A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

RESPONSES 2001-9 (Sept)

Archive Index


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #111 - #135 of 292 records. : 25 » : Last » :


Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :


Bookmark Link

Siren writes...

I must sound stupid right now...but, I don't think this was asked before, cause I don't see it anywhere's. I was looking at a large archieve of LOTS of Garg pics, and noticed in City of Stone Part 2, Demona smashed two stone humans that looked just like Margret Yale and BRENDON! (I love the way she says his name)
Was that them? In which case, I take it they are dead. I liked Brendon, sorta, kinda felt bad for the poor sap, stuck with that bitch of a woman (scuse the langauage, but she was). She reminds me of some of my customers at a pet grooming shop. ;)

Greg responds...

This has been asked before, and it wasn't them. Since they appear again in later episodes.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Ricky writes...

Hi again...

Sorry to hear that the Atlantis project was scrapped, that's terrible news...actually a series like that would've been great to see. Too bad!

Why are all the first episodes of Max Steel titled with "S" names? Was it your idea, any humourous reason?

Greg responds...

My idea. No humorous reason.

The reason in my head was always a bit obscure. I was trying to do something that I never quite achieved. Years later, it's even less clear to me now.

But here's a question... since the titles don't appear on the episodes, how do you know them? From this site?

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

1.Have you givens names to all the races involved in the galactic war yet?
2.What role do the other races involved in the war play in the war?

Greg responds...

1. No. Not all. Just the major ones.
2. I'm not telling.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Alien technology

1.Seriously what is Nokkar's spaceship made out of? metal?
2.Do the N'kai and Space-Spawn have anti-gravity technology?
3.How exactly does the Space-Spawn planetbuster work? Does it destroy the Earth like the Death Star or does it just make the surface uninhabitabele? Does Nokkar's race have planetbuster technology?

Greg responds...

Seriously, I don't feel like telling you.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Virginia writes...

Are you going to be able to make any kind of art gallery in the near future? I love your work and would be interested to be able to purchase picutres from the gargoyle and Max Steel series. My 3 year old son loves the show too, btw.

Greg responds...

That's great. But I'm not an artist. Can't draw worth a darn. (I said darn because your son is only three.)

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Why do you dislike Terminator 2? Was it because of the time travel?

Greg responds...

Well, I think the time travel is a mess, certainly.

But I just didn't like the movie either. It's been so long since I've seen it, that I don't feel comfortable giving a full review here. My command of the specifics is non-existent, I'm afraid. But as much as I loved the first one, that's about how much I disliked the second.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

JEB writes...

'Ello, Greg.

1) What years were you working at DC Comics? Were you there around the time they did CRISIS ON INFINITE EARTHS? (I'm assuming yes, since you worked on its 'cousin' WHO'S WHO IN THE DC UNIVERSE.)
2) If (1) was yes, did you work on anything Crisis-related (excluding WHO'S WHO)?
3) What did you think of the Crisis, story-wise? (I liked it, of course. Then again, anything with cosmic stuff and grand epic battles is guaranteed to be a favorite with me.)
4) Which did you like better, the pre-Crisis multiverse or the post-Crisis single universe? (I like them both, but I miss the former.)
5) What did you think of the Crisis' effects on DC Comics as a whole? Do you think it did more good, more harm, or do you think it didn't really do either? (I think it was interesting, and created many excellent opportunities for revamps (Superman, Wonder Woman, and Captain Atom being among the best). However, the continuity blips- especially those afflicting poor Hawkman- were a major long-term failing.)

Sorry if these questions are a bit annoying or disinteresting to you, but I just realized that you were in the offices around the time (at least) that the post-Crisis cleanup was underway, and I was curious about your views on that period. Thanks!

Greg responds...

1. I started freelancing for them in 1983. I joined the staff as an Editorial Assistant in 1985, toward the tail end of Crisis. I was promoted to Assistant Editor in 1986. And promoted again to Associate Editor in 1987. I quit my staff job in '87 but continued to freelance for them until late 90 or early 91 (overlapping with my Disney career for a year or two.)

2. No. I was a peon in those days. Unless you count xeroxing stuff. Of course, Crisis had ramifications that lasted for years, so you could say I later worked on things that were "Crisis related".

3. Some of the issues of Crisis are powerful great stuff. But the name Anti-Monitor never did much for me. And I have to say I miss the parallel universe stuff a bit. It wasn't so much Crisis as what came out of it that disappointed me. For me the results either went too far or not far enough. And there was so much well doing and redoing... It's all hindsight, and not like anyone at DC is asking me, but I'd do things differently.

4. Definitely the multiverse. I'd bring it back if I could. "Crisis on One Earth". I think it's what allows them to start over every twenty years or so, let the characters age normally. But then move on to a new Earth, where the old ones can still be reached, but we can see Superman, etc. young again. Let's us leave behind missteps without shattering continuity. Etc.
5. Well, I've kind of answered this already. But again, I don't want to blame Crisis. I think Crisis did ITS job. I just don't love all those revamps. (Except Captain Atom, of course.)

It's fun to revisit old stuff. That's why I'm here no need to apologize.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Jacob writes...

Hi Greg

Are there any series you have produced or created that you like more than others? Maybe you could write your three favourite ones.

Greg responds...

Well, Gargoyles. Duh.

But I also really loved working on Starship Troopers aka Roughnecks, though I was neither the Producer or Creator.

(I assume we're limiting this discussion to series that actually made it on the air.)

Anyway, those would be my top two, in that order.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Justin writes...

Greg

You have mentioned that you are color blind. I believe you said you are red-green deficient. So my question is,
What colors do you see the gargoyles as?
Brooklyn?
Hudson?
Lexington?
Broadway?
Kai?

Because you said you thought Goliath was blue, when he really was purple.

Thanks

Greg responds...

See, now this sounds like...

All right.

Brooklyn looks kinda burnt red to me.
Hudson... I don't know. Brown maybe.
Lex... Brown or green.
Broadway... green/blue.
Kai... hell, I don't remember. Blue or purple?

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Lucy Valko writes...

Dear Mr. Weisman!
I am a great fan of your "Gargoyles" and the fact that the show has been stopped still (in 2001!) breaks my heart . Realistically, is there any hope of its ever coming back?

Also, I haven't been in North America in 1997 to see the final (so far...) "Gargoyles" season ("The Goliath Chronicles"), and it's not on the re-runs. Do you know where/how I could get a chance to see the last 13 episodes?

And one final question: the "Gargoyles-Fans" website contains "The Gargoyles Saga" which by plot goes far beyond the last tv episode. Does this Saga have any relation to what the actual show might have been if the series haven't been cancelled?

Thank you for your patience!
PS: PLEASE-PLEASE-PLEASE bring the gargoyles back !!!!
a heart-broken fan :(

Greg responds...

Thanks for being a fan.

Yes, there's hope. For a more complete answer check the ASK GREG archive "Bringing Gargoyles Back".

And no I don't know how to arrange for you to see the Goliath Chronicles. Sorry.

And no, I have nothing to do with The Gargoyles Saga, though I understand they've made use of certain things I have revealed. I haven't even read it.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

icemann writes...

Don`t think this ones been asked be for

Is there any way that technology in the future (2158 and beyond) could bypass the Gargoyles turning to stone? Cause if magic can do it, I can`t see why technology couldn`t replicate the same effect in some way.

Greg responds...

Not by 2198, or 2199 for that matter.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Phil writes...

Greg,

I recently re-watched "Legion" and it sparked some questions in my mind about "Reawakening."

1) Was Coldstone suffering from multiple-personality problems when he first awoke, or did that not start until "Legion" with the Xanatos program or the virus?

2) Was Othello the only one in control through "Reawakening"? He is confused, but only generally. He doesn't forget moment by moment where he is and what he's doing. Also, Desdemona's reaction to the mirror made it seem as though she was "awakening" for the first time in "Legion."

Thanks

Greg responds...

1. He was not, initially, no.

2. Correct. Just Othello in Coldstone's first appearance.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Lord Sloth writes...

Enter Mcbeth:

1) Why does McBeth's stone dungen floor burn so easily? I've never seen Stone burn so well.

2) Did McBeth loose much of importance in the fire, I'd imagin there would be a lot of old magic relics, and the like. b) Did the fire burn Everything he owned? c) Did he build his new house on the ruins of his old one? d)Do you now the history of his old house, is it relivant and will you tell us?

3) Why didn't Owen call Bruno's group, or summon the steel clan, or do something more, when Hudson and Broadway took the Grimorum?

5) Did Mcbeth put Bronx in a seprate cage on purpose cause he thought they would figue out how to get him out? Was he testing them?

6) What did Macbeth tell Xanatos he planed to do with the Gargoyles? b) What did he plan to do with them once he had found their "queen"? c)Did Demona tell Macbeth about Goliath and the spell on him? And then he figured out where she was in NY when the castle was brought there, and know she must be behind it?

6) I just want to be sure this is correct. Lex and Brooklyn didn't think Bronx was strong enough to break open their cage, and Bronx only did it the second time because he had an order from Goliath. Is that all right?

Thank you.

Greg responds...

1. And you may never see it again. Consider yourself lucky.

2. Yes.
b. No. For starters the fire did not spread to Paris, where he also owns a chateau.
c. Yes.
d. Haven't given it one. And it's gone now. The newer one is just a replica.

3. Summon them where?

4. There doesn't seem to be a question four.

5. All went according to plan.

6. He didn't.
b. That would depend on events.
c. Not necessarily.

The second question 6. Bronx had momentum the second time. He could have gathered it the first time, I suppose. But it cost him to break through, so maybe your right. They didn't want to take any chances. Get help while he's free.

You're welcome.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Gipdac writes...

1) Did Titania ever really have any of the fairy attendants like she did in A Midsummer Night's Dream?
2) If so, what happened to them
3) Are any/all of them still alive?
4) Were any/all of them fae?
(My favorite is Mustard Seed)

Greg responds...

1. Yes.
2. My God, has something happened to them?
3. Far as I know.
4. Most.

Mustard Seed is cool.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Justin writes...

Do you have the names of the leaders of these clan's in 2198?

London

Manhattan

Loch Ness

Korea

Japan

Labyrinth

China

Guatemala

Thanks

Greg responds...

Some but not all. And you're welcome.

I am curious as to why you were only curious about eight of the twelve though.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

what does Demona's forehead look like behind that tiara thing she wears? are her brow ridges the same shape as the jewelry or like Angela's brow? Goliath has two small horns over each of his brows and Angela has one, so i'd assume that Demona also has one, am i wrong?

Greg responds...

Take a look at "Sanctuary" and then ask me again, if you need to.

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Airportman writes...

Hey, Greg

This is my first post here, and it's quite lengthy. I've been looking through the archives, and I'm pretty sure this question has never been asked before. But if it has, I honestly don't know what category it would be filed under. It's mainly about who knows what throughout the course of the Gargoyles story.

Nobody in the audience knew anything about Demona and Macbeth's relationship and former lives prior to "City of Stone," but who in the Gargoyles universe, if anyone, knew anything? I've been watching my taped episodes recently and this really stood out at me this time. It's always been the one thing about the show that bothers me.

It really sticks out in "The Price," when Hudson says, "Believe it lads, Macbeth's dead." Later in the episode, Lexington seems genuinely convinced that Macbeth actually is dead, which leads me to believe that he doesn't know about Macbeth's background by that point. However, later in the same episode, Hudson explains to Xanatos, "Demona and Macbeth are immortal. Has it brought them happiness?" Was Hudson simply feeding a line to Lexington? Was Lex not supposed to know about the whole Demona/Macbeth thing? It's wierd, because Elisa also knows about it by the time of "Sanctuary."

That leads me to another question: how does Hudson know? And Goliath for that matter? Who was it that told them about Demona's history? It couldn't have been Xanatos, because he didn't know either until "City of Stone," or he wouldn't have been fooled by Demona's excuse for living so long. I'm actually not too sure Xanatos ever finds out.

I could only think of one way that it could work. Here goes:

In "Temptation," Demona says to Brooklyn, "It's a long story, centuries long." I was thinking that Demona may have told her story to Brooklyn at that point, and that he later told Goliath, who told Hudson and Elisa. In that case, was this privelidged information that Goliath only trusted Elisa, Hudson, and Brooklyn with? This would explain Hudson's behavior in "The Edge," and give Brooklyn a shoe-in for Second in command, but it would not explain Brooklyn's puzzlement about Macbeth's identity in "Enter Macbeth," unless Goliath had told him not to tell Lex and Broadway. However, Goliath clearly has no clue who Macbeth is at that point. Could Brooklyn have told him later? Lex clearly knows about Demona's immortality by the time "Hunter's Moon" rolls around, so I was thinking that Brooklyn may have decided that it was necessary to tell Broadway and Lex everything when he was leader.

I don't think Macbeth would have told Broadway his story in "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time," when Broadway was tied up in his jet or at his mansion; the timing seemed all wrong.

So I guess what my question boils down to is this:

When did the clan first learn about Demona's past, and her relationship with Macbeth, and am I on the right track with the whole Brooklyn idea?

By the way, Gargoyles is my favorite show. It still amazes me how you were able to weave such an intricate story about such real characters, and teach real life lessons about vengeance, tolerance, family, reconciliation, and so much more, all within the confines of a childrens' cartoon. This was truly a story that made full use of its own medium, and made strong points about life. I believe that Gargoyles is probably the most beneficial and educational childrens' programming I have ever seen, in terms of teaching life lessons, and I too am completely disgusted that Toon Disney won't air "Deadly Force." Thank you for reading this long ramble of mine, and also for providing the best television program to date.

Greg responds...

Thank you.

I definitely have gone through this before. So it's somewhere in the archives. Like in the Macbeth archive or Demona most likely. I'm afraid you're on the wrong track, mostly because you are taking the word "Immortality" too literally. It's used in different ways in different places.

1. In "The Price", Hudson does know that Macbeth and Demona have been alive a LONG time. That makes them Immortal on at least one level. When he says immortal in this one, he's only referring to their obviously long life spans. But at this time, he doesn't know about their link, their inability to die unless one kills the other. The fact that they've lived that long might only mean that they've never been killed and have some kind of eternal youth spell or something. So Hudson can believe that Macbeth has FINALLY died when the first robot bites the dust.

2. After the Weird Sisters are captured in "Avalon, Part Three", they are (off-screen) forced to reveal the link between Demona and Macbeth, i.e the terms of their immortality. So at that point, a bunch of people know the truth, particularly Goliath, Elisa and Angela.

3. So by "Sanctuary", Elisa knows. And clearly, Demona has also told Thailog.

4. When Goliath, Elisa, Bronx and Angela return to NYC in "The Gathering, Part One" and after they have time to sit down and relate their adventures (between "The Gathering, Part Two" and "Vendettas"), they relate the Demona/Macbeth story to Hudson and the Trio. So now most of the cast is up to speed.

Mystery solved?

Response recorded on September 09, 2001

Bookmark Link

Paranoia... possibly.

So maybe it's me...

But lately I've been feeling like people are popping in to ASK GREG with the deliberate intent of catching me in a mistake or inconsistency. Like they are trying to trip me up.

If not, my apologies.

But if so... CUT IT OUT, OKAY!!!!

It's just not much fun for me.

And before anyone else gets personally paranoid, this isn't directed at any one person. I've just had this general sense that somehow this is the new contest here. Who can make Greg look stupid. Believe me guys, I don't need much help in that department.

If you have a legitimate question you're curious about, then ask away. But if you're just posting to make me look foolish and/or to prove that the show wasn't perfect... well, how 'bout I just acknowledge both things here and now, and we let that drop.

Okay?


Bookmark Link

matt writes...

both Proto-Mammals and Dinosaurs evolved from Reptiles. Proto-Mammals were very reptilian, but with some very Mammalian characteristics. they laid eggs, but probably nursed their young sometimes too. they lived at the beginning of the age of dinosaurs and most are considered "dinosaurs' in a very broad way, though scientifically they are not. Proto-Mammals would go on to evolve into mammals and what i'm wondering is if they also went to evolve into Gargates. from everything i know and you've told us, they fit the profile. some, like Dimetrodon, even had primative solar radiaters which could have evolved into the ability to store solar energy. in fact, Dimetrodon looks very similar to a garg beast to me, with a sail. i once asked you if gargs were related to Platypus cause of the varied similarities they have, and if Gargates did evolve from Proto-mammals than they were related since platypus is one of the few remaining Proto-Mammals not extinct. are proto-mammals the ancestors of gargates?

Greg responds...

matt, how many ways can I say I DON'T KNOW enough about biology to answer this question?

You're theory (assuming the facts are accurate) is interesting. So... MAYBE!

Before I say yes, I'd have to do a lot of research that I haven't yet done.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Denis writes...

Hello, Greg!
First thing first, thank you for your explanation about OTS.

Now to the "main course", I'm wondering, since Team Atlantis got axed, can you answer question related to the series?

Greg responds...

Some.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Did Mab have any children besides Oberon? If so are they more or less powerful than Oberon?

Greg responds...

Not answering this now.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Was it intentional to make Nick Maza similar to Captain of the Guard since both are described by you in the Garg bible and the 2198 contest as much like a gargoyle as a human can be?

Greg responds...

You're taking that too literally.

I was actually trying to connect Nick up to Tom, thematically.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

since Fox has twice as much Children of Oberon blood in her as Alex and Alex has managed to live til 2198 would Fox herself still be alive in 2198?

Greg responds...

Not revealing one way or another.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Punchinello writes...

Mr. Weisman,

I'm sorry I did not acknowledge your response before now. I only realized that you had addressed my post on sentience a moment ago.

I did not really think that you condoned the obliteration of a family of polar bears (anthropomorphic or otherwise). I was raising the issue because I think I am observing a trend wherein people are only assigning value to a life based upon an inference of anthropomorphism. That is to say, some people are investing their ethical concern in something based upon how much it resembles a human being; and this is hardly an objective premise to begin with. Semblance to human beings, mental or otherwise, can not constitute a requirement for being worthy of consideration or protection. However I do believe that it is reasonable to assign values based upon certain criteria from within our own perspectives (it's the only thing we can assign values from) as long as we make a concerted effort to avoid an obviously centrist sentiment like using ourselves as a template for what is worth consideration.

If someone were to ask me what criteria I thought were appropriate, I would probably return to what has already been implied. Intelligence. Emotional intuition. Volition. And a whole host of perceptual characteristics. Those things from which emerge a picture of mental life. Perhaps an ability to suffer and to anticipate conditions which cause or alleviate suffering, and to desire to distance ones self from a cause of it. However, if we are going to determine the presence of those capacities with nothing but purely verifiable data, then we fall in league with the evolutionary psychologists foundation of mental within the biological. And the biological machinery necessary to mediate these abilities is certainly not the exclusive domain of Homo Sapiens. (I _do_ subscribe to the evolutionary psychologist foundation by the way. I like to have data I can verify beyond "it is true because it is so.")

For a lot of people though, these emergent mental properties are always considered as something transcendent of biology, immeasurable, even inviolate, because I have observed others react with hostility to the reduction of mental qualities to biology. On numerous occasions. Thinking that way leads to all kinds of misunderstandings, however. Another contributor to this board, Entity, had taken the position that humans and gorillas were intelligent but dogs were not. I found this extremely interesting because even outside the realm of biological architectures in the brain I could use as a foundation for taking the evolutionary psychologist position, it needs to be acknowledged that even within social psychology dogs are attributed a measurable intelligence. It's not extraordinary. My dog has an IQ of 12 or so for instance. And of course these kinds of figures are disputable, because it really requires the participation of the test subject past his simple presence to get accurate results. I would submit that the whole concept of IQ as it is accepted within the social sciences borders on being fraudulent anyway. The point is that the ascription of non-intelligence that was made about the dog was arbitrary. It was not informed by the physical _or_ social sciences. It was just an assumption. And that kind of casual valuization can be dangerous when it functions as the basis for how much respect we offer another. This is not a slight against this Entity. I'm just using this as an example to outline the stated purpose of my original post. If people are going to hold these positions they maintain, then they need to ask themselves why they have that particular belief. If they have this mental dialogue with themselves and they cannot answer that first question, then it is time to evaluate how much their beliefs represent reality.

____________________________________________________________________________
I'm probably as guilty as anyone of overusing, or rather overbilling the issue of "sentience". I think the concept has its uses. But it's probably used as a crutch too often.
____________________________________________________________________________

I would agree. I think of it as a crutch of language. Some people subscribe to an ideology that is a holdover from religious impulses. It maintains that the mantle of "human" is sacred and unapproachable. They need to define what the quality of "human" is that makes it thus, without any background knowledge of cognitive science so that it fits their sensibilities. They can adopt the hazily defined expression, "sentience", imported from popular culture, via star trek, to articulate their position. For some others, the mental capacities of non human animals may be very well understood. They may acknowledge capacities for reflection and emotion, but they still need a convenient means of distinguishing various abilities. So an imprecise language becomes common.

Greg responds...

Agreed. And I'll also admit that your thinking on this subject is much more sophisiticated than mine has been.

I think a lot of how we are defining sentience does come down to the "Potential for Direct Communication", which is of course a fairly preposterous criteria.

On the other hand, if it is truly another hand, I don't think these ideas are mutually exclusive with notions of religion. Dog heaven, man. You know?

And don't worry about not getting back to me sooner. As I'm sure you've noticed, there's something of a delay going on in this whole system. I have trouble keeping up with the posts here. So as long as you remind me of what we were talking about, we should be fine.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

in the gargoyles universe, why did the chicken cross the road?

i'm not telling a joke, i'm looking for an answer. i swear theres a good one here somewhere... and this will keep me busy til the next contest!

Greg responds...

To find out how many gargoyles it takes to screw in a lightbulb, I guess.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #111 - #135 of 292 records. : 25 » : Last » :