A Station Eight Fan Web Site
: « First : « 10 : Displaying #63 - #72 of 702 records. : 10 » : 100 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
1. In "Vows" and "Revelations", the Illuminati symbol is a pyramid with an
eye on top - that symbol also happens to appear on the back of the
one-dollar-bill. Is there (in the Gargoyles Universe) some ominous
connection here?
2. In "Her Brother's Keeper", Xanatos had an upstate retreat called
Xanadu. Was the name taken from Coleridge's "Kublai Khan", or from "Citizen Kane"?
3. Why wasn't Lexington as upset about Angela choosing Broadway as
Brooklyn was? Was it because he was already developing a close friendship with
Alex, or because Brooklyn's more inclined to wallowing in self-pity? (Actually,
I think that it's a combination of the two, but I'd like to know what your
take on this is).
4. Your general disappointment with "The Goliath Chronicles" is well-known
(and an attitude shared by most Gargoyles fans) - but, did the new
production team do anything in the 12 episodes following "The Journey"
that you did think worked rather well or approved of? You did mention in your
last response that you rather liked the "Thailog's death" scene they did
in "Genesis Undone".
1. Yes.
2. Both.
3. Well, I don't think Alex and Angela are mutually exclusive. I
do think Brooklyn is more likely to wallow, but I think the main reason Lex
didn't feel as strongly was because he didn't feel as strongly. Brooklyn
convinces himself (as with Maggie) that it's true love. Lex had a crush
that was almost automatic because Angela was the ONLY available female he
had seen in some time. I think after a while, it became clear to Lex that
they were just friends. Brooklyn needed evidence that he was out of the
running, i.e. the kiss between Broadway and Angela.
4. I think the death scene was well-handled, but I don't actually
like it or the episode. Kill off Thailog? Not on my watch. Not in that
way. The only saving grace, which I believe I suggested was that the
"deaths" of the clones is at least potentially reversable. Otherwise... To
be honest the only things that I liked were things that were remnants of
suggestions I had made. I wasn't wild about execution on anything, save a
line of dialogue here or there. Frankly, I'm just too close to it to be
objective. I like Eric and Julia Lewald a lot, and I respect their talents
on everything else they've done. So my guess is that most of my problems
with TGC are my own, not theirs. Also, I only ever watched those twelve
episodes once each. It was very painful, and I haven't revisited them
since.
(GDW / 7-22-98)
One more question. Since you mentioned in your last batch of responses
that King Arthur and Griff would visit the South Pole in the course of their
search for Merlin - what effect would the six-month day/six-month night at
the Poles have on a gargoyle's biological clock?
Good question.
(GDW / 7-22-98)
1) My thoughts on the Camelot Seven: Arthur, Merlin, the Lady of the Lake
are the gimmes... others I'd guess would be Perceval (due to other hints
you've dropped), Galahad, Morgana le Fay, and Nimue.
2) You've said that, in TimeDancer, Brooklyn 'never really gets ahold of
[the Phoenix Gate]'. So, then, how do his timedancing travels work, if he
doesn't physically carry the Gate? Or did I misunderstand what you said
and he *does* carry the Gate? 3) Another TimeDancer question: Is there an
average length for one of Brooklyn's stays in a given time and place, or
does it vary widely (i.e., a few seconds to months or years)? Thanks in
advance.
1. Nope.
2. The Gate is lost in time, bopping around on its own. Opening
portals and vanishing. Brooklyn slides through these portals.
3. Vary widely. Though I wouldn't make too many stops of under a
minute. Not much storytelling fits into thirty seconds.
(GDW / 7-22-98)
Very fast:
1) From ep 1, Captain of the Guard said inhabitants of Wyvern were, ". . .
not my people." Care to elaborate?
2) You've probably been deluged with Merlin stuff since that mini-series,
so more straw for the camel's back: Didja notice the uncanny resemblance of
Frik to Puck? Yowza.
3) Finally, my ideas for the Camelot Seven: Art, Merlin, the Lady of the
Lake, Guenivere, Morgan LeFay (pleeeeeeese), Lancelot, and Mordred, on the
basis that Oberon doesn't count. Thank you for your time
1. I've addressed this already, but basically he thought they were
ungrateful snobs and ignorant peasants. He identified with the Gargoyles
much more than his fellow humans. Don't read too much into the statement.
2. Yeah, a resemblance. I wouldn't say uncanny. We're all
operating in the same set of traditions here.
3. Nope.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
Hi Greg! Which gargoyles story would you have most wanted to bring to
life but never got the chance to do? In other words, if someone came up to you
and gave you the chance to make one more episode (and let's assume here
that any background info needed to understand that episode would be provided,
so that it doesn't have to directly follow the eps of the last season), what
would that episode be? Since this is a broad question, let me ask it in
more specific chunks (unless you want to describe the whole ep, which I
wouldn't mind at all).
1) Which characters would it center around?
2) Which spinoff would it be in (i.e. Dark Ages, TimeDancer, etc.)
3) What would the main plot points be? *note: if you have no specific answers
for any of the above Q's, could you at least provide us with a general idea of
the one story you'd most like to create? Thanks!
Generally, this question is too hypothetical for me. My mind
doesn't work this way. If someone said you could do one more episode, but
only one, I'm not sure how I'd react. If literally, I couldn't even use it
for a backdoor pilot, i.e. no hope of future episodes coming out of it.
Then in essence, I'm being asked to do a season of one. (Kinda like what I
did with "The Journey".) The notion that the blanks could be filled in
between "The Journey" and this new episode doesn't play for me. It's too
detached from the reality of my creative process. So... If I only had one
episode to do. I'd try to give it the open-ended closure of a
"Reawakening," "Hunter's Moon, Part Three," or "The Journey." I'd probably
do the Halloween double date episode that I talked about. I guess. But
like I said, this exercise doesn't appeal to me much.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
First off, I have to tell you that I really appreciated the recaps in the
beginning of each episode. I only saw gargoyles every saturday, and thus
the continuity got completely screwed, and episodes were shown in a random
order. Plus, I was rather disappointed with the flying steel monsters in
"Awakenings" and the way the trio was portrayed in "Thrill of the Hunt" so
the show didn't hook me immediately. (I did like Part 1 and 2 of
awakenings) However, watching "Eye of the Storm" one morning got me completely hooked,
and soon I was scrambling to recover what I had been missing. (I still
have yet to see "The Mirror", "The Price", "Turf", and "City of Stone Pt 1."
Since all most of my questions have been asked for mine will be rather
brief.
1. Thailog seems to hold a lot of anger towards Angela, is this because
of Goliath's seeming acceptance of her and Goliath's rejection of him?
2. Did Thailog create any clones of Bronx? I would think that he would be
most inclined to have servants that were not intelligent enough to outgrow
their programming (and thus turn on him).
3. Did Thailog Clone more than one copy of each gargoyle?
4. My guesses for those still alive from the Arthurian period? Arthur,
Merlin, Lady of the Lake (thanks for the gimmes) Lancelot, The Green
Knight, Morgana la Fay, and taking a shot in the dark... mmm... Galahad?
1. Possibly. But I don't think he's that angry with her
specifically. He just knows that (a) threatening Angela is a good way to
anger Goliath and (b) it makes a great way to test Demona's loyalty.
2. No. Because Bronx never guarded Demona and Fang to get bitten
by the robot mosquitoes.
3. No.
4. Nope.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
****Blaise crashes through the door.**** Sorry, I'll fix that. Well,
first I wanted to say that I agree with you; the Broadway/Angela relationship
was not rushed. Next, I have a question:
1) When you went through all the Shakespeare plays, you listed MERCHANT OF
VENICE as problematic. Care to expand on that? I ask this because I had
the pleasure of portraying Shylock (an excellent character, in my opinion)
in a production of that play, and I am interested to hear what others
think of it.
2) My second question deals with the Arthurian guessing game (all my ideas
have already been listed, but I'll do them anyway); Are the survivors
Arthur, Merlin, the Lady of the Lake, Percival (sp?), Nimue, Morgan la
Fey, and Bedivere? (NOTE: I would have put "Blaise" on that list, but he is
not as famous or wide-spread a character of Arthurian legends as the rest of
them are) Well, that's about it. Oh, BTW, you're explanation on Hudson's
accent was great. It really makes a lot of sense to me why you did it
that way. Have a nice day! ****Blaise fixes the door on his way out.****
1. It's a tough play for me, at least. And also historically. For
a century it was performed with the subtitle "The Tragedy of Shylock"
attached. And believe me this wasn't because anti-semitism had fallen away
during those years. The problem is complex, and I'm not sure I can deal
with all of it here, but in a nutshell, the play is wildly anti-semitic...
and so is Shakespeare himself. Except it's highly likely that Shakespeare
never personally knew any Jews. He simply believed what he had been told
about them. And yet... And yet... As much as he wants to make Shylock a
monster, he can't. He imbues Shylock with so much humanity. So much that
even in his villainy, we can't help but root for him. Which would be fine,
except the plays ending doesn't really bare it out. We're also supposed to
root for Portia. Not simply to buy into her "The quality of mercy is not
strained" speech, but also to support her ultimate conclusions against
Shylock, including the forced conversion to Christianity. That's a hard
double road to walk down. Thus, I find the play (not the character of
Shylock) problematic.
2. Nope.
And thanks.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
Hi there, hope things are OK with you. 1) My vote for the seven
'Arthurians' would be Arthur, Merlin, Guenever, Nimue, Gawain, Morgan le Fay and
Mordred. I left out Launcelot as I think it would make for better stories without,
but I can't say why due to the rules. Fame ? Glory ? as it's 'Ask Greg'
not 'Tell Greg' I suppose I'd better try a question ummm..... 2) I thought
that the portrayal of Anubis was great and very thought provoking, did you have
any plans to use any of the ancient Egyptian myths or make use of the Gods
and Goddesses ?
1. Nope.
2. Given enough episodes, we would have eventually returned to
Anubis and probably investigated other Egyptian pantheon members. But I had
no immediate plans.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
Just a few questions this time around. Heh heh, my definition of a few.
Mr. Greg Weisman, 1)How tall is: a)Puck, b)Owen, c)Macbeth, d)Demona, e)Fox,
and last but not least f)Xanatos? But Puck and Owen most specifically.
2)Whats the name of that Cloth piece in Pucks outfit, held up by the
broache and forming the skirt-like thing? No one seems ta know that I've asked,
people have said Sash-which would be his cloth belt, Tunic-which is more
like his shirt, and even Toga which is wayyy to big. Please please tell
me.
3)People have asked, what character you relate to the most.... but my
question is, Which was the most fun for you to write for?
4)Why do Gargoyle Loincloths turn to stone. You must have a reason
whether it be magical etc.
5)Is Owen vunerable to iron in the same context as fae? Or is he so
perfectly Human that he can handle it the same as any other normal person?
6)Was it Owen or Puck that first met Demona? If Puck, when? Be as
specific as ya want, I'd settle for the decade or century even.
7)Xanatos' reaction when meeting Goliath was like he was expecting it,
which he was. But how did he react when he first met Demona?
8)a)Did you ever plan on teaming up any of the tricksters? b) If so whom?
9)Do you ever plan on revealing what Titania said to Fox in the forseeable
future? just wondering if theres *any* hope in knowing.
10)What other business rivals would Xanatos have aquired?
11)You mentioned before, that Titania had become... lets say wiser in a
way than Oberon, because Oberon never changed over the Millienium. Well Puck
seems to be a very everchanging Character, exactly how much *wisdom* does
he have? And how much do you think he'd actually take his own advice?
12)Duh duh duhhhhnnn the Puck family question! Does Puck have a mother or
father currently living on Avalon? yeah yeah yeah, all I wanna know
basically is if they're still alive.
13)Did Puck
1. I've never measured them.
2. I don't know.
3. They were all fun to write for. Though Thailog and Xanatos
stand out. Puck too. And Vinnie. And Goliath. I even liked writing
Renard. And Titania. The Archmage. I could go on forever. They were all
interesting to me for different reasons.
4. I've answered this before. A modesty spell cast by the guy who
wrote the Grimorum back in the time of Caesar Augustus.
5. Pretty much the latter.
6. Puck. That's as specific as I want to get right now.
7. Awe, wonder and humor.
8. Yes, as I've stated before, the story that eventually became
"Ransom" under TGC's new creative team, was originally supposed to be a
multi-Trickster story featuring Puck and Raven for sure, and probably Anansi
and Coyote as well.
9. Hope springs eternal.
10. Didn't have any specific plans for that beyond Cyberbiotics and
Nightstone. But I wouldn't have hesitated to create a fourth company if I
saw a need.
11. Hard to quantify "wisdom". And which advice are you talking
about?
12. Crystal Ball is cloudy. Check again later.
13. I don't think that tricksters like hanging with other
tricksters. Small doses, please.
14. Chuck would do what?
15. If you're too lazy, why should I make an effort?
16. Nope.
17. Nope.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
1. Thanks for answering my questions about the Quarrymen's motivation -
and for pointing out about how they wouldn't have been aware that the
gargoyles were sentient beings. Which brings me to a question-cum-theory about one
of the main reasons for TGC's failure. The first two seasons had Xanatos and
Demona, two complex and intriguing characters, for their main villains,
and did a good job accordingly (plus some good supporting villains such as
Macbeth - also a complex and intriguing character, and one who quickly
became a favorite of mine - Thailog, Jackal and Hyena, Sevarius, and so
on). TGC had for its main villains the Quarrymen, who were done (after "The
Journey") as a bunch of flat, one-dimensional characters with no real
depth to them - I liked the fact that you'd chosen to give them some variety
(some being mercenaries like Banquo and Fleance, others being terrified citizens
like Vinnie or Billy and Susan's mom), but in TGC, they nearly all seemed
to have been recruited from the local "Thugs R Us". Do you think that the
way that your successors handled the Quarrymen (both making them cardboard
villains and the main villains) could have had much to do with why The
Goliath Chronicles failed?
2. A query about Jon Canmore/Castaway. When I first saw "Hunter's Moon",
I was very distressed at the way that the initially most sympathetic Hunter
wound up turning into an insane gargoyle-hater at the end. But then,
after watching it a few more times and studying Jon's actions, I found myself
wondering if his fall from grace hadn't actually been carefully prepared
for. His suggestions to his siblings that maybe Goliath and his clan
weren't evil had a rather half-hearted feel to them and he allowed Jason
to easily quell them. He spared the clan at the ruins of the clock tower,
but THEN proceeded to publicly frame them on the news at Jason and Robyn's
request, without (as far as could be told) protesting about trying to turn
the public against the gargs, now that he knew that they weren't the
monsters that the other Hunters believed them to be. During the fight at
the dam, Jon was just standing around looking miserable, while Elisa was
making an active attempt to get Jason and Goliath to stop their feud. In
fact, Jon's only pro-gargoyle action was a negative one (not killing them
at the clock tower), whereas Elisa and Jason (after he finally saw the light)
took a much more active stance (Jason actually taking a shot for Goliath
in the cathedral) in trying to stop the slaughter. (Not to mention that, in
"The Journey", Vinnie also actively resisted Castaway's efforts to kill
Goliath and Elisa). So.... am I reading too much into this, or was Jon's
rather passive behavior during his "pro-gargoyle" behavior purposely
designed that way, to show that he was weak (to fit in with his
transformation into Castaway)?
3. Another commentary rather than question, mainly. I've also been
working out why Thailog is such an effective villain, and I think that it's more
than just that he's cunning and malevolent (though he's definitely both).
He's also a clone of Goliath, and looks and sounds almost exactly like
him. But his moral character is very different from Goliath's - in contrast to
Goliath's nobility and honor, Thailog is scheming, power-hungry, and
duplicitous. So there's a matter of a very chilling incongruity. Was
this part of what you had in mind when you created the character?
1. Todd, "failure" is one of those hot-button words that I don't
much like to throw around. Many people regarded the second season of
Gargoyles as a failure because it didn't meet those people's financial
expectations. Many people regard the World Tour as a failure because it
went on too long or whatever. I don't agree with either assessment, but
it's all subjective.
So let's not talk about failure. But now that I'm past the
disclaimer, I do agree that the villains on Goliath Chronicles were not that
well-handled, and I think the handling of the Quarrymen was particularly
problematic. You, as usual, are dead-on in evaluating what I was trying to
do with them. My successors took a different route.
2. Todd, people are going to start to think that either (a) I'm
paying you to write this stuff or (b) you actually are me writing under a
pseudonym. Again, you're dead-on correct. Jason was a strong man. Strong
in his prejudice. Strong in his resolve to change once he came to that
conclusion. Jon was a weak man. I'm gonna botch this quotation about the
banality of evil, but it goes something like, "All it takes for evil to
thrive is for good men to do nothing." That's Jon Canmore. I hope we built
him so that his transformation -- though shocking and tragic -- was
believable. If you're any indication, then I did my job.
3. Very much so. To me, the creation of a great villain depends on
making that villain a true counterposing force to the hero. Each villain
has to make us feel, at least in that individual story, that he or she is
the ultimate nemesis. This is accomplished not simply with opposition, but
by juxtaposing similarities and contrasting them with opposition. Let's
look at Batman for a moment.
a. Batman and the Joker both operate in strange, even garish
costumes, outside the law. But the Batman represents ORDER, the Joker
CHAOS.
b. Or... Batman is a man with two faces. Bruce Wayne and the Bat.
Two sides of the same coin. Personify that, and you have TWO-FACE. Now
you've got two characters who share a bond, and yet are as different as
night and day.
c. Batman was created to inspire fear in criminals. The Scarecrow
exists to inspire fear in decent people.
d. Batman is a man seduced by the darkness in his soul. Catwoman
is that seduction brought to life.
e. Batman strives to find order out of chaos, Ra's al Ghul strives
to establish his own order in place of human freedom. To me, these have
always been Batman's best villains, because they each speak to his soul.
Anytime I thought about working with any of the others, it was always more
of a struggle.
f. Take the Riddler. As fun as he can be, he was never my
favorite. The best I could come up with was to piece out a segment of the
Batman mythos, i.e. Batman is supposed to be the world's greatest detective.
Thus we pit this man of answers in a battle of wits against the world's
greatest questioner. (Not bad, but not great either.)
g. Penguin always stumped me until I saw the movie BATMAN RETURNS.
Now, I didn't care for that movie much. I thought it was a mess. But the
one truly brilliant addition to the Batman mythos was the notion that the
Penguin was a monster. Batman has a monster inside him. And he puts on a
monstrous aspect to give that monster reign. Tim Burton's Penguin was born
to that misshapen life. Suddenly, the villain worked for me.
Now. Return to Gargoyles. And specifically to Goliath. I
attempted to make every villain succeed in that manner. Thailog is of
course, obvious for the reasons you stated, but hopefully that resonance
carries through to all our antagonists. Goliath is the ultimate medieval
bastion of gargoyle morality. David is the ultimate modern stand-in for
human amorality. Demona was once Goliath's great love. Now she's his
greatest enemy because she turned away from the very things that made her
love him. Goliath is a gargoyle from another time. Macbeth is a human from
another time. Goliath is steadfast and serious, Puck is out there and in it
for the laugh. Goliath is thought of as a beast. The Pack are supposed to
be hunters. But their animal names and their actions make it clear who the
real beasts are. Etc. All this was very conscious. I'm glad it worked for
ya.
(GDW / 7-21-98)
: « First : « 10 : Displaying #63 - #72 of 702 records. : 10 » : 100 » : Last » :