A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Behind the Scenes

Archive Index


: « First : « 250 : « 25 : Displaying #344 - #368 of 536 records. : 25 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

aXvXia writes...

I just found DEADLY FORCE on video: you were right in your notes, it was aboslutely a gorgeous episode to look at. I almost cried. The gargoyles are so real, so emotional, so angry, it just gets to me... especially Goliath. It is obvious to the audience that he loves Elisa here. (i think that's what you wanted.) Thank you for the beautiful episode. After I saw it, i wrote an essay to the Toon Disney personnel about the message of this episode and why i think it would be wonderful if they aired it.
THe reply i got was cursory and almost smart-ass. They told me that it wasn't in "its(the episode's) contract." CONTRACT??! what contract?? ARRGH
anyways, i tried. now for a quick question, and i checked the archives on this one and I didn't find it. Please, Please tell me you have the information on this one at home: How old was Elisa in 1996? the last time i submitted this question you said you didn't have that information available...

Thanks anyways,
aXvXia, age 13

Greg responds...

Someone else just posted Elisa's age.

The Contract thing is just bull of course. Their S&P department won't allow them to air the episode. Toon Disney execs told me that. They're shining you.

Response recorded on September 25, 2000

Bookmark Link

White writes...

I got a verry tricky question now... I noticed in many cartoons * including gargoyles * that reruns always differ from the first time they pass on tv. ( I'm french and having trouble making that question clear... omg !!! )
Ok ok... here's an example :
in the episode Awakening 2, when Xanatos's *employees* attack the castle... one of them throws a granade at Goliath and Hudson I beleive... he shouted :"CATCH".
When that episode played again on tv the voice wasn't the same and he didn't shouted it.

Same thing with the "MOVE NOW" of Awakening 1.

How come ??? * do they record the sound twice or do they correct things they don't like after showing it once ??? )

sorry for the long question. You forgive me ?

Greg responds...

1. We sometimes do correct animation errors after the first airing if we didn't have time to correct them before. But not voices. What you're describing sounds very odd. Are you sure you're not comparing the "movie/video" version to the tv version?

Or maybe this was done for the French versions only? I don't know.

Response recorded on September 25, 2000

Bookmark Link

David Zevin writes...

Hi Greg, I am a huge fan of the Gargoyles series. It's hands down the best written/plotted series I've ever watched (cartoon or other). I recently graduated University of Southern California Film School. I am currently looking for work as an assistant editor. Any advice you might have on getting into the industry and/or breaking into the editor's union would be greatly appreciated. By the way, where was Gargoyles edited? Do you happen to know if was union? Thanks.

Greg responds...

Gargoyles was of course edited at Disney first by Elen Orson, than by Susan Edmonson, and finally by Bob Birchard who did most of the second season. It was union. Unfortuntately, I have no idea how one gets into the editors union. Can't they tell you that at S.C.?

Response recorded on September 25, 2000

Bookmark Link

DrFaust writes...

I always thought it was interesting we could see the targeting lasers of Xanatos' particle weapons actually
moving through space.

So I'm wondering, is the speed of light in the "Gargoyles" universe different than "our" universe?

Greg responds...

artistic license.

Response recorded on September 21, 2000

Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

Before I say anything, I'd like to apologize for the impersonalness of my last two guesses for the Clans Contest (about a dozen posts previous). I just figured a preamble was unnecessary, but looking back, it feels cold.

Anyway, I wanted to ask about the unrealized Tibetan adventure. Did it have to do with:

1) Religion
2) Politics/Current Events
3) One of Oberon's Children

Also, how far did it get in development before it was canned?

The revelation that this story was cut for episode volume is disheartening, especially since we won't get another World Tour, even if the show returns.

Greg responds...

1. No.
2. No.
3. No.

At Disney it was just a springboard. It never went any further than that. But it wasn't canned. We just decided that we had other stronger stories to tell.

I later wrote it as a comic book story for Marvel's GARGOYLES comic book. But the book got cancelled before the story was published.

Don't be disheartened, it'll see the light of day sometime. It was already a flashback story when I wrote it for Marvel.

Response recorded on September 14, 2000

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

One other tidbit on that description of Morgan (the prototype for Elisa) that occurred to me. Her bio mentions that she dressed up as Guinevere for Halloween. And you mentioned that in the early stages of development for "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time", other members of the production team had suggested having Elisa dress up as Guinevere, although you nixed that one. I wonder if that notion might have been another carryover from the original comedy development now. (One reason why these behind-the-scenes looks are so fascinating).

Greg responds...

I don't think so. Because Brynne, Michael and Lydia weren't involved in the show back in those days. And I'm quite sure they never read those old memos.

So I think they must have come up with that (nixed) idea independently.

Response recorded on September 09, 2000

Bookmark Link

Laura 'ad astra' Ackerman writes...

I read _Viewing Violence_ which came to me attention from your comments. First off I would like to [publicly] compliment you on your modesty. You said she described Gargoyles (specifically Deadly Force) as an example of violence portrayed responsibly. That is an understatement- it was the ONLY such example she gave in cartoondom, and, at least for the first half of the book, non-educational children's program in general. That far I had seen her recommend just three television shows highly and without reservation, and those were Sesame St, Mr. Rogers and Gargoyles. Next up was Barney; its banality outweighed by its gentleness. Then Star Trek for its optimism; but only for children old enough to have truly begun to differentiate between fantasy and reality. Later she praised a host of the less pointlessly caustic family sit-coms ranging from Full House, to the Cosby Show to Roseanne that she felt dealt with the smaller day to day issues young children have to learn. Gargoyles got as much positive attention as ET and Stand By Me.

She did seem to put Gargoyles in the wrong chapter, although she probably did so to deal with cartoons as one unit. At that point she was dealing with shows appropriate for the very young before they have a sense of either fantasy versus reality or long-term perspective. Gargoyles fits into the next age group in which she felt it worthwhile to demand exactly what episodes like Deadly Force gave: real consequences.

Another thing the book had pointed out to me was the prevailing pessimism of today. I knew that crime has been dropping to all time lows and yet people are not feeling safe, but I had never connected it to entertainment so directly. [I had thought of violent media as symptomatic not causal, now I think it is both.] It made me stop and realize (among other things) that Gargoyles, despite its wonderful moodiness and difficult issues managed to be an optimistic series. Considering it is a series that starts with a massacre and has several powerful episodes that end on very low notes (ex. Metamorphosis, Sanctuary, etc) it is quite an accomplishment.

The author did not seem a fan of animation. In fact she seemed to think that little had changed since back when cartoons were more blatantly just merchandising and 'moral messages' were simplistic and tacked on. She did not seem to think about adult audiences being a big issue with cartoons, and didn't deal with other cartoons that might have strong adult fan followings. [Well..., she did say she didn't like X-Men.] Considering all that, I find it more impressive that she dedicated so much time to Gargoyles. It is impressive to have won her praise despite her bias, and given her focus on only young audiences, a good sign that the official target audience was well served.

While I did not agree with some of what she said, the book did make me think a bit more carefully about what I choose to watch.

Here is where I get totally subjective:
I really wish that Disney paid more intention to such things. I had enjoyed the Disney Afternoon increasingly leading up to Gargoyles, but less so after. In my opinion the following shows slid from respectable to hit or miss and finally to disappointing. Ultimately they ceased to be the most impressive force in Tv cartoons. [Now WB has taken over despite its over reliance on Pokemon. Fox is pushing hard, and the Cartoon Network grows stronger and stronger.]

I know that Disney is a business first and foremost, and I do not begrudge them being profitable- in fact I wish them great prosperity, but they do market themselves as Americana and a responsible influence on the country and world youth. I think they succeed most when they stay true to that vision. When they place profitability before vision instead of second or at most equal to it, the results are often formulaic and forgettable. I would have liked Disney to nurture and give time to Gargoyles above and beyond other offerings precisely because it was of such a high quality. It was a departure and radical in some ways, but in others, specifically the ways that _Viewing Violence_ spoke about, a logical extension of what Disney is all about. Still, I do realize that other times Disney has taken the high road profitability took years to become evident. The initial Fantasia was considered a flop, and I am very curious how well Fantasia 2000 did financially. Television is not a forgiving medium, and cartoons are very expensive.

In hindsight I can say Disney chose the wrong approach because it meant backing away from animation just before so many other studios were getting interested and anime influenced offerings were becoming mainstream. I realize some of it had to do with major broadcasting changes- namely acquiring ABC and the rise the WB as a network with its own competing programming, but I wonder, especially now that Disney tries to market Toon Disney, if there aren't execs slapping their foreheads and shaking their heads over some of the decisions made over the last few years. And if those execs exist, are they thinking, "How did we lose that advantage?" without a real sense of what they did to lose it, or are they looking at specific shows and saying, "that was real quality, why did we let that go?" Truth be told, the failure to are Deadly Force makes the second seem unlikely.

By now I have turned my praise relating to the book to a ramble, so I will stop.

Greg responds...

I like Madeline Levine's book too. In fact, I like Madeline. Certain things were a revelation to me. Others, I believe, she got dead wrong. I've since talked to her about many of those things, and the funny thing is I think I changed her mind about a few of them.

But she was good to Gargoyles. And that came from the show itself. I didn't meet her until after she had made her decision about it. I seem to recall she's a big LAW AND ORDER fan too.

Anyway, about current Disney Execs... well, for starters, there has been so much turnover at Disney that I don't think they have any sense or knowledge of the company's own history... at least with regards to TV Animation. So that precludes a lot of "historical insight". But I see a pendulum starting to swing back, and I'm hoping we'll be there to capitalize on it and get our show back in business.

Response recorded on September 06, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bråndeewine writes...

on 08-19-00, you said, "But FYI, we didn't have lackluster ratings our first two years. They were solid, strong ratings. They just didn't beat Power Ranger's ratings."

Uhh.... Gargoyles was lost to us, due to POWER RANGERS?!?!?! I Think I'll go throw up now.

Greg responds...

Join the club.

Response recorded on September 02, 2000

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

In your first season Gargoyles Bible, you raised the question of whether gargoyles fought in the Battle of Britain, a notion that eventually became "M.I.A." in the second season. This indicates that the notion of gargoyles protecting London from the Germans in 1940 was one that you'd had quite early on in the history of making the series.

Is there any particular reason why you had thought of gargoyles as participants in the Battle of Britain?

Greg responds...

It was cool.

(I know that's not too deep, but that's the truth.)

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Marjorie Harris writes...

I am a huge fan, and because of my work schedule, I rarely get to watch the show. I met Keith David on the street, and his brother is a neighbor mine, and I think he is cast well for the voice of Goliath. I no longer have cable and was wondering when does the show (if at all) on regular television. I know UPN here in NEw York plays many of the Disney cartoons, in the AM. I am in New York City, when and where does the show air here?

Thanks for your help!

Marjorie

Greg responds...

Well, to be honest, I have no idea. But I think the answer is, it doesn't. As far as I know, it's only playing on ToonDisney right now in the U.S.

Anyone know different?

Response recorded on August 21, 2000

Bookmark Link

Jenn :) writes...

Why did you stop the show anyway? What's up with that? Did you have a buget problem?

Greg responds...

Jenn...

I didn't stop the show. Disney did. Check the archives for a more detailed answer.

Response recorded on August 21, 2000

Bookmark Link

Abigail Thorne writes...

A few days ago I took out my store-bought copy of "Gargoyles, The Movie," which is the first five episodes without commercials. I was trying to remember why I hadn't watched it in a while. That question was immediately answered once I started watching it.

There are certain details in the movie--background music, sound effects, scene editing--that are either off or just plain wrong. The sound of Goliath crushing Elisa's gun, the arrows flying through the air during the Viking battle, the metallic sounds of the Steel Clan opening their wings and firing their cannons--they are all different, and they drive me crazy!! Then there's the background music, which either starts too late or is completely wrong for that particular scene. But the most excrutiatingly obnoxious error of all is the sound of the gargoyles gliding--it's this high-pitched swooping noise, like a mechanical glider, or something, I don't know what exactly, but it's NOT RIGHT!! {Loud scream of frustration!!!!!!!}

I know, I know, these are fussy nitpicks, but the little details really do effect the quality of the program. I'm a diehard Gargoyles fan who's seen these episodes dozens of times, so hearing a difference makes me cringe. So yeah, what's the point of this post? To ramble, to complain, and to ask if anyone else (yourself included) had noticed and were annoyed by the changes made in "Gargoyles, The Movie."

Thanks for letting me rant. And vent. I feel better now.

Greg responds...

Sigh. I'm glad you feel better, but I'm annoyed.

They are NEITHER OFF NOR WRONG, they are simply DIFFERENT from what you've grown used to. They were mixed simultaneously with the five pilot episodes. NOT AFTER. And the people who mixed those pilot episodes went on to mix the rest of the series' episodes, so the style they used became ingrained.

And again, if you heard the movie version played the way it was designed to be played -- that is with giant SPEAKERS and on a big screen theater, you'd see that the effects work quite well. Still different, but well. They weren't designed for home video.

NOW CAN WE PUT THIS QUESTION TO BED. CHECK THE ARCHIVES PLEASE.

Response recorded on August 19, 2000

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Why did Gargoyles go off the air?

Greg responds...

Sorry, anonymous, but the answer to that is long, complicated and involved. And I've answered it SO many times before. I'm gonna have to ask you to check the archives first. Then if you still have a specific thing you don't understand, come back here and ask me.

(I once answered this in INCREDIBLE DETAIL, and I have a vague memory that someone has it posted on their site. Does anyone remember. I wouldn't mind reposting that long explanation here.)

Response recorded on August 19, 2000

Bookmark Link

Matthais writes...

At www.xanatos.com, there is an actual company called Xanatos Enterprises. Is this the source of the name, or visa-versa? That is, did they name the company after the character from Gargoyles? Or were you unaware of this company's existance?

Greg responds...

I can't say for certain, though I have an inkling, whether the show gave them the name. But I do know, because Disney's Legal Department did a search, that there was no Xanatos Enterprises in existence when the show first went on the air. There was a Xanacorp, however, which had been our first choice.

Response recorded on August 19, 2000

Bookmark Link

dracolich5 writes...

Hello again, Greg! I've decided to start posting questions more frequently, and I've got an interesting assortment of production questions.
During the creation of characters, how were their eventual designs chosen? Did the artists in question work on one design only, or were several designs tried? If so, is there any way we can ever see these unused designs? My interest in unused character designs started when I purchased some Japanese Godzilla books that showed alternate designs for machines and creatures. Just curious to see if similar interesting designs are around.

On a side note, IF any alternate character designs were made, were any of these re-used for later characters? Just checking!

Greg responds...

We had development artists at Disney come up with inspirational designs for all the main characters, which were used in the pitch to sell the show.

Bob Kline: Xanatos, the Eyrie Building
Dave Schwartz: Brooklyn, Lexington, Broadway
Greg Guler: Goliath, Demona, Elisa, the Pack
Paul Felix: the Clock Tower (and Hudson, I think)

These designs were then sent to Disney TV Animation Japan, where they sort of had a little competition to see who would be the primary designer on the show. They submitted multiple interpretations of the characters (Goliath in particular), and we chose Mr. Takeuchi, who seemed to capture the feeling of the show the best. Eventually Frank Paur went to Japan to work with Takeuchi and fine tune his designs. Paul Felix did a very early Bronx, but Frank changed it so entirely, it's basically a new design.

I have some of this old stuff, though I wish I had more. For example, I have almost nothing from the early comedy development. If you attend the Gathering, you can see the pitch and some of those early designs.

Response recorded on August 02, 2000

Bookmark Link

Blaise (repost by Aris) writes...

TEMPTATION

While this isn't the ep that cemented Brooklyn in my head as "Favorite Character," I have to admit he is GREAT in it.
I still love Lexington's remark about building a horse from spare parts.
Demona's tour of the city--Yeah, the DEAD BODY surprised me too. Very powerful, very good, as were Demona's other two "examples" of humanity. Bennett and Sirtis did WONDERFUL jobs with their voice acting here.
As for the bikers not noticing Brooklyn, yeah everybody notices that. I just try to ignore it and that seems to work. If nothing else, most of the bikers in that scene WERE wearing sunglasses at night (as someone else already pointed out). Come to think of it, some of them weren't even wearing helmets....;-)
Elisa's finger--great, now that you've mentioned it, *I'LL* probably look for it and not be able to see anything else in the scene.
I was surprised to hear that Brooklyn's description of the Cloisters was taken by some folks as "proof" that gargoyles were not native to this planet. Anyone who saw the first two episodes should have understood what Brooklyn meant. Come to think of it, why WOULD people want the gargoyles to be from another planet?
One of my favorite lines in this episode--Brooklyn: "You hold the book, Demona. But *I* hold the *spell*!" I just LOVE that.
The resolution of the spell may have been a bit of a cheat, but it WAS a creative and original solution to the problem. So, you guys still get some points in that area.
Lex and Brooklyn talking about the motorcycle at the end and Lex's reaction are always enjoyable.
Pointless note: Hudson doesn't speak a single line in this episode. Odd, when I think about it. Still, you do at least SEE him a few times.

Good ep.

Greg responds...

The Hudson thing was budgetary. Often if we had a character who needed to appear for logic's sake but didn't have too much to contribute to the story, we'd avoid just giving him one or two lines to prove he's there. That way we could save money on the actor's salary for that episode. That money saved could be used later on for some of our big cast expensive episodes.

Trust however that I never scrimped. If I thought Hudson needed to speak in that episode, even if it was only ONE line, I would not have hesitated to pay for Ed Asner to be in the session.

Response recorded on August 01, 2000

Bookmark Link

Good news (in the long term)...

I have found a cache of documents relating to the early comedy development of the series. Historically speaking, these are fairly interesting. Unfortunately, they are hard copies. I don't have them on computer files. Transcribing them will have to be a LONG-TERM project.

But at least we know they exist.


Bookmark Link

Axem Gold writes...

I have a few questions to ask you about the Gargoyle Series.
1. If Disney left you encharge of the series like they should have how many years would you have tried to air new episodes?

2. Which part of The Goliath Chronicle do you dislike?
A: That they ignored your Master Plan.
B: They didn't conclude most of the storylines (Coldtrio, Demona, etc).
C: Both

3. Did you read the episodes on the Gargoyle Saga page? Are they somewhat accurate to Master Plan?

Greg responds...

1. Until I died.

2. Neither. I mostly don't like how it was executed. And probably, if I'm being honest, I just don't like that someone other than me was in charge. When push came to shove, I felt it was my baby, and I didn't like anyone else giving it a bath.

3. No. I don't read FanFiction in order to protect myself legally, in case I ever get to do Gargoyles again.

Response recorded on July 29, 2000

Bookmark Link

More...

After our comedy garg pitch was rejected (of which little documentation survives), we searched about for a dramatic version. In the long run, we wound up coming back to many, if not most, of the concepts from the comedy version of our show. But here's the earliest document that I can find on the dramatic version. As you can see, it's largely single character and very different from the final.

[Unedited as usual, except for what's in brackets]:

THE GARGOYLE
(Weisman / Summary of meeting 12/19/91)

1000 years ago in barbaric Briton, an evil Wizard wanted to ransack the castle of the good princess.

Gargoyles are stone sculptures that are used to decorate castles. Inspired by this, the wizard creates his own giant (Beauty & the Beast-sized) Gargoyle. He instructs this engine of destruction to fly to the castle tonight, while the wizard's army attacks from the outside.

(Perhaps he gives the Gargoyle a powder that will temporarily bring the other little stone gargoyles to life.)

The Gargoyle, which is stone colored, even when it isn't stone, flies to the castle, intent on destroying it.

He meets the princess who teaches him the error of his ways. He will fight against the wizard. But as the sunrises, he falls asleep turning to stone. A part of the spell he was not aware of.

When the sun sets again, and he awakens, it is too late. The princess is gone (dead?). The castle has been ransacked. Even the wizard has left him behind. Angry at his betrayal...He is alone. Cursed as an outsider, able to function only during night hours. Frozen as stone during the day.

He stays in the ruined castle over the centuries. Making occasional forays to the outside world. Sometimes briefly, to steal books. Sometimes for long periods to fight evil (World War II, perhaps). But always returning to the castle and his loneliness. He despairs of ever finding a true friend. Despairs of ever having a purpose to his life.

One night he awakens, and finds that some repair work has been done on the castle. Each night he finds that a little more work has been done while he slept during the day. Construction equipment has gathered outside the castle walls.

One day, as he sleeps, the castle is lifted, lock, stock and gargoyle and flown whole across the atlantic to New York, by giant airships.

It is placed on the top of the Xavier Enterprises skyscraper.

Xavier is our arrogant villain. Not comic. Evil behind the scenes. Manipulator. Respectable to the rest of the world. Untouchable.

Our Gargoyle finds himself in this strange new world. Here he meets a young idealistic girl (perhaps a plain clothes police detective) who will be his friend and teach him not to despair. That he can help make the world a better place. In New York, the barbarians are at the gate, every night. This time, he can do something about it.

He becomes a de facto super-hero of sorts, though we don't have to flag it.

Xavier can hire other minor villains, plus we need to create some real psychos, and powerful ones at that, for Gargoyle to battle. Plus the ancient wizard could return in some form. Perhaps he has put his spirit in a amulet. Whoever wears it is possesed by him.

Perhaps, our Gargoyle can still temporarily awaken other gargoyles, little mischevious things who aren't too bright, but would try to follow his orders. But when they sleep each day, they have to be awakened by the magic dust each night or they will remain as stone. Only our hero awakens by himself every night.

Does our young girl have a child?

Who else populates this world?

Is the Gargoyle named Gargoyle, or is there another name for him?

Other villains?

cc: Bruce [Cranston], Gary [Krisel], Kat [Fair], Bob [Kline], Mike [Ryan], Fred [Schaefer], Tad [Stones], DoMo [Dolores Morris]


Bookmark Link

Another tidbit

From the very next day...

3-12-91:

GARGOYLES

They've been sleeping for a long time. It's been cramped, damp and uncomfortable up on those buildings. Now, it's time to wake up and PARTY!!!!!!!!

Gargoyles asleep for a thousand years.

Awaken in modern times.

They're the good guys.

We're working on villain.

Opportunity for a lot of broad cartoony, fun characters.


Bookmark Link

A real fossile...

This is the earliest file I have on the series, dating back to 3-11-91. It's short. But very strange. Here it is unedited:

GARGOYLES

They've been sleeping for a long time. It's been cramped, damp and uncomfortable up on those buildings. Now, it's time to wake up and PARTY!!!!!!!!

Only one problem: the evil DOCTOR VOMFU, who turned them to stone in the first place, is still out there making trouble for our bat-winged friends.

But, hey, NO BIGGIE. They're GARGOYLES! Vomfu won't know what hit him.

Vomfu was a joke name around our office. Look at a computer keyboard. And move the natural position of your hands, one key to the left. VOMFU becomes CINDY. Cindy Chupack was one of our development associates who was working on the show with me. Cindy has since gone on to be an emmy nominated sitcom writer on such shows as COACH, EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND and SEX IN THE CITY.


Bookmark Link

More archives material...

It recently occured to me that I only started to post old Garg internal memos starting with "REAWAKENING". Since this info seems to be of interest, I thought I'd go back and start over by posting some of the earliest stuff I still have on file.

First up is a memo to one of the earliest (pre-Michael Reaves) writers that we tried out on the project. Note the December, 1992 date of the memo. You'll see that some of the concepts never changed at all. Others, like the notion that Goliath might Demona-like live through the 1000 years changed a lot.

Anyway, here it is unedited:

GARGOYLES 12-4-92
Notes on 5-part Outline

GENERAL NOTES

--We want to stick closer to the original pitch. Keep the story solidly from Goliath's point of view, with his relationship with Elisa as the central emotional arc.

--We want to clarify what a Gargoyle is and what the "rules" are:
1. Gargoyles were not created by an individual. One thousand years ago, they were real living creatures, a now extinct race that even then was scarce.
2. Gargoyles are nocturnal. At sun-up they transform into stone statues as a protective measure. Theoretically, there may be some magic involved, but from a gargoyle's P.O.V. it's a natural biological process.
3. They cannot wake up at will. They cannot turn back and forth from stone at will. Daytime, they are sleeping. Frozen in stone. That makes them fairly protected, though if someone took a sledgehammer to them, it would kill them. At night they are not stone, they are strong and powerful, and they can fly, etc. But they are not invulnerable.
4. Gargoyles don't have any special instinct or telepathy for danger. What they do have, instinctively, is a territorial and protective nature. Up to this current story, that never extended beyond the castle walls. One of our main objectives is for Elisa to give Goliath a wider definition of his territory...extending it across all of Manhattan (all of NYC?). She gives him hope and a revived sense of purpose.
5. Naming is a human trait. The medieval humans deal w/Goliath so he gets a name. The others have none until they get to the twentieth century, when Elisa encourages/insists on it. Then they pick their names.

CHARACTERS
--We have to know and sympathize w/Goliath much sooner on in the story. We should largely see it through his eyes. His concern for Elisa should drive the latter half of the story, much more than any desire to foil a crime.

--The absolute key to this is the relationship between Goliath and Elisa. We need to develop this slowly. She's got to get used to him in a big way, and for his part, he's not comfortable around humans, and definitely unused to human kindness. He's awkward. Maybe even stunned. We don't have to play it for romance, per se. Even friendship from a human is a foreign concept.

--Hudson is an ex-gargoyle warrior, long past his prime, who now acts as Goliath's advisor. He tends to knock around the castle. Maybe, he likes television. He is not and would refuse to act as a baby-sitter for the younger kids. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT. Goliath is the Gargoyle-Master. The other gargoyles are HIS responsibility, not Hudson's.

--We'd like to play the younger Gargoyles (Broadway, Brooklyn and Lex) more as teens than little kids. Very eager to explore the new world as you have it, but with a more adventurous sensibility.

--Bronx, the gargoyle-dog does not have wings. His ears allow him to hover a bit for short periods of time. But it's hard. (Keep in mind, he has a weighted tail, like a mace.) He can't really fly. He CAN scurry all over the place, up straight vertical walls, across the ceiling, etc. He has claws that really allow him to dig in.

--Our fault, but we don't think the Bannister character is adding anything. We can probably drop him.

--Xavier needs to be much more imposing. Not bordering on broke. Though obviously, he's not in Goliath's league in terms of brute strength, underneath that three-piece suit he should be a powerful man. As men goes, he should be very strong. And brilliant. On the surface, a rich powerful man, but underneath with his hand in all-things nefarious. He should not be petulant. He should always feel menacing threatening. If, at the end, we do send him to prison, we should not weaken or reduce him. He should go off like Al Capone, with an attitude like "You don't expect prison walls to stop me, do you?"

--We don't necessarily have to use the Gladiator-esque PACK, but if we do, we should keep their strengths clear in mind. The television aspect is a front, but one we might need to see in order to understand why the public regards them as good guys. Since clearly, no single member could be as strong as Goliath, their strength lies in the pack mentality. Goliath tosses one aside, their are five others leaping on top of him, etc. Also keep in mind, that our toughest pack members as they were originally designed were probably Wolf, Jackal and Hyena. Dingo, Fox and Coyote were never designed to be very threatening on their own. Another possiblility might be the SCARAB CORP. Robots from the pitch. (Scarab could also be a division of Xavier Enterprises.) However, feel free to create new villains or a different threat.

PART ONE
We want to get to know Goliath right away. Preferably, all the beats we played in the pitch.
1. He and his fellow Gargoyle warriors defend the castle from "barbarians". We establish his territorial and protective nature.
2. For their pains, they get no thanks or even kindness. Humans look at them as necessary evil.
3. Goliath spends his time reading and keeping the younger Gargoyles out of trouble.
4. We might want to plant a seed for the Demona character here. Establish her as the gargoyle he cares for the most.
5. Also establish Hudson, his advisor, and the younger gargoyles.
6. Goliath and Hudson are sent or lured away from the castle (perhaps by Demona, though the viewers don't have to know she betrayed them). They do not get back before sunrise.
7. The trio of younger gargoyles chase Bronx down into some hidden dungeon. At daybreak they are frozen their.
8. During that day the castle is overrun and sacked.
9. When Goliath and Hudson return that night, Goliath is horrified to discover that the rest of his Gargoyles have been destroyed. Someone took the equivalent of a sledge hammer to them during the day. Demona, his love, is probably part of the rubble. (We don't have to revisit her in the five parter. She can be an element of the tragedy of Goliath. We can bring her back in an episode if this goes to series).
10. Bronx and the younger Gargoyles survived, because they were hidden from the attackers.
11. It may be stronger for Goliath not to be cursed into a thousand year sleep. He takes responsiblity for the disaster. Hudson and the others are cursed to sleep "Until the castle rests in the clouds." (I.e., theoretically, until kingdom come.) Goliath is forced to guard them (the last of his race) alone for a thousand years. This means that he won't be totally ignorant of planes and cars etc. He's seen them over the years. And it might increase his tragedy. At any rate, we don't want to bring up the issue of exorcisms. Dangerous ground.

PARTS TWO - FIVE
1. Let's keep in mind that the whole castle is moved to New York. It can be dismantled, but the human focus should be on moving this castle to the top of the skyscraper. The gargoyles are nothing more than decoration to the humans.
2. There's probably something to Goliath being on a castle top in Scotland one night. Falling asleep and waking up crated in the bowels of a ship, the next night. But we probably want to go for a more dramatic problem than him leading them with a lamp.
3. The other gargoyles, Hudson and Bronx included, don't wake up until the first night after they are installed on top of the castle in the clouds. They've gone from riding a parapet a 100 feet above the ground, to the top of this mega-story skyscraper. It's a pretty hefty transition for them.
4. Art thefts and Bank thefts aren't nearly as crucial as putting Elisa in danger and involved in the case. That's what brings Goliath in. Perhaps we should open with her undercover, infiltrating Xavier's organization. Perhaps that leads her to the Pack training grounds or some other aspect of Xavier's operation. Make her a vital and integral part of the Xavier story. Not simply on the trail of it. And though we don't want to make her helpless, we do need to put her in jeopardy.
5. We're not sure what the red herring of blaming the gargoyles for Xavier's crimes buys us. Not opposed to it, but does it just force us into awkward moments? Lots of talk about guys in gargoyle suits. That's not really a major issue for the series.


Bookmark Link

Ameathia writes...

You work for Disney right? So do you know what happened to Mighty Ducks the Animated Series? I know this is really off topic and you are more than likely not going to answer. But, Hey, you can't blame me for trying to find out what happened to one of my fave shows can you?

Greg responds...

I no longer work for Disney.

I don't blame you at all, but I don't know the answer. Is it airing on Toon Disney, maybe?

Response recorded on July 26, 2000

Bookmark Link

Blaise writes...

I found your little memo "Batman vs. Gargoyles" quite amusing (especially the remark about how Batman does not turn to stone, etc.). Actually, I sent a copy to my folks, and my mom loved it. She found it a bit surprising that anyone would think "Gargoyles" could be construed as a "Batman" rip-off in the first place (me too). I guess we all find that idea a little silly.

Greg responds...

It's very silly now. It was even silly then, but it was a real concern -- silly or not. There just weren't that many shows of that nature on the air. Plus we were using Frank Paur, Michael Reaves and a number of other people who had worked on Batman.

We all just wanted to have our ducks in a row, in case anyone yelled foul.

Response recorded on July 26, 2000

Bookmark Link

joe c. writes...

I would like to say that the "Gargoyles" series was probably the most original and best i've have ever seen among animation and live-action alike...until it went to abc where the shows were weak and the epic storyline was destroyed. The ending of the series was not a good one and did not deserve to have the name "Gargoyles" on it. I was just wondering how the show changed from excellent to extremely bad? Also, is the series ever gonna be available on dvd?

Greg responds...

I can't answer the dvd question at this time.

As for the changes, man, joe, I've talked about this to death in the archives here. Suffice to say there was a 100% change in the creative staff who made the show what it was in the first two seasons. The new staff didn't have the background, time or resources to do the show right.

Response recorded on July 26, 2000


: « First : « 250 : « 25 : Displaying #344 - #368 of 536 records. : 25 » : Last » :