A Station Eight Fan Web Site
A few Questions All about VInnie! ^_^
1. Jeff Bennett did Vinnie's voice, however were there any times when he did not do the character's voice? (For example, in "Awakenings" The very first time we see Vinnie is on his motorcycle. That yell that Vinnie does when he sees Lexington, is that Jeff's voice yelling or someone else?)
2. If the above is yes, who did Vinnie's voice as well as Jeff?
3. In the series, is Vinnie single, or is there a 'special someone' in his life?
4. How long did he work at each of his respective jobs for?
Thankyou so much Greg! ^_^
1. I don't recall. It wouldn't surprise me if it was Jeff.
2. No one did "Vinnie's voice" except Jeff. But if you're talking about a grunt here and there, it's possible someone else might have done the character before we knew the character was Vinnnie. In which case, I definitely don't recall. But odds are Jeff was still doing those grunts.
3. He's available. (Didn't I just answer this?)
4. Well... I don't have my timeline here to give you the exact length of his tenure at Gen-U-Tech, but it was clearly short. I haven't given any thought as to how long he worked at Cyberbiotics before being fired.
No clue where you're going to file this one, probably "Random Stuff," since JEM seems like the only project you've done that doesn't have its own category *sniffle*
(no, it's OK, really)
Anyway, there's one thing I've always wanted to know regarding your "Video Wars" episode. Do you remember how it was decided which song would be reused from the existing song library? I'm referring to "Like A Dream," which appears in Act One. That song has the distinction of having appeared THREE times in the series, and in the case of "Video Wars," what the song's about isn't crucial to the plot. Why use that song a third time when there were others that hadn't even been used twice?
It's OK if you don't remember this. But it's bugged me for years.
However, it is worth nothing that both the other occurences were in episodes written by Christy Marx. While Roger story edited the first episode that song appears in (and also story edited your & Cary's episode), Christy Marx story edited herself on the other episode. Maybe they just didn't manage to compare notes as to what had been used.
I'm going to ask Christy for her take too, but sometimes her memory's lousy on the fine points.
We didn't decide anything about the songs. As we were instructed, our scripts would stop and say something like: SONG GOES HERE. We'd sort of describe what needed to happen in the song, but that's it. And we were aware that whenever possible, they'd reuse.
And just for you I'll give JEM its own category. But keep in mind, all I did for that series was co-write one episode freelance. I know almost nothing about it.
is 'N'Kai' the name for Nokkar's species, tribe, military branch, religious group, race, or something else? i'd assume its his species like everyone else is doing, but never have i seen you say or write that that is his species...
Okay..I have to ask because I'm really curious. <:)
Greg, why did you choose Pukhan in Korea? Is it because of its location geographically (being at the southern tip of the Korean penninsuula), or maybe because of people population? Or because the the event during the Korean war that took place there? Or maybe just because it sounded cool? ^_^;;
Not saying now.
What kind of music you think Brooklyn would like?
Brooklyn seems like a rocker to me.
Is it safe (and corrected) to say that we haven't met either of Oberon and Titania's two children on screen?
Yes. As far as I know.
after the Wyvern Massacre, why didn't Hakon and his men just stay at Wyvern? it would've been way easier to defend than his campsite, the gargoyles were destroyed. why not just camp in the castle? and even if he did know that some gargs probably survived, its still easier to defend yourself from in the castle from gargs, isn't it?
The castle was burning.
I think also, frankly, he was spooked.
Have you ever watched Reboot, Beast Wars or War Planets? What did you think of them?
Reboot is fun.
Haven't seen the other two. (Well, I've seen a clip here and there, but never an entire episode.)
What do you think of the work of John Ostrander(Spectre, Firestorm and Hawkman), Walt Simonson(Orion and Thor), John Byrne the King of Retcons, J. Michael Straczynski(Babylon 5, Ghostbusters the cartoon and Captain Power and the Soldiers of the Future) and Harlan Ellison
Keep in mind, I haven't read comics since 1996.
John's work I generally love. Loved his Grimjack especially. Liked his Spectre. Didn't much care for his Firestorm. Hawkman seemed to have potential, but... The one thing of his that I really disliked was the issues of Captain Atom he did right after I left. I really feel he didn't get the character. But of course, I'm biased.
LOVED Walt Simonson's Thor. Loved it. Don't think I saw his take on Orion.
Byrne -- Loved his work on Fantastic Four. Didn't care for his Superman at all.
Straczynski (is that spelled right?) - I didn't care for the original pilot of Babylon 5. So I didn't watch that show. By the time people mentioned that it was great and I tuned in, I'm afraid I couldn't make heads or tails of what was going on. Didn't see the other things you've mentioned.
Harlan - is a master.
if Demona had destroyed Owen as a statue as she almost did twice in "City of Stone" what would've happened to Puck? would he have died? could he have recreated Owen if he did live?
He'd have died.
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. ;)
This has been asked before, and it wasn't them. Since they appear again in later episodes.
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?
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?
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?
1. No. Not all. Just the major ones.
2. I'm not telling.
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?
Seriously, I don't feel like telling you.
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.
That's great. But I'm not an artist. Can't draw worth a darn. (I said darn because your son is only three.)
Why do you dislike Terminator 2? Was it because of the time travel?
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.
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!
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.
Are there any series you have produced or created that you like more than others? Maybe you could write your three favourite ones.
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.
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?
Because you said you thought Goliath was blue, when he really was purple.
See, now this sounds like...
Brooklyn looks kinda burnt red to me.
Hudson... I don't know. Brown maybe.
Lex... Brown or green.
Kai... hell, I don't remember. Blue or purple?
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 :(
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.
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.
Not by 2198, or 2199 for that matter.
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."
1. He was not, initially, no.
2. Correct. Just Othello in Coldstone's first appearance.
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?
1. And you may never see it again. Consider yourself lucky.
b. No. For starters the fire did not spread to Paris, where he also owns a chateau.
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.
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)
2. My God, has something happened to them?
3. Far as I know.
Mustard Seed is cool.
Do you have the names of the leaders of these clan's in 2198?
Some but not all. And you're welcome.
I am curious as to why you were only curious about eight of the twelve though.
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?
Take a look at "Sanctuary" and then ask me again, if you need to.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
Did Mab have any children besides Oberon? If so are they more or less powerful than Oberon?
Not answering this now.
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?
You're taking that too literally.
I was actually trying to connect Nick up to Tom, thematically.
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?
Not revealing one way or another.
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.
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.
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!
To find out how many gargoyles it takes to screw in a lightbulb, I guess.
Which character do you feel is most like you, or closely resembles you physically and/or mentally?
None really resembles me physically, I think. But many of you have seen me at Gatherings. Do you agree?
As for mentally... if you took ALL the characters and squashed them together you'd get me, I think.
You mentioned you were in a play called THE WARRIOR'S HUSBAND and played Theseus. Could you tell us what it was about?
Sure. Although, keep in mind, that I was in this play over twenty years ago. So I may be misremembering stuff. I'd recommend hitting a library and reading it for yourself. It's by Julian Thompson.
But anyway... Hercules and Theseus attack the Amazons to get the girdle of Hippolyta, which Herc needs to complete his ninth labor. Homer is along to report on the action.
Hercules is very strong and carries a big club, but is neither bright nor brave in this play. Theseus is smart and cunning and good with a sword. He likes to let Herc stand up as the front man, while he makes things work behind the scenes. He's used to getting his way.
The Greeks come up against the Amazon Queen Hippolyta and her younger sister Princess Antiope. All the Amazon men are pretty wimpy. The title character is an Amazon man named Sapiens, Hippolyta's husband. He gains backbone as the play progresses.
Theseus and Antiope do battle. Antiope is very turned on to find a man who can hold his own with her. Theseus, used to just getting what he wants, is also knocked for a loop to find an equal in this woman. They fall in love. Together, they end the war. Herc gets a girdle. Not THE girdle, but everyone figures no one will notice the difference. It ends happily.
It's a bit of fluff, but I remember really liking it. Fun fluff. (It probably didn't hurt that in rehearsing the kiss between Antiope and Theseus, Elizabeth and I sort of discovered that we liked each other. As a result, we were boyfriend and girlfriend throughout my senior year of high school. So, as you can imagine, my memories of the play are rather fond.) Elizabeth also recently reminded me that David Schwimmer, now of FRIENDS, played Giganius the Herald.
FYI, Katharine Hepburn played Antiope in the original Broadway cast.
And thanks for asking this question. It makes me very nostalgic.
in The Mirror when the are in that plaza and battling Demona as humans, why is there a shop selling medieval weopons? Demona breaks a store window and all of a sudden the clan starts grabbing swords, sheilds, maces, spears, axes... why are those in NYC?
They just are. Have you been to New York? They sell all sorts of things there.
1. when Recap downloaded the computer virus through the taser line from Coldstone, why didn't the virus destroy recaps programming?
2. when Coldstone first arrives at the Clocktower with Goliath and Lex, Bronx is growling at him. why? Iago has yet to take control of Coldstone. does Bronx just hate the cybernetics of Coldstone or does he sense the evil one or something?
1. It destroyed much of Recap's programming. But keep in mind, Xanatos knew what he was after. So he got the virus working on a loop of some kind so that it wouldn't SELF-destruct.
2. I'd have to see it again.
Broadway bring back Maggie's Genutech bracelet after they first encounter her and Elisa says its a tracking device. doesn't that mean that Genutech knows where they went with it? is this how Xanatos found their new home? why wasn't the clan worried about bringing a tracking device into their home? seems kinda foolish to me, esspecially in light of what would happen with a tracking device in Hunters Moon!
I'm fairly certain that Broadway says it's busted now. (But perhaps I'm confusing it with another episode.)
in Metamorphosis Elisa and Matt show up at Genutech to investigate a kidnapping. whose kidnapping are they investigateing? i wouldn't think it was Maggie cuz i don't know who would report her as missing, and why would they think to look for anyone at Genutech anyway?
I'd have to see it again, but I think they were investigating Maggie on Brooklyn and Broadway's tip. (Obvioulsy, Elisa must have been circumspect about what she revealed to Matt and the folk at Gen-U-Tech.)
why did you decide to redo the look of the Mutates after Metamorphosis? esspecially Talon, his hair got smoother and darker, he lost his tail, and all the Mutates gained retinas in their eyes, not just white like Bronx's. and yes, he did have a tail!
2. in the garg universe do you have an explanation for the change in appearence? like perhaps they were still mutating? i don't know how that explains gaining a tail then losing it...
1. I didn't. Frank did. I just didn't object.
2. Yes. They were still mutating. That's why I didn't object. It was absorbed back into their bodies as their human dna regained some ascendency.
I just reviewed what I have written here. It's so formal it's almost offensive. I'm sorry. I don't think one can talk about issues like this without sounding (obtuse? Stuffy? Something like that.) And not a word about Gargoyles.
Let me leave the realm of animal intelligence's for a minute and consider the intelligence of some of the more fantastical characters in your story. The fae. When I think about this kind of (ethereal?) character, these are the kinds of associations that I make.
-The thought of angels moves faster than human thought. (I don't recall where that comes from)
-A four dimensional object or being will cast a three dimensional shadow. (That's an observation Buckminster Fuller made.)
-A being that cannot die will have no concept of death, and certainly will not attach values, positive or negative, to the ending of a life. (This is a condensed and bastardized summary of some of the speculation of extraterrestrial intelligence's that participants of the SETI program publicized.)
I hope some of the above makes sense. My thinking is this. That the content of fae thought/mentality may be fundamentally different from homo sapiens thinking. Not just an accelerated or enhanced analogue of human thought, but structurally different. Our mental world is the emergent condition of innumerable biological systems interacting with one another. I have no reason to conclude that the fae's intelligence emerges from anything reductionist in nature. It is a condition that exists without origin in biology (potentially). Everything that we think of as intelligence rests on an evolutionary foundation of connections to allow us to successfully distinguish between things we can eat and things that will eat us. It would be absurd to think that the fae (who I don't think were subject to natural selection through predation) would have an intelligence structured upon the same principles. Simple alternative concepts like "either or" may not have the same meaning to them. This could go far towards explaining why they are so damned irritating.
My second thought on the matter, in reference to the three dimensional shadow concept, is that the visual representation we get of the fae in the story may be a poor representation of the reality. I use the concept of a hypothetical four dimensional being to illustrate. A two dimensional being could be aware of my presence if I allowed it to, although it would be a simple matter to remove myself from it's perception with a minor movement. However it's awareness could not give it a complete representation of what I am. It could only understand me as a fragment that can be translated into something comprehensible within the context of it's world. I can easily attribute an extra dimensional quality to beings like Oberon and Puck who seem o appear and disappear at will. We might not be able to understand completely, what they are. Only that the portion of them that is represented in three dimensions resembles a group of tall, angular, oddly complexioned people in period costume.
My third observation of the fae, and in particular of Oberon who has demonstrated a dispassionate distance to killing his rivals in certain instances, is that he may have no concept of murder because he may have no concept of death. (Yes I know that he reacted to the iron bell in such a way that would indicate it was harmful to him. Even lethal.) However, even if he were to express a concept of death we would not be able to be certain that his concept was anything like our concept. Does death mean an end for him? If it does not, then the gravity we attach to it may be lost on him and the other fae.
I think my point is that while it would certainly not be appropriate to think of a creature like this in human terms, i'm not even certain you can extrapolate "human" from him. There could be creatures, so far removed from human experience that it would be impossible. Of course, the associations that I make with the fae are not going to be the same ones that you make. Your concept of them may fall within human experience. You have other creatures though. Your space spawn. They would certainly have been subject to mental dispositions grounded in a different biology. We're conditioned with the genetic remainders of our hunter gatherer ancestors. They would be conditioned with something else. I dont know what. Something spawny probably.
Spawny. I like that.
Play with these ideas:
1. I believe that Oberon's Children evolved from the Will-O-the-Wisp.
2. I believe that they can die, as completely or not as any human. But they can't die of old age, unless they stubbornly insist on maintaining a mortal form until it kills them. They are therefore, acutally, technically mortal themselves, but don't truly comprehend mortality (if that makes sense). So they like to pretend they are fully immortal, fully untouchable. (Well, that's a generalization, really. Individuals may vary.)
3. I don't necessarily believe that we have seen the true form of any of Oberon's Children. We have seen 'preferred forms', but not anything that isn't just as much of a guise as any other shape they've taken on.
4. When they transform into a mortal of whatever species -- as opposed to just taking on the glamour of a mortal -- they are bound by all the rules of that species, save ONE. They can transform back.
5. I don't find them as irritating as you seem to.
Anyway, play with those five notions and get back to me.
Do you think that the the music in "the Green" was a bit over done when we first saw the pyramid? I think they had seen seen a few other more impressive sights, like egypt's pyramids, and Easter Island's heads. I'm not complaining, just wondering why the music was so dramatic.
Well, I'd have to look at it again, I guess.
But probably, my answer would be "NO." After all, I was present when we mixed the show and I must have approved the music at that time.
1. from where did Gabriel inherit his chin horns and strange brow ridges? neither Othello or Desdemona have them, are these traits recessive from a biological grandparent(s)?
2. any reason why Iago is the only other garg to have the chin horns besides Gabriel?
3. what does Ophelia find physically attractive about Gabriel?
4. doesn't Gabriel have any close male friends?
5. is the reason Gabriel was the only male garg we were introduced to on Avalon because so many of the main characters up til "Avalon" were male, esspecially gargoyles?
1. Potentially. (Again, I'd ask you, what answer did you think I'd give?)
2. The only other one you've seen, you mean.
3. Probably lots.
4. I'm sure he does.
5. Mostly, it's about time limits and design limits. Just the reality of making television.
It brings me to another distinction: the one between sentience and artificial intelligence. Coyote, for instance, can throw a zinger, but is he self-aware? I don't think he is. Xanatos hasn't achieved (or would wish to achieve) that much, has he?
I don't know anything about computer technology past it's relationship to cognitive studies into artificial intelligence. There is a lot of dispute about the possibility of an actual computer intelligence. I'm not competent to say if the possibility is real but I would not discount it. I can see numerous avenues for foundations for intelligence besides the neurochemical variety. Incidentally, I once took a Turing test...and failed. I was delighted.
I don't know what a "Turing test" is. Sorry.
I believe that in the Gargoyles Universe that artificial intelligence is truly possible. I just don't think any Coyote robot we've seen has truly achieved it yet.
Matrix may be closer.
1. in Leader of the Pack when the clan learns from Elisa that the Pack escaped from prison Lex wants to head off to PMS cuz he thinks they'll return there like "snakes to a nest", Goliath and Elisa try to stop him and then Brooklyn says he'll go with Lex to PMS to check it out. what gives Brooklyn the authority to just run off with Lex like that, hes not yet Second and he never asks Goliath or anyone if they can go?
2. what does "snakes to a nest" mean anyway? from what i know of snakes, they all abandon their eggs completly or stay with their eggs until they hatch.
1. Look, these guys have been working together for awhile. Brooklyn makes the offer (whether he phrases it that way or not), and Goliath tacitly accepts. What's going on here, primarily, is that everyone is aware that Lex is out of control. Elisa (and thus Goliath and Brooklyn and everyone) don't believe that the Studio is a likely place for the Pack to go to. So Brooklyn goes along to keep Lex out of trouble at a theoretically harmless location.
2. Ask the writer. I was just the producer.
1. did Dingo meet up with Coyote for the first time when he was in Europe or was it when he returned to the States?
2. how well did Dingo know Coyote? did he know that it was 'Xanatos'?
1. That's a story for another day.
2. Not well. No.
1. does Coyote from Upgrade still have the memories of his original version from Leader of the Pack?
2. since the head of Coyote Version 1 was destroyed in Version 2 does Version 3 or 4 still have the memories of Version 1 and 2?
what i'm asking is, did each Coyote Version that Xnatos built have a completly blank memory to start with or were the memories from the previous Coyotes passed on.
and i agree that with all these Coyotes, Coyote was probably a relative of Wile E. Coyote.
And that was the idea.
Is the reason you created the clone's differn't skin, eyes and hair pigmintation, because you didn't want another cartoon where your trying to figure out which one is the real Goliath or Lexington? Or at least not overdue it since this happend latter with Proteus?
I liked Thailog's look. It was partially inspired by the changes that John Byrne made to the Fantastic Four's costumes in the eighties.
But yes. Though we played the beat for a couple of acts, I didn't want to do EVIL TWIN takes the place of the good guy and confuses everyone. Once Thailog was revealed, there wasn't any question as to who was who. Just seemed a more original take on the old clone idea. What do the rest of you think?
(And Proteus had nothing to do with it. At the time we were creating Thailog, I didn't yet know that I was going to insert The New Olympians into the Garg Universe.)