A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Ask Greg Archives
Pop Culture
Archive Index
: Displaying #1 - #25 of 305 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
Fallenlegend writes...
Hey Greg, got some multiverse questions. Not going to ask about earth 17 as I know that:s a spoiler…but ignoring that:
1.- How open would you be to earth 16 interacting with other universes?
2.- How open would you be to the idea of Canon crossovers with other shows for earth 16 ? I know there are plays, but those aren’t canon. Say Teen titans and the team of Young justice meeting for real instead of that Beast boy nightmare.
2b Also how do you feel about the ides of canon crossovers between other shows with Gargoyles (not counting your planned spin-offs like Bad guys’’
3.- Do you view Earth 16 as being isolated from the multiverse? As in part of the multiverse, but more bound to interact with other universes?
Thanks Greg
Greg responds...
1. Not very. It all sounds like fun in any individual story, but I think it's extremely ripe for abuse. EXTREMELY RIPE FOR ABUSE.
2. Same answer.
2b. I don't much care for the idea on the surface. But we did have plans to cross over with the Team Atlantis Universe. Or rather a version of Gargoyles existed in the Team Atlantis Universe. And a version of Team Atlantis exists in the Gargoyles Universe.
3. I really am not sure I understand either way that you phrased the question.
One Last HERCULES springboard
This last HERCULES springboard I can recall must have only been a verbal pitch, as I don't seem to have a document to cut and paste here. So, I don't remember too much about it. But it was a Western pastiche, based on the television series BONANZA, called "Hercules and the Sons of Poseidon".
The idea was to treat Poseidon like he was Lorne Greene/Ben Cartwright.
And he had three sons:
THESEUS (Pernell Roberts/Adam Cartwright)
POLYPHEMOS (Dan Blocker/Hoss Cartwright)
TRITON (Michael Landon/Little Joe Cartwright)
Polyphemos, of course, is the cyclops from the Odyssey. Triton was going to be the youngest brother, but he was going to be the Triton who would someday grow up to become Ariel's father in THE LITTLE MERMAID.
And that's about all I can remember about the idea. Mark and Bob didn't go for it. But somehow, we took Theseus and found our way to making him the Grim Avenger for the one episode I DID end up writing for HERCULES.
Anonymous writes...
Two Questions In Regards To Earth-16 Black Canary:
#1. Is her full name Dinah Laurel Lance?
#2. Does she have a sister (Sara Lance) like her Arrowverse counterpart?
Greg responds...
1. Not committing to that.
2. I doubt it. I don't think that fits our history for her. But I'm not committing to this either.
In general, though, I'd avoid looking to other media versions of these heroes as reference points. Each series or movie generally goes its own way.
RJB writes...
Hi Greg,
1. Do you think that "quality of writing" is something that the average person might have a stronger opinion about compared to other subjective creative forms like art or music? Does that make it more likely that you'll get people complaining about the quality of the writing in a show rather than any other aspect of it?
2. Is it fair to say that a lot of complaints of this nature are ignorant of the many factors that go into making a show outside of purely creative decisions? Stuff like budget, scheduling or availability that might influence what's reasonably possible to do in a specific time frame?
3. Have you noticed these kinds of criticisms getting worse over time? I feel there wouldn't have been as many people complaining about "Hello, Megan" during the time of Gargoyles, or maybe even Spidey.
4. I get that armchair criticism has always been around and that social media has provided a bigger platform for it, but the recent negative reception to stuff like the ending of Game of Thrones or Star Wars The Last Jedi has made me curious about your perspective on this kind of thing.
Greg responds...
1. I do think that. My hypothesis - untested, unconfirmed - is that in a literal sense, nearly everyone knows how to "write". They know how to grab a pencil, pen or keyboard and put words on a page in an order that is at least comprehensible to another human being. So there is, perhaps, a subconscious assumption that if they just set their minds to it, that they could write stories, too - as good or better as most of the professional writers out there. On the other hand, to take your examples, not everybody believes they can draw or make music. Those talents seem esoteric, special, unique. I believe they strike a bit more awe - at least generally - than writing does. So the writing becomes the easy target. Or at least the easier target. But, of course, I'm a writer that can't draw or make music. So it makes sense that I should believe I'm under attack more. Human nature. So take it all with a grain of salt.
2. I think that's very fair to say. (And this is reading a bit like I posted these questions myself in order to defend myself with the answers. Not that I'm complaining.)
3. The internet is... well... awful... in so many ways. And its spread and influence has increased over the years, so, yes, it is definitely getting worse. But it hasn't really changed. Back in the pre-internet days, I'd still get nasty letters (sent via the post office) on Captain Atom. And the basic percentage of praise to criticism to abuse is really about the same. It just feels multiplied by the internet. The quantity of feedback is exponentially larger. And, again, human nature being what it is, I can get literally 50 tweets of praise, which are then wiped out of my mind by one mean tweet.
4. Well, I hated the ending of Game of Thrones, too... and I had mixed feelings about Last Jedi... but that wasn't the point of your question. It definitely FEELS worse. The main thing that people don't seem to get is that I LIKE MY SHOW. Brandon and I like what we've done. Not every frame, mind you, but overall, we LIKE OUR SHOW. And we are making the show WE WANT TO MAKE. I don't mind that people don't like it. (It'd be lovely, I suppose if we had 100% praise for the thing, but I honestly don't expect that. Ever.) What gets on my nerves is the assumption that many "fans" (or hate-watchers) have that we should be making the show that THEY WANT US TO MAKE, and that we're failing because we're not MAKING THEIR SHOW instead of MAKING OUR SHOW. That does grind on me. You want to shout out: "GO MAKE YOUR OWN DAMN SHOW!! No one's forcing you to watch ours!" But, of course, that's not a particularly politic statement to make. And more hate-watchers are still more watchers.
Anonymous writes...
Mr. Weisman,
In the comics, the full name of Batwoman is addressed in two different ways:
#1. In pre-Flashpoint DC Comics continuity (New Earth), her full name is addressed as Katherine Rebecca "Kate" Kane.
#2. In post-Flashpoint DC Comics continuity (Prime Earth), her full name is addressed as Katherine "Kate" Rebecca Kane.
As such, in the Earth-16 continuity, which version of Batwoman's full name is the correct version to address her by?
Greg responds...
This doesn't make any sense to me. Her birth certificate wouldn't read as either option. So where one chooses to place her nickname "in quotation marks" is arbitrary or, at best, based on a style guide. Neither is right or wrong. And I don't see any actual difference between options #1 and #2. It certainly has nothing to do with whether it's pre or post flashpoint. I'd guess it has more to do with the stylistic choices of various writers and/or editors.
Also, to be clear, I'm not confirming that her middle name is Rebecca, by the way.
Anonymous writes...
Mr. Weisman,
In the DCEU film, "Man of Steel," and in the second episode of the second season of the Arrowverse TV show, "Superman & Lois," Kal-El is indicated to be a natural-born Kryptonian; while all other Kryptonians were genetically-engineered. Is this true for the Earth-16 version of Superman as well?
Greg responds...
Absolutely not.
Anonymous writes...
Mr. Weisman,
In 2017, Bruce's full name was established as "Bruce Thomas Wayne" in post-Flashpoint DC Comics continuity. Does this full name also apply to the Earth-16 version of the character?
Greg responds...
Not necessarily.
Anonymous writes...
Considering that the YJ versions of Wonder Girl, Artemis, Zatanna, and Miss Martian appear in "Scooby-Doo! WrestleMania Mystery", does that mean that it's canon to the YJ universe or is it just fun cameos?
Greg responds...
Just fun cameos. At least for now...
Anonymous writes...
Which of these two would you rather do?
A Spectacular Spider-Man Season 3 or writing the next Spider-Man trilogy for the MCU?
(I mainly ask this because I think you'd be the best choice for writing the next Spider-Man films)
Greg responds...
The hypotheticals attached to these questions are so vast as to make it impossible to answer. I'd love to do additional seasons of Spectacular. And I certainly wouldn't say no to writing anything for the MCU, let alone three Spider-Man films.
Claire writes...
Is Achilles gay? Was/is he in a romantic relationship with Patroclus?
Greg responds...
I would say so. But honestly, I'm not sure why you're asking me.
Verdragon writes...
Since you've written for the character before, what are your thoughts on the MCU version of Spiderman, and what do you think makes a good Spiderman adaptation as a whole?
Greg responds...
Generally speaking, I like the MCU Spider-Man. There's a lot to like. I like his youth and inexperience. I like his good intentions, not always backed up by his relatively inexperienced actions. I may have quibbles here and there, but they're relatively minor.
What "makes a good Spiderman adaptation as a whole?" Well, for starters, you definitely need a hyphen. It's Spider-Man, not Spiderman.
Beyond that, I think I've answered this question in great detail - over two seasons and twenty-six episodes: it's called THE SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN. That's my version of the best way to adapt the character. I'll let it speak for itself.
Guest Ramble
I'm attaching a ramble J. Michael Straczynski posted back in 1995 on usenet in response to a very negative reaction to even a hint at a same-sex tryst on an episode of "Babylon 5". The point of Greg Weisman posting this is not to get into a discussion of religion or LGBTQ+ issues. Or even to get into a discussion of "tolerance," which was a big buzzword in the 90s, but which, as I've stated before in many ways, I find insufficient. The point of me posting this is to show that just because SOME FANS don't like something doesn't mean EVERY FAN feels the same way. And so, be careful what you wish for, right? Because if people start telling creators what they can and can't put into their shows, you may not like what ELSE they remove.
See, here's where I start to have a problem. For starters, I don't do any thing to be politically correct, or politically incorrect, I do what I do in any story because that's what the story points me toward. Anybody who says "It's not necessary" isn't entitled to that judgement, frankly; you don't know what's necessary to the story. And by framing it in the "is this NECESSARY?" way is designed to make you defend your position when such defense isn't the point; is it NECESSARY to have humor? to have a romance? to have correct science? No, *nothing* is NECESSARY. It's what the writer feels is right for that scene, that story, that character.
"Oh, well, I saw it, but was all that violence NECESSARY?" This is, frankly, a BS observation usually offered by someone with an agenda, who wishes to invalidate the notion of an artistic view and impose some kind of quota, or objective criterion to what is and isn't necessary for a movie or film. As far as I'm concerned, the first person to throw this into a discussion has, frankly, just lost the argument.
Point the second: one of the most consistent comments I get, in email and regular mail, is the spirituality conveyed in the show, that we have shown, and will continue to show, tolerance toward religion, even created sympathetic religious characters. "Thank you for your tolerance," they say...until we show somebody or some action THEY don't like...and at that point suddenly it's a lot of tsk-tsking and chest thumping and disapproval; so okay, how about I just stop all positive religious aspects of the show?
It seems to me, that if I do *all that* with religion, and with thje (the) simple act of showing maybe ONE PERSON in all the long history of TV science fiction across 40 years has a different view of life, that the show is somehow degraded, or downgraded, or dropped in opinion...this simply reinforces the notion, held by many, that a lot of folks in the religious right wish to make sure no other perspective or lifestyle is ever shown on television, at any time, unless in a negative fashion.
The thing of it is, while on the one hand I'm getting praise from religious folks for addressing spirituality in my series (speaking here as an atheist), I've gotten flack from others who think it has no place in a SCIENCE fiction series, and why the hell am I putting something in that goes right against my own beliefs? "Because," I tell them, "this show is not about reflecting my beliefs, or yours, or somebody else's, it's about telling this story, about these people, with as much honesty and integrity as I can summon up. That means conceding the fact that religious people are going to be around 260 years from now." Well, fact is, all kinds of people are going to be around 260 years from now. And what did the anti-religion folks say specifically about including spirituality in my series? "It's not *necessary*," they said.
Translation: they didn't like it. Well, tough. It was right for this story, and this show. And it seems to me rather hypocritical for some folks, who applaud the show for tolerance, for my standing up to those who want to exclude religion from TV, to then turn around and say the show is diminished because it showed that same tolerance...to another group or perspective. I guess tolerance is only okay as long as it's pointed one way.
You say that as a christian, you think any sex except that between a husband and a wife to be wrong. Well, as I recall, the bible also speaks against murder. We've depicted deaths by the hundreds of thousands. (And we're talking here about the *depicting* of the act, simply showing it, not the value judgements made after the fact.) Why does the one (which is so barely hinted at as to be almost invisible) cause the show to be diminished where the other does not?
My job is not to reinforce your personal political, social or religious beliefs. My job is not to reinforce MY personal political, social or religious beliefs. Then it isn't art or storytelling anymore, it's simply propaganda. My job is to tell this story, about these people, AS people, as mixed and varied as they are today. And there is no outside objective criteria as to what is, or isn't *necessary* in a story; that is the sole province of the author. You may or may not like it. You may or may not choose to watch it. Just as people who don't like to see religion and god discussed on TV may dislike it or choose not to watch it.
But you'll excuse me if I see complaints about this one little thing from the religious side, after all I've done to present religious characters and the religious life in a positive fashion, to be hypocritical and frankly somewhat ungrateful. It's as though all this means nothing because of one thing, one outside-imposed litmus test that disregards anything and everything else that has been done.
So straight up...if I should stop tolerating or showing viewpoints that are not my own (spoken as someone who is absolutely straight), then should I now stop showing religion as well? Because that's what this comes down to. Is that what you want? Because religion is included at my discretion as well as anything else on this show. You want me to be less tolerant? Just say the word.
Borris writes...
Hi Greg.
1: Has Lois won a pulitzer in universe?
2: How proud of you about the continued success of Kaldur'ahm? DC's Aquaman: The Becoming shows that he's become a mainstay of the DC universe
Greg responds...
1. Hm. Not sure. I'd want to discuss that with Brandon.
2. I know I should just say, "It's great!" But iIs it fair to say I have mixed feelings? On the one hand, I feel like the Jake that's soon to star in his own show is two iterations removed from Kaldur (via Jackson), and that Brandon, Phil and I don't get the proper credit for creating what was the basis for the character. On the other hand, I'm glad that his reach is expanding on any level. It's a conundrum.
Anonymous writes...
Have you by some chance seen or read "March Comes In Like A Lion"/"3-gatsu no Lion", somehow the storytelling in that is very reminiscent of your style of writing, if you have not I highly recommend you watch it.
Greg responds...
I have not.
Anonymous writes...
Hi Mr. Weisman, really love watching Phantoms and the fruits of your labor! I had a bit of a different question for you.
You said in the past that you were impressed with Avatar: The Last Airbender and you were planning on watching The Legend of Korra after.
1) What did you think about the sequel series? Particularly in relation to its predecessor?
2) I know you try to keep your own work original and you try to avoid taking outside ideas, but were there certain elements (story or character) from either Avatar:TLA or TLOK that you felt were interesting to use in your stories?
3) If you had an opportunity to work within that universe, would you craft a story with gambits that you're so famously known for or would you take a different direction than usual?
Thank you again. Young Justice and Avatar/Korra were large elements of my childhood and what stands out to me are the very strong themes, characters, and over-arching narrative. I feel pretty blessed to be part of a generation that could have not only enjoyed it but grew up with them as well.
Greg responds...
1. I haven't watched it yet. I watched Avatar with my son. Now, he's all grow'd up and living 3,000 miles away, and we don't have the same kind of time to sit together and watch an entire series. Still would like to someday.
2. I actively try not to think that way.
3. That's such a massive hypothetical, I don't even know how to answer it.
Crossoverparinglover writes...
Unrelated to the last one and thought I'd ask.
Are/were there any other series, beside Scooby Doo, that you explored/are curious about crossing into YJ from beyond DC (I assume if you are, say, in talks for Ben 10 x Young Justice you can't say)
Not sure how the legalese of that question works, as sometimes it feels like rights get lost in WB sometimes.
Greg responds...
I can't think of anything, honestly. Doesn't mean some random idea wasn't tossed out at some point, and I've simply forgotten. But nothing's coming to mind.
Unless you count the just-for-fun Gargoyles/Spectacular Spider-Man/Young Justice crossovers I wrote for various radio plays at various conventions, all of which can be viewed on YouTube.
Isaac writes...
Hello! I was wondering if you ever watched Robert Kirkman's Invincible (2021) animated series? It's about superheroes and gave me the same vibes as Spectacular Spider-Man and Young Justice (just WAY gorier). I really enjoyed it, and one aspect of it that I absolutely loved was the longer episodes, running about forty-to-fifty minutes each. I know it's way above your pay-grade, but I was just curious, if you had the choice, would you want to extend your episodes to fifty-some minutes like Invincible? Or would you want to keep them a little over twenty minutes? Assuming of course you'd be able to still produce twenty to twenty-six episodes for each season, which Invincible didn't do at just eight episodes per the first season.
Anyways, Happy Halloween! I'm eagerly awaiting the next episode of YJ Phantoms! Artemis' arc is looking to be fantastic!
Greg responds...
I haven't seen Invincible.
In some ways, I'd love to stop worrying about episode lengths entirely. But I'd still want the same quantity of episodes (or more). And budget is definitely a factor. It's been great on the last couple of seasons of YJ that if we have (within our budget) been freed from the constraints of a maximum length. But I don't feel like we've been hugely restricted by running between 22 and 27 minutes. Don't know that we need "fifty-some".
Josh writes...
1. Do you consider yourself a fan of the horror genre?
2. I read on here that you watched the pilot of Penny Dreadful. What did you think of the show in its entirety, assuming you continued to watch it? Personally I thought it was one of the best shows of the 2010's.
3. Did you enjoy the FX show Legion?
Greg responds...
1. Not particularly.
2. I liked it quite a bit until the last season, where I felt they were working REALLY hard to tie it all up and finish it. I also watched Penny Dreadful: City of Angels and wasn't as thrilled.
3. Most of it.
Todd Jensen writes...
A couple of weeks ago or so, the comic strip "Sally Forth" had a scene where the family was discussing Halloween decorations for their house - and suggested gargoyles, but wanted to make them the ones from the "Disney nineties series". I thought it was a pleasant surprise for the show to get a casual allusion like that (and in the Comics Kingdom discussion section, a few posters had fond memories of the series; one particularly praised the voice actors).
Greg responds...
That's nice. Sally Forth isn't in the Los Angeles Times anymore, so I missed that. Too bad.
Antiyonder writes...
1. Is there still the interest in doing a Young Justice/Scooby Doo film? I figure even with YJ now being for a older audience it wouldn't be out of place considering Scooby's appearance on Supernatural.
2. Was it planned as a canon story (and as such the Mysteries Inc. Gang being part of continuity)? Or does the Newsgirl Legion presence change such is previously a yes?
Greg responds...
1. Brandon and I are still interested. I don't know that anyone else at WB ever was.
2. We never got that far. But we were, at the time, willing to do a Scooby import into the YJ universe, or a YJ import into the Scooby universe.
Todd Jensen writes...
Earlier this year, two of Disney's television animated series included allusions to "Gargoyles". The first was the series finale of "Duck Tales", which had an already-established character, a headless horse named Manny, become a Goliath-counterpart (including a scene where he grows a head and wings while the theme music of "Gargoyles" plays, then cries - voiced by Keith David - "I live again, again!" - it makes sense in context). The second was in the Season Two finale of "Amphibia", where one of the characters is seen looking through a book on legends, which had a picture of Goliath drawn in the style of Leonardo da Vinci's "Vitruvian Man".
I was wondering if you'd heard of these two nods to the show, and if so, what you thought of them.
Greg responds...
I'd heard about both, though I haven't seen them myself.
It tickles me.
Alex writes...
1. Do you think Xanatos will ever form a club with Lex Luthor and Norman Osborn? I can't imagine he would find Bruce Wayne and Tony Stark fun for long :)
2. Regarding their wealth do you think Xanatos and Luthor are billionaires and Osborn was a multi millionaire in terms of wealth?
Greg responds...
1. I think we touched on this in one or two of the RadioPlays. You can check 'em out on YouTube. There are links in the Gargoyles Wiki.
2. I haven't done the math.
Krazyfan writes...
You like Ghost Rider, right? since they have the ability to amplify and boost anything they ride on, what kinda things would you ever want to see one ride? I kinda like the idea of Johnny or another Rider Riding, and therefore Boosting, either The Hulk, or the Helicarrior...
Greg responds...
Um... how about a motorcycle? Is that too radical?
Jim writes...
Would you ever like to write for Power Rangers?
Greg responds...
Ironically, I'm not categorically opposed. But that's a very big hypothetical. No one's ever asked me.
Zero writes...
What do you think of Peter Parker in the Marvel Cinematic Universe?
Greg responds...
I generally like him quite a bit.
: Displaying #1 - #25 of 305 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :