I'm sure you've read most or ...
Question: I'm sure you've read most or all of
Jon Robin Baitz's Huffington Post entry about his ousting — not firing — from the creative team that actually gets to map out the story arcs for
Brothers & Sisters. Do you think the show will be OK creatively, since he himself admitted that the people still there are really great writers and that he's just not good at playing the day-to-day TV showrunner game? He also seemed to look down on your colleague, Michael Ausiello, for reporting what he heard in a "cutesy, blind item." He intimated TV reporters often report what these studio people want planted in the media with the promise of a free keychain or handshake with a future star. How do you walk the line of reporting what you have heard but not feeling like you are playing into the hands of a source with an ulterior motive? Whether Baitz is partially at fault or not for this show "divorce," it is sad that he will not get to continue to drive the show that was his creation.
Answer: I have nothing but respect for Jon Robin Baitz — I've seen a number of his plays, and his most recent one staged in New York (the very moving
The Paris Letter, starring John Glover and
Brothers & Sisters star Ron Rifkin, who is something like Baitz's muse) was among my favorites. But he's the first to admit, in that exhaustive blog-cum-autobiography, that his skills aren't necessarily in sync with the week-to-week running and execution of a TV series, so I think
Brothers & Sisters will continue to do fine without his hands-on participation. In fact, the show probably wouldn't have survived the first season (as he also admits) if not for being guided by a gifted showrunner like Greg Berlanti. It is sad, of course, that he has been divorced from his creation and that he leaves with such bitterness and ambivalence. It's also true that left to his devices, his vision for the show would have resulted in a darker but also deeper exploration of family, aging, politics and sex, and I wish we could have seen more of his point of view get across (especially regarding the Sally Field character). At the same time, it probably wouldn't have been as conventionally entertaining (which isn't such a bad thing) as the show is now. I hope he does get to contribute the occasional offbeat episode in future seasons, and I'll certainly be curious if any of the future pilots he pitches or writes for ABC make it through the process. As for his slam at my colleague, I would have been more concerned if he had questioned the item's accuracy. Everyone has an agenda in Hollywood, no doubt, but the truth's the truth, even when it comes to industry gossip. You have to have a pretty thick skin to work on both sides of the business (obscene faxes from Roseanne available upon request).
