, so it has to be!"  Huh?  Does he not understand what too violent means?  It means its...too violent.  As in, should be toned down.  As in, "You're absolutely right, GH viewers, some of our scenes have been unnecessarily violent, and we are going to make sure that doesn't happen."  Now, Guza could also go the other way and say, "I'm writing about mobsters.  Mobsters lead a violent lifestyle, so the violence we show is necessary and not gratuitous."  Of course, he wouldn't be able to keep a straight face, but it's a print interview, no one will see him laugh.  Instead, Guza finds middle ground where there is none, and says "Yes, we are entirely too violent, but really, we're not too violent at all, except when we are, which we aren't, so there!"

Finally, Guza brings home the crazy with his insistence that they don't glorify violence-in fact, that they work hard at GH to show the consequences of violence.  Wow, if this is them working hard, I'd hate to see them being lazy.  Again, having girlfriend no. 3 or henchman no. 5 get killed, and then going about your business as usual is not an effective way to show consequences of violence. 

Also, when Sonny's family is attacked by enemies, what does Sonny do?  He attacks them back, having them beat up or killed.  And Sonny's still standing and most of his foes aren't.  Take-away message: Violence works and he who is the most violent wins.  Sure, Sonny may suffer a casualty here or there, but we suffer casualties in wars, and as we all know GH is romance in wartime, according to Guza.  And while certain people may get killed, Sonny and his immediate circle have been shot multiple times, blown up, been in car crashes, etc, etc-and keep right on ticking like a Timex watch.  You can't talk about how you always show the consequences of violence, and then write stories where the main characters should have died five times over. 

Honestly, this is such a pathetic job of spin that I'm wondering if it's really spin at all.  Surely, if you were trying to pull a fast one on the viewers, you'd construct something better than this, right?  But, the only alternative is that Guza actually believes what he's saying, which is all the more frightening.

And now, my monthly rant against Soapnet...

(clears throat)

WHERE THE HELL IS THE OLTL

MARATHON?!?!  DAMN YOU, SOAPNET! 

DAMN YOU!  DAMN YOU! 

IT'S IN THE CABLE GUIDE, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THERE!  YOU BASTARDS!

(CHECKS SOAPNET WEBSITE)

WHAT. THE. HELLLL?!  YOU RAN THE MARATHON LAST NIGHT AT 1 A.M.!  WHEN

WAS THAT ANNOUNCED?  AND YOU'RE ONLY RUNNING TWO EPISODES TODAY, SO

YOU CAN RUN A MOVIE ABOUT DOGWALKERS?! BUT, YOU'RE RUNNING ALL FIVE

HOURS OF GH TODAY, AREN'T YOU, YOU INCOMPETENT BASTARDS!  GOTTA HAVE 

THAT SONNY FIX, DON'T YOU? 

YOU MAKE ME SICK!  I SPIT IN YOUR GENERAL

DIRECTION!  PTOOEY!

THIS HAS BEEN SNARK'S MONTHLY RANT AGAINST SOAPNET, SPONSORED BY "SERIOUSLY, WHAT THE HELL?",  "ARE YOU TRYING TO LOSE VIEWERS?" AND "COME ON, SOAPNET, GET IT TOGETHER!"

Alright, daytime dawgs--we've got a poll running on Snoop's remix of the OLTL theme.  It's right there to your left--pick the answer that suits you best, and feel free to expand on your answer in this thread.  For those who missed it, here's the video.  Thanks to YouTube poster allthingslayla.

We've also got a poll asking for your reaction to OLTL's decision to give each episode its own individual title.

From Lynn Leahey in Soap Opera Digest's newsletter:

though talks hadn't ended between GL's Beth Ehlers (Harley) and her show as I write this, she is taking a month off and and is exploring her other options. Ehlers is an amazing actress and I can't imagine GL without her — but wherever she lands will be one lucky place.

Here's the video I promised you yesterday:  Are those soaps just too darn sexy?  That was the question on many people's minds nineteen years ago, and who better to answer it than Maury Povich?  This piece runs about two and a half nminutes, and features lots of late-80's clips, as well as interviews with a couple of familiar faces.  Enjoy!

Sorry that National Damage Control Week seems to have turned into National Damage Control Month.  Busy times at work have derailed that a bit, but we'll get back into it later this week.  And let's face it, with the current state daytime is in, you're never too far away from a damage control article.

In the meantime, enjoy these links:

Is it possible to get hooked on a current soap?  Over at Soaps by Remote, Zara is asking that question.  Fed up with her current daily slate of DAYS and GH, (a combination which I think is used to get information out of terrorists), Zara is soap shopping, and she's testing out One Life to Live, a show which she has never followed on a regular basis.  Whether you're watching OLTL these days or not, you'll probably find this an interesting series.

Part One

Part Two

Part Three

Lynn Licardo now has her own blog.  She follows up on her P&G discussions, and also talks about why 1981 was such a pivotal year for television.

And tomorrow, I think I will have something fun for you in the way of a video clip.

The L.A. Times is reporting that Beverlee McKinsey died on Friday.  McKinsey is best known for inhabiting the roles of Iris on Another World and Alexandra on Guiding Light.  More updates later.

(Update): Here is a link to the classic interview McKinsey did with Michael Logan shortly after she left GL in 1992.

And here is an interview McKinsey did with SOW in 2000.