A Station Eight Fan Web Site
So, having nothing to do with the future of Young Justice or Young Justice: Invasion, Khary Payton and I pitched a Young Justice spin-off to DC Nation, based on a suggestion by David Wilcox, inspired by a design by Phil Bourassa.
The folks at DC Nation asked for a brief write-up, but Khary and I felt that the best way to get the idea across was to write a script for the first episode. So we did. On spec. Though it received some praise, DC Nation eventually passed on it. But I thought you'd like to see it, so here it is, keeping in mind that it's NOT formatted correctly on this website:
BLACK MANTA'S CELEBRITY HOT TUB
"Black Beetle, Black Vykin, Black Lightning"
Written by Khary Payton & Greg Weisman
FIRST DRAFT: October 17, 2012.
EXT. BLACK MANTA'S BACKYARD - NIGHT
ON BLACK MANTA'S BAND - MANTA TROOPERS play various instruments, including the LEAD TROOPER playing SAXOPHONE through a small hole in his helmet and three female BACK-UP SINGERS (CHESHIRE, AMANDA WALLER & KILLER FROST - all in their standard outfits, including Cheshire's mask). The Lead Trooper finishes a <SAX RIFF> and then sings into his microphone:
LEAD TROOPER (singing): Who's the man with the underwater plan?
CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): Black Manta!
LEAD TROOPER (singing): Who's got the time to do the crime?
CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): Black Manta!
TRUCK OUT TO REVEAL - A large bubbling HOT TUB.
LEAD TROOPER (singing): Who do you know with his own Hot Tub Show?
CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): Black Manta!
LEAD TROOPER: That's right, it's…
LEAD TROOPER, CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): "Black Manta's Celebrity Hot Tub!"
CLOSE ON WATER - BLACK MANTA (in full costume) slowly RISES out of the bubbling water to sit (up to his chest) in the tub.
LEAD TROOPER (OS): With your host, Black Manta!
WIDEN TO INCLUDE BLACK BEETLE (in full costume) - Sitting in the tub beside Manta.
LEAD TROOPER (OS CONT): Manta's guest tonight: Black Beetle.
Manta turns to Beetle. Neither say anything for a LONG BEAT. Then Black Manta <BLASTS> Black Beetle with his EYE-BEAMS. Beetle <EXPLODES> and is just gone. Manta sits back in the tub.
ON BAND - The Lead Trooper, Back-Up Singers and the rest all stare at their boss. Then they quickly cover.
LEAD TROOPER: Thanks for watching! This has been…
SMASH WIPE TO:
EXT. BLACK MANTA'S BACKYARD - NEW NIGHT
ON BLACK MANTA'S BAND
LEAD TROOPER, CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): "Black Manta's Celebrity Hot Tub!"
CLOSE ON WATER - BLACK MANTA (in full costume) slowly RISES out of the bubbling water to sit (up to his chest) in the tub.
LEAD TROOPER (OS): With your host, Black Manta!
WIDEN TO INCLUDE BLACK VYKIN (in full costume) - Sitting in the tub beside Manta.
LEAD TROOPER (OS CONT): Manta's guest tonight: Black Vykin.
Manta turns to Vykin. Neither say anything for a LONG BEAT. Then Black Manta <BLASTS> Black Vykin with his EYE-BEAMS. Vykin <EXPLODES> and is just gone. Manta sits back in the tub.
ON BAND - Less surprised.
LEAD TROOPER: Thanks for watching! This has been…
SMASH WIPE TO:
EXT. BLACK MANTA'S BACKYARD - NEW NIGHT
ON BLACK MANTA'S BAND
LEAD TROOPER, CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): "Black Manta's Celebrity Hot Tub!"
CLOSE ON WATER - BLACK MANTA (in full costume) slowly RISES out of the bubbling water to sit (up to his chest) in the tub.
LEAD TROOPER (OS): With your host, Black Manta!
WIDEN TO INCLUDE - Nobody.
LEAD TROOPER (OS CONT): Manta's guest tonight: Black Lightning.
TILT UP - BLACK LIGHTNING (in full costume) stands beside the tub with his arms crossed. Manta looks up at him.
BLACK MANTA: Man, get in the tub.
BLACK LIGHTNING: I'm not getting in that tub.
BLACK MANTA: Get in the tub, man.
BLACK LIGHTNING: Not unless you take off that helmet.
BLACK MANTA: Man, I'm not taking off my helmet!
BLACK LIGHTNING: Then I'm not getting in the tub.
ON MANTA - Very begrudgingly, he starts to REMOVE his helmet.
BLACK MANTA: <low grumble>
REVEAL that with the helmet off, Manta's AFRO is STILL shaped like his helmet.
FAVOR LIGHTNING - He NODS.
BLACK LIGHTNING: Oh. You don't want to get your hair wet.
BLACK MANTA: I don't want to get my hair wet. Now get in the hot tub.
ON TUB - Lightning LOWERS himself into the tub beside Manta. Neither says anything for a LONG BEAT. Then Manta's afro <FRIZZES OUT> huge and ridiculous from the humidity.
ON BACK-UP SINGERS - Reacting.
CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST: <Ooooooooooooo!>
ON TUB - Manta glowers.
BLACK MANTA: <low burn>
Then Black Manta's ROCKET-LAUNCHER <RATCHETS> out of his shoulder and <BLASTS> Black Lightning, who <EXPLODES> and is just gone. Manta sits back in the tub.
ON BAND - Ready this time.
LEAD TROOPER (singing): Who do you know with his own Hot Tub Show?
CHESHIRE, WALLER, FROST (singing): Black Manta!
BLACK MANTA'S CELEBRITY HOT TUB
"Black Beetle, Black Vykin, Black Lightning"
BLACK MANTA - 6 lines. With and without his helmet. When the helmet's off, his Afro is the same shape as the helmet - until it FRIZZES OUT ridiculously.
LEAD TROOPER - 16 lines. Singing and announcing. In a Manta Trooper costume with a hole for the mouth so that he can play saxophone and sing.
CHESHIRE - 8 lines. One of Manta's back-up singers. In full costume, including her mask.
AMANDA WALLER - 8 lines. One of Manta's back-up singers. In standard outfit.
KILLER FROST - 8 lines. One of Manta's back-up singers. In full costume.
BLACK LIGHTNING - 4 lines.
BLACK BEETLE - No lines.
BLACK VYKIN - No lines.
MANTA TROOPERS - No lines. They play various musical instruments in Black Manta's band.
BLACK MANTA hosts his hot tub talk show, which features a series of celebrity guests from the DC NATION. This week: BLACK BEETLE, BLACK VYKIN and BLACK LIGHTNING.
[FYI - We had ideas for a ton more vignettes. Once DC Nation passed, we sent it over to CN's MAD. But they passed too. Which is too bad, but that's just how it is in the business. Selling stuff is... hard.]
I'm big fan of your characters drawing pics and I want to know how to draw those characters to be a great cartoonist drawer and something else like you and others as well.
I can't draw AT ALL. So for artistic advice, I'd recommend asking one of the artists.
Did you have plans of pitch or self produce a new original concept in form of series/comic?
I've tried pitching many times, but have yet to sell anything. Long ago, I had thoughts of self-producing, but it's just an economic impossibility for someone with my (lack of) financial resources.
I heard down the grapevine you're a fan of Joss Whedon.
1.) Have you gotten to see the Avengers film yet?
2.a) If so, did you draw any inspiration from it, seeing as it's in the same "super-hero ensemble" genre you write (so well) for?
2.b) What modern works (be they film, television, literature, art, or not at all) do you draw inspiration from? Or just like?
3.) Over your career, you're written generally high-concept stories. Now more than ever, it seems like high-concept stuff has entered the mainstream (aliens, super-heroes and giant transforming robots running around everywhere). Since everyone's playing in the same sandbox artistically, does that make it more difficult to come up with original ideas? Without subverting or straight-up parodying the genre you're writing in?
4.) How do u rite so gudd? What would you recommend to new, ambitious writers, to help us learn to write with confidence and voice and stuff?
5.) Your decision to skip ahead 5 years (in YJ) shocked me, upset me and piqued my interest. I've never seen a show jump so much time, so I'm very excited to see how you all bridge the two season together. How did you let the studio powers-that-be let you take such a big narrative risk? Was it a big struggle?
Thanks for (presumably) taking the time to read and answer my questions. I love that Ask Greg makes it so easy to reach out to an artist I admire, whose work I respect. I'm the biggest fan ever of everything you've ever done, yadda yadda more accolades, etc. But really, you are an inspiration.
2a. We were WAY done by the time I'd seen the movie.
2b. Check out the "INFLUENCES" archive here at ASK GREG.
3. I'm not sure you're defining "High Concept" correctly. I think you mean "genre" has entered the mainstream. In any case, I just don't think in those terms. I'm just trying to tell good stories.
4. READ the classics. WRITE a lot. Proofread scrupulously. Get yourself VERY educated. Read newspapers. Etc. Or check the ASK GREG archives for a more complete answer.
5. No struggle. Everyone loved the idea.
Hello Greg Weisman, thank you for this interesting opportunity. I'm a big fan of Young Justice and it's great to see another great DC show around. I'm sorry to say this is the first show by you that I've watched (I should fix that). Snappy writing, fun undercurrent of mystery, and from what I understand is a staple of your shows, not assuming your fans are incapable of following an ongoing plot line.
I love the fight scenes in the show. Very fluid animation; and I enjoy in particular when the "normals" get to cut loose and drop some martial arts on each other. I also find it fun when Superboy gets to utterly wail on people.
Anyways, I have a question that has been plaguing me in recent years. I'm not sure if the answer varies from show to show but here it is. How much say do the writers get in the crafting of the action scenes? Do you guys lay down some guidelines for what must happen in a fight or do you ultimately leave it up to the animators and/or artists?
Well, there's my question that quickly devolved into a multi-question, I'm sorry. But, please, keep the awesome coming man! I hope this show keeps on keepin' on! Six seasons and a movie!
Every series is different. On YJ - and most of the shows I've produced - I make sure that the script spells out the action in real detail - in part to attempt to assure that we're not winding up with an episode that's too long or too short. Having said that, I then am happy to have our board artists, directors and my fellow producer (on YJ that's Brandon Vietti) go to town and PLUS the action and visuals. But I do get approvals on all this to make sure we're staying on point with our story and not doing stuff that's out of character or off-tone for our series. Then you have the timers and, of course, the animators contributing too.
I just read a comment there about shows being leaked on youtube. Not taking away from what you creative guys do but I think a lot of the blame should go to how the industry is structured. Taking Young Justice for example, If you live somewhere like America were Young Justice is screened on tv, catch up service on the Cartoon networks website(probably), available for purchase digitally from Itunes or Amazon or on a region 1 DVD, then there's no excuse. But due to international copyright laws that's not the case for those outside of the US, the show hasn't been made available to purchase in any way.
And it goes both ways. There are popular european tv shows, particularly british shows that US citizens want but can't purchase due to the DVD region system. Or if they can they are expected to wait for two-three years possibly, indefinately. Look at Gargoyles. It's only been partially released in the US, there's been zero releases to the rest of the world.
The best way to discourage piracy, in my opinion, is to make content available universally, so people are actually able to purchase the SAME content at the SAME time. If not through DVDS then digitally. I don't know why the entertainment has such a problem with this?
I'm very much in favor of entertainment companies making their product available.
Hi Greg! I looked through the archives and found that you previously mentioned that the first couple seasons of Gargoyles cost $400k-500k per episode to produce.
Assuming the cost of haven't changed dramatically, it seems as though animation is cheaper than the standard scripted network show. Given that, I'm surprised there aren't more animated shows on the major networks, especially with anime so popular in the US now, particularly among older audiences.
I think the only weakness to Young Justice is that it feels like the stories are big enough to fit in a whole hour, but are being condensed to thirty minutes. Again, assuming the cost of animation is in the ballpark of what it was for Gargoyles, an hour-long show doesn't strike me as financially prohibitive.
1. Can you say how much Young Justice costs to produce? A ballpark would be fine if you can't/don't want to give exact numbers.
2. What are your thoughts on the lack of non-Fox/non-comedy prime-time animation? Do you think this is something that can change in the future?
3. Do you think we might one day see hour-long dramatic animation? Did you ever consider making YJ an hour long?
Thank you very much for many excellent shows and opening yourself up for questions from the community!
Your assumptions are faulty. Animation and anime have not - in this country - hit the kind of critical mass among adults that you seem to think they have. A few comedies, like Simpsons and Family Guy have worked in primetime, but others have failed. Even the great BATMAN THE ANIMATED SERIES - which was a huge success in the afternoons - didn't fare well in primetime.
In addition, costs HAVE changed dramatically. Budgets have not, but that means we have to learn to do more with less, generally.
More important is the issue of shelf space. An hour - per conventional wisdom - is a LONG time for kids to sit and watch an animated show. We're told, with some evidence to back it up, that they get bored. And kids still define the economics of most animated product. So if you are going to use up the VERY limited shelf space that any network has with an hour show, it darn well better kick some major butt in the ratings. Because otherwise, for nearly the same money, they could put on two shows (if not four) and have twice (or four times) the opportunity to grab the audience.
In fact, the trend isn't to longer shows, but to SHORTER shows. 11 minute episodes.
So with all that in mind:
1. No. That's proprietary information I'm not authorized to reveal.
2. Yes, I think it can change. But I won't pretend it would be easy to change the corporate culture that doesn't believe in this notion at all. What it takes, of course, is one network taking a chance on one show that's SO GOOD, that it's a hit in defiance of that culture and all conventional wisdom. That would break the floodgates. The inevitable result would be a lot of crap would go on the air, fail, and the conventional wisdom would come back into play with a vengeance. The one hit would be the "exception that proves the rule" and that would be it for awhile. That's what happened after Simpsons. (Who remembers Fish Police?) But the door would be open at least a little. Over the very long haul change is possible.
3. One day? Sure. In fact, I hope so.
3a. I'm not saying it's never crossed my mind. I'd love it, of course. But (a) it's not up to me, and (b) it's never been a realistic possibility.
The first season of "Young Justice" takes place over the course of half a year, starting on the Fourth of July and continuing to New Year's Eve in the Season One finale (with episodes set on Halloween and Thanksgiving along the way). I remember that the first season of "The Spectacular Spider-Man" similarly stretched from the start of the school year in September to Thanksgiving (with a Halloween episode along the way), and that the second season got up at least to Valentine's Day. The time progression in "Gargoyles" was more vague, but we had two Halloween stories ("Eye of the Beholder" and the Double Date story) and three wintry episodes in New York ("Her Brother's Keeper", which ends with a snowfall, "Re-Awakening", and "The Price"), as well as a clear timeline for the Stone of Destiny story.
I like this sense of the year's progress through the seasons and landmark days (like the Fourth of July and Halloween), but it doesn't seem that common in animated series outside your own work. I've seen two speculations on why that element is so rare in animated series. One is that a lot of the people who engage in such creative work aren't big on continuity and change, far less than you are. Another is that most people involved in creating animated television series live in or near Los Angeles and other parts of California, where the climate is pretty much the same year around and there's less a sense of four seasons than in other parts of the United States. I was wondering what your thoughts were on these theories.
Both these theories seem valid to me, but they probably pale from the economic explanation: if you progress through the seasons then you have to redress backgrounds and characters, and that's expensive. Me, I believe it's WORTH the expense. But that's only true if you're really going to DO something with it. If you're not, then there's not much point. (We also did it on W.I.T.C.H. by the way.)
Greg! You are my hero (professionally at least. I mean, face it, I don't know you. You could be an axe-murderer). I want to spend my life doing what you do. Any pieces of advice for an aspiring writer? What are good ways to train myself / further my writing skills / develop confidence in my voice (or my character's voices)? How did you get your start professionally, and what are some good avenues towards putting your work out in the world?
I thoroughly look forward to seeing the rest of your work, because all of it has been great. Thank you and adieu.
At the risk of losing my heroic status, I'm going to demur here, since all this information is already available in the ASK GREG archives. (I've been asked this MANY times before.) For example, check out "Animation", "Behind the Scenes", "Biz, The" and "Weisman, Greg" for starters.
Hi Greg. I've been a long time reader of your responses and I figured after reading through 100's of responses (for my own purposes), I'd find the courage in me to ask you a question. When it comes to planning for a show like "Young Justice" that's episodic in nature (like many of your other works) yet geared for all ages (see previous statement in parenthesis), how do you and your collaborators approach something as daunting like weaving together multiple plot threads, showing character growth, and create story arcs? What are some of the advantages and constraints to writing in the way that you do? I'm currently studying television production as my major in college (a career path I've been told that is faced with rejection, hard work, and passion) and I'm asking this question (well, now it's questions) because I've been fascinated with well organized/structured series. Being the well accomplished writer that you are, I thought I'd ask you on the subject since you have a lot of experience writing/creating/producing shows like "Gargoyles", "The Spectacular Spider-Man", and "Young Justice". If you don't feel like answering this question, I understand that you're a very busy person (you don't need to tell me how busy, I've read the rambles) who takes the time from work to answer the many questions people send to you and I for one certainly appreciate all the hard work you (and of course, the many people you've worked with) put into your each of your projects. Anyways, thanks so much for giving me the opportunity to ramble and I look forward to whatever stories you have planned next (INVASION! WOOT!).
I've written quite a bit on this subject already - even recently (like today). So take a look at the archives, and if you have specific questions after reading what I wrote, feel free to post again.
Hey Greg. I wanted to let you know that I, and a large portion of the internet community, absolutely loved Spectacular Spider-Man. The show accurately portrayed who Peter Parker was, his troubles, his difficult choices, and his life as Spider-Man. Me, being a teen in high school, thought Peter was someone I could relate to, even though he had these extraordinary powers. Being able to relate to Peter Parker is something that should be constant (and for the most part, has been constant) in every Spider-Man story. I know I'm not the only one who thinks that the series should have went on for much longer. However, I know that the series' ending had to do with Disney/Marvel purchasing the animated series rights from Sony. Since this was pretty much out of your hands, I'm here to propose an idea.
Since the rights to the theme song, character designs, etc. for The Spectacular Spider-Man are locked by Sony, and you couldn't possibly resume the show even if you wanted to at Disney/Marvel, I suggest making, if you'd be fine with doing so, an INDEPENDENT episode (about 45 min. or an hour long)of The Spectacular Spider-Man and release it online. Sean Galloway could come back to do the designs, and you could get the voice actors who would agree to it back if the scheduling works in the favor of both parties. This is more than a scheduling thing than anything, when you're not busy with Young Justice and they're not busy with anything, but it may be able to work. And since it wouldn't be
released under the Sony or Marvel banner, and if you make it perfectly clear that it's a "fan film", no breach-in-contract would occur at all.
I'm sorry if I'm sounding selfish, but the show had a HUGE, HUGE fan base, and most of this HUGE fan base, when tuned in to watch Ultimate Spider-Man on Sunday, all cringed in unison (no offense to Marvel or anyone who likes the show). It just doesn't match the charm that your interpretation of Spider-Man had. So I would definitely like for you to take this into consideration. Would you be able to make an independent "final" episode of Spectacular Spider-Man exclusively for online, one that is a "fan film" of sorts? Thank you for your time.
Justin, it's just not up to me. I can't create a "fan film" with someone else's property.
For starters, who would pay for it? Even if I and everyone else involved were willing to donate services for free - which honestly I'm not - who would pay for the materials? None of us have the hundreds of thousands of dollars that it would take to do even one episode at the quality level you'd expect. And why would we want to produce something at a lower quality level? Why would you want to watch it at a lower quality level?
And that's aside from the fact, that I'd never be allowed to work for Marvel, Disney, Sony or probably any other studio again ever. I'm a pro. They know that. I can't make a fan film, stealing someone else's characters, and just get away with it.
For this to happen, Sony would have to make a deal with Marvel/Disney to do this - and then they'd have to reassemble the key players from the original cast and crew. I'd LOVE for this to happen, but I don't see that as realistic.
I mean, don't get me wrong. I'd love to do more SpecSpideys. But it's less likely than me doing more Gargoyles, even.
Hello Mr. Weisman,
I am a teenage aspiring writer and I love to think of story ideas to write about. But whenever I actually sit down and try writing, I don't know how to start or I have second thoughts about my characters, plot, etc. So, I was just wondering if you could give me any tips on writing a story. Thanks!
Just spit it out onto the page, and worry about quality later. You need to get past the self-imposed barriers you're creating. So just get it out.
Hey greg what's up I love your work and I am big fan of how awesome you are as a writter so I would like to ask you the following?
1.-What would you advice to aspring storytellers?
2.-In your opinion wht makes/how do you create an interesting character?
3.- What in your opinon makes a good villain
4.- What in your opinion makes a good plot?
5.-If you could advice something to your ast self regarding stprytelling what would you do?
Thanks for your time. You are a big inspiration
1. I'm going to direct you to the archives, as I've answered this many times before, and nothing's changed about the kind of advice I'd give.
2. I believe they exist as fully as possible. I create backstories for them, whether or not those backstories will be revealed on screen or on the page. I make them real to me.
3. See the answer to question 2 and add one factor: Opposition to the villain. Again, check the archives, as I've discussed my theories of opposition before, particularly with regard to the villains of Gargoyles and Batman.
4. Characters make a good plot.
5. I'm not sure I understand the question.
If this double posts I'm sorry, whoever the admin is can remove this only if it is a double post.
I saw your answers to my questions, or one of them anyway, but I also noticed that I left out the second question.
The companion comics have a date of say April '12 on them (issue 12) but that comic came out in January '12. Was this intentional or were the comics finished sooner than expected? I was waiting for the questions to open back up to ask this, and when asked, I messed up and left out my question.
I've noticed this trend when looking at the page on the comic website I order from. I may be wrong, I don't know.
One added thing, I noticed looking at the comic site, that Issue 14 has a different look than 1-13, any reason why the change in the way you display the issue number.
I've never really understood why comics' cover dates don't ACTUALLY reflect the dates they come out. (For example, it's currently July as I write this but our "September" issue just hit the shops, stands, etc.) But it's a fairly universal thing. Not at all specific to YJ.
First, I just want to say that Gargoyles is one of my all-time favorite shows, and I often return to it when I'm lonely and I'm always pleased by how fresh episodes like "Vows" remain after many viewings many years later. I'm also a big fan of Young Justice--to be honest, it took a while for the show to win me over 100% (of course, very high expectations were in place, both because it's a DC animated property and because you were working on it), but, I'll admit I've watched the Brazilian "leaks" up through "Unusual Suspects" and those episodes are pitch perfect, so, great job, and many thanks. I'm VERY excited for what's next.
Now, on to my questions:
As several people have pointed out, Brazil and Turkey are ahead of the US in terms of airing schedule. I don't know if you're aware, but fans have undertaken to sub the broadcast episodes back into English. I know you have mixed feelings on the subject of fanfiction, but I wonder if you have feelings on the practice of fans sub titling your work, originally created in English, back into English with their own translations? (And if you do have feelings/ideas on the subject, would you care to share?)
And while we're on the subject of fanfiction--I know a lot of authors who engage their fans have a public policy of not reading fanfiction, and you're among these. IIRC, the reason is because you don't want to incur the risk of being sued by a fan who claims you stole their work. I'm a law student and something of a nerd/geek, so I'm intensely curious to know where you picked this idea up. I'm taking copyright right now, and two of the doctrines we've learned seem to be in contradiction with the viability of this fear: (A) The idea/expression distinction (ideas are not protected under copyright, only their expression, so the idea of having Prospero on Gargoyles, even if you got it from another source, would probably not be considered infringement since the idea of having Prospero on Gargoyles is probably too abstract, whereas if there were a specific fanfic which predated a Gargoyles comic by five years and the Gargoyles comic carefully followed the plot of the fanfic, that could be a case of copyright infringement). And, (B) Infringing works are deprived of copyright protection, so if a fanfic infringes on a copyright (which, presumably almost all fanfic does, unless fanfic is fair use), it would have no copyright protection. (Here a critical question is whether fanfiction is fair use, which is an odd little quirk of the law, in that it's a well-known black hole in the law of copyright that seems unlikely to be adjudicated, and therefore, unlikely to ever be resolved.)
Of course, I'm not a lawyer (yet) and this is by no means intended to be legal advice, and I'm also not suggesting that you read fanfiction (personally, I'd rather you produce your awesome original stuff than spend time reading fanfic). But as a law nerd, I'm intensely interested in the relationship between perceptions of the law and the law on the books, and to what extent the law (and perceptions thereof) impact professional practice.
Thank you both for your wonderful works, and for your time.
1. I am HORRIFIED that people are watching episodes for the first time on YouTube - and in a different language no less. Given that those episodes were due to air in the U.S. in a matter of mere weeks, I think it's appalling that anyone would choose to watch them that way. So then having someone sub or dub it back into English seems beyond preposterous - and again mildly HORRIFYING. Just be patient and watch the shows as they were meant to be watched. Don't spoil them for yourselves.
2. I learned this fear from corporate attorneys at EVERY entertainment company that's ever employed me. And I've also learned this fear from personal experience from fans and others who have filed lawsuits or threatened to. And that's the key. It's not about who has a valid case, it's about who can make me miserable by filing suit - and how I can protect myself (as much as possible) from exposing myself to that misery.
Hey Greg why your not consulted on Scheduling
I'm not important enough in the grand scheme, I guess.
Loving Young Justice up here in Canada!!! We are expecting our first son in April and I have all the episodes taped for when he is old enough to watch them.
My question is how often do you receive feedback from the Cartoon Network? When would you know whether to begin on season 3? Keep up the awesome work!
We receive feedback from Cartoon Network all the time, but 'feedback' and a 'pick-up' are two different things. In theory, they could pick the show up at any time, but I don't expect any definitive answer for weeks, if not months.
Hello Greg.i would like to ask a few questions about your job because i am interested in going into the directing business.
1. What exactly is your job(the name of your job)?
2. Do you enjoy it?Do you ever get bored?
3. What did you have to study in college for this job?
4. What would you say are the most useful school subjects that should be learnt for this job?
I appreciate if you could answer these questions. And you are also a role model for me and i really love Young Justice.
1. My title is Producer. And sometimes I'm also the Writer. And even, on occasion, an Actor. I'm also the Story Editor - but that's pretty much covered by my Producer credit.
2. I do enjoy it, and I NEVER get bored, but I do get very, very tired sometimes. Exhausted even. Our schedules can be brutal.
3. I don't know if I "had" to study this, but my B.A. is in English with an emphasis in Creative Writing. My Masters is in Professional Writing, with an emphasis on Play Writing. Plus I studied a bunch of other things too, including history, languages, a little bit of physics and math, etc. And a lot of literature - and Shakespeare, in particular.
4. Learn to read critically. Learn to write. Learn to PROOFREAD!!! Learn to rewrite and revise. Etc.
Hello, Mr. Weisman.
My questions today are more closely related to television programming. So here goes.
1. Have you viewed the new ThunderCats on Cartoon Network that debuted last year? Assuming so, what did you think of it?
2. Have you viewed any of the original episodes of the ThunderCats cartoon? Assuming so, what is your opinion of the old show, and how do you think it compares to the latest incarnation?
3.The original ThunderCats cartoon met the 65 mark episode needed to go into syndication, and produced episodes beyond it. While many of the new episodes were entertaining, I could not help but notice, in my opinion, a decline in certain qualities of the show. One of the areas hit hardest, in my opinion, was the writing in the episodes. This seemed to manifest itself in terms of more predictable scenarios occurring, less creative solutions to the problems that arose and eventually lackluster storylines. ThunderCats wasnât the only show to suffer from this though. Cartoons like Captain Planets, which also surpassed the 65-episode mark, began to experience a bit of a lag, and lost many of the original voice actors/actresses who made their characters so exceptional.
4. So my question is what exactly happens to a show behind the scenes after moving beyond syndication? Is a showâs storyline only plotted out for 65 episodes and not expected to pass it? Or does the writing team have to brainstorm an entirely new set of ideas for episodes beyond? Are new writers assigned to the program or the old ones retained? Are the initial voice actors/actresses replaced with new people, choose not to renew their contract or different causes altogether?
Thanks for the time.
1. I haven't had time to see it, but I really like the people involved with it.
2. I did a long time ago, when I was working on a single script for a different reboot that didn't see the light of day. But you need to understand that I never saw it when it first came on, so I have no nostalgia for it.
3. I just have no opinion on this. I only saw a handful of episodes.
4. Every case is different. And obviously, I have no idea what went on with ThunderCats.
I was just reading the Toonzone interview with the late Dwayne McDuffie (http://www.toonzone.net/news/articles/36545/toonzone-presents-an-interviewtribute-to-dwayne-mcduffie) and he describes the difference between Story By credits and Teleplay By credits on Justice League, and how there may be a lot more writing done by uncredited main writers on the show. Is this similar to how you work on your shows?
Yeah, more or less.
1. What was the gem in Misplaced called?
2. Where did Ultra Humanite get his scar across his mouth?
3. Do you know why Young Justice Invasion only has 20 episodes instead of 26?
1. Ambre Jeune Perdu.
2. It came with the body. (For more on this, see issue #19 of our companion comic book.)
3. That's how many Cartoon Network ordered.
What's was the budget for the first season of young justice
Ps big fan of just about all our work
That's proprietary information.
Do you think there's a way Disney and Marvel could be convinced to consistently pay royalties (including royalties paid to estates of deceased creators) on reprinted material like DC Comics does?
Horror comics legend Steve Bissette publicly announced that he is boycotting all Marvel products due to Marvel not paying any money to Jack Kirby's family (and keep in mind that Steve has noted that DC still pays him royalties for reprints of his Swamp Thing stories, and that he and John Totleban got paid when their co-creation John Constantine was adapted into that movie with Keanu Reeves.), there's been speculation that reprints of Alan Moore's Marvelman/Miracleman have been held up by by the fact the artists (included Rick Veitch, who has had trouble with Marvel in the past) didn't sign away their rights, and I think Don Rosa of Disney Ducks comics fame has refused to work for Disney again because they don't pay him royalties for reprints of his works.
Any ideas on how to get Disney/Marvel to remedy these situations?
First off, I can't confirm or deny any of your statements. I have no idea what Marvel and/or Disney and/or DC is or isn't providing royalty-wise. Second of all, I'm not a lawyer.
One might easily argue that I should be more educated on this subject, but one can't deny the fact that I'm NOT. And I'm just not going to speak to issues I'm ignorant of.
Dear Mr. Weisman,
Thank you for all the wonderful work you've done from Gargoyles, to Spiderman, to Young Justice. Been a fan for years.
1) From your experience, what was more enjoyable to work with? Working on a show that was completely yours to control - Gargoyles - from character development, plot, and storyline? Or Spiderman and Young Justice where the basics has already laid out?
2) Was there more pressure to succeed working on Gargoyles because it was original and the creativity was your to control? Or was there more pressure to work on an adaption on Spiderman and Young Justice because the bar has already been set?
1. They're different. Gargoyles is my baby. But in terms of the actual work, I don't think I had any more or less fun working on SpecSpidey, W.I.T.C.H. or YJ.
2. I think the pressure rises with each series, but I blame the internet more than anything inherent in the series. (I blame the internet for a lot, which is not to say I could go back to living without it.)
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?
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.
Hey greg, my name is Michael. I was a huge fan of your spectacular spiderman series. And I'm not sure if you're gonna know the answer to my question or not, but I'm just gonna shoot for it. Question: Do you have any idea why Marvel canceled it? I mean, both season 1 and 2 had decent reviews and many fans liked it. So, I gotta ask,Do you have any idea why Marvel made that decision.
Marvel DIDN'T cancel it.
It's all very complicated, and we were certainly the recipients of bad corporate luck, but no single company cancelled the series. We just wound up with a situation where no single company could proceed with it.
I'll try to break it all down:
1. Sony had originally produced SpecSpidey as part of their overall entertainment license of the Spidey property (which of course included the extremely lucrative live action films).
2. But in order to win some concession on those live action feature films, Sony returned the animation rights to the character back to Marvel.
3. So now only Marvel could produce a Spider-Man cartoon. Sony no longer could, which meant SpecSpidey couldn't continue at Sony.
4. I have no idea whether Marvel was interested in continuing Spectacular Spider-Man or not. But let's assume for the sake of argument that they would have liked to.
5. They couldn't.
6. Why? Because Sony owned all the specific elements (designs, storyline, etc.) to the SpecSpidey VERSION of Spider-Man. So Marvel would have had to license all that BACK from Sony.
7. You can imagine how unlikely THAT scenario was. Marvel finally gets the rights back to do an animated version of their marquee character, and then they have to pay Sony to do it instead of just starting from scratch. That was never going to happen.
8. Of course, all this was complicated by the fact that Disney purchased Marvel, and Disney and Sony are direct competitors.
9. And I'm sure Marvel was excited to put their own stamp on an animated Spider-Man. Who could blame them?
10. So that was it. We were toast through no fault of our own. The folks at Marvel, Sony and even Disney all seemed to like our show, but the corporate mess made it impossible for us to continue.
11. And, yes, it is a bummer. (For me, at least.) But it's no single person or single company's fault. It's just how things shook out.
12. And finally, though I have no involvement with the upcoming Ultimate Spider-Man, you can't deny that a lot of great people have worked on it. There's no reason to think it won't be as good or better than SpecSpidey. To a certain generation, SpecSpidey will always be THEIR Spider-Man cartoon. But to a new batch o' viewers, I'm sure their Spidey of choice will be the Ultimate.
I'm currently attending college to achieve a degree in English. Problem is, I don't know what to do with it apart from the obvious "get a paycheck". I'm a big fan of your work and was wondering if you had any advice, especially on how to get into the entertainment.
Many thanks for all the fond childhood memories (i.e., "Batman: The Animated Series", "Gargoyles", et. al) and please keep up the great work.
I didn't work on Batman: The Animated Series.
As to "how to get into the entertainment". I'd start by proofreading a little better. (Sorry, the English Teacher in me couldn't resist.)
If your serious about it, you need to be someplace where the entertainment is happening. Learn as much as you can and figure out what EXACTLY you want to do. Then go for it.
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.
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.
just read your response to my post about the league of assassins being called the league of shadows. you're right i should have waited to see the episode before jumping to conclusions. loved the intro of red arrow/Artemis and the inclusion of sensei.
besides im too big a fan of your work to let a minor gripe like that blow the show for me. just had to vent thou.
initially, i might have been over glorifying what i believe tv-pg v ratings get away with violence and edge wise. (and i agree with you completely, i believe that we all want to see smart storytelling with well developed characters. and being that i am not an expert i only assumed that kids want to see all that grimy stuff.)
but as far of my lack of knowledge as to how the censorship of cartoons works, Whats good with some inside info?
1. how does censorship effect you in this series.
2. when developing a series thats tv-pg v, what content do you automatically take off the table? where do you believe the line of tv-pg v stops in terms of what you can get away with?
3. what are some of the more risky themes you've brainstormed? i know how you feel about spoilers so ill take what i can get on that last one.
and as always keep up the good work.
1. Almost not at all. It may be because to a certain extent that, after nearly two decades in this business, I've internalized Standards & Practices, but I don't think so. I think I have my own standards about what you will and won't see in a show I'm producing. Every once in a while we get a note from S&P, usually just a warning along the lines of "When you do that don't milk it to death," which is generally a note that I agree with and didn't need to get in the first place. Sometimes - very rarely - a double entendre gets rejected. Disney had this thing on SpecSpidey about the sound of broken glass, but didn't mind when we replaced it with the sound of broken porcelain. (It's a subtle distinction.) KidsWB didn't like the sound of gunfire. And everyone wants to beware of imitable behavior - including me (within reason). I don't want to assume our audience is unintelligent, but I'm conscious that I don't want to model dangerous behavior for impressionable little kids.
2. I don't pay any attention to these ratings. None. I do what I do.
3. Themes? I dunno. Watch the shows, and you tell me.
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.
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.
There have been many forums who have been comparing Young Justice to Chris Yost's Avengers series that's coming on Disney XD. Personally, I think they're both great shows that comic book fans and the general audience can enjoy at the same time. I mean this is the first time in animation where there's a cartoon featuring the Earth's Mightiest Heroes and another one with the Justice League. Anyway, what do you think of this debate from maybe both a perspective of a comic book reader and a professional writer? Also, what do you think of Mr. Yost's Avengers series?
I haven't seen Avengers, but there are a bunch of great people working on it, so I'd hardly be surprised if it was kick-ass.
I don't see much to be gained even by comparing the shows, let alone putting them in some kind of hypothetical competition. They're not even on opposite each other. And in this DVR age, what difference would it make to most people even if they were?
Anyway, if you like one of the two series but not both, watch the one you like. If you like both, watch both and enjoy each for its merits - which may have a few things in common, but are likely very different.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Todd Jensen and others have commented on the similarities between âGriefâ and the Batman episode âAvatar.â Toddâs question being here:
I noticed another pair of episodes of Batman and Gargoyles that really reminded me of the other, because of the same writers. âLegionâ and the Batman episode âWhat is Reality?â 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 Robinâs case. An electronic shock emanating from Goliathâs body in Lexâs case. Side note: That was the biggest problem I had with âLegion.â I can buy a cybernetic gargoyle and that Xanatos can design a computer program based on his personality, but I never understood how Goliathâs 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, âWhat is Reality?â and âLegionâ 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 âFuture Tenseâ, which also had a VR sequence in the Xanatos Pyramid, albeit in a dream. They didnât write âWalkaboutâ, which had a metaphysical reality (MR?) scene.
I do think the examples of âAvatar/Griefâ and âWhat is Reality?/Legionâ are interesting examples of how writers will take previous ideas theyâve had and use another chance to expand or improve on them. âAvatarâ didnât work for me, but âGriefâ is one of my favorite episodes of Gargoyles. And itâs close between âWhat is Reality?â and âLegionâ, but I slightly prefer the former.
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.
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?
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.
I heard that Young Justice's premiere was viewed by over 2.5 million people which apparently is very good. I dont know what numbers for channels like Cartoon Network are usually like, can you kinda explain how good that number is?
In this day and age, it's GOOD.
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?
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.
I saw in the archives how you've answered how long it takes to create a single episode (8 to 10 months). I'm curious how long it takes to write an episode or how long you give your writers to turn in a script after you've given them the story.
I try to give them at least two weeks to write the script based on an approved outline. More if I can.
Hey again Greg,
You once said that while you were working at Sony, you and Victor Cook tried to get Sony interested in doing a Ghost Rider series. Now the impression I got was that the "Powers That Be" weren't interested and the concept never got far beyond the "I just had a neat idea" stage, so I understand if you didn't draw out some big five season master plan about how you'd handle the series.
But I was just wondering if you'd given any thought to how you would have dealt with a lot of the S&P challenges that related to the character. Mainly that both GR himself and a good chunk of his rogues gallery are literal demons from Hell. Is America ready for a superhero cartoon where the Big Bad is Satan?
I would have crossed that hellbridge when I came to it.
First, let me briefly state that Gargoyles remains among the best animated series IMO of all time. I particularly appreciated the classical and Shakespearean references, I'm not sure I would have been as big a fan of Shakespeare in school and today, were it not for Gargoyles. That being said, the animated shows today lack the originality, narrative, and cutting edge that shows like Gargoyles, Real Ghostbusters, Batman, and even Duck Tales had, which is a real shame. Instead, today's cartoon for adults and kids, fail to have any purpose to them, and seem to have deevolved to the level of entertainment for 5 year olds. The only ones in past decade worth viewing have been Justice League and Boondocks.
My question involves trying to connect the 'Golden Age' of cartoons in 80's and early 90s, with today. I'm looking forward to your new series, and had a thought. I know that Mike Reaves worked with Gargoyles, as well as other cartoons, such as Ghostbusters and Dungeons and Dragons. While Gargoyles got a proper sendoff with Hunters Moon, there was never a finale for the short, Dungeons and Dragons cartoon, even though it was still popular and in syndication over a decade later, with only a dozen episodes. However, there was a screenplay finale done by Reaves, just not animated. What about in your or your production's free time, with Mike Reave's approval, you animate the finale of Reaves' screenplay, providing a link to your new series, which will remind the fans of cartoons of the serious narrative medium that cartoons used to be, that your cartoon series will have that 'edge' and give free publicity with many views (likely viral views) about your new series when people watch the link to the finale that was never done for a famous cartoon from the 1980's? It sounds like a good idea, which is why I am suggesting it.
Well, let me begin by RABIDLY DISAGREEING with your statement about today's cartoons. Some suck. Some are great. I'm proud as hell of the work I did on W.I.T.C.H., Spectacular Spider-Man and Young Justice, and there's no way I would pretend that I'm the only guy out there doing great work. I think Brave and the Bold is a TON of fun for both adults and kids. I thought Kim Possible was great. And I barely worked on either of those two series. And Avatar (which I never worked on) also seems great and rich. And that's just off the top of my head.
Your definition of "Golden Age" seems to have more to do with you than history.
As for your D&D idea, you just seem to have NO idea about the way the business works. I couldn't do what your asking even if it was my fondest wish in the world. Believe me, if I had that kind of power, don't you think I'd be doing more Gargoyles?
None of this stuff is up to guys like me or Michael. Different companies own the rights to different series, and most are uninterested in spending money on the kind of thing you're suggesting.
Do you have a premeire party when the shows you work premeire on TV?
Depends on the studio.
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)?
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.
dear greg weisman i wont ask what i really wanted too ask because too be honest i wanted too suggest a idea. i got something big in mind that i would love too see or even be apart of as far as gargoyles go. also i am a aspiring actor. i really dont have any expierince but i still would like too know how would i be able too be apart of your work. please email me back at email@example.com i look forward too hearing from you.
As I've stated MANY times before, I do not respond to personal e-mails. If I did it once, everyone would expect me to do it, and that just isn't practical. Also, if you read the guidelines for this site, you'll see that appeals for work are not appropriate to this forum.
If you want some general advice on how to break into the business, that's one thing. Otherwise...
I wrote this blog entry up a few months back, and I thought I'd share it with you. I'm curious as to your thoughts on the matter:
Ever since Disney bought Marvel, people have been asking Greg Weisman if he has any interest in integrating the "Gargoyles Universe" (which would be the first sixty-five episodes of the series, and the two SLG comic series "Gargoyles" and "Gargoyles: Bad Guys") into the Marvel Universe, and Weisman keeps saying no. Yet people keep asking him.
I love "Gargoyles" and I love the "Marvel Universe." I love "Gargoyles" more, and I'm not afraid to say it. But this is a terrible idea, and I'm going to talk about why it's a terrible idea.
First of all, the two universes are pretty incompatible. Time travel works differently in both universe for one. In "Gargoyles" you cannot alter history, and that series is so much better for it. If it were a part of Marvel, it would be too easy for Goliath to, let's say, go back in time and prevent the massacre of his clan back in 994 Scotland.
I suppose you could retcon away those Marvel time travel stories like "Age of Apocalypse" and "Days of Future Past." While I would not mind that, it wouldn't be fair to the fans and creators of those stories.
Second, while I have no doubt the existence of gargoyles would be shocking to the people of the Marvel Universe, it wouldn't have the same impact it should. Not in a world where mutants, super-beings, Atlanteans, Inhumans, Eternals, Norse gods, and Fin Fang Foom are already known to exist with Galactus stopping by every other Tuesday.
Third, okay, Marvel's Odin is now a Child of Oberon, as are the Asgardians. Okay... how well do you think that's going to go over with the fans of Jack Kirby's Thor who have been reading it for nearly fifty years now? Hell, there are still some people who are uneasy about Odin being subject to Oberon in "Gargoyles." I'm not one of those people, but I understand where they're coming from.
Now, I know some people are bound to mention the NON-CANON Radio Play from the 2009 Gathering, that was a crossover between "Gargoyles" and "The Spectacular Spider-Man," so let's get this out of the way. That wasn't actually the Marvel Universe. It was a re-imagined, and stream-lined version of it. It also helped that both shows were created or developed by Greg Weisman. It was a lot of fun, and I enjoyed it, but I don't think anyone wants this to be a regular, or even a recurring occurrence. I think it worked well as a pandering love letter to fans of both franchises, and the voice actors who brought these characters to life.
Finally, and perhaps most important, the Marvel Universe is not really going anywhere. It is very cyclical. Things come, things go, status quos change and are restored. Spider-Man is married for twenty years, then he is single again. Magneto reforms, then is a villain again, then reforms, etc, etc.
For example, I respect a lot of what Joe Quesada has done for Marvel. However, the notion of him having any kind of creative influence over "Gargoyles" scares me. "Goliath and Elisa were more interesting before they finally declared their love and got together. The core of it was always impossible love, so now we have to split them up." You know it would happen.
"The Gargoyles Universe" is going somewhere, even if we're currently not getting any new fiction, it was always evolving. Never going backwards, but moving forwards. It was an evolving tapestry, and change was constant. Marvel, on the other hand, lives and breathes on the illusion of change, while actual change is non-existent. Death is meaningless. Characters don't age, and the status quo may shake up on occasion, but it is always eventually restored.
The Marvel Universe was built by Stan Lee, Jack Kirby, and Steve Ditko, and maintained by many very talented and creative people acting as custodians of that work. But, for better or worse, it is a soup with hundreds of cooks. Many great chefs, and more than a few fast food fry cooks.
"Gargoyles" was co-created by Greg Weisman, and while he had a lot of help, he was the only co-creator, and the one who never stopped working on it. He was the first author of "Gargoyles" and more than likely he will be the last author of "Gargoyles." For the better. We saw "Gargoyles" without Greg Weisman, and it was nothing good.
Both universes have their place, but you couldn't merge them without one of them being significantly altered in the process. Now, I will admit my bias again and say that I wish the "Marvel Universe" was more like the "Gargoyles Universe" but, there's no real point. It's been around for nearly five decades (over seven if you want to talk about Timely Comics), and it's not going to change. As I've made clear, I think that's kind of the problem, but an understandable one given the nature of Marvel Comics. DC too, for that matter.
Now, I realize a lot of the above makes it look like I'm saying "Gargoyles" is great and Marvel is awful, but I don't feel that way at all. I just don't think such a thing would work without one of the universes suffering for it.
The Radio Play was a ... lark, a goof. But even if we were ONLY talking about the Spectacular Universe merging with Gargoyles, I'd be opposed.
I want to become a writer just like you. How can I get my ideas published?
There's no one way. And there's no surefire way -- though if you find one let me know.
Since I don't know your background (i.e. where you are in the continuum toward being a professional writer) it's hard to give you advice.
I'm a big fan. I work in South Korea teaching English and I thought you would be interested in your creations' progress over here.
I did some research on the internet and Gargoyles: The Movie and some season 1 episodes were released on VHS over here. What a collector's item those would be? The official translated name of the show is "Champion Goliath", but happily enough online Korean fans just call it "Gargoyles."
Channel surfing, I did see The Spectacular Spider-Man on the cartoon channel, 5:30, Saturday morning. That's actually a good time, since Korean children have Saturday school and 5:30am would be just the right time they're waking up.
Keep up the good work and hopefully I'll see Young Justice in Korea.
Very cool! Thanks, Richard.
I had a question. I'm currently a theatre student in college. However, I've always had my hand in multiple areas in the arts. It was only my love for writing and acting that had me not decide to go to a strict art college (I had wanted to be a comic book artist for a long time).
I plan to move to California eventually and try to make it in the show-biz, either through acting, my art ability (I'm currently doing a lot with prosthetics/mask making) or writing. My question was how exactly you got into your current field of work? It's something that interests me, what with my love for comics both in writing and art. So basically, I was just wondering how you got started.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
For a fuller answer, check the archives here at ASK GREG under topics like "Weisman, Greg", "Animation", "Biz, The", etc. As I know I've answered this before.
But the short answer is that I started as a comic book writer for DC Comics, while I was still in college. I then became an editor there for a couple years after college. Then I went to graduate school to hone my skills as a writer, while interviewing at various studios. I was hired as a junior executive at Disney Television Animation, got promoted a couple times, developed Gargoyles and became a writer-producer.
A while back I remember you commenting how it annoys you that when folks praise Batman the Animated Series they mention Timm and Dini (rightfully) but not Burnett. Actually, I just did a search and see you mentioned it several time, and that it mystifies you. Since I had wondered something similar, (his name was so prominent in the Dark Deco look episodes, and don't really remember it after), I was going to ask if you have a theory why. Instead I'll ask if it, in some small way, factored into the Naming of Owen Burnett?
The "Owen" part of the name was in the original development. The last name Burnett came from writer Michael Reaves, so you'd have to ask him if Owen Burnett was a tribute to Alan Burnett.
And I don't have a clue why Alan doesn't get all the credit he deserves -- other than the fact that Alan doesn't seem to seek it at all. He's a modest guy. Not an attention whore like me, for example.
Hey Mr. Weisman,
I noticed that in the Bad Guys issues, character's inner thoughts were shown through narration boxes, while in the final few issues of Clan-Building, Brooklyn's thoughts were shown in cloud-shaped thought balloons. Is there any reason for the difference?
It's stylistic. I think captions are more distancing... so they feel more thoughtful, less immediate. Thought balloons seem more casual.
I decide those kind of things on a case-by-case basis.
All the delays and schedule changes for Spectacular Spiderman, besides being terribly annoying, jepordize the chances of the series to catch on and continue. I listened to the podcast mentioned early and have a sense of the legal changes and problems that contributed to the crazy schedule, but still I can't shake the nagging feeling that there is a disrespect, perhaps born in ignorance, to animation that is greatly contributing to the problem. It wouldn't occur to TPTB to tell a cast of a live action show, "we'll let you know if we are picking you up for another season in 18 months." Let alone the none acting staff and crew. Beyond that, once the script is written, the turn around time for an episode is much shorter on a live action show.
Is there any truth to that nagging thought? The closest analogy I can think of was to how tv series handled the most recent writers' strike. It wasn't perfect, and some good shows died as a result, but the reoccuring question seemed to be, "do we try to rush in a delayed 2nd half to this season, or just pick up at the next.", not "let's send everyone home, wait a year, and then decide.
I'm not sure how to respond. In general and IMHO, animation gets less respect than live action, but no company actively tries to sabotage its own show. Though mismanagement can do great damage.
Disney as of recent bought out Marvel. That in mind will Marvel release thier comic adapton to Gargoyles as a graphic novel?
I doubt it.
With your expertise in the writing industry I am hoping you would be willing to perhaps give me some advice in my own writing career. I have written a fantasy adventure story for pre-teens and have begun my search to get it published. I have been working with Children's Literary Agency and they have suggested me to go to Strategic Publishing, which I have done. They sent me a contract that sounds okay, but they are asking for a large fee up front and I am a bit concerned.
1; Is this a vanity company, which I have been advised to stay away from?
2; Is it normal for publishers to ask for a fee up front?
3; Do you know anything about either of the two companies listed above?
Being new to this industry I am hoping that you will lend me your professional opinion.
1. If they are asking YOU for money, then it sounds like a vanity company at best. There's nothing wrong with that, per se, if it's legit. You pay to get the books published and succeed or fail on your ability to market and sell your books. (Good material helps of course, but isn't mandatory.) But make sure it is legit so that you're not sending money to someone who's just going to pocket it.
3. No. But keep in mind, I have no experience in that end of the business. Comics and animation is the sum total of my background - at least so far.
Hey Mr. Weisman,
Before I ask my question I just want to thank you very much for Gargoyles I'm not sure that any other piece of fiction has stuck with me so profoundly. I thoroughly enjoyed the final volumes of the comic series though I had to stifle back tears as I realized it was over. I will never stop hoping that there will be more Gargoyles for me and my future children to enjoy.
My question is focused around the recent buy out of Marvel by Disney. I don't imagine you have many more insights into it than anyone else watching the news reports but I do wonder if you've thought of approaching Marvel now. Marvel being such a well established comic publisher may see the merit in continuing your run of the comic series. I would hate to see them take it and make it their own of course, we'd never see your true vision of it, but it would be nice to see them allow you to continue what you started. Just something I've been thinking about as I very badly want to see Gargoyles continue.
In a similar line of thought, I asked this question sometime ago and never got a response. Would there ever be a time that you would make a more detailed version of your overall plot for the rest of the series and its spin-offs available to read. The Three Brothers story was great. I'd love to read more like that. I've always feared that if enough time passed we would never get to know what else was lurking in that wonderful brain of yours regarding our beloved Gargoyles. Would you ever reach that point if things didn't look good for the series being continued that you would allow us more bits of your vision?
Re: Marvel. Check the archives. I've answered this ad nauseum.
Re: My master plans. I throw out tidbits now and then and if the whim strikes me, I might give out a bit more. But beyond that, any story is only as good as its execution, so I'm not likely to just ... vomit up ... a report of my plans.
Now that Marvel is own by Disney how will it affect your plans with Gargoyles comics or other media?
Asked and answered multiple times. Check the archives.
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.
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.
What does Disney's aquisition of Marvel mean for the future of Gargoyles?
Did you find it spooky that Disney bought Marvel so soon after you wrote and put on the Gargoyles/Spectacular Spider-Man crossover Radio Play for the Gathering? I know that it was just a coincidence, but I still found the timing a bit eerie.
Eh... few things (in this business) truly surprise me these days. Which is NOT to say I saw this coming, because I did not. But hearing about it, I was hardly shocked.
In the latest move by The Walt Disney Corporation in acquiring Marvel, Disney has shown a renewed interest in comic book and superhero literature.
Can you see this as beneficial to getting Gargoyles back as an active property? Id Disney sell-able on making a now lateral pass of the Gargoyles property as a new Marvel entity? Given your stint writing for Spider-man, could you foresee a world in which The Manhattan Clan was a full member of the Marvel Pantheon?
2. I have no idea.
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:
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.
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.
So does this mean that Gargoyles is part Marvel?
What do you think about the Disney Marvel merger? Do you think it will change anything for you(or in other words you're struggle to get more episodes of Gargoyles made)? Do you think we will see you're gargoyles comics published by Marvel in the future?
1. I'm withholding judgement.
2. I don't know.
I see there are two other questions about Disney buying Marvel - but I'm going to ask two other related questions:
(1) Were you aware ahead of time that Disney would be purchasing Marvel?
(2) I'm sure the legal complexities involved in this transaction are very... well, complex... as they interface with your show. However, to your knowledge, how does Disney's purchase of Marvel impact the possibilities of using previous off-limits characters on Spectacular Spider-Man? (Especially Kingpin, but also other characters you said you wanted to use on rare occasion, such as Human Torch.)
2. No idea.
Now that Disney is buying Marvel, do you think will affect, positively or negatively, The Spectacular Spider-Man's future?
I really don't know.
Will Disney buying Marvel Comics mean anything for the Gargoyles comic book series?
I don't think so, but I don't know.
I've always wondered how building a writing team works exactly. Obviously Sony liked your pitch for Spectacular (and I'm very glad they did)and we wound up with great efforts from Matt Wayne, Kevin Hopps, Andrew Robinson and Randy Jandt. But did you hand pick these people or were they provided for you by Sony? Or did they have their own takes on Spidey that convinced you that they, out of the many people who must have been vying for a spot on the show, had the right stuff for the series? And you guys had a pretty solid rotation system, so how does whatever selection process used differ from freelancing for a show?
Hmmm.... the order of things...
I think it started with Randy, who had been my script coordinator on many previous series. We offered him the job of apprentice writer, a union position that would allow him to be a script coordinator but also take the next step up and write one script per season.
My next hire was Kevin Hopps, who was brought on as a staff writer. Kevin and I go way back to my Disney days. He's given me work; I've given him work. He's great and someone I can count on.
The rest of the "staff" was in fact freelance. Andrew Robinson was an obvious choice. He had done great work for me on W.I.T.C.H. I didn't know Matt Wayne, but my boss Michael Vogel was big on Matt's stuff... so I gave him a try (with great results).
Having chosen these writers, we did start something of a rotation.
I wrote the pilot and reserved the twelfth (origin) episode for myself. Then staff writer Kevin, was followed by freelancers Matt and Andrew for episodes 2-4 and 5-7. Randy took episode 8, a middle episode that would give him a chance to get acclimated on the series. 9-11 were taken by the "rotation". I did twelve. Kevin did 13.
For season two, I added Nicole Dubuc (another W.I.T.C.H. success story) as a freelancer to give us a another voice. While Nicole got acclimated, we began with the same Kevin, Matt, Andrew rotation for episodes 14-16. Randy did 17. Then we had planned to start the rotation again, with Nicole added in. (So the PLAN was to have 18-21 be Kevin, Matt, Andrew, Nicole). But by this time, Matt was getting pretty busy on other series. So Nicole also jumped in and took Matt's spot in the rotation, and 18-21 became Kevin, Nicole, Andrew, Nicole. We then started a new rotation without Matt. And Kevin, Andrew and Nicole took 22-24. I had reserved 25 for myself. And Kevin again finished out the season with 26.
That's the way I like to work. Have a small "staff" (mostly freelancers for budgetary reasons) that do multiple episodes. That way the writers really learn the show. We all break episodes together, helping each other out pre-outline. It really becomes a team.
My brothers and I are impressed by the fluid animation in Spectacular Spider-Man. We imagine it must be very expensive. How much does it cost to do those cool action scenes?
I can't spit out a number for the action scenes in a vacuum. SpecSpidey had a fairly standard "per episode" TV Animation budget. We tried to get as much bang for our buck as possible.
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.)
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.
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.
Different networks have different rules, I guess.
In response to two of your previous responses to me (via everyone):
You wrote, "If I am going to "lift", I try to be direct and on the head about it, so that I'm acknowledging the debt as opposed to trying to get away with something."
Would you say that this is simplified explanation of the difference between 'homage' and 'rip-off'?
As for Free Comic Book Day, it's the first Saturday in May every year and is sponsored by some of the larger comic book companies as a way to support the industry and local comic shops. Here is their website:
Yes, I think in bald terms that is the difference between 'homage' and 'theft'.
Hey, Greg. I heard some scenes in Gargoyles were censored by Disney. In one episode in season 1, I remember a part where Hyena says "Would you like an autograph?" a girl (forgot her name) pulls out a knife on the guy and says, "Maybe I should signï»¿ it on your face!" And that's when Jackal says, "Might as well get in on the fun." And I heard there were a few more episodes that had censors.
I would say Spectacular Spider-Man is a little violent for a children's show. So far, your show has had drug addiction, Tombstone getting stabbed in the back by the Green Goblin, Doc Ock promising Rhino the "permission" to impale Spiderman's heart, George Stacy saying the F word in "Shear Strength", a funeral, and also violent fights. I've considered most of the fights in this show (especially the season 2 fights) a little bit violent for little kids.
So here's my question: Will Spectacular Spider-Man suffer from censors the same way some scenes of Gargoyles have? Were there any censored scenes in the show so far in Spectacular Spiderman on Disney? If yes, which scenes? Also, I heard the "Natural Selections" episode had censors. Is that true?
Thank you for answering my questions.
GARGOYLES wasn't censored in the traditional sense of the word when the shows first aired. Since then, I'm told, ToonDisney/Jetix/DisneyXD may have made some cuts. But I haven't watched their versions of the shows.
George Stacy never said the "F-word" unless you and I have VERY different ideas of which F the F-Word stands for. I don't think THE SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN is too violent for kids. Of course, I grew up on Coyote and Roadrunner cartoons.
You're sort of throwing the c-word (censorship) around willy-nilly. I'm not sure you really get what it means in a practical sense. But in any case, the 1st Season and half the second season have all aired on DisneyXD, and nothing has been cut from the versions we made.
And, no, nothing was censored out of "Natural Selections". Where did you hear that?
Got easily a hundred calls, texts, e-mails yesterday about the big Marvel/Disney news and a few about the Sony/Marvel/Spidey news, so here are a few random thoughts to go with what I posted yesterday...
1. SPEC SPIDEY: The main thing that's changed about the Spec Spidey situation is that Sony is now out of the loop/decision making process about whether or not there's a third season. Before Sony was waiting to see if Disney picked up the series. Then they'd decide on its economic feasibility for Sony. Now Sony isn't part of that equation, leaving the whole thing in Marvel and Disney's hands. Of course, now that Marvel and Disney are kinda one hand, so-to-speak, I don't know what that means for us. Other than the obvious, which is that I'm sure we're not exactly Disney/Marvel's highest priority at the moment. How and when this decision gets made is really up in the air, but a former negative does feel good -- now -- that our last six episodes won't start airing on Disney XD until late October. That means our last episode won't air until early December, which may be a better time for Disney/Marvel to focus on the show. (Or not.) Of course even a positive decision in December or (more likely) January means a HUGE gap between Seasons Two and Three, but I'd take that over no new episodes.
2. FLASHBACKS:I can't help but be reminded of events in the mid-nineties, when Michael Eisner (then CEO of Disney) wanted to buy Marvel, so that he'd have super-heroes to compete with Warner Bros' DC Universe heroes (including Superman and Batman). Back then, however, Marvel was, or so I was told, a corporate mess. And it wasn't just that -- as now -- various studios already had the rights to individual characters, but that the rights had been double sold all over the place, and that every character pretty much represented a lawsuit in the making if not already in the works. Eisner was advised NOT to buy Marvel, and of course he didn't. But he REALLY wanted to be competing in the boys action/super-hero market. That was when the Gargoyles Universe was raised as a possible alternative. We pointed out that the Marvel Universe began with the Fantastic Four, and that we could use Gargoyles as a springboard to more properties and to an entire Universe. We were encouraged by Michael to create spin-off properties, backdoor pilots, etc. And that was THE major impetus for us to work on things like New Olympians, Bad Guys, Pendragon and Dark Ages. (Gargoyles Future Tense -- which became Gargoyles 2198 and TimeDancer came later.) It was also a reason to be expansive with the World Tour and introduce more and more new characters, etc. Of course, by the time all this stuff was actually made, the world had changed again. Frank Wells died. Michael and Jeffry Katzenberg went to war, with Jeffry eventually leaving to found DreamWorks, and taking two of my immediate superiors, Gary Krisel and Bruce Cranston, with him. Rich Frank (another of my bosses up the chain) also left. Dean Valentine was placed in charge of Walt Disney Television Animation and he had no affinity for Gargoyles or its spin-offs. And Michael, who had initiated the whole thing, had way bigger concerns on his plate. I was more or less forced out. But for one bright, shining moment...
3. GARGOYLES: I'm sure a lot of people are wondering what this means for our favorite winged warriors, but in the short term, I'm sure the answer is "Not much." Gargoyles is pretty much under Disney's radar right now, and really doesn't exist on Marvel's radar at all, as far as I can tell. We'll be an extremely low priority. Our best bet is still SLG, which HOPEFULLY will be motivated by the sales of the Trades to want to make more content with me. Having read Dan "Mr. SLG" Vado's recent reaction to the Disney/Marvel merger, I'm hoping he isn't too discouraged by being in bed with his competition. But I have no doubt that the best way to get Dan fully on board is to make it worth his while by having those trades sell VERY well. So again, buy the trades and/or SPREAD THE WORD!!!!
Okay, in the period of just a few days, I have been rocked by two incredible pieces of news.
1. Last Thursday (8/27/09), Vic Cook and I were informed that in exchange for some concession vis-a-vis the live action Spider-Man features, Sony returned the television rights (including the animated television rights) for Spider-Man to Marvel. This took place the day before ComicCon, I'm told. But I was only informed of it this past week.
2. Today (8/31/09) comes the news that Disney has purchased Marvel outright.
NOW, before you ask -- before you post a thousand duplicate and/or overlapping questions to ASK GREG -- let me be clear: I have NO IDEA what this means for either Gargoyles or The Spectacular Spider-Man. Neither of these developments are by definition good news or bad news. Shocking news, sure. But how it will play out for either or both properties is a complete mystery to me. As soon as I have ANY information on either property, I will post it here at ASK GREG. Until then, don't ask. Seriously. Just don't. There's just no point in bogging down the queue with questions I have no answer to. Thank you for your cooperation.
Hi Greg!..iam a full supporter of your show....this show is by far the best spidey show ever...everytime i watch an episode i need more!! AMAZING JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Truly amazing! AMAZING !!!!!!
I have 3 Questions And A Request. :)
1) How much time does it take the crew to make one episode? and then a whole season ? i mean the final thing when every things (editing etc) finished,
2) If the confirmation for season 3 comes out (i hope it does!) ...how much time will it take for it to air? i heard season 2 came late because of the whole channel changing thing...now that every things set how much time will season 3 take ? i mean which month?
3)If ratings on all future seasons are good how many seasons would you plan to make ? (i hope more than 10 !!!lol)
And a Request
This show....has made me an addict to the extent that ive spent my holidays discussing episodes of Spectacular spiderman with my friends and not doing anything else lol....and i like it !!! this is the 1st show that im in love with ....i want you to promise your fans that other than the ratings you will do everything in your power to make this series a success and by success i mean doing more seasons! :)...Please please please please x 100000 Dont Stop making new seasons please.And i pray that this success will continue.:)
Eagerly waiting for your reply.
Long Live Spidey.!!! Long Live Spectacular Spiderman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1. It takes between eight months and a year to produce a season of animation, with multiple steps going on simultaneously on multiple episodes, a bit like an assembly line.
2. No way to know at this point. We'd need the pick-up. I'd have to plan the season, then we'd get started. And even once we finished, they could choose to hold the episodes for a more auspicious launch time (at least to their minds).
3. Generally speaking, I'm shooting for 65 episodes and then hope to continue with Direct to DVDs. But I'll take more or less... basically whatever I can get.
As for your request, it's just really not up to me. If they offer me the opportunity, I will make more. But I have no control, I'm afraid.
1. You've often mentioned how you chose Tombstone as the new "Big Man of Crime" because the Kingpin was unavailable due to legal issues. What other characters besides Tombstone did you consider for this position? Also, is the phrase "Big Man" a title given out to whoever happens to be in control of New York's crime rings at the time and is passed on to their successor, (ie, like a king or queen) or is it an alias that is permanently attached to Tombstone? I've seen evidence to support both cases.
2. How exactly does Doc Ock get dressed in the morning? The part of his harness that lines up with his spine clearly goes on underneath his clothing but the ring around his waist goes overtop of everything else. Can the harness still open up in front or is that fused shut too? Just watching Ock go through his morning routine would probably clear most of this up, plus the notion of him using his tentacles to brush his teeth is just hilarious. (Just be glad I'm not asking how Rhino goes to the bathroom.) I also assume that for the duration of Season 2 he's had enough time to acquire or build a new power source for his harness that can last for years at a time?
3. You burned down the Big Sky Billiard lounge! I loved that place. Every comic book needs a place where the supervillains can go for some downtime and hang out. Please, I know you don't want to spoil anything you have planned for season 3 but at least give us a vague hint that we'll get to see a new "Bad Guy Bar."
4. Is Chameleon's white visage a mask that he wears with other masks going on top of it, or is that actually his face after being surgically altered to have any distinguishing features like a nose and ears removed? Typically one would expect a face-changer to remove as much of their original face as possible and then add on top of that as needed, (just look at Metal Gear Solid's Decoy Octopus, the guy shaved down his cheek bones and cut off part of his nose and ears.) Wearing two masks doesn't seem to be that effective since you're doubling the amount the disguise is lifted above your actual face.
5. Exactly how long has Norman been inhaling the gobulin green? I'd assume he'd either start as soon as he'd invented the stuff, shortly after he was nearly killed by a giant geriatric buzzard and wanted to make sure he didn't have to rely on Spidey the next time something similar happened, or shortly after his first dealings with Hammerhead when he started planning to overthrow the Big Man. By the way, what kind of guy develops an experimental highly dangerous performance enhancing drug and then brings it home to show his family and then just leaves some lying around where his son can start chugging the stuff without anyone noticing it's gone?
6. We didn't see much of Aunt May in Season 2, but with so many characters floating around this isn't too surprising. If May does play an important role in any season three episodes is she going to get a spot in the opening credits for that episode?
7. When comparing animated shows through the years there doesn't seem to be a large change in the style and tone from the 1960's through to the late 80's. All the animated shows had a simplistic plot and generally weren't mentally demanding. However sometime in the early/mid 90's we started seeing shows like Fox's Spider-man, Batman The Animated Series, Reboot and Gargoyles, all of which felt more sophisticated than earlier shows and had such features as real character development and story arcs that could last through a season. Somehow I have a hard time imagining an episode like "Lethal Force" being done on G.I. Joe. As someone who has been in the industry a while did you notice a change in attitude from networks or executives towards animation at around that time? When producing Gargoyles did you find that in general people were more willing to let you attempt making a show with more mature themes relative to what you had done before?
8. Should Spiderman not get a third season or become cancelled for certain after season three wraps up, how likely is it that production could continue on direct to DVD movies? Generally speaking is it easier to convince producers or whomever to greenlight a single movie length piece of work comparred to an entire season of an animated show?
1. No one really. Tombstone was pretty much my instant second choice to replace Kingpin. And as for the "Big Man" title, I've seen evidence to both sides too.
2. I'm mostly content to leave Ock's morning routine to your imagination. As for his power-pack, he has had time to find one that lasts a long time. But he still NEEDS the power-pack. The arms won't function without it.
3. Yes, eventually.
4. Again, I'll leave this to your interpretation.
5. As you indicated, he started immediately after surviving Vulture's attempts on his life. He did not like feeling that powerless.
7. I think Batman the Animated Series was a revelation to many of us, and gave us the courage and evidence of success that allowed us to at least attempt to match or better that great series. Simpsons helped too, as did Who Framed Roger Rabbit and The Little Mermaid (the movie), and to a lesser extent The Great Mouse Detective. Animation seemed to be in something of a renaissance. But it shouldn't have been surprising. A generation of multi-discipline writers and artists who grew up on cartoons, comic books and genre fiction -- creative types who had learned to be discerning readers and viewers -- began to execute the kinds of shows they wanted to see. As for Gargoyles specifically, the miracle wasn't that people let me do what I wanted, but that they left me alone, which allowed me to do what I wanted. A subtle distinction, I know. But a significant one.
8. If we got cancelled or not picked up after Season Two is done airing, it would, I believe -- despite all evidence to the contrary and no matter how unfair that perception might be -- put the stink of failure on the series. Which would make it hard to get a greenlight on a DVD.
Hey, Greg! I love what you've done with Spectacular Spider-Man. The the best show ever. The 90s show compared to yours is nothing. This show rules!! Here's my question:
Every season in Spectacular Spider-Man has 4 arcs. Each arc is 3 or 4 episodes. You were involed in "The Batman" but you weren't the main director. If you were the main director and producer of "The Batman" when it was first planned, would you have done the same thing you did to Spectacular Spider-Man (having 4 arcs per season)?
I'm not a director at all. (Well, I've been a voice director, but I'm guessing that's not what you're talking about.)
What you seem to be talking about is me being a writer-producer. But no series exists in a vacuum. The arcs weren't my idea on Spec Spidey -- they were part of my marching orders -- though I took to the notion like a duck to water.
Regular readers of Ask Greg know I'm not too fond of hypothetical questions, but asking me about The Batman in this context is just... well... a hypothetical that borders on the silly. (Sorry.) There are too many unknown factors for me to evaluate. But since clearly the producers of The Batman had no such marching orders, the odds are slim that we would have taken that approach.
So, Greg, just out of sure curiosity, have you ever felt there was a whole conspiracy against the Gargoyles series at Disney? I mean, judging from Disney's actions, it was like they wanted the series to fail?
As I've said many times before, that's SO far from the truth it's beyond preposterous.
They made 78 episodes before RATINGS caused them to cancel the series.
So, I'm curious about something involving the early development of Gargoyles...particularly, the pitching process. I'm not exactly sure how to word this, as my knowledge of how the process of actually pitching a show works, but I'll try my best.
Listening to commentary on Awakening recently and browsing the Archives revealed that you had pitched Gargoyles multiple times: First as a comedy, then as an action show. What intrigues me in particular is the fact that the show had multiple pitches over the course of however long (the amount of time escapes me, sorry).
1. Are repeated pitching sessions common for television shows?
2. On what basis are pitches repeated (after being tweaked)? Positive notes from executives, faith in the concept, a combination?
3. Has the environment for pitching become stricter? As in, are concepts expected to be marketable/viable in one try or are multiple pitching attempts on the same concept still possible?
I apologize if these aren't worded all that correctly, it's just something I find very puzzling and I'm not entirely sure how to word my questions.
1. Sometimes, although more often if a show doesn't sell the first time out it dies. But often enough, a creator will keep trying variations until he or she sells their idea... or runs out of people to sell it to.
2. All of the above, plus a smidgen of desperation.
3. See above. Nothing's really changed, though it's definitely tougher to sell an original idea now than it was back then.
i would like to say thank you for creating the best superhero animated series of all time...second, this is a question, i know you can't and won't reveal any future plans for the series but can you answer this, i know fox had a hellofalot things the 90's series couldn'y do like punch...PUNCH, obviously this series doesnt have as much problems but, finally my question, is carnage to dark for the series, along with morbius biting people, and how about the death of gwen and george stacey stories? thanks
I don't know any way to answer this without making it sound like hints toward future plans.
So just talking about S&P in general, the situation shifts and changes all the time, depending on everything from the network and its current strategy and target audience to the individual giving notes -- but most of all depending on how any given thing is handled by the writers and board artists. Ultimately, it's all about execution.
When recording voices for animation, must all actors record voices in the same studio?
It's not an absolute, but we like it both for reasons of actor chemistry and because it's easier on our budget.
Hi Mr. Wiesman
As a folllow-on from something asked of you by "Anonymous" on the issue of growth and evolution in Spider-Man , I would like to, first, argue that the Spider-Man series you have been working on isnt "pinned down" by the problems the comic version of Spidey faces. You have placed Peter, MJ, Gwen, Harry and others into the most innocent kind of "hell" on Earth, High School.
Long before girls fell off bridges, long before clones and long before Peter realized MJ was the love of his life and married her, you don't have to worry about "resetting" there because that only affects the characters outside of High School...where readers expect them to act grown up and responsible for one another, and when they act like rank adolescents as they do in BND (my opinion), or heck, ever since the last ten years worth (Spidey's never recovered since 1999, again, my opinion)
Spider-Girl has now been running for eleven years, with another good few years left in the tank (I don't know how long Tom intends to tell it, right now the word is "indefinatly"), yet Tom recently admited if he so much as fought for an animated series, he'd be shot down. I find this incredibly tragic and disheartening.
And yet...look at what D.C accomplished ten years ago with Batman Beyond.
Terry McGuiness may only have had the golden rule of syndication ("Get 65 and DIE") one movie, and one episode of JLU, but it says a great deal about the higher-ups at WB to risk three years worth on character growth on someone new, whilst balancing that with remarkable doses of growth for Bruce Wayne and Barbera Gordon to that extent than, say, three more years of "The New Batman Adventures"
Hell, let's argue LOONATICS. Done CORRECTLY, this would have made Loony Toon characters DRAMATIC...key word there is "done correctly" of course, but premises like that are ones any writer can eat up with a spoon...again, WB risked it, suceed or fail.
Likewise you have put a lot of risk into Spectacular Spider-Man that has paid off, so maybe it's not a case of marketers being afraid of "growth and change", maybe it's more a case of certain groups being behind the times and just not living in the here and now.
Time will tell. Right now, I like to think those people KNOW that we need something new. Nothing lasts forever.
Not even the relevancy of the "Modern Myth".
My question: Why is it easier for something like Batman Beyond to be favoured over something like Spider-Girl?
No idea. Not even sure that's true, frankly.
The thing to keep in mind is that the business is fluid and NOT monolithic. Things change. There's much human turnover, and with that turnover comes changes in direction at every studio and every network. What the RULES are this week may not be the rules in six months time.
I've often said we'd NEVER have gotten Gargoyles on the air today, and that's true TODAY. But tomorrow is a whole other story.
Maybe Batman Beyond hit at the right studio and the right network at the right time.
Spider-Girl's situation is complicated by the fact that Marvel and Sony co-control the Spider-Man license. I'd guess (and it's ONLY a guess) that Marvel views Spider-Girl as a separate property. And I'd guess Sony views it as part of the Spider-Man license... and that disagreement (assuming it exists and/or has EVER even come up) would obviously be a roadblock to making a Spider-Girl series.
In any case, you give me credit for taking risks that I don't really think I deserve. Sony and Marvel came to me and ASKED me to do a Spider-Man series set in his High School years that was not in continuity with the movies or the current comics or Ultimate or anything. That's all they gave me, but that fit perfectly with what I wanted to do with the character. And given the fact that Spidey is one of the top marquis characters in the known universe, it wasn't exactly a risky proposition.
I like to think we executed well, but let's face it -- ANY Spidey show would do pretty well just by virtue of it being Spidey. I can't exactly take credit for the character's popularity. All I can do is strive to do him justice. It's for others to judge if we succeeded, though we succeeded well enough to satisfy me. I'm biased, of course, but my standards are pretty high.
Sometimes when I write, I worry about how much specific influence other similar media has on what I'm working on. As a student and literary lover, I am well aware of the dangers of plagerism and feel very sensitive to it, but I worry about unitentionally drawing too much from source material in fiction writing. For example, if I was working on a story about a vampire, I would worry about how much I'm being influenced by, say, Interview With the Vampire, which is a personal favorite novel and series. It's important for ideas to be new and fresh, even if they cover subject matter already used in the past.
Like you, I produce what I'd like to consume, so how do you avoid copying your favorites? Any sagely advice?
Otherwise, also want you to know that I impressed upon my local comic shop the sheer importance of my obtaining the two trades coming out this summer. I talked up the series, of which he was alredy a similarly disappointed fan. Both trades are on my pull-list.
I don't have a set of guidelines for you. I try to feel my way through it, I guess. If I am going to "lift", I try to be direct and on the head about it, so that I'm acknowledging the debt as opposed to trying to get away with something. But I also avoid seeing/reading newer interpretations of stuff I know I plan to write about. And as much as possible I stick with "source material," i.e. things in the public domain.
I've got for you a very in-depth question: How did you get to where you are today? What kinds of steps did you take? If you could give specifics, I'd be quite happy.
You see, I myself would love to go into the business of TV and film, and I frequently identify myself with you (in a non-creepy way - I mean regarding style and that kind of stuff).
I've answered this in depth and with specifics before. Check the archives for a more detailed answer.
Generally, I'd say the first things you need to do, if you haven't already are...
1. Finish your formal education.
2. Move to Los Angeles.
3. Read, write and proofread a lot. Practice. Learn that your first draft may suck, and that even your second draft may need shelving.
As for my specifics...
*Bachelors from Stanford in English with a Fiction Writing emphasis.
*Started working as a writer for DC Comics as a 19-year-old while still in college.
*Moved to New York to work in comics, cuz that's where THAT action was.
*Masters from U.S.C in Professional Writing with an emphasis in playwriting.
*Staff Assistant at Disney Television Animation.
*Eventually promoted to Director of Series Development.
*Developed Gargoyles and moved sideways to produce it.
I have watched the first two seasons of Spectacular Spider-man and absolutely love them! I think the thing I appreciate the most is the fact my 3 yr old son and I can watch them with both of us being entertained. We can share that experience and take completely different things from the episode. Kudos for walking that tightrope. With the series moving to Disney XD I have a few questions. 1) How does the ratings thing work? We record and watch every episode that comes on and would LOVE for that to be counted as credit for you guys. I want to do whatever I can to ensure a third and forth season. 2) Is there somewhere or someone we can contact and/or email with our support for this series? I would hate for it to not get picked up. Keep up the good work if you get the opportunity!!
Thanks. I'm glad you and your son both enjoy the show. That was the intent, for there to be something for kids and adults without short-changing either demographic.
1. Unless you are a Nielson household, your personal viewing is not specifically counted, but IN THEORY if you and your kid are watching and a bunch of other folks like you are watching with their kids, then the odds are some Nielson family just like yours is mirroring your collective behavior and that DOES count in the ratings. It has to do with statistics, and I don't pretend to understand it really -- or even fully buy into it. But that's how it works. Again, IN THEORY, if you stop viewing the show it suggests that somewhere some Nielson family just like you has also stopped. So DON'T STOP!!!
2. You can try to contact Disney XD through their website or write a letter to them. It can't hurt.
How much does it cost to commission or create a series or season and how does that work?
sorry for my ignorance and ambiguity,
Um... costs really vary. A lot depends on the mode of production, the development budget, etc.
Episodic costs on Gargoyles averaged about $450K per episode, at least for the first 65 episodes. (I have no idea what the final budget was for Goliath Chronicles, but I imagine it was considerably less.) And those per episode costs do NOT include development costs, marketing costs, etc. So making a series is a VERY expensive prospect, which is why we need/put up with studios, networks and the like.
Greetings, Mr. Weisman. First off, let me say that it is an honor to be able to speak to you, regardless of whether my question is accepted or not. I truly wish I were able to meet you someday being a writer myself! If only my living in Puerto Rico were not so bothersome... (why not make a Gathering here? :3)
Anyways, on to my question. We all know the story: for reasons beyond us, Disney canceled the legendary Gargoyles TV show we all know and love, and then we got a certain spin-off fiasco. Then, literally a decade later, we get a gratifying notice: the comics! (which I will definitely buy this summer, hopefully, even if it's only the Clan Building trades.) But now, sadly, Disney's gone EPIC CANCEL on us. Again. Therefore, I must ask this question. Apologies if it has been asked, by the way. Here goes:
Has it crossed your mind to consult other animation companies, such as Viz, Funimation, Man of Action (creators of the excellent Ben 10 series) on acquiring the license off Disney, or perhaps giving the series a new animated show on a different genre, such as anime or CG? Hell, I'm pretty sure people would pack the theater if it were to be turned into an anime or CG, especially given the highly impressionable teenager crowd of today that's into these genres.
If you ask me, Gargoyles is definitely not doing well under Disney's wing- I mean, it was virtually untouched for a whole decade and more and would have been thrown into the dark hell of obscurity were it not for the fans-i.e. us, and I'd like to take the chance to thank the fans for doing everything the fandom has done.
Thank you very much for your time, sir. It has been an incredible privilege that you even read this letter. Greetings from Puerto Rico, God Bless and please keep giving us great stories to enjoy.
Wolf E. Urameshi
PS: Did I mention your Spider-Man series is awesome? If not, there we go. :)
First off, thanks for all the praise.
You're welcome to organize and hold a Gargoyles Convention in Puerto Rico. I'd be happy to attend too.
The reasons for Gargoyles being cancelled are NOT beyond us. I've laid them out many times, and you can find them by looking through the ASK GREG FAQ. Calling "Goliath Chronicles" a spin-off, isn't really accurate either. It was a third season, rebranded, and with different behind the scenes talent running the production.
And again, to be accurate, Disney didn't cancel the comics. Technically, SLG did, because they could not afford the license under the terms Disney was offering. But sales of the trades will determine whether we'll eventually be back.
And, yes, this question has been asked and answered MANY, MANY times, so check the archives for fuller answers. But briefly, there's no way Disney would release the animation license to another company. And bashing Disney's efforts doesn't further our cause.
This is a question kind of about a Gargoyles movie but not really. I read that back in the 90s one of the reasons a live-action Gargoyles movie wasn't made was because a good script couldn't be found. Not sure if this is true or not but it leads to my question.
Why is it, Gargoyles or otherwise, movie companies contact outside screenwriters to develope a script instead of the creator, if the creator is available for contact (Not dead or no longer working on the project)?
I assume they think that the creator can't create something that would work for a wide audience because they'd be TOO faithful to their creation. I'm sure in some cases that might be true. But there's also a basic assumption that movie writers are inherently superior to television (and certainly cartoon) writers.
A comment, inspired by my last question about the Standards & Practices deaths.
Many of the "deaths by falling" that you had in the series, such as Findleach's and Gillecomgain's, were there simply because of S&P, and I don't think that it would have made a sizable difference to the story and characterization if, say, Gillecomgain had run Findlaech with a sword instead.
But it made good dramatic sense, I think, to have the Captain and Hakon die that way. One of the crucial points of "Awakening"'s opening was Goliath being driven to despair by one blow after another, to the point where he finally commits suicide (in a sense). The Captain and Hakon falling off the cliff rather than being ripped to shreds by Goliath worked there; now, not only has Goliath's clan been massacred, but he can't even exact vengeance upon the two people most responsible for his loss. It brings him one step closer to devastation.
So I think that even without Standards & Practices, it was a good idea to have the Captain and Hakon die that way.
In "City of Stone", you had Findlaech, Gillecomgain, and Duncan all die by either falling off something or getting burned up by the Weird Sisters' magic, to make the methods of their deaths acceptable for Standards & Practices.
But in Part Four, you had Canmore temporarily slay Macbeth by running him through with a sword. Did you have any difficulty with Standards & Practices over that?
Nope. Because (a) the audience saw no details of the event and (b) a few seconds later he stood up.
I know you are probably used to hearing it, but I am a big fan of both Gargoyles and The Spectacular Spider-Man. My questions mostly concern Spectacular Spider-Man.
1. How do the overseas ratings effect our chances for a third Spider-Man season?
2. What is the earliest we could possibly know if Spider-Man is picked up again?
3. If picked up, how long would it take to produce a new season?
4. How has the show being transferred to a Disney channel helped or hindered the possibilities of a third season?
5. Will Disney now be handling the DVD releases of Spider-Man?
My last question I ask because I am hoping they will be as I think (or hope) that they would use that as a sort of free advertising for the Gargoyles DVDs (If you like this, buy this other series by creator Greg Weisman, etc.) and possibly give us the season 2 part 2 we have all been waiting for. Anyways, thanks for your time and just know that I, as a dedicated Spider-Man fan who was highly wary of any new incarnation of the character, love what you have been doing on that series so far. Thanks again.
1. Well, if ratings are high all over the world and those stations want more episodes than perhaps it would encourage Sony International to put more money into the series, so that if for WHATEVER reason, other Sony divisions are less interested, it might help compensate. But we're still waiting for Disney to give us a domestic pick-up sometime after the second season starts airing in June.
2. June at the earliest.
3. About ten months, give or take.
4. Well, we lack continuity, and Disney wants us to prove ourselves all over again, I suppose.
5. No. That's always been Sony Home Entertainment.
I was just wondering...I have a very general question. How is it you or any of us know how well a cartoon does. I mean, is there a website that shows a show's ratings? I was interested in knowing how spectacular Spiderman, or any show for that matter, is doing in popularity and there seems to be little out there when I search. Great work on spectacular spiderman by the way. Best cartoon ever.
I learn about the ratings from my bosses. I would think they're published SOMEWHERE, but I couldn't tell you where.
Hello, Greg. I'm familiar with the guidelines and I clearly understand why you dont want any original ideas or fanfic. But I got this ideas for season 3 (I know its not even picked yet), its really only the major plot for the episodes, not getting into any depth. All I'm asking is if I can post them or somehow send them to you, just to take a look and tell me is it good, bad, what do you think of it. Just this. I dont wanna make your life miserable. I know that you, Vic Cook and everybody else can and will come up with something way better. I just want your opinion. If this question/request doesnt get approved, I'll understand.
I appreciate you asking so nicely, but there's no way Sony would allow me to read what you're offering, even on an educational "tell me if it's good" basis. Spidey is a LIVE property. I can't risk the lawsuits, and Sony wouldn't let me risk the lawsuits even if I was inclined to take the risk. Policy. Sorry.
I'm loving the effort and detail put into Spectacular Spider-Man! It's incredible how this show stays close to the comics, and somehow does its own thing! I can't find anything negative to say, and I'm accustomed to always finding something bad to say.
But I am curious...what was the reasons behind putting this show (in the USA) on Disney XD? The show started on CW, and it was doing well (wasn't it?) on that network, then BAM...Disney has the show...and their decisions to torment us with how long we have to wait for the season 2 episodes seem so...stupid. What happened? Why Disney?
(We are talking about the same company that screwed us all on Gargoyles after season 2 aftreall, Mr. Weisman...)
Wow... where to start.
First, thank you for the compliments.
Second, Disney did NOT "screw us all" after season 2 of Gargoyles. That's patently false. One could argue about how good a job they did or didn't do with the show, but no screwing was involved. For more information, read this: http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/faq.php?s=realworld
Third, as for Spidey, the show aired originally on KidsWB, which was a programming block on the CW. Halfway through our season, we learned that CW was dissolving the KidsWB block and selling (renting?) the space to 4KidsTV. So KidsWB became CW4Kids. Sounds like nothing more than a minor name change, but that's not true. CW4Kids was a totally different business entity. I had ZERO involvement in or direct knowledge of the negotiations that followed with either CW4Kids or with DisneyXD (or with Cartoon Network or any other channel Sony might have talked to), but I think it's safe to assume that DisneyXD offered Sony the best OVERALL financial deal, which doesn't necessarily mean the biggest episodic license fee. There are other FINANCIAL factors too that I'm sure were considered. But... and I hope this doesn't shock you... it is ultimately all about money.
I read your guidelines, and I am curious how to 'break into the business' Not necisarily starting my own comic book, but working for a smaller, more independent company such as Creature Comics. I have purused job sites, having recently graduated with a Bachelor of Animation, but am not having luck finding any such companies or positions.
As a side note (coming from the fan side of me) thank you for keeping the Gargoyle universe alive for your fans!! I am so excited to read the new comics, and see the Gargoyles making a comback!
Creature Comics isn't really a company. It's more of a partnership -- between myself, Greg Guler and Marty Lund (and not really that anymore either) -- formed to get the license to the Gargoyles comic. That didn't happen, and we wound up at SLG instead.
But in any case, my first question is "Where do you live?" You have to go where there's work. Do some research into companies you might want to work for in your area. And if there are none in your area (or if the concentration is too slim to get employed) -- move.
I think spectacular spider-man is great and probably one of the best animated series in the past 5 years. The only other series that I can think of that have equally strong plotlines, acting, and sense of continuity are those in the DCAU (DC Animated Universe) created by Bruce Timm and Paul Dini. That whole shebang spun off of what was originally the standalone Batman: The Animated Series because of the commercial and critical success of that show. I already know that you're considering doing DVD movies after Spectacular Spider-Man ends it's run, but would you ever consider doing other shows set in the same self-contained Marvel Universe like that of the DCAU? Just wondering b/c I see how strong a series Spectacular Spider-Man is and can only imagine the potential for adapting other characters.
And once again, the DCAU was not "created" by Timm & Dini. For starters, of course, it was not CREATED by any of these people, it was DEVELOPED. An important distinction in this business. Secondly, it was developed by a number of people, but certainly the two most important were Timm & ALAN BURNETT (who was Paul Dini's boss). I feel bad about constantly doing this, because I think it leaves the (false) impression that I've got an axe to grind against the very talented Mr. Dini, and I absolutely do NOT. Paul is phenomenal and deserves major props for his work on the DCAU. But I'm really tired of Alan not getting the credit he deserves for (a) RESCUING Batman the Animated Series from mediocre writing and (b) being the Executive Producer (alongside Bruce) of the entire DCAU (including THE BATMAN).
As for Spidey launching a "MCAU"... it isn't likely. Marvel's doing that on their own. Sony has the rights to ONLY Spidey and Ghost Rider. And before you ask, Vic and I have asked Sony about doing an animated Ghost Rider, but they are currently uninterested.
I'll start off with my question, but please forgive me for including some praise which I feel you are due.
My question: With Disney's recent decision to raise their licensing fee (effectively ending production of the Gargoyles comic) as well as their now seemingly permanent decision to not release Season 2, Volume 2 on DVD - do you ever get the feeling Disney thinks of you as the bastard child they never wanted and would do anything to make go away forever?
On a personal note - I would like to thank you for making my childhood better. "Gargoyles" was always a major part of my childhood - I had the toys, I had the VHS "The Heroes Awaken" with the game, I had everything. I even remember getting yelled at for putting TV above family when I commented to my mom one day that I couldn't go anywhere with her because the new "Gargoyles" episode was about to come on. After recently finding the two DVD collections currently available, I watched every single episode - and was once again amazed at how great they were.
Thanks for all that you do - I'm currently trying to buy all the comics that I can. I hope that, one day, we'll see the rest of your creation available on DVD, because I would love for my children to see it one day.
No, I don't feel that way. For starters, they did WANT us originally. They just never quite knew what to do with us. How to help us be as successful as possible. Now, we're simply a low, low, low priority. A corporation with literally hundreds of IPs needs to prioritize certainly, and we're low... largely because we have never made them quite ENOUGH money to be a high priority.
Are you the maker of Gargoyles? and if I want to make a book what should I do?
Please tell me how to make a good story.
I'm the creator (or at least co-creator) of the GARGOYLES television series. I was one of the writers, supervising producers and supervising story editor, and I'm currently writing the GARGOYLES and GARGOYLES: BAD GUYS comics.
I'm not sure what kind of book you have in mind. Generally, I advise would-be writers to get a great liberal arts education. Read... a lot. Write... a lot. And proofread.
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?
It takes eight to ten months - give or take.
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?.
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.
I just wanted to say thanks Greg for the fantastic story you've created here. I went on a nostalgic kick awhile back and revisited some series from my childhood.. most did not stand up so well, but I actually appreciate what you were doing with Gargoyles more now than I ever did back then and, in hindsight, recognize just how far ahead of its time it actually was.
The world you have crafted here is so vivid and interesting, it got me to thinking, have you ever thought about writing a novel about the Gargoyles? Or do you see Gargoyles always existing in a more visual medium, like animation or comic books?
Just to go a little further afield, what are your thoughts on "opening it up," Stars Wars style, so other authors can write the stories while you maintain tight control over canon? I think I know what your answer will be, but I have quite the appetite for more Gargoyles stories than exist at the moment, so I have to ask.
As I've said (here) many times before, I'd LOVE to write a Gargoyles' novel.
As for your second question, that's pretty much how I ran the series in the first place.
Do you think that adapting a familiar comic-book figure from the medium of comic books to the television screen (as you're currently doing with "The Spectacular Spider-Man") is much like adapting a familiar legendary figure (such as King Arthur or Theseus) to a modern work of fiction (except, of course, that Arthur and Theseus have been around a lot longer than Spidey has)?
There are common factors, but no. The main difference is that Spider-Man isn't public domain. Marvel OWNS the character and is quite the watchdog, as it should be.