A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Ask Greg Archives
Behind the Scenes
Archive Index
: « First : « 50 : Displaying #84 - #133 of 536 records. : 50 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
hallofjustice writes...
How old are Kevin Hopps and Jamie Thomason? I can't find any darn websites that will ever confirm their date of births!
PS: If they do make more DC Showcases, I personally believe they should hire Jamie Thomason as the casting and voice director for all them.
Greg responds...
I don't believe it's my business to tell you.
Lyla writes...
Whose idea was it for Demona to start turning into a human during the day and why did you add it to the series? Did you plan for that to happen from the beginning?
Greg responds...
I think it was mine. But so many years later, I can't be sure. So much of the series was a collaboration.
And, no, we didn't know we were going to do that at the beginning. But it became clear that was the way to go.
Curious writes...
I am so tempted to ask if Bette Kane (aka flamebird) Barbara Gordon ( aka Batgirl) and all those other high School students with alternate hero personas (Bumble bee, Herald) in the comic books are ever going to put on said costumes/personas on the show but I know better than that. So I'm just going to ask about another topic.
(1) Is it hard coming up with ideas and episodes for a show?
(2) When you get writers block is that when you raise the flag for a hiatus?
(3) Do writer's for t.v shows (any t.v show in general) use hiatuses in order to work on other projects?
Greg responds...
1. Nope. It's hard to leave things out. Thank goodness for the comic.
2. No. I don't have writer's block on this series at all. And we had no control, one way or another, over any hiatus. That's the network.
3. I suppose some do. I was busy on Young Justice.
Richard Jackson writes...
In the series, Demona gave several phony explanations of how she managed to live so long. Such as, stone sleep (Awakening) and stealing minutes of life from humans (City of Stone). Of course, also in City of Stone we found out that her link to Macbeth is the secret of her immortality.
But that was revealed in season 2 before the introduction of Oberon's Children. Demona let it slip in "Temptation" that she had survived through the centuries, but didn't elaborate.
When in production on the first season, did you know what the secret to her immortality would be? And were there other explanations you thought of but ultimately didn't use?
Greg responds...
Pretty much by the time we wrote "Enter Macbeth" we knew the basics. Didn't work out the details until "City of Stone".
Tom writes...
I've always appreciated that the show you create feature so many diverse characters with agency. It's great to see Elisa and her family, to finally seeing Spider-man in New York that features so many people of color in his cast, to having Aqualad and Artemis as such important, interesting characters in Young Justice. I love that your shows aren't engaging in the tokenism the way a lot of other shows (for kids or otherwise) do. And having strong women is a huge part of that--I remember friends in 4th grade fighting over who got to be Elisa or Demona at recess. So thank you for that!
I think with shows that are adapted from comics, there's this predicament of wanting to pay homage to decades of comic book history while not carrying forward the inherent racism and sexism of the eras when they were written. I think The Batman botched that when Detective Yin was replaced by Commissioner Gordon--closer to the comics, but axes a female, minority lead for a white male.
Not to mention the pressures from other areas. I remember hearing Dwayne McDuffie say that even in the height of its popularity, companies had no interest in making Static Shock toys, for example.
So, how do you handle this? Whether it's selecting minority/women characters from comics, creating new ones, or changing characters races like in Spectacular Spider-man, what's that process like when you make your shows?
Greg responds...
Um... mostly... I just try to reflect the world I see. I'm a sheltered white boy, but even a sheltered white boy would have to be blind not to see that the world is populated with more than just sheltered white boys. So putting in strong female characters and strong characters of color seems natural and easy, frankly.
If you're asking for process, though, it's very much case by case. We don't sit there and go, "We need 2.5 minorities on the Team with 23% females." Instead, we build a diverse cast of characters, character by character. When adapting a property (as opposed to creating one from scratch, like GARGOYLES), we DO pay attention to tradition. But some characters are certainly more iconic than others. So Robin, Kid Flash and Superman's clone remain Caucasian, and there was never any thought of changing them. But by using Garth's Tempest identity, it freed us up to create a new Aqualad, as the son of Black Manta - in part, to demonstrate the alternate Earth idea, i.e. this is Earth-16, and one decision changed the course of it's history (continuity) from what we're familiar with in the comics. As for Artemis, we felt she was obscure enough to make her half-Vietnamese, without fundamentally changing what mattered most about her. Likewise, her mother Paula Brooks-Crock seemed obscure enough to go ahead and make her the Vietnamese Paula Nguyen-Crock, as that also helped us make her Cheshire's mother, since Cheshire has always been the daughter of a Vietnamese mother and a Caucasian father. Maybe "obscure" isn't the right word, but I think you get the idea. As for Miss Martian, well, obviously she's a Martian, but I suppose we could have made her Megan Morse identity a minority too. (We portrayed her uncle John Jones as African, after all.) But again, we're not trying to meet quotas, and as you'll eventually see, we had reasons for the choices we made with Megan.
Anonymous writes...
Hi Greg! First of just wanted to say that I'm absolutely loving the Young Justice series, it's fantastic (particularly Home Front!) I just have a few questions about the process of voice recording for Young Justice.
1) Do the voice actors record in the same studio and interact with each other during the recording? Or do you often have to record separately due to conflicting schedules?
2) How long does it typically take to record each episode?
3) Who generally directs the voice actors during recordings?
4) Do the actors input their own suggestions for how the characters may react in a certain situation?
5) Does the script go through 'last minute' revisions during the recording?
Thank you so much for taking the time for looking at all the fan's questions and I look forward to seeing the rest of season 1 and 2!
Greg responds...
1. Both.
2. Three to four hours or so.
3. Jamie Thomason.
4. Occasionally. But unfortunately, we don't have a ton of flexibility.
5. Occasionally. Nothing major.
Jo writes...
Hi, again! First, thank you for answering my previous questions! I know you must be stressed, but, like others have said, it's awesome that you take time to answer questions like this. :)
And, now questions.
1. As a writer, how much say do you have in how the story is told? I mean, I know you write the script (duh), but it's the director who ultimately decides how it's told. So, do you both consult heavily on the matter?
2. Do you sit in on recording sessions? If so, why?
3. Um, I think this ties in with both the previous questions, but, do you have much say in how an actor performs their lines? Because, you must have written it with a certain tone, inflection, and emotion in mind, but the actor might interpret it differently.
4. How long does it normally take you to write an episode?
5. Do you find it easier or harder to write characters that have been created before you came along, as opposed to your own characters.
6. As far as character development goes, how deep do you go? Like, do you consider things that probably won't be presented in the project, or do you stick to things directly relative to the story?
I think that's it...not that I can't come back and ask some more. Thanks so much!!
Greg responds...
1. Well, it depends if I'm a freelancer or a show-runner. If we're talking Young Justice, than Brandon and I have final say on everything. The directors work for us. Though of course, they are immensely talented people, and we value what they do. The writers likewise work for us, but we've worked really closely on the stories and scripts with them. And as we proceed forward into design and direction, it's all in service of those stories.
2. Yes, of course. All of them.
2a. Voice recording is (a) one of the most important parts of the process and (b) the most fun part of the process. I wouldn't miss them for both reasons. We need to make sure that what we record is what we intended and needed. And I enjoy it. This year, for various reasons, I've also recorded a lot of scratch track, i.e. I've been the temporary voice for various characters when the actors we needed were temporarily unavailable. Just to give the board artists something to work with, until we can get the correct actor in there.
3. Yes. Ultimately, Brandon and I have final say. But again, we trust and appreciate the great work done by our stellar cast and by voice director Jamie Thomason.
4. To write a script: eight days. To write an outline: four days. To write a beat sheet: one day. To break the story: two days. Add it all up. Throw in time for notes and editing at every step. And you're talking about six weeks, give or take.
5. A well-thought out character is easier to write, whether I created it or someone else did.
6. We have detailed backstories for all our leads and supporting characters. Sometimes even a one-liner character has backstory in our minds.
PPL Ltd. writes...
Hey Greg,
Looking at the TV series producing industry as a whole, something I've always noticed is that, when it comes to live-action, comedies like "How I Met Your Mother" are always produced to fill one half-hour time slot, while dramas like "Dexter" always fill an whole hour time slot. Every show ever made is bound to contain elements of both drama and comedy, of course, but it seems like it is the overall tone of the series that decides the length of each episode.
For example, comparing two recent shows with a vaguely similar premise, the two medical shows "Scrubs" and "House". Anyone will say that "Scrubs" is a comedy show with dramatic elements at times, while "House" is a drama that often incorporates humour. Scrubs was a half hour show, House is an hour long show.
So the general line of questioning I'm leading up to with all this is the following, why is it that that there has never been an animated series which consists of hour long episodes spread over a whole season, even though animated shows can also be seen as dramatic?
The closest thing I can think of as an exception is the early 2000s Justice League series, which always had at least two part episodes throughout its run (until it became Justice League Unlimited), but those were always divided into smaller chunks, even if many channels just aired them back-to-back anyway.
HBO's Spawn can easily be said to be more drama than comedy, yet the episodes still were not as long as any other dramas on the channel, even though there were only six episodes a season.
I'm not trying to say that quantity is the same thing as quality, I'm just wondering if you have any insight as to why the episodes of a regular animated series are always of about the same length, regardless of their tone, while live action ones are not.
Greg responds...
The "conventional wisdom" is that kids won't sit through an hour.
I'm not saying I agree. But that's what the wisdom of the conventional states.
A.B. Washington writes...
Hi, Mr. Weisman!!
In the episode "Eye of the Beholder", I've seen "Fox"(a.k.a. Jeanine Xanatos" turns back into her human self and she was naked in this episode, how did you guys come up with that story which aired many years ago??
Greg responds...
Um... I'm not actually sure what you're asking.
The Eye of Odin was created by the video game folks, but we gladly brought it into the series. The discovery that Fox and Xanatos loved each other was a revelation that came with the "Her Brother's Keeper" episode. The idea of the gargoyles being free to walk around on Halloween seemed natural. Otherwise, the characters just sort of brought it all together, giving us what they would do.
Sean writes...
Dear Mr. Weisman,
I've been a huge fan of yours for years and just wanted to thank you for supplying or helping to make 1/3 of the cartoons of my childhood. I'm currently following Young Justice and I love it! I do have one question that I couldn't find in the archives though.
I noticed in episode 10 what seemed to be some height inconsistencies with Red Arrow. Cheshire was said to be 5ft 6in tall. But when the two of them were having their stare down in prison, Roy only looked a bit taller than her. Meanwhile, he seemed to be a bit shorter than Lex Luthor as well. In my animation classes, my professor mentioned a tendency for teenage characters to be drawn slightly shorter than adults, to make them easier to distinguish. Is that what happened here, or was it just animation error/camera trick?
I know in a previous post you said that he was the tallest of the teens, with Aqualad in second, but I was hoping that you could tell me their actual heights (and the rest of The Team's), or at least your best guess.
Thank you for your time and good luck with the rest of the season.
Greg responds...
We have height charts for all our characters and those charts are sent overseas to our animators for reference. I won't deny that animation errors take place sometimes, but none that I noticed in 'Targets'.
I can't tell you their actual heights. We don't put that information on the charts. I can only tell you how tall they are relative to each other.
spence writes...
A few questions about voice-over.
1) Is it recorded before the episode is animated?
2) How long does it take from recording the voice work until the episode is completely finished?
3) Do all actors get together in the room when recording one episode?
4) Are you present?
Greg responds...
1. Yep.
2. Months.
3. Ideally. Sometimes people aren't available on the day of the record, and we pick them up later. Sometimes if someone only has a line or two in the episode, we take pity on them and get them in and out fast. Sometimes, a single episode has two completely separate plots intertwining. We'd ideally record every actor in the first plot together, and then record every actor in the second together. But since the two groups don't interact, there's no need to record the entire group together and force a lot of actors to sit through scenes they're not in at all.
4. Yep.
Matthew writes...
This is about pretty much all the series you've worked on. I've noticed that most of your series has a large cast of recurring characters (and that despite this characters tend to be very well delineated.) Now for Young Justice, WITCH, and Spectacular Spiderman that may be just because they were pre-existing properties and already have large casts. However, Gargoyles also had a large cast.
Was this a because of conscious choice?
Do you perfer working with a large cast of characters?
Greg responds...
I do. I like creating worlds that feel real and populated.
Anonymous writes...
Was the notion of stone gargoyles coming to life at night an original concept of the television show, or does it have a basis in historical legend?
Greg responds...
Gargoyles as protectors is legend.
Specifically having Gargoyles only come alive at night, is -- as far as I know -- an invention, if a completely logical no-brainer one, of the series.
Anonymous writes...
How different of an experience is it to work on a show were the seasons are 13 episodes(Spectacular Spiderman) from one where the seasons are 26(I think it's 26 might have read 28 somewhere)?
I mean do you have to pace yourself differently?
Which do you prefer?
Are you more comfortable including sub-plots that you might not get to adress in 13 episode seasons?
You know stuff like that.
Greg responds...
The more episodes the better as far as I'm concerned. More EMPLOYMENT, first of all. Plus more room to maneuver, to add more subplots, more characters, etc.
Henry writes...
Are the "bibles" something that just you do, or is it standard for animated series?
Do live action television series do it to?
Also do all animated series have time-lines like you've made?
Or do they just kinda make it up as they go?
Greg responds...
1. It's pretty standard, though mine tend to be longer than standard.
2. As far as I know, though I've never worked in live-action.
3. That I doubt.
4. I'm sure each series is different.
Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...
I asked an unclear question a little back:
Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...
You've always (wisely) refused name one series you've worked with a favorite over another. It'd be like choosing which child you love best. But is there any instance of one work being a favorite instance of X and another of Y?
Greg responds...
Uh... I'm not too clear on what you're asking....? Is it a chromosome thing?
Me again...
Sorry. I meant that do you look at the various shows you worked on and when you think of one or the other does one particular aspect stand out as for you favorite example of getting that particular thing right, or conveying another thing the best as you've ever done it? Either in general terms like saying your favorite John Wayn western versus military flick. Or in a very specific terms like saying you think you really aced a concept- like a relationship or a philisophical concept or bravery or human foible etc.
Greg responds...
Hey, there are a lot of great moments that I love (he says without modesty) in all the series I've produced. Even in the stuff where I was just a hired gun.
But the thing is... I mostly work in the same genre (i.e. super-heroes) nearly all the time. It's a bastard genre (he says with affection) that includes fantasy, science fiction, detective and mystery, thrillers, etc., plus -- at least the way we do it -- romance and comedy on top of the action and adventure. So it stays fun for me, fresh for me. But it doesn't lend itself to the western vs. military comparison you make above. All of them are all of it. So it's just about the execution. In general, there aren't any episodes of a show I've produced that I hate. Some work better than others. But for me it's mostly about the moments.
Anonymous writes...
Should a storyteller be telling us stories we want/expect to hear, or are they allowed to tell us whatever story they want, regardless on if we like it or not?
Greg responds...
Uh... I don't know that there are or even should be rules.
But as for me personally, I try to tell the stories I want to tell, the ones that I'd want to see - that way I maintain passion for the material. Then, of course, I desperately cross my fingers and hope that others also like the stories I'm telling.
Whether these are stories they wanted or expected, who knows? The audience isn't monolithic, so I'm not sure it's possible to give EVERYONE what they want or expect. But if a majority LIKE the stories, I figure I'm good.
Ada writes...
Being an Nigerian, it was exciting in Gargoyles to see the Black Panther story line done in Nigeria! I am curious to know why you chose Nigeria to create the story?
Greg responds...
English is one of the national languages there.
Harlan Phoenix writes...
So what's the specific appeal of animation to you? Or rather, the appeal of writing it (and by extension, comic books) primarily over other mediums?
I could make guesses, but I'd be curious to know what exactly thrills you.
Greg responds...
Well, the MAIN appeal is that they'll hire me.
(Only semi-kidding there.)
Anyway, I love the semi-contradictory notions of the control I have over the final product and the collaboration I get while making my way there.
Anonymous writes...
Apart from the work that he's done with you, what's your favorite thing that Kevin Hopps has ever written?
Greg responds...
I don't know off the top of my head.
Anonymous writes...
I have some questions concerning episodic details
1. I noticed the original documents thread only has your memos on the pilot outline up to when Michael Reeves became the new writer, are we ever going to see rest of those memos(assuming there were more).
2. Concerning your tiers and tentpoles plan that started in season 2 you said awakening retroactively became tentpole 1, rewakening tent pole two, city of stone tent pole three and avolon tent pole four. Im curiouse what episodes made up the next sets of tentpoles after those ones. I figured Future tense or the Gathering was probably one of them with hunters moon obviously being the final ones, but what was the tentpole in the middle of the world tour episodes? I assume there had to be one more otherwise that would have been more episodes than usual in that tier.
3. You mentioned after Hunters Moon changed from direct to video to a three episode finally you had to cut 3 planned episodes. You said one was simply the vinnie episode being merged into vendettas, but what were the other two? Was the Coldston world tour story that made it into clan building one? Was Bronx's side story youve said happened during vendattas/turf one? If not do you remember what they were?
4. Youve said somewhere that the wierd MacBeth story was nixed because your superiours wanted it to be one episode instead of a two parter and you didn't think you could do it justice in two if Im not mistaken. Where would that two parter have taken place if you had been allowed to do it? Ive tried to figure out a spot in season 2 where it could have gone but none really seem to make sense and Id be curiouse to know. Also if you ever get the chnace to write more issues of the comics would you try to do this story now?
Thanks for your answers.
Greg responds...
1. "Ever" is a long time. But the issue is that I don't have those memos electronically archived. So I have to transcribe them. And I've just been (a) too busy and (b) at my Warner Bros office (and before that at my Sony office) most days, and not in my Beverly Hills office, where I have that stuff.
2. "The Gathering" two-parter was the next tentpole. Then "Hunter's Moon". There was no tentpole in the middle of the world tour. There were more episodes than usual, but Season Two was WAY longer than Season One, so we needed that flexibility.
3. I honestly forget now. (Isn't that sad?) I do have that info written down, but again -- it's in Beverly Hills, and I'm in Burbank.
4. It would have gone in the final tier of Season Two around the time of Vendettas.
4a. Yes.
Lost writes...
are you friends with Diane Duane?
Greg responds...
Nope. Never met her.
Blizzard Sprite writes...
Hello, Mr. Weisman.
My next questions are for Brooklyn, who was one of my favorite characters in the franchise. Not only did he come off as cool, but he was a relatable character who came off as a sort of rebellious youth. So, here are the questions.
1. I read in a 2008 interview that Brooklyn was quite popular with the fans of the show. How and when were you able to determine that? Nowadays, I figure it would be pretty easy given the pervasive nature of the internet and how fast information can be circulated. But back in the 1990's, during the show's original run when internet use was not as prevalent, how were you able to obtain feedback about certain aspects of the show, such as character popularity?
2. Brooklyn’s encounters and love interests in the twentieth century always seemed to have an unhappy ending to them (his initial encounter with Demona and his initial interests in Maggie the Cat and Angela come to mind). Because of this, he seemed to come off as the most unfortunate character in the original Manhattan clan, at least to me.
a. Do you think that all of these unfortunate letdowns were necessary in developing his character, and preparing him for what was to come in Timedancer?
b. Do you think that Brooklyn having fewer ties to (new) people in the twentieth century made it easier for him, mentally and emotionally, to jump around different points in time?
3. Were you concerned about the audience perception of Brooklyn when you had him return from the Timedancing adventures not only with a family, but an eye patch? I think one of the qualities that made Brooklyn such a likable character, in addition to his personality and his cool voice, was that he was a physically attractive and handsome gargoyle. One external change might not be all that drastic though.
Thank you for your time.
Greg responds...
1. From the internet. It may not have been AS prevalent back then, but it was prevalent enough. There was like an e-mailing list. Uh... for the Disney Afternoon in general, I think. Then my sister helped me find Station 8.
2a. It just felt organic to us.
2b. No.
3. I don't think he's any more or less handsome now. If you liked him before, I can't imagine the eyepatch would cause you to think he's unattractive now.
Richard Jackson writes...
Todd Jensen and others have commented on the similarities between “Grief†and the Batman episode “Avatar.†Todd’s question being here:
http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?qid=2870
I noticed another pair of episodes of Batman and Gargoyles that really reminded me of the other, because of the same writers. “Legion†and the Batman episode “What is Reality?†Both were written by Robert Skir and Marty Isenberg. Both episodes deal with virtual reality, but the third acts are very similar to me.
Batman/Goliath has to go into a virtual reality world to help his friend, Commissioner Gordon/Coldstone. His VR savvy compatriot Robin/Lexington tells him how it works. Once inside Batman/Goliath battles his enemy, The Riddler/Xanatos. Robin/Lexington tries to help Batman/get Goliath out of the VR world, but is painfully rebuffed. A shrill noise blasted into his ear piece in Robin’s case. An electronic shock emanating from Goliath’s body in Lex’s case. Side note: That was the biggest problem I had with “Legion.†I can buy a cybernetic gargoyle and that Xanatos can design a computer program based on his personality, but I never understood how Goliath’s body became akin to a live wire when hooked up to Coldstone. It must be one of those side effects when science and sorcery are combined.
Of course, “What is Reality?†and “Legion†are two different episodes and the execution of third acts are very different. Dialogue, characters and virtual reality as represented in the respective episodes were all different. Even the resolutions are different. I guess writing the virtual reality Batman episode gave Skir and Isenberg the experience to write the Gargoyles VR episode. Interestingly enough, they did write “Future Tenseâ€, which also had a VR sequence in the Xanatos Pyramid, albeit in a dream. They didn’t write “Walkaboutâ€, which had a metaphysical reality (MR?) scene.
I do think the examples of “Avatar/Grief†and “What is Reality?/Legion†are interesting examples of how writers will take previous ideas they’ve had and use another chance to expand or improve on them. “Avatar†didn’t work for me, but “Grief†is one of my favorite episodes of Gargoyles. And it’s close between “What is Reality?†and “Legionâ€, but I slightly prefer the former.
Greg responds...
Science and sorcery indeed.
Anyway, as always, the springboards for every Gargoyle episode pre-date writer involvement (unless the writer was also a story editor). But it may be very possible that once they got the assignment, they created or emphasized parallels with other work they had done.
Marc G. writes...
Is there a list online somewhere of all the overseas animation studios used for Gargoyles, by episode? It's frustrating because the credits always just listed "Walt Disney Television Animation".
Also, a related question: did you have control over which scripts were sent to which studios? Or was it purely dictated by scheduling and budgetary concerns?
Thanks!
Greg responds...
I don't have a list. Most of the first season was animated at Walt Disney Television Animation Japan, though I seem to recall that a couple were subcontracted out to Korea.
Season Two featured some eps by WDTVAJ, plus more from Korea (such as Hanho). But I can't remember who did what.
Scheduling tended to dictate what studio got what episode, but we did make an effort to make sure that "Bushido" went to Japan.
John Derrick writes...
I hate to say it, but I was extremely disappointed in the Young Justice premiere. Don't get me wrong--the animation was gorgeous, the dialogue entertaining, the story intriguing. But the gender imbalance was a huge turn-off for me.
Why was it that the women of the Justice League were only shown in the last five minutes of a two-part pilot? Why did the male sidekicks get to go on a rebellious adventure and force the League to accept them as a team of their own, while the first girl is only added to "Young Justice" at the very end, introduced by her uncle and guardian like some sort of token?
I expect that the women will have a lot more to do in the episodes to come, but I still find it profoundly problematic to introduce the characters in such an unequal manner. I believe there are too many men in the world as it is who see women as mere supporting players in their stories. Why reinforce this stereotype for a whole new generation of superhero cartoon fans?
Greg responds...
It's a legitimate gripe. And I doubt my answer will satisfy you, but it came down to a couple factors that we at least found important: (1) practicality and to a lesser extent - but intertwined with - (2) tradition.
Let's start with practicality.
You asked why there were no female Leaguers until the end. But where would they have fit? There are no female Leaguers with traditional first generation sidekicks. So Batman, Green Arrow, Aquaman and Flash could not be replaced by Wonder Woman, Black Canary or Hawkwoman. That leaves the four Leaguers introduced at the Hall of Justice. I needed Martian Manhunter to be there to set up Miss Martian. I needed Red Tornado there to set up his interest in the teens. I needed Superman there to set up Superboy. That leaves only Zatara. He was certainly replaceable. But then I would have had to hire another voice actress to read ONE LINE. I couldn't afford to do that. We have budgets. (And you'll notice that Red Tornado never speaks in the episode. Couldn't afford giving him a line either. None of which had anything to do with gender.)
There was NEVER any intent to introduce Artemis this early in the season for story reasons. Wouldn't make sense for her character. And I think the reasons why will become clear as the season progresses.
As for Miss Martian, yes, in theory, we could have introduced her sooner. Manhunter COULD have brought her along at the beginning. But then I'd have had FOUR characters running around the first half hour and FIVE in the second. That steals screen time and characterization from everyone. I think the entire production would have been weaker for adding another character -- ANY other character (gender notwithstanding).
Of course, that begs the obvious question - why not ditch one of the boys in favor of her to create a little balance.
But it seemed to us that would create balance at a cost.
There are FOUR TRADITIONAL sidekicks: Robin, Speedy, Aqualad and Kid Flash. To leave one out seemed wrong to us. Which brings in the Tradition argument, which I'll admit is somewhat feeble, but as an old comic book geek, I'll also admit it matters to me and to everyone else here.
The very first Teen Titans story ever in Brave and the Bold featured only THREE heroes: Robin, Aqualad and Kid Flash. Wonder Girl did not join until their second adventure. So we felt there was a precedent for beginning with Robin, Aqualad and Kid Flash and saving the real introduction of Miss Martian (beyond hellos) for OUR second adventure.
For what it's worth, if you give the series another chance, starting with episode three (i.e. the one immediately following the pilot "movie"), I think you'll see that female characters including Miss Martian, Black Canary, Artemis, Wonder Woman and MANY others will be playing ESSENTIAL roles in the show as we progress. I think the balance - and then some - is absolutely present in the first season when viewed in its entirety.
Yes, the pilot was very boy-centric, but that's not the rubric for the series. Personally, I love writing female characters, and if you're at all familiar with my past work, you'll know I have a history of doing them justice. (At least, I think so.) Gargoyles, for example, is FULL of strong female characters, including Elisa, Demona, Angela, Fox, etc. WITCH was nearly ALL female leads. Even Spider-Man had a strong female supporting cast, in my opinion at least.
If we did "reinforce a stereotype" (which I think is overstating it) then perhaps we've lured in kids that we will reeducate over the course of the season - organically without forcing it.
So I'd beg a little patience, a little indulgence... maybe even a little trust that we'll do right by this issue.
But judge for yourself.
Steven D. writes...
Hello again, Mr. Weisman.
I've had a question in the back of my mind for some time, and now seems like a good time to ask it.
Recently, you released the writer's rotation for the first 24 episodes of YJ.
I've always been fascinated with television writing,as there seems to be no one way to do it, so I wanted to ask a few questions on how you approach it.
1. Back when i first wanted to ask this, I checked the SpecSpiderman archives to see what you mentioned about writing for that show. When going over writing duties, you mentioned that some of the episodes that you "reserved" some of the episodes you wrote. Since Young Justice finds you in a similar position of being both a producer and staff writer, I'm curious to know, what factors do you use when picking episodes to reserve for yourself (and confirming that reserve wasn't just a metaphor you were using)?
2. While I'm here, I was hoping you could also shed some light on how much freedom your freelance writers are given. Do they ever get the chance to write an episode completely from scratch, or because the shows you work on are so arc based, are they always given a firm foundation to start with, and if so, how rigid is this foundation (generally)?
Thanks!
Greg responds...
1. Sometimes I end up writing an episode for pragmatic reasons... or a combination of the creative and the pragmatic. For example, I wrote the two-part pilot of Young Justice (i.e. episodes 1 and 2). Of course, I had a creative desire to write these episodes, but it also would not have been pragmatic for anyone else to write them. I needed to set the tone of the series for the other writers to be able to get it.
Another example: staff writer Kevin Hopps and I were set to write the last two episodes (25 and 26) of the first season. Though we know the basics of what takes place in them, based on meetings that Kevin, producer Brandon Vietti and I had over a year ago, we hadn't broken those episodes yet, and creatively I hadn't decided which of the two I wanted to write. But scheduling realities last week made it apparent that Kevin would HAVE to write 25, meaning I was writing 26. All of which is just as well. I started the season; I might as well finish it. But the decision wasn't creative; it was purely pragmatic. The creative decision might have been no different. But the creative decision became moot for pragmatic reasons.
On the other hand, I've also written three other episodes. In those cases, the pragmatic need was for me to write one episode each between 6-11, between 12-17 and between 18-24. Within those parameters, I chose 11, 15 and 19 for purely creative reasons. Those were the ones I felt a special affinity for (based on reasons I can't reveal now without spoilers). So going into the three writers' meetings for each of those three "sets" of episodes, there was SOME flexibility as to which writer took which episode (keeping scheduling pragmatism in mind), but I had "reserved" for myself the one I wanted to write in each case.
2. My freelancers have, for better or worse, very little freedom when it comes to WHAT stories we are telling. The premises were all approved long before the freelancers came aboard. If a specific writer feels no affinity for a specific story, then he or she doesn't have to take that episode. I always try to give each writer an episode that jazzes him or her. But the basics of the stories are set. Now, the writers are very involved in the execution of those stories. That's where their freedom comes in. But they still have quite a gauntlet to wade through... beat outlines, outlines, scripts (and notes from many sources). Ultimately, I take responsibility for every episode, and I'm the guy doing the final pass on every beat outline, outline and script. But I couldn't do this job without stellar writers providing me with great stuff. And on this series, I couldn't do it without Brandon and Kevin actively participating in the inception and breaking of every single story.
Clark Cradic writes...
Any characters you were surprised to see becoming popular? The ensemble darkhorse in other words.
Greg responds...
What series are we talking about here?
I guess I'll assume we're talking Gargoyles. And, no, not really. Perhaps I underestimated the Trio's popularity a bit, but I never thought they'd be UNpopular. But we can pretty much see who's popping as we're making the series.
Jurgan writes...
Not a question so much as a comment. You've said several times you think you missed a bet in "Grief-" namely, that Coyote should have killed the travelers, to show that death was impossible with Anubis locked up. I may be in the minority on this, but I prefer the story we got to this alternate version.
First of all, it would reopen the Highlander-esque questions that you get regarding Demona and Macbeth. So, Angela's shot through the heart but doesn't die- when Anubis is freed, is the wound still there? If so, would the wound then kill her? If Goliath were decapitated, would the head still talk, or would it sprout spider legs and walk back to him (sorry, I just watched The Thing the other night- incidentally, Keith making a surprise appearance in a movie is something that always makes me smile)? I imagine that, if only for S&P reasons, the death would simply be through bloodless laser beams (sorry, "particle beams") and the issue wouldn't have come up, but it's still confusing.
The bigger point, though, is that it cheapens the characters' abilities. I've read most of the Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita Spider-Man comics, and while they're great stories, one thing that always bothered me was how supervillains always let Spidey live. Typically, a new villain would dominate the wallcrawler and then arrogantly announce "I don't need to kill Spider-Man- I can beat him any time I want!" I don't have a count, but I really think this happened dozens of times in the Silver Age. I could understand if the villain had a reason to run, like Doc Ock's power running low in your show, but most of the time they just seemed stupid, since of course Spidey trounced them next time. The point is that it seemed like he was surviving more through luck than any particular skill. Likewise, our gargoyles have survived countless battles because of their own abilities. To say that they finally lose- but it doesn't count because, for this one day, they can't die, seems to cheapen their earlier successes. It feels like the only reason they're winning is because the writers want them to win, and if they get in big trouble, a deus ex machina twist will save them. The show starts to feel artificial, and I wonder if these characters are really that special, or if they're just the designated heroes.
Now, of course, this is hypothetical. It's possible that, if I'd seen the episode the way you envision, I would have loved it. As it is, it's kind of hard for me to imagine it working. Just something to chew on.
Greg responds...
I guess I wouldn't agree about one lucky break cheapening earlier victories... I guess I wouldn't agree with that at all.
I'm also not big on deus ex machina saves myself, but when an ENTIRE episode is ABOUT arresting death, having them live because death has been arrested doesn't feel like deus ex machina at all to me, even with a deus (Anubis) present.
And, as you noted, the beheading (et al) issue just wouldn't have come up.
I know you're arguing for the success of what we made, and I'm in the odd (very odd) position of arguing that we could have done better, but I still think a bet was missed...
Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...
I’ve heard you mention several times that you have had very good luck with S&P over several series, praising people who really understood the series and were more interested in showing consequence than keeping any violence off screen. When they put their foot down it was generally to avoid what a child can copy, even willing to have a different violent action in place they couldn’t. Did you ever have bad experiences? (Either on a series you were running, or one you freelanced on.)
Greg responds...
Yes, I've had many. Some completely inexplicable. Others explicable, but still wrong-headed.
Taranee on W.I.T.C.H. was a constant problem, as her power was fire and the S&P executive was very uncomfortable with... I'm not quite sure... the notion that we were encouraging child pyromania? The possibility that kids would use magic to generate flames?
I can't think of a really funny example just this second, though God knows I have more than a handful.
Trevor Duke writes...
Why does Lexington have different wings from the four other gargoyles of the manhattan clan? The behind the scenes answer please!
Greg responds...
Behind the scenes? We thought they looked cool on him, and we wanted diversity.
TZ writes...
Tana writes...
You Asked:
"Does anyone know if "Maza" means "iron" in any Native American language or dialect?"
According to my book of names (it's got like 20,000 names and their meanings, which is totally cool, especially the Athurian names) Maza blaska, which is a Dakota name means "flat iron." So if it's one of those languages where the adjective comes after the subject, then Maza does infact mean Iron in Dakota. Which interestingly enough adds more irony since Dakota was an early choice for Demona's name. ^_^
And you know that J.R.R. Tolkien claimed that all of his novels were fact...you seen to have the same symptom with the Gargoyles.
Greg responds...
I'm not claiming they're fact so much as acknowledging that sometimes storytelling on this show just seems to click with history, existing legend and with dramatic necessity. It's a rare feeling, and I'm humbled by it. All I'm saying is it sometimes feels like the stories are true somehow somewhere, and all I'm doing is (imperfectly) tapping into them.
But I'm not actually delusional.
Ok, this is TZ now......
I was looking over the archives and was simply amazed by this response of yours, Greg. I have always felt that art (in all forms, from literature to sculptures to music) is discovered, not created. I subscribe to that theory because there are such famous examples of great work that endure for years, sometimes even centuries. Why would something like Michelangelo's David or Beethoven's 9th remain so popular through the ages? I think it's because those pieces already existed and were "discovered" by those artists, because certain works like theirs touch us so deeply. When one of us "finds" that piece of art, and shares it, it seems to strike something in all of us. I think creativity is God's alone, but I think He gives some of us a gift to find or tap into (as you've put it) something He's already created that reveals a great truth or lesson or feeling. Anyway, just a ramble of mine to share based on something I was amazed to see here. I'm not sure if I got my point across to others (I found it really hard to put this into words) but I think you get it. Thanks for "discovering" more great art for us all!
Greg responds...
You're welcome. Glad you get what I'm getting at, more or less.
RandomStan writes...
What animal noises and sound effects were used to make the gargoyle sounds, like when they roar, growl, sigh? Also for Bronx and gargoyle beasts as well? What sound was used for when the gargoyles would dig their claws into stone? That one sounds a bit familar, almost like popping bublbe wrap.
Greg responds...
I don't recall. Sorry. Been too long. And I was never at foley sessions anyway. Just the mixes, when the effects had already been created.
Landon Thomas writes...
Hi, I'm posting on Disney/Marvel Merger Day and I'm looking for some historical perspective. Someone in the comment room says "I recall Greg once saying that back in the 90s Disney was interested in buying Marvel, but instead decided to create their own universe with Gargoyles." I've found this on the New Olympians episode ramble:
"ORIGINS
Well, the Greek Myths of course. But that's not really what I'm talking about. As many of you know, The New Olympians was a concept -- originally created by Bob Kline -- that we began developing at Disney TV Animation even BEFORE Gargoyles. It was definitely a concept that evolved, but it was also a concept that we felt fit nicely into the Gargoyles Universe. So this episode was created as a backdoor pilot. At the time we had big plans for the Gargoyles Universe. Hopes that it would eventually evolve into Disney's equivalent of the Marvel or DC Universe. The World Tour expanded our Universe in many ways -- mostly for the sake of the Gargoyles series itself. But also to demonstrate that our universe had the "chops" to go the distance."
Could you elaborate?
1) Is it true that Disney considered buying Marvel in the 90s?
2) Did the Disney higher-ups want a Gargoyles Universe to rival Marvel/DCU, if briefly, or was that your idea?
3) How heady were the days of season 2? Was Gargoyles being positioned as a significant face of Disney? I remember the Anaheim Gargoyles baseball team memo is from around that time too.
Greg responds...
1. Yes.
2. It was my suggestion, but it was a suggestion that my bosses, including Michael Eisner liked. At least for one meeting.
3. They weren't all that heady. There was a lot of potential in the property, but the schedule was also both long and brutal, and we were still producing episodes into May of 1996, even though the season had premiered in September or October of 1995. By January it was pretty clear that reruns, preemptions, the O.J. Simpson trial and Power Rangers had combined to severely damage our momentum. In addition, the death of Frank Wells and the departures of Jeffrey Katzenberg, Rich Frank, Gary Krisel and Bruce Cranston, i.e. some of the people who had been such great backers of the property, hurt too. As did Eisner's decision to step back from the hands-on decision making he had done vis-a-vis Disney T.V. Animation. It left us quite at sea. New people came in who had no affinity for the property, long before we were even done producing Season Two.
Tonya writes...
Hi Greg! I was reading an earlier post of yours where you mentioned that it's harder to pitch original ideas (I'm guessing to networks, but maybe it's the same with comics, books, etc...?) now than it was when you originally pitched Gargoyles:
1. Why is it more difficult to pitch original ideas now than it was then? (I would think they'd be anxious for new concepts???)
2. What's probably the #1 thing that the people being pitched to are looking for?
3. Is a successful pitch sometimes tied to the person you are pitching to? (I mean, if you're pitching to one guy on Tuesday, but had you gone on say, Thursday and had a different guy, could the outcome of the pitch be different? I guess I mean do you depend on getting lucky with whomever you're scheduled to pitch to? And if not, can you ask to pitch to someone else?)
Thanks! I hope my questions were clear enough to get across what I'm trying to ask. I'm thinking of writing professionally (IF I'm any good) and wondered how hard it would be to "pitch". Thanks again! (Love your work by the way.)
Greg responds...
1. They're not. They're afraid of new concepts and would rather have something that's "proven" in some other medium or era. This, in my opinion, is a direct result of the vertical integration of these companies that makes the decision making process a long uphill struggle.
2. It differs all the time, but marquis value doesn't hurt.
3. Luck-of-the-draw and incidental timing are huge factors.
Geoff writes...
What was with the animation goofs that happened throughout Gargoyles? Did they seriously get by everyone until the episodes were aired? (I'm talking about the character design ones, to be specific.)
Greg responds...
What exactly do you expect me to say here?
Sometimes things were off-model. Sometimes we had the time and money to fix it, other times we didn't.
MARVEL-FAN writes...
Greg, how come in the Spectacular Spider-Man it doesent use realistic gunshot sounds? But, Batman: The Brave and The Bold it uses realistic gunshot sounds, other Batman cartoon shows.
Greg responds...
Different networks have different rules, I guess.
Purplegoldfish writes...
Hi Greg,
erm, I don't know if you noticed, but I created a bit of a stir in the comment room recently about the design of Constance, and I would appreciate if I could have some of your input in the matter. It might put this annoying demon in my mind to rest.
I'm just wondering, if at any time in the design process for Coco you made the connection between her being a heavy set female that resembles an animal that is unfortunately used as a negative metaphor for large women.
I actually like Coco's design, and her personality especially. What I don't like is that she's the only full figured female we've seen and she just happens to resemble a pig.
I admit I'm a bit jaded and cynical when it comes to this stuff. Chalk that up to having to endure a lot of verbal abuse growing up. I'm just really curious if you personally made that connection while designing the character. I'm really interested to see what you have to say about it.
Greg responds...
One of the main reasons that the original Coco became Broadway (i.e. why we took a female heavy-set gargoyle and made her male) was because we were afraid of the politically correct blow-back that we thought would come by depicting her that way. It's a double standard, but it's true. You can do a heavy set guy who likes to eat. But you can't do it with a gal without risking repercussions.. Ultimately though, that's cowardice. And not that I think the series is poorer for it, because I love Broadway, but ANY series is poorer for that kind of cowardice. When you fold to that, you wind up with the same types (not bad types, but the same ones) over and over.
Having gotten over that specific brand of cowardice (though I'm sure I'm still subject to other examples of the same kind of thing), I decided to create this new Constance/Coco. Being part of the London Clan meant she should be based on a heraldic animal. And the boar was one I hadn't used yet. So let's hit it HEAD ON. She's a heavy-set female gargoyle -- and she even has a pig-snout.
So go for it. Tell me she's nothing but a bad and inappropriate joke. I dare you. (I don't mean "you", Purplegoldfish, but a more generic "you" that's out there.) If I do my job well, then there's no concern. She's strong and multi-faceted, and her size is just an aspect of who she is, not the whole story. If all anyone can see is the girth and the snout then either I've failed... or that "anyone" has failed to look beyond the surface, which is one of the MAJOR themes of the entire series.
Generally, the response to Coco has been fairly positive, so I'm feeling pretty good about the job I did. Even you seem to like her, and your reservations are based on surface qualities and old prejudices and memories that I was openly defying on purpose. I can live with that. (Since ultimately I have no choice.)
Plus, I just really like Coco's design. I think David Hedgecock did a GREAT job on her. Instantly, I forgot about any agenda and just thought she was a great looking character. Which is how it should be.
Anonymous writes...
who paid for gargoyles
Greg responds...
Originally? Disney.
Bazell writes...
How do you come up with your character names? (though the Manhatten's names' origins can be easily deduced)
Greg responds...
Different ways. And I didn't come up with all of them. Some came from other writers and story editors, such as Cary Bates and Michael Reaves. Others come from mythology or legend, etc. We try to make the names believable but have resonance.
Anonymous writes...
Generally speaking, about how many pages is the script for an average 30-minute television episode?
Greg responds...
Well, for starters, it's really 22-minutes (once you subtract commercials, credits, etc.) Our scripts for Season One of Spectacular Spider-Man were 36 pages. But we were often long and were often forced to cut material that was scripted and recorded. So for Season Two, we cut back to 34 pages. And still we were often long and forced to cut material that was scripted and recorded.
slayer38 writes...
Iam very interested for the 3rd season as comics. But i want to know, comes this comics also translated into german language in the german book stores? My English is not the best, << you can see that in my text. and another question? in 1996 at the moment disney do not produce season 3 with you as author, why you dont changed to another company at this moment. (btw. The goliath chronicles sucks, the liason between goliath and eliza are also ignored.)
And btw. My favorite Episodes is Hunters moon part 1 - 3. Great story, very dramatical, and the lovely end, << at this moment between goliath and eliza, the fans waited since episode "the mirror" / german titel "Der Spiegel"
And is that true. Episode "the mirror" is cutted in usa (in tv) because the "world trade center"?
Greg responds...
I'm afraid I have no information on German translations.
And I don't own the property. Disney does. It wasn't and ISN'T mine to take anywhere else.
As far as I know, "The Mirror" still airs with all the others.
Nick P. writes...
Hello. Since this is my first question I feel obligated to state that I've been a Gargoyles follower since the show's original airing, and even though I don't live in the US anymore, I still manage to order the comic books. I particularly like how coherent the gargoyles universe it. Too often I'm confused by bizarre universes that fiction creates (specifically comic books), and I'm please to find myself being able to recall what happened to all the characters and what's going on and realize that it makes sense (recall some of the more confusing story-lines in the marvel comics of the 90s that nearly required a long-winded nerd debate just to remind yourself of what's going on). Also, Keith David's voice knocked the show up a few notches on the cool scale.
Anyway, I have a number of questions that I will send from time to time when I find ways to word them so they like real inquiries rather than fan boy rants, so I'll start with something simple:
Did you originally create Gargoyles with the intention of it being a children's show? I felt at times like I was watching a watered down version of what the show was intended to be, which was weird and a little unsatisfying at times.
Greg responds...
Nothing was watered down -- and frankly I can't even think what gave you that impression. The show was developed from day one to appeal to kids. What we did simultaneously was write the show on multiple levels so that in addition to kids, we would also appeal to tweens, teens, college students and adults.
Brenden writes...
A few days ago I realized something about Norse mythology. Most of the time the Honorable Viking Warrior was fighting an Inhuman Monster. Was this theme a factor in choosing vikings to sac castle Wyvern or was just because they were the most prolific badguys of Europe at the time. This realization really added too the anti clich'e of Gargoyles for me, where the "Inhuman Monster" was the victim and the "Honorable Viking Warrior" was a cowardly murderer.
Greg responds...
I think the Vikings may have been Michael Reaves' idea.
Webhead2006 writes...
Hello greg, I just wanted to say season 1 of SSM was very good and i cant wait to see many many more seasons come for the series. I loved it alot besides a few changes here and there i didnt like at first but grew on me over time and it works for the show itself. I just had a question i was wondering on the production side of things for the show. How long does it take to animate a single episode for the series?
Greg responds...
It takes eight to ten months - give or take.
Durkinator writes...
This is question in regards to censorship in Spectacular Spider-Man. Back in the 90s series, there was an obnoxious amount of censorship (Spidey couldn't throw a punch?!) that sometimes hindered the story in obvious ways. Now, Spectacular Spidey is obviously a bit of a lighter tone, so I don't expect to see people dying all over the place or anything, but I am curious about how the censorship from the studios of this series differs from other shows you've worked on, like Gargoyles--which I think was great about being delightfully edgy whilst still obeying the censors. Gargoyles was much darker that Spider-Man currently is, obviously; I'm just curious as to how similar the rules regarding the amount of death and violence and such are and if it has changed a lot since your work in the 90s.
And just to be clear, I'm not complaining or asking for Spider-Man to be darker or more violent or anything, I'm very happy with how everything has been handled and balanced without getting too "gritty" thus far (and I'm usually a sucker for dark stories). I'm just curious, you know?.
Greg responds...
I'm hinky about the way you throw the word "censor" around. The biggest rule is, was and always has been our own personal standards of what's right and wrong, what is and isn't appropriate. After that, both Gargoyles and Spectacular Spider-Man benefited from having smart, intelligent and understanding S&P executives (Adrienne Bello for Gargoyles, Patricia Dennis for Spidey). As I've mentioned before, there wasn't much we wanted to do on Spidey that was disallowed. The realistic sound of gunshots comes to mind... and those are being restored on the DVDs. I think it has less to do with the era, and more to do with the individual looking over your shoulder.
avalon writes...
A spectacular SpiderMan question (one of these days you'll probably need to devote a separate SpiderMan Ask Greg! :))....some of the script and storylines are flat out funny and witty, I love it! Do you come up with these lines in your writing as well or is there a separate staff that does this?
Greg responds...
There isn't a SEPARATE staff. There's just THE staff: myself, Randy Jandt, Kevin Hopps, Matt Wayne and Andrew Robinson on Season One. Nicole Dubuc joined the staff for Season Two. It's a team effort on breaking stories. Dialogue generally comes from the writer credited on the episode with an assist from me.
Simon Elst writes...
M. Weisman,
I'm a student soundengineering (final year) at the IAD (Institut des Arts de Diffusion de Louvain-La-Neuve, Belgium ; http://www.iad-arts.be ). I take the liberty of writing you about my thesis. It had to handle on the role of sound in animationfilm. My ambition is to bring out the importance of sound in animation film, my passion in which I want to invest myself in the future. The fact is that the Gargoyles were my heroes wen I was young (thanks to belgian televisions to made it possible !).
I think Gargoyles would be an excellent example to analyse in detail for my thesis. To do so, I'd like of course your permission, but also, if possible, your help by means of a few questions to answer. Would you ? I can understand that answering all the questions may be heavy, so.. use the way you want ! :)
a) In your opinion, are there (or have there to be) differences in the aesthetic and the realism of the sound when handling on "live" film or animated film. If yes, wich ones, and why? If no, why?
b) What do you think about next three hypothesis :
1) "Reality Effect" : traditional animation film is, by essence, soundless : the elements (components) that forms the film (figures, objects, sets, …) are mostly "silent" and even if they could produce sounds, the fact of shooting image by image makes it impossible to record live. The artificiallity or virtuality of the elements on screen creates a lack of credibility : the audience isn't naturally absorbed in the represented world. In movies in general, sound permits to locate elements "off screen", to create a world of which a great deal isn't seen at the screen. It has to be the same in animation film. But, as the characters are artificial here, there presence and activity doesn't exist for the audience unless by a "sound confirmation".
2) "Sound inspires life into the virtuals worlds of animation film" : in the same way as the animator gives live to his figures, the soundengineer gives them a lively dimension (thanks to the voices, the presences and the interactions of the character with his environment).
3) Most of the animationfilms are shot at 12 frames per second. The result is tolerably well for the audience, but nevertheless less fluid than in a "live" film. Sound is a constant component that permits "to link up the frames", to put a smooth coating upon the frames, and so reduce partly the "jerky appearance" of the 12fps format.
Thanking you in advance for your answer, Simon Elst
Greg responds...
To begin with, you don't need my permission to do a thesis on Gargoyles. But if you want my blessing, I say go for it!
a. I've never done live action, so I'm not the guy to ask about comparisons. I know we want what is real to sound real, and what isn't to sound innovative, spectacular and yet still real.
b.
1. I guess I'd buy that.
2. Sure.
3. We shoot at 24 frames per second, although we shoot on twos quite often, which makes it 12 drawings per second. Though I tend to agree with the general premise nevertheless.
She Who Shall Remain Anonymous writes...
Hi, Greg! I was wondering, which character would you say is the one the audience is supposed to identify with? I would guess Brooklyn, or maybe Elisa.
Greg responds...
I don't really write this series that way. Each episode or issue defines its own parameters.
Nelio writes...
In the background while I am playing on my MMORPG, I tend to have my DVDs going, which of course includes Gargoyles. Tonight I was watching Legion when I noticed the Gargoyles heading to an island north of the Statue of Liberty while chasing Coldstone. Out of curiosity, I decided to check google maps and see which island that was since I didn't think it was named in the show. TO my surprise, Ellis Island is not only in the exact location as in the show, but is incredibly accurate to what was show. I even managed to find the exact location in which Coldstone crash to on the fort there.
Likewise, in other episodes I have noticed an astonishing level of detail in Gargoyles, which I find to be very cool since it is placed in a real world location. To name a few, the Brooklyn Bridge (Reawakening), Belvedere Castle (High Noon), Central Park (various episodes), and so forth in the show. While I was a child, I never noticed just how much detail was there, but now that I am an adult, I can see just how much effort went into it.
My question to you: How much research did you put into these real world locations that appear on the show, and did you check to make sure that the art for the locations were accurate?
PS. Thanks for having a great and dedicated site where we the fans can ask you our questions! I only wished my other favorite shows had similar sites.
Greg responds...
I lived in New York for years. So I did very little locational research myself. Mostly relied on my memory. But our artists (both in L.A. and Tokyo) did TREMENDOUS amounts of research. I never had to check to make sure it was accurate. I trusted those guys and gals. And my trust seemed well-placed, don't you think?
: « First : « 50 : Displaying #84 - #133 of 536 records. : 50 » : Last » :