Even on a show known for violence, the shooting of a child had to be a risky move. Right, head writer Bob Guza Jr.? He told Entertainment Weekly that it plays into a larger theme he wants to promote.
''We've been accused before of glorifying violence,'' Guza said. ''But we always try to show the consequences. We do deal with mobsters. We can't just have them importing illegal tchatchkes from the Far East and getting a slap on the wrist. You've got to deal with the fact that they kill people and people are killed all around them.''
Guza replied to a pair of burning questions, as well:
Will the show will use the shooting as an opportunity to age up Michael and replace 13-year-old Dylan Cash?
Guza (who is keeping mum on Michael's fate) doesn't believe he's necessarily locked into keeping Cash playing Michael forever, but he does say that having the same actor play a character straight through from childhood raises the dramatic potential (just look at Kimberly McCollough's Robin).
Does this mean the end of the mob violence? Is this the start of kinder, gentler General Hospital?
''We're not going to make them all go in the garment business. That is not what this story is about. The show is about romance during wartime, for lack of a better term. We have the highest stakes possible because people can be killed. We're not going to ignore that. We're not going to go away from that. But we're going to make them very, very aware of the consequences and make them try to deal in nonviolent ways.''
What did you think about the shooting? Chime in now on our General Hospital forum!