Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Who's onlineThere are currently 54 members and 1622 guests online.
|
Interview with "Brothers & Sisters" creator Jon Robin Baitz
And there is a kind of a world where the creators of TV shows and of content and of movies are far more entrepreneurial now. And I think that it’s galling to the studio heads. So yes — they were able to write off some expensive deals. I don’t think that they fully understood or imagined that the thing was going to be as expensive in terms of good will as it has been for them.
AE: Do you think they even now understand?
AE: Don’t you feel like a part of that is they think — this
is helping us financially?
AE: Do you think they have any interest in that?
AE: Do you feel like a lot of writers who’ve been a part
of the strike have gotten really screwed in the long run? Have had to sacrifice
a lot. And that they’ve sort of taken advantage of that?
AE: You spoke a little bit about [love] on your blog post
[where Baitz discusses a relationship that ended around the time he left the
show]. What do you have to say about finding love as a gay man in his 40’s? I think that if you come to terms with your nature and what you find is that you’re deeply romantic and somewhat sentimental and perhaps overly attuned to the crisis of aloneness — which lives with you no matter how happily married or coupled you are. There are people on this planet who feel fundamentally part of themselves is apart, alone. And so I think you have to deal with all of that stuff. If you get to your 40‘s and you’re not dealing with it, it doesn’t get easier. So that’s what I’ve been doing. I think it’s really hard to be a real person. That’s the most I can say about that.
AE: Well thanks so much. I know you’re going to go on to
do all kinds of wonderful things. AE: AfterElton will be so happy. Submitted by on Sun, 2008-02-17 22:08. |
 Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
JRB: I think it requires authenticity. And I feel
that that means that you live an entirely authentic life as best you can, and
that that’s all you can do. You can’t try and make yourself palatable to the
world as it moves ever quicker and ever younger. You can only live in your now.
And I’m at peace with that.
I really enjoyed reading
I really enjoyed reading this interview. Really looking forward to more of Jon Robin Baitz's work!
Of course there are pro-gay Republicans
The thing is, none of them are running for president on the Republican ticket. Not even close. I mean, the candidates that weren't horribly anti-gay--Guiliani, McCain, and Romney--completely pandered (and continue to pander, in McCain's case) to the anti-gay bigots. Appoint more judges like Scalia? That's great, more judges like the biggest anti-gay bigot on the Supreme Court.
Hey, Baitz can create any characters he wants. But I find it annoying when ALL the Republicans he creates are so pro-gay that they're in favor of gay marriage, even when running for president. This is not just a fantasy, it reinforces a really, really dangerous idea in middle America, that there really is great overlap between the two national parties on gay issues, when the reality is that their positions just. Could. Not. Be. More. Stark.
Virtually every Democratic party leader currently holding national office or running for president either supports expanding or full rights for gays (even if they don't all want to call it "marriage"). Meanwhile, virtually every national Republican party leader currently holding national office supports restricting those rights further, and supports and enables anti-gay bigots like Bush and Scalia who are on record as pretty wanting to eliminate all rights completely. And don't get me started on how even the few state-level Republicans who aren't completely anti-gay have mostly stayed silent while the national party demonizes us for electoral gain, specifically putting anti-gay ballots on initiatives just to drive up fundamentalist turn-out, and spreading nasty, hateful anti-gay rhetoric all across the country.
The current Republican base would NEVER support a candidate like McCalister. To say otherwise, as B&S does every week, is a lie.
Read my books! Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com
Repubs and da gays
My initial purpose in bringing that up was to discuss the dichotomy/hypocrisy inherent in the behind the scenes acceptance that powerful Republicans have regarding the gay people in their lives – in their families and in their political offices – and yet how they almost all play the homophobe angle in their political policies in an exploitive bid for political power.
But – there was a lot to cover with limited time; so that comment does just sort of sit there.
It would have been an interesting road to go down. I checked with Dennis Ayers, AfterElton’s resident Brothers & Sisters expert, and he reminds that MCallister (the Rob Lowe character) did (in a purely cynical polticial move) vote for an anti-gay marriage amendment, despite support of his brother behind the scenes. [you can check out Dennis's great B&S articles on AE's B&S resource page:
http://www.afterelton.com/TV/brothersandsisters.html ]
Judging from Baitz’s Huffington Post blog, I think he may have drawn the Republican characters’ public political views more sharply then they are drawn now, had he remained more in control of the show.
Hi, Brent!!! Dude – you should have emailed me before I talked to him!!! (And BTW the Dems need to stop being lame and start supporting gay marriage in their policy. As I’m sure they do privately.)
No comment on your Q&A James
I thought it was great! Really, really insightful and probing. I've just heard Baitz give this same answer before and (obviously) it really annoys me. (And for the record, that "cynical" vote caused him to reassess and vow never to oppose gay marriage again.) I don't disagree that I wish more Democrats would stand up and be open. It's weird when we're having a debate and NO ONE is advocating for your POV! Then again, if they did, that is all the Republicans would ever talk about. Every election would be about nothing except gay marriage...and it's still at 27% (or so) in the polls, so what can you do?
Sorry, posted this under the wrong name before (Michael used my computer).
Read my books! Explore "Brent's Brain" at http://www.brenthartinger.com
I just saw all of this season's B&S episodes in a marathon...
as I missed the second episode of this season when it first aired. I held off on watching the show until I had a chance to catch up and had no clue that so many had aired. Thank God for the writers' strike as I can finally read about the show without worring about spoilers.
It was very cool to find this interview, especially after seeing more than a dozen back-to-back episodes. Another great job by James who in my opinion did a really hard thing by getting Baitz to open up without any false idolatry. I like seeing when interviewees say more than they had intended to and I feel like I got that from what I read.
With regard to B&S, it's by no means a perfect show, but one of the best cast, breeziest, and while at times can be quite sophomoric, it actually focuses on adults interacting. A great alternative to the 100 boring procedurals on the air. It may promote drinking wine more than any show in the history of television, but that is neither here nor there.
To me the most problematic part of the show by far is its focus on politics. Not only it's take, but the fact that it address it at all as I think that it would be an even better show by totally abandoning that angle entirely. While it may have served as a calling card when the show was first pitched to ABC, I predict that no one would miss it if it went bye bye.
While we are asked to suspend judgment in almost anything that we watch, this show lives and dies by its winning cast, family-focus, and relatability. Political card-board characters like Kitty (when first introduced in season 1), and Robert (who seems to get more God-like annoying each episode), only take away from a fun way to end a Sunday night.
I love the actor who plays Kevin Walker (although is there bad/unattractive one in the whole show?), but with the exception of the last couple of episodes, he did not seem to have anywhere as much to do as his other siblings. Poor Uncle Saul seems to be getting the Nuke treatment, so I am surprised that the gay angle was not adandoned in its entirety rather than have it toyed with. They could do great things with having a man of a certain age who is coming to terms with his sexual orientation.
Unfortunately, I predict that we won't be seeing much more of Uncle Saul as there are too many characters on the show already and they all need to have something to do. His remaining on the show will serve as a reminder of where they are not going or not going to go.
I do hope to see Kevin hitting the sack with Scottie more often and hope that the writers do a better/more subtle job of working the constrasting elements of these two than they have with the show's weird take on politics. If they can't, then they can focus on non-class/lifestyle issues as the Walker clan are a fun bunch who don't need all these bell and whistles. While it's a show from a different era with a different dymanic, the writers should find old episodes of the series Family and Ken Olin's own thirtisomething as B&S already has the infrastructure to last a bunch of politic-free seasons.
I am still looking for a gay-centric show and this is not it, but it is without a doubt one of the better offerings on TV.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=518130334
There isn't enough major corruption
Original pilot?
Was the original pilot filmed?
It's too bad it wasn't included on the DVD as an extra (like the other unaired episode was).
Re: B&S
Robbie Baitz deserves tremendous praise for creating and sustaining arguably the most fully-realized gay character on network TV. And if they are able to start really fleshing out Saul's storyline, that will make two.
As for McCallister's faux-Republicanism...I've always disliked it and think it's entirely unrealistic, for obvious reasons. But do I think it's really harmful? I actually don't. Maybe I'm being naive, but to me this show is so unquestionably liberal in its gay-inclusivity, and the Republican characters are so moderate and likewise gay-accepting, that I truly doubt many viewers are left thinking, "Well, I was under the impression that Republicans weren't so gay-friendly, but that must not be true given Rob Lowe's character on Brothers & Sisters."
The Republican party's anti-gay agenda is pretty well established in the mainstream media (let's not forget the tremendous focus placed on the antigay initiatives last election cycle). I think most people who watch this show are (a) already sufficiently liberal in their views that they would alread know the distinction, and (b) even if they aren't, most recognize that Rob Lowe's character is fictitiously uber-liberal on this issue. I've ready many posts from conservative viewers who decry that Robert and Kitty are way too liberal to be Republicans.
Robert and Kitty are flat out unrealistic
I'm sorry but if there's one major credibility gap in Brothers & Sisters it's the enlightened liberal attitude that Robert and Kitty show off virtually all of the time. Robert wants to fight greenhouse gases, support workers impacted by weather disasters and he seems amazingly gay-friendly.
Honestly, if they hadn't explicitly said he was a Republican I'd swear he was running for the Democratic nomination!
When Robert was first introduced Kevin was on the warpath because Robert's voting record and speeches apparently indicated that he was not at all gay-friendly. He had a whole stack of supporting evidence (lawyer that he is) which means that it was not just a one-time issue on the Constitutional ammendment that Robert voted for. Yet as things develop he is depicted so as to make Kevin seem needlessly alarmist.
Meanwhile, despite the fact that Kitty was supposed to have been a popular conservative commentator we haven't seen much real conservativism out of her. She may turn her nose up at Nora's extreme liberalism but she doesn't sound at all Ann Coulter-ish.
There's no question that opposition to gay rights is mandatory for national-level Republicans. Guiliani was very gay-friendly as mayor of NYC but immediately started pandering, promising to appoint judges like Scalia and Alito, as soon as he went on the campaign trail. The message is that the Republican party is perfectly willing to throw gays to the wolves in order to appease their base.
Some people like Mary Cheney support the GOP because they are well-connected politically and financially, and thus don't worry as much about their status. That the GOP actively seeks to deny rights to those that don't have powerful Republican parents is apparently irrelevant to them. They lie to themselves and say that the GOP isn't that bad, that their Republican friends and family love them.
Maybe, but their Republican friends and family vote for politicians who try to deny gay rights through legislation and block them in the courts by appointing anti-gay judges.
If B&S wants to be honest, I think that Robert should be forced into an anti-gay stance in his quest to win primary votes. One, because it's unrealistic that a Republican with such a liberal attitude could be the party front-runner. Two, because I think it would make for an interesting turn in Robert and Kitty's relationship with Jason and Kevin.
One of my favorite Robbie lines...
One of my favorite lines of Robbie's was from the second installment of his "Leaving Los Angeles" rants at HuffPo:
"However, I cannot help but dream about what my version of Brothers & Sisters would have looked like, had I been given the chance to try it my way (in an alternate universe).... A show that followed Rob Lowe's black charm down the rabbit hole of American politics and revealed the ugliness that lives there."
As an alternative to the crapfest campaign storyline we are getting served this season (and much of last), I'd much prefer to go down that rabbit hole. At least it might be "bloody interesting".
I have no doubt Robbie rants. Yes, probably on set and to studio executives. And he certainly didn't do himself any favors by ranting at HuffPo about his bosses. It's pretty clear he knows it cost him dearly given his mixed emotions about being force majeured from the show he created.
But something has been missing from B&S this season. I can't help but feel it might be the person who created these characters and the world they live in. Since Berlanti is supposed to become more involved in the final episodes of the season, I'll know which of the two I was missing more.
PS - Thank you, James, for embedding one of my all time favorite scenes from B&S in this article.