A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Behind the Scenes

Archive Index


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #224 - #248 of 536 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

Chapter XXXIII: "The Price"

Ramble, ramble, ramble...

The other night my family and I sat down to watch "The Price"...

Director: Dennis Woodyard.
Writer & Story Editor: Michael Reaves
Based on Comic Book Material by Lee Nordling

RECAP
It seems like I was starting to learn my lesson about not giving too much away in the "Previously on Gargoyles" section. This one is really all about Hudson, and issues of old age and mortality. I think it tends to hint that maybe, just maybe, we were thinking of killing him off. Anyone else think that perhaps we might?

There's some really great, really good looking character work in this animation. Pretty stuff.

There's a great moment where Hudson banks off an office building. Very cool.

Also, I like it on those rare occasions when we do weather in New York. Snow here. Or rain. Usually, it's all left standard for the same reason Elisa usually wears the same clothes. It's cheaper.

As the story opens, we're again trying to set Hudson up for possible termination, at least in the minds of the audience. He says, "Not a bad life all things considered..." which is usually an invitation for something really horrible to happen.

TIER STUFF

This is the last episode of our third tier. I had always hoped it would air last, since what happens at the end to Owen's hand would make interchanging very difficult. But on the first go-round it was ready long before a couple of other eps in the tier. So it aired early. (Particularly before Owen's appearance in "The Cage".) I tried to correct that for later runs. Sometimes with success. Sometimes not.

Anyway, because I couldn't be sure it would air in the right order, you can see that we hedged our bets a bit. Goliath doesn't understand how Macbeth escaped the Weird Sisters. He's not referring to events in "High Noon" which he could not have known about and which I could not guarantee would air before "Price". He's referring to events in "City of Stone, Part IV".

*At the moment he brought them up, my daughter Erin just happened to be coloring a picture of the Sisters drawn by artist David Wong (I think that's his name) who was selling them in the Dealer's Room at the Gathering 2001 in L.A. Erin was very excited by the kismet of the moment.*

Did you guys register Mac's limited dialogue? It would be tough in the first fight by itself. He does have four lines. And GARGOYLES was never a show to go in for extensive quipping during battles. So four lines may have seemed like enough.

And did you register the "Magic Sparkly Powder" when it first hit Hudson?

This ep is fun because there are so many layers of deceit going on.

Note that at this early stage, Goliath doesn't intend to kill Macbeth. He aims for the Sky-sled's control panel and hits it. The fact that the sled goes down is an unfortunate and unavoidable result. And Goliath clearly feels at least a little guilty. Hudson doesn't mind though. He thinks Goliath's action was perfectly reasonable.

I don't suppose anyone thought Mac was really dead? I wasn't really even trying to trick you into that one. Between the immortality info that you (but not the Gargoyles) knew from City of Stone and the early timing of the death in the episode, I figured nobody would be fooled. And I didn't want anyone fooled. Because that wasn't what I wanted to fool you guys about. I didn't want you to figure out that Macbeth was a robot. So I intentionally did not show the body, on the assumption that most everyone knows that if you don't see the body, the victim probably isn't dead. That way when Mac came back, you'd all be thinking, "Hah, Immortal!" instead of "Hah, Robot!"

BTW, everyone always asks how Hudson can believe Mac is dead and then later acknowledge Mac & Demona's immortality to Xanatos. But Hudson was thinking of immortality in the sense of living on without aging, ala the Norse Gods. Not in the sense that Mac was somehow immune to all injury and death ala the Greek Gods. Clear?

Lucky for Xanatos that all the Gargs seem to have favorite poses. (Cheaper that way, don't you know.) Of course it also helps that since they all wake up and go to sleep at the same time, they rarely get a good look at each other's poses. Makes statue prep easier, huh?

Anyway, when Hudson didn't wake up, did everyone buy the magic powder/he's not waking up scenario? Had anyone seen Lee Nordling's Disney Digest comic story that inspired this gimmick. I've never met Lee, but he came up with the idea of replacing a sleeping garg with his statue. He used Goliath, not Hudson. But it was the same basic principle. I gave the idea to Michael (just that notion) and he ran with it to create this entirely different story? Did anyone see Lee's story and still not get it?

I can't remember why we wound up cutting Banquo & Fleance. Guess we were saving money or time at some stage. So Mac's mansion works on auto-pilot, I guess. Though those cannons still aren't too effective against gargs. And who else would attack?

Back to Brooklyn and Broadway guarding "Hudson". We wanted to keep the focus on Hudson, which is tough, since he's not moving. Brooklyn's worried about the reality of being able to find a cure. Again, we're expressing his leadership tendencies without confirming them since we couldn't guarantee that "Upgrade" would air first.

Then, finally at the end of the act, we reveal the real Hudson. My kids got very excited. Erin said: "The stone guy's not the real him." And Benny chimed in with: "That's the real one!" What were you thinking at this moment?

I even had the odd notion last night that we could have gone the direction of Hudson's "prison" being all in his mind. That the statue was him, and that he couldn't wake up until he escaped this mental/dream prison. Obviously, not the way we went. But it's a cool story idea. Anyone think THAT?

So then we come back from commercial and reveal Xanatos who claims he wants Hudson's skin. The line is said in such a way that we and Hudson are geared to think the worst. Which sets up the fun.

Hudson: "You'll have the devil's own time getting it."

Xanatos: "Gee, that wasn't as hard as you made it sound."

Ah, STONE skin. For the Cauldron of Life. I'm pretty sure the Cauldron was Michael's idea.

Everything has a price. Xanatos just doesn't get that yet.

But Hudson has X's number. They're exchanges throughout this episode are a lot of fun. Like a flip on the Goliath/Renard exchanges in "Outfoxed". But better done, frankly. Less preachy.

These exchanges may have been the inspiration for Hudson and Xanatos killing each other in "Future Tense". Owen's watching and subconsciously realizes that in some way, Hudson and Xanatos make better natural adversaries than Goliath and Xanatos. Maybe.

Hudson: "Growing old terrifies you doesn't it?
Xanatos: "Nothing terrifies me, because nothing's beyond my ability to change." (Who else can lie and tell the truth in the same sentence with this much charm. I'm so proud of this boy.)
X: "What about you? Still wasting your nights in front of the television?" (An only semi-dated reference to both Hudson's origins as the comedic gargoyle Ralph and to the way we occasionally still relegated him to clock tower duty in order to have fewer characters to deal with.)

Note that Xanatos plans on giving Fox immortality as well. He knows he loves her at this point. Wouldn't leave her out.

He doesn't mention Owen though, and in general doesn't treat Owen with his usual respect. Goads him a bit. (Macbeth has already died for me once.) Or rather teases him. He probably figures that Owen can take it. But I think it gets to Owen a bit. Xanatos wasn't expecting Owen to test the Cauldron for him. Owen felt the need to prove something. As he says: "Service is its own reward."

Lots of people watched this episode and e-mailed me that X was a big jerk for treating Owen this way. Particularly at the end of the episode when Xanatos seems completely unfazed by Owen's stone hand. Of course in our minds, this was all a very subtle clue to Owen's true identity. Xanatos and Owen both know that this condition is only as permanent as the Puck chooses to make it.

"Over-sized chamber pot." Heh.

X loves them zingers. He nails Hudson with that "the hardest part was finding a replica for your sword."

I like Goliath's desperation in the scene with him and Elisa. "We need a sorceress. We need Demona. You are a detective."

She doesn't know how to find Demona though.

Meanwhile Mac's back, still using only those same four lines. Anyone catch on here? Or wonder why Mac was working for Xanatos again?

Broadway now knows the expression is "Sitting Ducks" not "Sitting Dorks" as he said it in "Enter Macbeth". A little inside joke.

Okay. Very little.

Erin sees Hudson pick up the stone skin and asks what it is.

Sunrise. At the end of Act Two, Elisa has an oddly timed slow reaction to events, that I wish we had found a way to trim a bit.

Benny was worried: "He's gonna break into pieces and never be alive again."

Erin was a bit more tv-savvy: "He's not going to break into pieces. Or this would be the last [episode]."

I didn't really think anyone would think we were actually going to kill BW here. I think the interest is to wonder over the commercial break exactly how the hell we're going to get out of this.

Beth asked: "How'd Elisa know to shoot at that box? Who came up with that? She clearly didn't like it."

Michael Reaves put in this bit about BW turning to stone in mid-air. And I cut it. That's right. Cut it. I thought that it was too big a deal to fit into this story or at any rate that we could never make the rescue convincing. But ultimately I put it right back in. Michael was right. We needed it here. Everyone worked very hard to make Elisa's save as real as possible. The carpet sign established in advance. The multiple shots it takes her just to hit the rope twice. And Brooklyn and Goliath's exchange:

Brook: "It's a miracle!"
Gol: "A miracle named Elisa."

We're acknowledging how unlikely this is and hoping you'll just share it with us.

I still don't know. It's fun. But I'm not sure we really pulled it off in a convincing way. What did you all think?

"Jalapeña, you're still alive!" Another tier risk. Since I couldn't be sure this would air after "Protection".

X: "Hudson, your bath is ready."

This is another cool exchange. The Price metaphor really comes through here.

The title, I think, was one of mine. Inspired by the Arthur Miller play and the Jim Starlin Graphic Novel of the same name.

Back at the Macbeth battle, here he is again. By this time, the robot thing may be more obvious. Same four lines. We still tried to preserve suspense. Since he's presumably working for Xanatos to distract the Gargs that may explain his behaviour. Anyone who thought he was the real Macbeth right until the moment G gutted him?

Elisa is out of bullets. At the time, I thought that made realistic sense. Always hated guns that seemed to have unlimited bullets. Now it just feels like she was dumb for not reloading.

But one other thing strikes me -- in today's environment, we probably wouldn't have been allowed to let Elisa use a realistic gun at all.

Boom. The Hudson statue is blown to bits. By this time you all knew it wasn't Hudson, but we were hoping that for a split second, the image itself would be shocking enough to make you forget. Just for a second.

I think it worked. Ben needed to reassure himself: "That's okay. It's not the real Hudson." I don't think he would have even bothered to say that, if for a split-second he hadn't thought it was.

Of course, Goliath, who had been on the verge of putting two and two together just before this attack, goes positively medieval on us. Before he aimed for Mac's sky-sled. Now he wants "Gargoyle Justice". He's trying to kill Macbeth. It's just lucky that (a) it was a robot and (b) we had a very understanding S&P executive.

I think the robot's death scene is pretty cool. We had John Rhys-Davies come in just to record five lines. The four that we reprinted over and over and one more 'winding-down' take on "You'll have to do better than that!" It's very cool. With the eye popping out and everything. Nice stuff.

One thing I remember discussing with Michael was the rescue of Hudson. Originally, I think he had Goliath and the boys figure it out and have them show up to get H. But I felt strongly that Hudson had to rescue himself. Prove to all concerned that his age was not the liability that X thought.

This is fun.

And I love that Hudson won't destroy the Cauldron.

Like Xanatos, we think that H is "just full of surprises." But it shouldn't be much of a surprise. I think that was right in character for Hudson.

And I love his parting shot: "What will be your legacy, Xanatos?"

Frakes and Asner were both just amazing in this episode.

X: "Let him go. He's earned it." Of course, that's right in character for X too. No revenge. No jumping up and down and whining.

And hey, now Owen's arm can live as long as the mountain stones.

"How literal-minded." I think that line was one of mine. Not sure. It would probably have helped if I had read those two drafts of the script I posted yesterday. But I didn't have time.

So there's my ramble. Where's yours?


Bookmark Link

Justin writes...

Greg,

I have asked this before, but I can't find it in the archives.

1) In "Shadowss of the Past" we saw a whole bunch of slaughtered gargs from Goliath's clan. Why was the only female represented Demona?
2) Who was that one gargoyle with the rather big nose that pushed Goliath?
3) I also know that before the massacre, the wyvern clan broke up into two groups. Did more females go than males? That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense.

Thank you for you time. And I was good of you to give blood. I did too :)

Greg responds...

1. Limited resources. We just couldn't design the whole clan. Our designers drew up a few random gargoyles, unfortunately all male, and we had neither the time or the money to balance things out.

2. I don't recall Goliath getting pushed.

3. No. Gender-wise there was a fairly equal distribution.

Response recorded on April 26, 2002

Bookmark Link

Vanity writes...

I have a question. Relating to biology.

In the animal kingdom, animals(let's use chimps), chimps show a ratio in the wild and in captivity to be 50% right handed and 50% left handed. In the human population as a total about 75% are right handed and 25% Left handed. Some human societies vary of course some being 95% to 5% right to left up to 70% and 30% right to left. I couldn't find this in the archives so, do gargoyles have handedness, and if so of the gargoyle population are they like chimps with a 50/50 Right to left handers or more like humans with a heavy slant to Right handers?

Greg responds...

Some facts about animation "handedness..."

It's very hard to keep track of.

Storyboard artists like to have the freedom to allow characters to freely use either hand, depending on how they want to stage a scene.

To some degree, particularly in an action show, this might make sense. I.e. the heroes and villains all TRAIN themselves to be at least semi-ambidextrous, because their lives may depend on it.

So although I have no idea what handed our various human characters are, I'm going to say that Gargoyles are ambidextrous. Because visually, the series seems to confirm that fact.

Response recorded on April 16, 2002

Bookmark Link

Grad Thesis semi-Answers

I got the following e-mail from Gore the other day. I don't usually encourage going around the system this way. But the guy seemed to be under deadline pressure, so I cut him some slack and moved him to the head of the line. I'd ask that others not abuse the process. Thanks.

Subject:
[Fwd: Graduate Student needs Greg's Help]
Date:
Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:21:44 -0500

Just forwarding something that was sent to me.

-[Gorebash]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Graduate Student needs Greg's Help
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 14:21:57 -0500

Dear Mr. Weisman,

My name is John Diego Hernandez. I am a full time graduate student in public relations at Rowan Univeristy in Glassboro, New Jersey. My research topic for my thesis is "toys and cartoons" and how the two fields relate to one another when it comes to development of both toy lines and animated serials. As part of my thesis research I am required to survey individuals who pertain to my investigative studies. As creator of an animated television serial, your knowledgeable expertise would be an invaluable
wealth of information that would remain in my thesis throughout perpetuity.

The survey consists of 12 short questions posted below. It will only take 20 minutes of your time - no longer. If you can find some time from your busy schedule, I would be most indebted. You do not have to answer all the questions if you choose not to. If you wish to remain anonymous, I will not put your name or personal data in my thesis.

Thank you for your time,

John Diego Hernandez

1. Do toys affect what cartoons you make?

Yes. The profit margins on children's programming are so slim these days (largely because of misguided government regulation coupled -- ironically -- with the deregulation that has allowed entertainment companies to vertically integrate) that potential money from consumer products (including but not limited to toys) has become a greater factor than when I started in the business in 1989. Toy companies can help fund programming -- for better and for worse -- that might not otherwise get made. And even original properties benefit if there are multiple forces (e.g. a toy line) that maintain incentives to keep a show alive.

2. Do you choose what toys are made?

Never.

3. How significant is a hit animated show to sales of toys?

It can be very significant, in that an animated series can virtually act as a 30 minute daily commercial for the toy -- a commercial that establishes play patterns and allows the audience to invest in both characters and the property as a whole.

4. How many cartoons a year are related to toy lines?

I have no idea.

5. Must the toy manufacturer pay royalties to cartoon producers?

Depends on the origin of the property.

6. Does a successful cartoon guarantee a hit toy line?

No. Some shows are not considered 'toyetic'.

7. Does a successful toy line guarantee a hit cartoon?

Never. But it doesn't hurt.

8. When your company is in search of a new animated serial, where do they look first - current toy lines or creative innovators?

There's no one place. (And that either/or you just gave me is ridiculously simplistic. Implicitly biased even. There are plenty of creative innovators working at toy companies, for example. And there are more than just two places where you might look for inspiration or series springboards.)

9. Approximately how much do cartoon producers allocate to the funding of toy lines?

Doesn't work that way. Toys help fund cartoons (in simplistic terms) not the other way around.

10. Which usually comes first - the toy line or the cartoon?

Again, there's no one rule. In certain countries, like England, if a toy line exists already then you CAN'T air the property at all. But here in the U.S. it can go either way. Though often the cartoon will appear first to help promote the toy line.

11. May I attribute your responses? Yes / No

Yes.

12. If yes, please list name and/or title and company name:

Greg Weisman
Freelance Writer/Producer


Bookmark Link

martyn writes...

hi greg my names martyn, heres my question.
what made you to create the gargoyles and why doesnt toon disney show all the episodes.it only goes up to "turf" and starts back the begining, i dont mind but its getting annoying, so its possible can you give me an addresse on toon disney so i ask them directly.

thanks for taking the time to read and answer my question

martyn

Greg responds...

I don't have their address, I'm afraid. Though I suppose if you sent it...

TOON DISNEY
c/o WALT DISNEY COMPANY
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521

it would probably get there eventually.

I didn't realize they skipped quite THAT many episodes. I know they've never aired "DEADLY FORCE" for reasons of S&P that I find absurd, but which I'm sure they feel strongly about.

As for 'what made [me] creat the gargoyles'...

Well, I've answered that in all sorts of detail here at the archives. Explore around a bit. And if you have any specific questions, come back here and ask them.

Or come to THE GATHERING 2002 in Virginia and get the full story at the Opening Ceremonies!

Response recorded on March 04, 2002

Bookmark Link

Demona Taina writes...

This is a question that I honestly have never seen the answer to. Why doesn't Laura San Giacomo appear on the credits of Gargoyles?

Greg responds...

You haven't looked to hard, cuz I KNOW I answered this one.

Laura's representation (NOTE: NOT LAURA herself) felt that it could damage her career to have her name appear in the credits of an animated television series. We tried to change the reps mind, but no go. Nowadays, I doubt it would be an issue. And I want to stress that Laura was nothing but wonderful, working on the show. A real pleasure. Also she and Fox gave birth at more or less the same time.

Response recorded on March 04, 2002

Bookmark Link

Silverbolt writes...

Do you expect disney will make any more toons like gargoyles or will they continue to make toons like they have been lately.

Greg responds...

Depends on how wide you define your terms, I guess.

Response recorded on March 04, 2002

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Did you plan to incorporate the recent destruction of the Twin Towers into Gargoyles (Warren Ellis actually tried to put school shootings into Hellblazer, but DC nixed it.)?

Greg responds...

If I felt I could do it in a responsible and sensitive way -- and I had the forum for it, then I might try. But to be honest, I can't presently think of how it could be dealt with that didn't feel exploitative -- no matter how good my intentions might be. Obviously, this is an immense historical event, that would be reflected in ways both obvious and subtle. But direct reference? I don't know. I tend to doubt it.

Response recorded on February 14, 2002

Bookmark Link

Sheryl writes...

I know Gargoyles was canceled but I don't know why. See I olnly reasintly, as in this year and a bit last, became a big Gargoyles fan. But if so maney people like it so much why was it canceled. (Sorry if you have answerd this before but I don't read every singal question on this webpage.)

Greg responds...

Well, Sheryl, I'm going to send you to the ASK GREG FAQ. If you read the answer there and still have questions then come back.

Response recorded on February 14, 2002

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

The posting of the FAQ (thanks, Bishansky and JEB!) and your comments on them (including the "Weird Macbeth" part) prompted a question about this unmade two-parter from me.

We know that you had planned the following casting choices for this episode:

Macbeth as himself (or, more accurately, as his Shakespearean counterpart).
Demona as Lady Macbeth (the role that she was hatched to play :)
Goliath as Macduff
Elisa as Lady Macduff

Do you remember any of the other casting decisions for this story (i.e., who was to play Duncan, Malcolm, Banquo, Fleance, the Porter, etc.)?

Greg responds...

Hudson was Duncan, I believe.

The rest I don't remember off-hand, largely because I don't think I had done much casting. It never got past the premise stage, unfortunately. It was the one story that I wanted to do that upper-management wouldn't approve. Even then, they were willing to approve it for a single episode. But I felt I couldn't do it justice in 22 minutes. So in essence, I'm the one who kiboshed it.

That really says something about the creative freedom we were given on the show. 66 episodes. And only one semi-rejected premise.

Response recorded on January 22, 2002

Bookmark Link

Galvatron writes...

1.Why didn't Kenner make any action figures of the characters that we saw in the World Tour? They might have made some money with Griff, Arthur, Nokkar, Cuchullain, Golem or Fara Maku figures so why didn't they?
2.Whose idea was it to have the World Tour?

Greg responds...

1. They only wanted to make toys based on characters who appeared in a large percentage of episodes. And sometimes, not even then.

2. Mine, largely.

Response recorded on January 15, 2002

Bookmark Link

Epantiras writes...

"Vows" has 2 endings, right? Why? What appended in the 2nd ending where Goliath and Demona are still together? How can they live in Manhattan if Demona didn't help the Vikings to attack the castle ?
Thanks!

Greg responds...

"Vows" really only has one ending. But the first time it aired, it aired with an uncorrected scene. It showed Goliath and Demona kissing. It's supposed to be a final flashback to them at the castle in the tenth century. But the first time it aired the wrong background was used, and so they seemed to be kissing in the present at the clocktower. This is just a mistake, and it was corrected for subsequent airings. (We ran out of time or it would have been corrected before the first airing.)

Some of the fans prefer the mistake. Don't ask me why.

Response recorded on November 29, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Gargoyle Beasts
Were there any Gargoyle beasts at Wyvern besides Bronx? If so why didn¡¯t you show them?

Greg responds...

Yes.

There were limits as to how many soon-to-be-dead-gargoyles we had the time and money to design.

Response recorded on November 13, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

I just noticed that Charles Canmore's Hunter costume was most similar to Jon Canmore's Hunter costume was this symbolic of both men unable to give up the tradition of the hunt while Robyn and Jason it seems were able to give up the hunt? If not why did the two costumes of Charles and Jon resemble each other?

Greg responds...

Each and every Hunter costume is a variation on the original's basic theme.

Some of what you've noticed may be due more to coincidence rather then intent. Otherwise you'd have to ask the costume's designers.

Response recorded on November 01, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

If the Oberon's Children are called the Oberite what exactly were Mab's children called?

Greg responds...

The Children of Oberon were never called the "Oberati". That was a behind the scenes suggestion that I made that some combo of Michael/Brynne/Lydia rejected as sounding too much like an Italian sports car.

Response recorded on October 17, 2001

Bookmark Link

Zarok writes...

I just saw "Deadly Force" on Toon disney UK, somebody got the message, welldone.

Greg responds...

I take no credit. Is this a new development? Has Toon Disney UK shown "Deadly Force" in the past?

Response recorded on October 10, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

after the first season, why was it decided to put Goliath's voice over the original opening theme music? i remember the first time i heard it i liked it cuz it was new, but now i think i prefer the just music version, so i'm curious to why it was done.

Greg responds...

I probably prefer the music-only version as well. Though I think Gary Sperling did a great job writing the naration and Keith did a fantastic job reading it.

It was my idea, nevertheless I was really on the fence about it. It seemed that it might help new viewers understand the basics of what was going on. Is there anyone out there for whom this was true?

At any rate, I didn't think it was ideal, but I didn't think it hurt too much either. The final decision was made by my boss Gary Krisel.

Response recorded on September 11, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

When did you decide there were gargoyles living in New Olympus and Loch Ness?
When did you decide there were gargoyles in Xanadu and Pukhan?
When did you decide that there was going to be a gargoyle clan in New Camelot?
When did you decide that Paris, Queen Florence Island and Wyvern were the sites of future clans?

Greg responds...

Years ago. By 1996 at the latest.

Years ago. By 1995 at the latest.

Years ago. By 1996 at the latest.

Years ago. By 1996 at the latest.

Response recorded on September 11, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

What was the difference between the original NO show and the latter one that became part of the gargoyles universe besides Sphinx being Terry's girlfriend and Xanatos appearing? Were all the characters there including Helios, Jove, Borea and his son, Chiron, Ekidna, Taurus, Talos, Sphinx, Medusa and Terry and his mother?

Greg responds...

There were no differences except Xanatos.

Sphinx and Terry were always slated to be Romeo and Juliet.

The problem you're having is that I talk occasionally about brainstorming sessions and ideas from them. But that doesn't mean we have entire separate versions of these shows developed. In the first (and really only) version of New Olympians, the leads were Terry, Sphinx, Talos and Taurus, with all the supporting characters you mentioned, plus Proteus of course. (Oh, and Boreas has two sons.) And it's Kiron not Chiron.

Response recorded on September 11, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

when Puck transforms the human population to gargs why is it that Elisa and the three teen girl gargs in the subway not have brow ridges or horns of any kind? every other gargoyle we've seen except for the English gargs had either horns or brow ridges or both, but these transformed humans had neither. in fact, besides the pointed ears and color difference (which Elisa didn't even have) their bodies from the neck up looked very human, not gargoyle. was it cuz you wanted these characters to be physically attractive to human viewers even as gargs? cuz i think physically Desdemona is more attractive than Demona or Angela and Des has big old horns, so why make these characters as gargs so human looking?

would you have objected to the animators giving Elisa a beak or a frill or any of the other non human features of gargs?

Greg responds...

Yes, I would have objected to Elisa getting a beak, because she wouldn't have looked viserally like Elisa. Other changes that were less significant would not have bothered me.

However, I loved the design they came up with and didn't question it.

As for the girls in the subway. MINOR, minor characters. There wasn't as much time to do all this stuff as you seem to think. We just had to get it done.

Don't read too much into it though. We all think that Desdemona is attractive. Frank in particular likes drawing attractive females. I think Demona and Angela and Elisa are pretty hot too. Among other characters.

Response recorded on September 11, 2001

Bookmark Link

LIFE IN THE REAL WORLD

This is something I wrote YEARS ago. But I don't think it's here in ASK GREG, or if it is, it's only in the old archives. Vash dug it up recently, and I thought I'd reprint it here, verbatim, I've added a few notes in [brackets]:

Life in the real world.

I know I've said this stuff before. Please read this carefully. I have a real fear that this might sound defeatist or condescending, but you can't possibly succeed in "saving" the show if you don't come to terms with these hard truths. I don't know what you've been told by other people. But I do know a few things about today's animation market. I've told you before that I did not believe that Gerry Leybourne was single-handedly responsible for not renewing the show. Dean Valentine is also not single-handedly responsible. Neither is Eisner. If the fans insist on looking for a VILLAIN to blame, they stand no chance. [Neither Leybourne or Valentine are at Disney anymore.] You say you're looking for a straight answer. But really you've been given and have ignored straight answers and what you are looking for is for simple answers. There are none. Here are some (but not all) of the many factors that have probably played into the non-renewal:

1) Quantity. A normal syndication package for any children's show is 65 episodes. If you don't make it up to 65 then you are considered something of a failure. If you make 65, then you have created a show that can have ongoing library use. That's a success. Anything above 65 is gravy and NO SHOW makes more than 65 episodes without significant financial incentive. They made 78 gargoyles (including Chronicles). The financial incentive for the last 13 was that ABC needed a boys action show with some "Marquee" attached to help fill out it's Saturday Morning line-up. You'll notice that no new episodes were made for syndication. There was no financial incentive in syndication. So they didn't make any more for syndication. [These days a syndication package can be as few as 39.]

2) Ratings. The ratings for Goliath Chronicles are, or so I'm told, lousy. Forget about the why for a moment, and just absorb this fact. If the ratings are lousy, we've just lost the financial incentive to make any more beyond the 13. On that level, Goliath Chronicles objectively failed. Gargoyles did a bit better in its day, but it never broke out and knocked down the competition. Aladdin did better business for Disney. And they're not making any more new Aladdin tv episodes either.

3) Shelf space. The Disney Afternoon, as we know it, is dead. The rise of FOX, the WB and UPN ate up almost all of the existing independent stations that aired the Disney Afternoon or (in lieu of the full two hour block) the individual shows that made up The Afternoon. We've known this was coming for awhile. Existing contracts kept the Afternoon alive through the end of this season. But after that it is gone in it's present form. Now, as I understand it, Disney has made a deal with Kelloggs to do a reduced version of the Afternoon. I think it's supposed to be an hour and a half long, with one new show and two library shows. The new show for next season is 101 Dalmations. For fall of 98, it's supposed to be HERCULES. There isn't room for new Gargoyles in syndication. ABC has similar problems. As a broadcast network, they've committed to air 3 hours of FCC/Kid friendly programming per week. That means 3 hours of their morning have to be reserved for that kind of programming, because unlike Fox, they don't have any other place in their schedule to air this FCC stuff. That only leaves them with about one and a half hours to fill their morning. They have an existing commitment to the Bugs Bunny cartoons that they air for an hour. That leaves them with one half hour slot to fill. Given Goliath Chronicles ratings, it just doesn't make sense to fill that one slot with a show that's failing, when you can take a chance on something new that might succeed.

4) Resources. The fans seem to regard Disney as this Giant that can do whatever it wants, and that's true up to a point. But Disney TV Animation has limited resources. There are only so many talented animators and storyboard artists out there. There's only so much money they can spend without profits to justify the expense. From Disney's point of view, Gargoyles had its shot. You and I may quibble about how that shot was handled. Whether it could have been handled better. I think everyone would acknowledge that mistakes were made. But not intentionally. EVERYONE at Disney wanted the show to be a huge success. IT WAS NOT. I wish I could tell you different. Creatively, I'm very proud of the show. We touched a substantial group of people. But an even more substantial group preferred POWER RANGERS on a consistent basis. They cleaned our clock. Disney has to decide how to allocate limited resources. If Gargoyles had 78 shots to be a hit, and didn't quite make it, you can see why they might think it's time to allocate their resources to something else.

5) Quality. Resources came into play with Goliath Chronicles. The decision was reached to allocate priority resources to shows and home videos that they believed had a better chance to break out. That's why Chronicles looks the way it does. In my opinion, the show is inferior to the original on almost every level. This doesn't mean that a lot of good people didn't work their butts off to make it as good as it could be. But limited resources result in limited success. The resource issue was the major reason why I walked away. I regret it now. The animation has been weak, but I should not have passed up the opportunity to tell twelve more of my stories. But that's spilled milk. Eric Lewald was under the gun from the moment he came on board the show. There wasn't adequate time to make the show at its previous quality level. There wasn't even adequate time for Eric to become as familiar with the show as I'm sure he would have liked to. I tried to help. I was paid to consult. But...

6) Time. Along with limited resources, the main reason Chronicles isn't up there is Time. The show didn't get a go ahead until late november '95. I began "The Journey" in December. Eric didn't really come aboard until January '96, as I recall. Look at where we are now. It's late February [1997]. Do you really want to see the GARGOYLES episode that would result if it started from scratch now and had to air in September [1997]? I WOULD NOT.

7) Expectations. I do believe that Disney in general views the show as a disappointment. They had tremendous high hopes for it. They rushed 52 episodes into production for it's second year despite my warning that they'd have to air a lot of reruns in between new episodes. The reruns, the weaker stations we were on and many other factors, including series content resulted in a solid but decidedly unspectacular performance. I do believe that the high expectations that many at Disney had for the show, led to greater disappointment in its real failure to break out and its perceived failure in general. That disappointment doesn't make a lot of people feel inclined to make more.

8) Strategy. O.k., I'm not at Disney anymore, so I'm not privy to their strategy meetings, but from outside observation, it doesn't seem like Gargoyles fits in their overall strategy plans. Maybe it never truly did. Now we can be mad about this. We can even try to change it. But first and foremost, we should be glad they made the show at all. Next we should realize that if it doesn't fit their plans, they aren't going to be too inclined to change them IN THE SHORT TERM.

9) Management. (The one I suppose you've been waiting for if you still insist on playing the blame game.) There has been a lot of management shake ups at Disney. Jeffrey Katzenberg, Rich Frank, Gary Krisel and Bruce Cranston all left. So did I. We were all supporters of the show. But Eisner didn't leave and he was a supporter too. I haven't talked to him recently. I don't know what he thinks about the show. Maybe he's disappointed. Maybe he's not. Maybe for him it's just the resource issue. Gotta take a shot with something new. Maybe he's not involved in this decision in a significant way. No way to know. But I wouldn't be so quick to label him a villain. It doesn't hurt to let him know that you love the show, but it can't help to blame him for its demise.

I don't know Gerry at all. I've never met her. I'm also a little vague on her responsibilities at Disney, thought I've heard she's responsible for scheduling ABC's Saturday morning. But before you blame her, or even guess at what she personally feels about the show, reread all the above, particularly the section on shelf space, strategy and ratings. Now she may not like the show. I have no idea. Neither do you. If she doesn't care for the show, I'd personally be curious to know what she bases her dislike on. Goliath Chronicles? Gargoyles? Both? Whatever, she's entitled to her opinion.

I've met Dean. I've heard that Gargoyles isn't his thing. I've heard that he believes that it may not be Disney's thing either. But I don't know any of that. And again, Dean's personal view of the show is, positive OR negative, way down on the list of reasons not to make more. See above.

Buena Vista. Mort Marcus ran Buena Vista at the time I left Disney. I have no idea if he's still there. Mort was a big early supporter of the show. He was also very disappointed when it didn't perform up to expectations. Buena Vista is taking its next shots with Dalmations and Hercules. But even if the Afternoon had survived, there wouldn't be any new episodes of Gargoyles in syndication. Look at the Disney Afternoon's history. A new show premieres with new episodes. Over the next few years, the reruns move down through the Afternoon. That's cause they couldn't afford the MILLIONS of Dollars that it would take to make new episodes for early time slots that don't deliver very many kids. If there aren't any (or many) butts sitting in front of the t.v. then advertisers don't want their products advertised there, in which case they don't pay much for commercials. So networks won't pay much for the shows, so the shows operate at HUGE budget deficits. Gargoyles operated at a huge deficit. Ultimately, I'm sure it will make an overall profit for the company. It may have already. But let's not pretend this was the LION KING.

Other divisions. Some did better than others. But no one is clamoring for more gargoyles product, so none of the other divisions are clamoring for more shows.

SO WHAT DO WE DO?

We begin by admitting, at least to ourselves, that in the short term, we lost the battle.

Then we go on and try to win the war.

We have one big chance and a general small chance. Both are long shots.

The Big Chance is the Touchstone Live Action Feature. If this ever gets made and if it succeeds, then there will be renewed interest in the show.

The general chance is that television is cyclical. He-Man rules until DuckTales comes along. Rescue Rangers rule until Batman comes along. Soft and quirky is big now. But times change. And Gargoyles has a marquee. (It's a trifle damaged, but it's real.) There's a chance it could come back.

The best thing we can do is keep the flame burning. Keep executives, particularly if there's any executive turnover, informed that there is a fan base for the property. Write letters to Buena Vista, to Eisner, to ABC, to Disney TV Animation, to Touchstone. Write letters to local stations, asking them to air reruns. Write letters to the Disney Channel for the same thing. If the reruns are airing in the U.S., we have a much better chance of someday making new episodes. Keep these letters respectful. Don't try to assign blame. My god, what difference does that make. If I thought it would help I'd take 100% of the blame myself. I certainly deserve some of it. Just let people know that you loved the show. Praise it's virtues. Show "Deadly Force", "Lighthouse..." and "The Green" at grade schools. Make the GATHERING a yearly event. Increase it's budget and scope on a slow and steady basis until it becomes an important event. (Don't try to get too big too fast. If you go bust early on, you won't get a second chance.) Keep the fan base excited about the show. (This to me is the main virtue to the whole fanfic thing, which I have many mixed feelings about. If it keeps the fans interested, great.) Don't let the fans marginalize themselves with hostility or esoterica. If they get territorial they keep new fans out. No new fans. No new episodes. Prove to Disney that you are part of that great consumer demographic that they are hunting for. BUY STUFF. Buy all the stuff you can find. Prove that the show can still make money for the company. Buy all the videos off the shelf. Then write Disney's home video division and have them make more. More copies of existing tapes and more episodes on tape. Show those taped episodes to new fans. Particularly young fans. Adults and college kids are great too, but if kids don't like the show, we are doomed. Try to convince Disney records to release Carl's music on C.D. Buy animation cells from authorized Disney dealers. Talk it up.

As for the petition, hell, make copies. Send it a lot of places. Buena Vista for sure. Don't worry about whether or not it's read cover to cover by the president of the division (Mort Marcus, I think). It'll make an impression. But I don't see why you shouldn't send it to Gerry too. Send it to Dean Valentine at Disney T.V. Animation. Send it to Barry Blumberg (at the same place). Have someone in every market send it to their local ABC affiliate. Gerry isn't giving you bad advice there. If the local stations want the show, they'll make their voices heard at the network. (But remember, you need locals to send it to local stations. A petition postmarked Newark won't be taken very seriously in Cleveland.) Send it anywhere you think it might help. But you might want to read it over first. If it's full of hostile and antagonistic attacks, then we've marginalized the petition. Also try to make sure that there's no doubling up. If people signed the petition twice and Disney figures that out, then they'll figure the entire document is compromised, and they'll freely ignore it. If it's a rational statement from real existing fans than I promise you it'll make a positive impression.

But I don't want to kid you. We are probably past the point of no return, at least for this coming fall [1997]. I appreciate that you refuse to give up, and I'm not telling you to. But if you want to save yourself some heartbreak, I think you might want to start focusing on the long term instead of the short term. Even if we could change everyone's minds overnight, we've all but run out of time to put new episodes of any quality on the air by September. I don't like saying that, but I figure it doesn't help anyone to beat around the bush.

Now let me say in advance that most of this won't work. Sorry. The odds are against us. I take some consolation in knowing I was involved with 66 episodes that I can be proud of. I told the stories I wanted to tell. Not nearly all of them, but many. I ended it with Hunter's Moon and Journey, in a way that gave us some small closure but left it open in case I get another shot. A shot I'm longing for. All this offers some consolation. I hope you and the other fans feel the same. It's something to hold onto through what's bound to be a LOT OF REJECTION. There are no guarantees that we'll ever get the show back on the air in any form. But what I've written above is the most practical plan I can think of. If I can help in any way, let me know.

Otherwise, Good Luck. You are going to need it.

GREG


Bookmark Link

Lord Sloth writes...

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.

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

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?

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Lord Sloth writes...

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?

Greg responds...

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.)

Response recorded on September 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Artemis writes...

Hi Greg! First time poster here. I want to thank you on writing such a great show!! I only started to watch it a little over a year ago. I've only seen about 70% of the episodes, because of it's late airtime and the fact that I have older siblings who what dibs on the tv. What I really want to ask you is how did you come up with this whole series? It's really incredible how it all ties in, considering its complicated plot. My teachers have always told me that I have a gift for story telling, but most of its all been fan fiction. I love to write, but the only reason I do fan fiction is because I can't seem to make up my own characters. So how did you come up with all these complex characters? Did you have to sit down for hours to think of characters, or did they just suddenly come to you one day? Anything you're willing to tell me will be greatly appreciated. I don't care if writers don't really make it on their first story, I know that (I'm only 17, after all). I just want to write share with some people something that I can truly call my own. Thank you! (Next time around, I actually will ask questions regarding the show)
=^..^= <---Meow!

Greg responds...

Well, let's start by acknowledging that I wasn't working in a vaccuum. From day one I had a staff of people working with and for me on the show.

Special credit needs to go to Michael Reaves, Brynne Chandler, Gary Sperling, Cary Bates and Lydia Marano who were all huge participants in the process.

Lots of time was spent talking, batting ideas around. But honestly some things just came so easy and naturally that I still believe that the Gargoyles Universe is out there broadcasting history to me.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #224 - #248 of 536 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :