A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Animation

Archive Index


: « First : Displaying #60 - #159 of 188 records. : 100 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

Richard Jackson writes...

Todd Jensen and others have commented on the similarities between “Grief” and the Batman episode “Avatar.” Todd’s question being here:

http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?qid=2870

I noticed another pair of episodes of Batman and Gargoyles that really reminded me of the other, because of the same writers. “Legion” and the Batman episode “What is Reality?” Both were written by Robert Skir and Marty Isenberg. Both episodes deal with virtual reality, but the third acts are very similar to me.

Batman/Goliath has to go into a virtual reality world to help his friend, Commissioner Gordon/Coldstone. His VR savvy compatriot Robin/Lexington tells him how it works. Once inside Batman/Goliath battles his enemy, The Riddler/Xanatos. Robin/Lexington tries to help Batman/get Goliath out of the VR world, but is painfully rebuffed. A shrill noise blasted into his ear piece in Robin’s case. An electronic shock emanating from Goliath’s body in Lex’s case. Side note: That was the biggest problem I had with “Legion.” I can buy a cybernetic gargoyle and that Xanatos can design a computer program based on his personality, but I never understood how Goliath’s body became akin to a live wire when hooked up to Coldstone. It must be one of those side effects when science and sorcery are combined.

Of course, “What is Reality?” and “Legion” are two different episodes and the execution of third acts are very different. Dialogue, characters and virtual reality as represented in the respective episodes were all different. Even the resolutions are different. I guess writing the virtual reality Batman episode gave Skir and Isenberg the experience to write the Gargoyles VR episode. Interestingly enough, they did write “Future Tense”, which also had a VR sequence in the Xanatos Pyramid, albeit in a dream. They didn’t write “Walkabout”, which had a metaphysical reality (MR?) scene.

I do think the examples of “Avatar/Grief” and “What is Reality?/Legion” are interesting examples of how writers will take previous ideas they’ve had and use another chance to expand or improve on them. “Avatar” didn’t work for me, but “Grief” is one of my favorite episodes of Gargoyles. And it’s close between “What is Reality?” and “Legion”, but I slightly prefer the former.

Greg responds...

Science and sorcery indeed.

Anyway, as always, the springboards for every Gargoyle episode pre-date writer involvement (unless the writer was also a story editor). But it may be very possible that once they got the assignment, they created or emphasized parallels with other work they had done.

Response recorded on January 12, 2011

Bookmark Link

Marc G. writes...

Is there a list online somewhere of all the overseas animation studios used for Gargoyles, by episode? It's frustrating because the credits always just listed "Walt Disney Television Animation".
Also, a related question: did you have control over which scripts were sent to which studios? Or was it purely dictated by scheduling and budgetary concerns?
Thanks!

Greg responds...

I don't have a list. Most of the first season was animated at Walt Disney Television Animation Japan, though I seem to recall that a couple were subcontracted out to Korea.

Season Two featured some eps by WDTVAJ, plus more from Korea (such as Hanho). But I can't remember who did what.

Scheduling tended to dictate what studio got what episode, but we did make an effort to make sure that "Bushido" went to Japan.

Response recorded on January 12, 2011

Bookmark Link

Mike W. writes...

Hi Greg,

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.

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on December 01, 2010

Bookmark Link

Steven D. writes...

Hello again, Mr. Weisman.

I've had a question in the back of my mind for some time, and now seems like a good time to ask it.
Recently, you released the writer's rotation for the first 24 episodes of YJ.
I've always been fascinated with television writing,as there seems to be no one way to do it, so I wanted to ask a few questions on how you approach it.

1. Back when i first wanted to ask this, I checked the SpecSpiderman archives to see what you mentioned about writing for that show. When going over writing duties, you mentioned that some of the episodes that you "reserved" some of the episodes you wrote. Since Young Justice finds you in a similar position of being both a producer and staff writer, I'm curious to know, what factors do you use when picking episodes to reserve for yourself (and confirming that reserve wasn't just a metaphor you were using)?

2. While I'm here, I was hoping you could also shed some light on how much freedom your freelance writers are given. Do they ever get the chance to write an episode completely from scratch, or because the shows you work on are so arc based, are they always given a firm foundation to start with, and if so, how rigid is this foundation (generally)?

Thanks!

Greg responds...

1. Sometimes I end up writing an episode for pragmatic reasons... or a combination of the creative and the pragmatic. For example, I wrote the two-part pilot of Young Justice (i.e. episodes 1 and 2). Of course, I had a creative desire to write these episodes, but it also would not have been pragmatic for anyone else to write them. I needed to set the tone of the series for the other writers to be able to get it.

Another example: staff writer Kevin Hopps and I were set to write the last two episodes (25 and 26) of the first season. Though we know the basics of what takes place in them, based on meetings that Kevin, producer Brandon Vietti and I had over a year ago, we hadn't broken those episodes yet, and creatively I hadn't decided which of the two I wanted to write. But scheduling realities last week made it apparent that Kevin would HAVE to write 25, meaning I was writing 26. All of which is just as well. I started the season; I might as well finish it. But the decision wasn't creative; it was purely pragmatic. The creative decision might have been no different. But the creative decision became moot for pragmatic reasons.

On the other hand, I've also written three other episodes. In those cases, the pragmatic need was for me to write one episode each between 6-11, between 12-17 and between 18-24. Within those parameters, I chose 11, 15 and 19 for purely creative reasons. Those were the ones I felt a special affinity for (based on reasons I can't reveal now without spoilers). So going into the three writers' meetings for each of those three "sets" of episodes, there was SOME flexibility as to which writer took which episode (keeping scheduling pragmatism in mind), but I had "reserved" for myself the one I wanted to write in each case.

2. My freelancers have, for better or worse, very little freedom when it comes to WHAT stories we are telling. The premises were all approved long before the freelancers came aboard. If a specific writer feels no affinity for a specific story, then he or she doesn't have to take that episode. I always try to give each writer an episode that jazzes him or her. But the basics of the stories are set. Now, the writers are very involved in the execution of those stories. That's where their freedom comes in. But they still have quite a gauntlet to wade through... beat outlines, outlines, scripts (and notes from many sources). Ultimately, I take responsibility for every episode, and I'm the guy doing the final pass on every beat outline, outline and script. But I couldn't do this job without stellar writers providing me with great stuff. And on this series, I couldn't do it without Brandon and Kevin actively participating in the inception and breaking of every single story.

Response recorded on October 22, 2010

Bookmark Link

Chris Krause writes...

Hey Greg!

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!

Thanks,

--Chris

Greg responds...

Chris,

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.

Response recorded on June 25, 2010

Bookmark Link

Balron writes...

This is a silly question, and I might ask others on the blog page.
I was watching Pochahantes on youtube and I thought-what if "Gargoyles" had been directed and animated by the people who did this *f'd up* cartoon?
Could you imagine YOUR animation being done by the people who did that cartoon, or for that matter, "Fern Gulley?"

xD I lol at the concept XDD

Greg responds...

Are you actually asking about the animation or about the design style?

Response recorded on May 13, 2010

Bookmark Link

Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...

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.

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on March 29, 2010

Bookmark Link

RandomStan writes...

What animal noises and sound effects were used to make the gargoyle sounds, like when they roar, growl, sigh? Also for Bronx and gargoyle beasts as well? What sound was used for when the gargoyles would dig their claws into stone? That one sounds a bit familar, almost like popping bublbe wrap.

Greg responds...

I don't recall. Sorry. Been too long. And I was never at foley sessions anyway. Just the mixes, when the effects had already been created.

Response recorded on February 23, 2010

Bookmark Link

Robby writes...

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?

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on November 24, 2009

Bookmark Link

Tonya writes...

Hi Greg! I was reading an earlier post of yours where you mentioned that it's harder to pitch original ideas (I'm guessing to networks, but maybe it's the same with comics, books, etc...?) now than it was when you originally pitched Gargoyles:

1. Why is it more difficult to pitch original ideas now than it was then? (I would think they'd be anxious for new concepts???)

2. What's probably the #1 thing that the people being pitched to are looking for?

3. Is a successful pitch sometimes tied to the person you are pitching to? (I mean, if you're pitching to one guy on Tuesday, but had you gone on say, Thursday and had a different guy, could the outcome of the pitch be different? I guess I mean do you depend on getting lucky with whomever you're scheduled to pitch to? And if not, can you ask to pitch to someone else?)

Thanks! I hope my questions were clear enough to get across what I'm trying to ask. I'm thinking of writing professionally (IF I'm any good) and wondered how hard it would be to "pitch". Thanks again! (Love your work by the way.)

Greg responds...

1. They're not. They're afraid of new concepts and would rather have something that's "proven" in some other medium or era. This, in my opinion, is a direct result of the vertical integration of these companies that makes the decision making process a long uphill struggle.

2. It differs all the time, but marquis value doesn't hurt.

3. Luck-of-the-draw and incidental timing are huge factors.

Response recorded on November 02, 2009

Bookmark Link

alycia lowry writes...

hi Greg,

i was wondering about something. Why did you guys took off gargoyles? I was upset over the years cause its my favorite tv show and also movies?

Greg responds...

Don't include me in the "you guys". It wasn't my choice. Disney stopped the syndicated version because they had a full 65 episodes, which is standard. They cancelled Goliath Chronicles because of poor ratings. For more details CHECK THE ARCHIVES!!!!

Response recorded on October 29, 2009

Bookmark Link

Geoff writes...

What was with the animation goofs that happened throughout Gargoyles? Did they seriously get by everyone until the episodes were aired? (I'm talking about the character design ones, to be specific.)

Greg responds...

What exactly do you expect me to say here?

Sometimes things were off-model. Sometimes we had the time and money to fix it, other times we didn't.

Response recorded on October 28, 2009

Bookmark Link

MARVEL-FAN writes...

Greg, how come in the Spectacular Spider-Man it doesent use realistic gunshot sounds? But, Batman: The Brave and The Bold it uses realistic gunshot sounds, other Batman cartoon shows.

Greg responds...

Different networks have different rules, I guess.

Response recorded on October 27, 2009

Bookmark Link

Chryse writes...

Hey Greg, I have a quick question regarding the episode "Subtext" from Spectacular Spider-Man Season 2. I've watched the episode on my DVR a couple of times now (I'm from Canada, so I've seen 'em all already), and I've noticed that the animation is little off from all the other episodes. It seems a tad jerky and unpolished, and I was wondering if there was some sort of mishap when it came to animating the episode? Off course, you have every right to deny me an answer in case that Sony gets the wrong impression, and that's completely understandable. I am merely curious.

Other than that, the episode was well-written as always, and I especially enjoyed the fact that it starts in medias res (an artistic technique that I am quite fond of). If the scripts for Season 3 maintain such a high quality I'll tune in every week -- even if the show is animated using xerography (like "Marvel Super Heroes" back in the 60's...a Canadian-made show, sadly). Best of luck to you and your team and I hope that you guys get that 3rd season!

Greg responds...

SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!

I'm not denying you an answer, but I don't in ANY way agree with your assessment of the animation. I noticed no qualitative difference between "Subtext" and any of our other episodes, and I've been doing this for a LONG time.

Response recorded on September 18, 2009

Bookmark Link

Rage writes...

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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on August 11, 2009

Bookmark Link

Will Keaton writes...

Greg:

SPIDEY SPOILERS

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?

Greg responds...

SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!

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.

6. Yep.

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.

Response recorded on August 07, 2009

Bookmark Link

Harlan Phoenix writes...

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.

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on July 21, 2009

Bookmark Link

David B. Jacobs writes...

Hey, Greg!
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).
Thanks!

Greg responds...

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.

Etc.

Response recorded on June 29, 2009

Bookmark Link

I writes...

Hello,
How much does it cost to commission or create a series or season and how does that work?
sorry for my ignorance and ambiguity,
Me.

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on June 05, 2009

Bookmark Link

Heather writes...

In the series Elisa's hair color seems to be dark blue, although it is black considering her African and Native American ancestory. Is the reason you did this because of the series' generally dark color scheme and the probability of it getting lost in the background if it were black?

Or do you just like the color blue? :P

Greg responds...

There's kind of a tradition in comics and cartoons to use blue to highlight black hair. You can't highlight black with black. And lightening the black, i.e. making it grey, makes a character look old. If you use brown, then the character's hair looks brown, not black. For most people, the dark blue sheen on black hair still reads as black hair.

Response recorded on May 29, 2009

Bookmark Link

Paul writes...

Thanks for doing such an amazing job with The Spectacular Spiderman. Both seasons are really enjoyable. I've just got two questions:

1) Why is it that a lot of the background music in season 2 was stuff that had previously been used in season 1? Aside from character themes, nothing seemed to be repeated in season 1, but in season 2, lots of music from previous episodes kept popping up again and again. Was a smaller budget used for the music in the second season?

2) The animation in season 2 seemed to be weaker than season 1 as well. Some episodes looked beautiful, but others seemed a bit choppy and off-model at times, like "First Steps" and "Identity Crisis". Was there a smaller budget for the animation in season 2?

Greg responds...

1. Themes were reused intentionally -- and by the second season we had a LOT more themes to reuse -- but to my knowledge, no actual music was reused, and I attended EVERY music spotting session, muisc preview session and sound mix.

2. No. We've had inconsistent animation here and there both seasons. Both our seasons contain some of our most gorgeous stuff and some of our weakest stuff.

Response recorded on May 27, 2009

Bookmark Link

Galax writes...

I'm so sorry, I forgotten to tell which show I mean ^^

Of course Gargoyles ;)

So I ask again:

Can you tell me, which Animationstudio produced the episodes of the show?
Maybe a name of one or all?

thx a lot.

btw: keep on to bringing Gargoyles alive! :)

Greg responds...

Oh. Sorry, I guess I was in Spider-Man mode.

As for Gargoyles, the series was produced by Walt Disney Television Animation. Most of the first season episodes and many of the second season episodes were animated by Walt Disney Television Animation - Tokyo. Some others were animated in Korea by Han Ho. There were other studios too, but it's been too long, and I don't remember off the top of my head.

Response recorded on May 20, 2009

Bookmark Link

Galax writes...

Hi Greg.

Can you tell me, which Animationstudio produced the episodes of the show?
Maybe a name of one or all?

thx a lot.

Greg responds...

Sony TV Animation produced the series. But if you mean what studios animated them, we used Dong Wu, Han Ho & Moi.

Response recorded on May 20, 2009

Bookmark Link

Trisha writes...

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!

Greg responds...

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.

Response recorded on October 22, 2008

Bookmark Link

Lemmy Pierce writes...

So I unexpectedly came off work early today and found myself with a bit of free time-- not much, mind you, but enough. I don't know what it says for my intelligence or creativity that my thoughts immediately wandered to television, but eh . . . free time is supposed to make you feel good, not benefit humanity as a whole. And it felt like it'd been awhile since I'd gotten to actually sit down and watch anything (as opposed to, say, piping up the volume and listening from another room while I do this, that or the other thing). I wasn't sure what, if anything, I was in the mood for, and cast a casual eye onto my DVD shelf.

Gargoyles.

Well, why not Gargoyles? The quality ratio and fun factor with that show is so high that the only difficult part there is choosing which episode to run. So I pulled down Season One.

Initially I thought to watch Awakenings, but that's a lot of time to commit for one sitting when I had other things to be doing later on. I decided I'd watch "Enter Macbeth" instead.

It is, of course, one of my all-time favorites. mainly because of its titular character.

I actually watched it two times through for the hell of it. When I was finished, I ended up thinking and rethinking through a lot of it . . . and then somewhere in the back of my mind I remembered ASK GREG.

So, I thought I'd ramble. That *is* allowed, isn't it?

ENTER MACBETH

Yeah, we'll tell the truth on this one: The episode does kinda look like . . . well, crap. I have a much more affectionate eye for the episode than I did upon first viewing and look past a lot of it now, but there are still moments of "Enter Macbeth" that I can't get out of my head as something to say, "God, that's some [your negative adjective goes here] animation." I can't quite put my finger on what it is-- the whole episode just feels so off from a visual standpoint.

This would, in fact, become the start of one of the things I disliked most about this particular studio. When gargoyle wings fold over cloak-like, you should not see the three "limbs" as you do when seeing their interior. Or at least, you don't in the better animation studios. Drive me nuts; don't know why.

And of course, there was that one shot of Macbeth with the most yellow friggin' teeth. WTF?!

Greg, it's been many years since I've checked the archives in any great detail, but I think I remember you saying something like, "I was sure that the bad animation would make it so that almost no one would be interested in seeing Macbeth again." Well, this is one of those instances where the characters and plot shine through to make up for an episode's lackluster animation. (I call them "Korean Incidents".) It never detracted from the story. Not for me, anyways.

Let's start with Macbeth himself. This is an interesting character. At first glance, he appears to come out of nowhere. His motivations are unclear, so for now he's just "the bad guy". So how do you sell him without the cool backstory that will be developed later?

You have him kick copious amounts of ass, both literally and figuratively.

The scene with him posing as a prison guard is a highlight. So much of the credit for this episode should go to John Rhys-Davies, who from what I can tell just leapt into the role. Although, is it my failing memory or is this practically the only time that Xanatos and Macbeth have any real interaction with one another? If this is true, then that's a shame because they play well off of one another. But why would Macbeth introduce himself as . .. well, *himself*, rather than Lennox MacDuff (presuming that this is the identity he's gone by for many hundreds of years as a cover)?

Look at this guy, though. Not only does he wait for the gargoyles to awaken, he takes them all on single-handedly and wins. Not only that, but he takes prisoners. All on their home turf, and without so much as breaking a SWEAT. His knowledge in these "creatures" is so expert that he knows precisely what to do and how to do it with cold and calculated precision.

Check that attack. He throws (an admittedly off-guard) Broadway into Hudson and over the castle edge with ease. Then before anyone else can react, he tosses the smoke pellets and gains the upper hand over everyone else. Confusion ensues. The gargoyles who can't see and don't move end up blindsighted by gargoyles who can't see and DO move in very wrong directions. Or by Macbeth himself, who most assuredly can see and makes short work of Brooklyn before he can do a damned thing.

From there, it's just zap zap zap and it's finished. "Captured me three gargs in under 20 seconds, EL-OH-EL."

I always found this battle to be interesting in and of itself. Macbeth, for as much as we know this far in the game, is ordinarily human. He doesn't have biological enhancements or special powers or even henchmen; he's as human as you or me. And he takes them ALL down. Hell, Goliath himself probably gets the worst of it-- the outcome is so nakedly humiliating that I'm blushing. Oh, and that body slam into the fusebox didn't help either.

And is it me, or was Elisa WAY too close when Goliath came swooshing down after being electrified by the hull of Macbeth's ship? I say that she was damned lucky: If he had actually COLLIDED with her at that speed, I say that she might've been crushed to death.

So now Goliath leaves to track them down. Hudson and Broadway are left to defend the castle, but of course that's another subplot all its own.

Elisa warns Goliath that it's not safe to stay at the castle. Hell, she says it three times in a row. And his best reaction is to shrug her off-- something he won't be so apt to do in later episodes. He took off awful fast to rescue the other gargoyles at that point, almost as though he couldn't avoid the conversation fast enough.

Something else we don't see a lot of in later episodes tends to show in abundance with regards to Season One and particularly "Enter Macbeth", and that's Goliath Pissed Off. It was only juuuuuuust last episode that he was in a rage over what he thought was Elisa getting shot by Dracon. Goliath holding Dracon over the railing was a powerful dramatic moment. (Although in hindsight, he does that a LOT. Twice in "Awakening" with Hakon and Xanatos, Dracon in "Deadly Force" and I think at least once more somewhere down the line, although I can't remember when.) But in "Enter Macbeth", it's kinda flipped around. Goliath caught Dracon with relative ease, and it was clear what he would have done had Broadway not fessed up in time. Goliath never catches Macbeth, though. And he spends so much time chasing mirrors and shadows that I think Goliath might have been pissed enough to do worse than simply drop him. So we get to see a lot of vicious anger on his part in this ep. Roaring. Tearing through walls. Getting into a slugfest. Goliath isn't just another species, he's a dangerous one when it comes to the defense of his clan.

But that just makes Macbeth even cooler. Now it's Goliath who's handled with ease. Think about that for a moment. GOLIATH. A gargoyle warrior who is more than a match for just about any human out there. But against Macbeth, and especially on his turf, that same gargoyle finds himself at a disadvantage. And what makes that so interesting is that Macbeth isn't this ZOMG "genetically-engineered gargoyle sorceress hybrid mutant clone" superior foe. He's a human being. A human being with technology up the wazoo, but still human.

Look at the way he handles himself in their duel, after the chase is over. It's completely even. It was smart of Goliath to grab for a weapon when he got the chance, because even if weaponry isn't his habit I think he knew that against a sword-swinging Macbeth it was his only real chance. Even so, Macbeth doesn't relent. Goes on and on. Fights until the mansion is about to go up in flames . . . and he never gets too angry or panicked even when forced to escape. Is he pissed because the plan went to rot and his house burned down? Sure, why not? But he still takes it all with a certain amount of stride. No loud threats for vengeance, no personal grudge against Goliath, no real "villainous" actions taken at all (except, maybe, leaving the other gargoyles to burn alive). He just leaves when the gettin's good, and knows a little more for next time.

Love that little slip-out-of-the-jacket thing, by the way.

No, Macbeth doesn't have extra emotions to waste on Goliath and company. He wants Demona, Demona, Demona. The other gargoyles are just pawns (albeit useless ones as it turns out). I think it was a wise decision for her to not show up in this episode at all; it would have been too convenient, not to mention that it would also have detracted from Macbeth's character study. This is his episode.

Back at the castle, the remaining Gargoyles decide to take the Grimorum off Xanatos' hands. Now Owen gets his moment, too.

Hudson: Who's going to stop us? You?
Owen: Indeed.

You can tell by Hudson's attitude that he didn't expect Owen to knock his ass onto the floor. I don't think any of us did! Then, before Broadway can intervene, he's got a loaded gun pointed at his head. (I don't think that S&P would let that slide nowadays.) Owen is capable and reasonably prepared, no matter the circumstances. I think it's great that it's Elisa throwing a crutch at him that effectively turns the tables-- for all their strength, the gargoyles ended up pretty helpless otherwise.

Ah, well. All part of the job for Owen Burnett. However, I wonder if he faced some sort of penalty or reprimand for failing to prevent the theft of the Grimorum.

I despise when recurring characters are introduced via Korean outsourcing. I would say, introduce them some other way, and then give them crap animation somewhere down the line. Macbeth has a great character design; it should have been introduced through one of the better studios, perhaps the best one. (Not that I'm implying fault. You can give only so many episodes to Japan's Tokyo outlet; you make your choices and you live with 'em.) This is one of those episodes that I say to myself, "Damn, I'd love to see what this would'a looked like with kickass animation."

The "City of Stone" four-parter becomes interesting for this reason, given that we see how many changes Macbeth has gone through throughout the centuries . . . again, both figuratively and literally. It's not done by the Tokyo studio, but we're given so many designs for Macbeth. It's wonderful.

I've gotta start dinner now, so I guess that about does it for me. Later!

~Da Lemmy

Greg responds...

We couldn't know while writing scripts which episodes were headed for Korea vs. Japan. Of course, nowadays, things in Korea have improved quite a bit. ALL of The Spectacular Spider-Man is animated there, and we're generally thrilled with the results.

Response recorded on October 08, 2008

Bookmark Link

anonymous writes...

Hi there:

1.) I didn't know if you knew, but your show currently holds the record for the most episodes to feature Sandman on any Spider-Man animated series, as he's never appeared in more than one episode of a Spider-Man cartoon. I've noticed some villains that have appeared on the various cartoon shows have been used surprisingly little. Mysterio's had no more than four episodes (as shown on the Fox Kids, 1990s "Spider-Man" show), Electro's had three (from the 1960s animated series), and Kraven's had three or four appearances at the most, I think (also from the Fox Kids TV show). Do you have any plans for future seasons to try and break these villains' current records and let the villains appear in more episodes?

2.) Is there any chance we will see Doctor Octopus meet with Mysterio in season two, or maybe in another season?

3.) When season two is a huge hit (which I'm sure it will be), will you guys get started animating season three or does it usually take a few months of planning before you can get right back to work on another season?

Greg responds...

1. I'm not interested in records, just in telling the best possible stories I have in my arsenal.

2. There's always a chance.

3. Planning, arcing, outlining, scripting, voice recording, pre-production, design, direction and all sorts of levels of approval must happen before animation can start. If we don't get a pick-up - for scripts at least - until Season Two airs and is (hopefully) declared a success, than there will be over a year gap between Seasons Two and Three.

Response recorded on September 29, 2008

Bookmark Link

Needs A Little Guides writes...

This has been bothering me for sometimes, and i dont know how or who to ask this, so i'm just going to ask you because your in the cartooning busniess, I'm a senior in high school. And I've alwayed dreamt of becoming an cartoonist, I've alwayed enjoyed drawing and cartoons, and ever sense i was small I use to watch gargoyles and loved it, And from there I started getting into the arts, but it stopped when i enterd in high school,there was no arts and so my talent has gone to waste, -_-... You probably dont really have time for this but I'd really like your opion on how you started off or where to i could start, ...Thanks for putting up with me if you do response to this

Greg responds...

I don't know too much about art schools, but obviously it wouldn't hurt for you to look into them and find one that has a solid animation department. CalArts comes to mind, because I know so many artists in the business who went there. But I'm sure there are other decent programs out there too. If you're truly serious, then start doing research and find the program that's best for you.

Response recorded on September 25, 2008

Bookmark Link

Bill Rodebaugh writes...

Hello Greg,

I'm an animation fan....particular from the days when everything was animated in the US....such as the earlier Hanna-Barbara days or Filmation's cartoons. Has "Gargoyles" and the new animated "Spectacular Spiderman" animated overseas? Do you have direct input into all the stories that go or have gone into these series?

Sincerely,

Bill

Greg responds...

All the writing and voice recording for both shows are/were done in the US. On Spider-Man all of the pre-production and post-production as well. On Gargoyles, most of the pre-production was done in the U.S., but a few episodes were pre-produced at Walt Disney TV Japan, but under the supervision of myself and Frank Paur. All the post for Gargoyles was done in L.A.

The actual animation was/is done overseas. Gargoyles was about 1/3 Japan and 2/3 Korea (with a bit of China thrown in). Spidey is all animated in Korea at one of three studios: HanHo, DongWoo and Moi.

Response recorded on April 17, 2008

Bookmark Link

Jordan writes...

Hey Greg,

I caught the spider-man premire and I have to say it was one of the best saturday mornings I've had in years. Congrats to you and your crew.

In the time between Gargoyles and Spider-man, how would say the overall process of creating an animated show has changed, for better or worse?

Greg responds...

Mostly worse for me at least, because in those days I had the occasional ear of Michael Eisner. He was hard to sell, but if he said yes, we got to MAKE OUR SHOW with no more bologna attached. Nowadays getting a "yes" is nearly impossible as it's always a decision by committee. Heck it took them years to decide to make Spider-Man. I mean... Spider-Man?!! If any show is a no-brainer...

Response recorded on March 14, 2008

Bookmark Link

Moeen writes...

This question is actually not about Gargoyles.

I was wondering if you have seen or know about the animated series "Avatar: The Last Airbender." If you have seen it, what do you think of it?

I've heard some people complain about how animation and animated shows in America have been in a decline since the 90's, but Avatar is actually the best animated show I've seen since Gargoyles. It came out a few years ago on Nickelodeon and is currently in it's third season.

The shows strong points are many that made Gargoyles such a great show, namely very complex characters, a complex plot and excellent pacing among other qualities. Like Gargoyles, it also appeals to many different age groups, not just kids.

You've mentioned how it would be difficult to air a show like Gargoyles these days with the current lack of S&P freedom, but the creators of Avatar have nonetheless managed to make a great show with an excellent storyline apparently without sacrificing anything, and it has become quite a hit.

So I thought you might be interested in looking into it, if you haven't already.

Greg responds...

I've seen clips from Avatar, but I haven't seen a full episode.

I've heard very good things, but it doesn't change my argument. Nick has Avatar and... and...

Myself and others I know have pitched shows to Nick, shows that might be great companions to Airbender, and yet... and yet...

Avatar seems to be the exception that TESTS the rule. But the rule seems to still be in place.

Response recorded on October 30, 2007

Bookmark Link

Shan Muir podcast

Friend, fan and pro, Shan Muir -- who some of you may have met at past Gatherings -- has been interviewed on a podcast promoting her new book on the animation biz. Check it out.

http://www.catchdacraze.com/episode94.html


Bookmark Link

Landon "Lumpmoose" Thomas writes...

Hello, long-time reader, first time asker. I just caught "Ken 10" and loved it. I think it's one of the best Ben 10 episodes yet, and that's saying a lot. I love seeing the shades of Gargoyles in there with your fearlessness in shaking things up, adding drama, introducing new characters, and playing with the time line. It makes me all the more excited for Spectacular Spider-man (congrats on the 26-episode pick-up, by the way).

I'm currently pondering a career in sound design/editing/engineering. Animation is my passion and that's what I'd like to work with, at least partially (i.e. I can't draw). You've mentioned Advantage Audio in the past as the Gargoyles post-production house. Advantage Audio looks like a great place to work, but it surprises me that Disney television animation would contract out for audio work on one of their flagship products.

1) I know smaller animation studios usually contract out for audio post-production, but how often do the big studios, like WDTVA, WB, Cartoon Network, and Nickelodeon, use external post-production houses?

b) Do they even have in-house audio teams? If so, how often do they use them?

c) Just out of curiosity, what does Culver Entertainment do?

2) The thing I'm worried about most is being 'merely' a tech grunt in the audio production field. In your opinion, how much creativity is there in the audio post-production field?

b) How closely do you, as a writer/producer/director, work with audio teams? Do you just pass the work on and expect an end-product?

3) This is a personal, limited-in-scope question of which you may have no opinion. I'm currently in Minneapolis with a BA in theatre, minor in computer science, and very little audio experience. I'm pondering going to Full Sail for a trained-by-the-best kind of thing. Does that school stick out for you or would a local tech school and/or experience be good enough to break into the big time?

Thanks for any help! I know questions weren't strictly Gargoyles-related, but Gargoyles was what inspired me to steer into the entertainment industry in the first place!

Greg responds...

Thanks for the congrats.

1. None of the studios I've ever worked with in Television Animation have their own post houses.

b. Never.

c. Each show is different, but as far as Spidey's concerned, we'll probably make a decision in the next couple weeks as to which audio post house we'll be using.

2. Tons. But it depends on what you mean by creativity. Obviously, you're coming at the piece near the end of the process. You're not writing the story or animating the picture, but you are breathing life into it with sound, and there are a tons of choices to be made. The producers (if not the executives) have final say of course, but a great engineer or sound fx designer makes all the difference in the world.

b. I discuss things with the team, they go to town and then I'm present for the mix (at the very least). I don't just hand it off and cross my fingers that I'll like what comes back, but I also don't stand over their shoulders while the sound is being designed.

3. I've never heard of "Full Sail", but frankly I don't know this arena very well, so don't judge by me.

Good luck!

Response recorded on October 12, 2007

Bookmark Link

Bazell writes...

In "A Long Way To Morning," Demona, Hudson and Goliath do not turn to stone until the clouds clear and the sunlight shines through - with the sun clearly well over the horizon, suggesting a bit of time has passed after sunrise. However, in "The Silver Falcon," Broadway turns to stone even though he is in a basement, cut off from the light of the sun, suggesting a circadian rhythm. Was it simply an animation error in "A Long Way To Morning," or is there a reason for this. (I assume it's the animation, but I was curious)

Greg responds...

A little from column A, a little from column B.

Response recorded on August 20, 2007

Bookmark Link

Want to know more...?

Shan Muir, who some of you may know from various Gatherings she's attended, has written a book on Animation production:

Gardner's Guide to Writing and Producing Animation presents a step-by-step guide through the animation production process-- from deciding what type of animation project to produce to marketing the final production. This book includes behind-the-scenes glimpses into these areas by incorporating interviews with professionals in all areas of the field. It presents in-depth, first-hand descriptions of how certain people personally perform their duties as part of the general production pipeline. In addition, the book explores the various career opportunities in the animation industry, which is known for incorporating a diverse group of artists and engineers. Whether your goal is to produce a completed television special, pilot, short, or independent feature, Gardener's Guide to Writing and Producing Animation offers a comprehensive understanding of the art and business of animation.

Interviews include:

*Jack Angel, Voice Actor
* Monique Beatty, Line Producer
* Jerry Beck, Producer/Animation Historian
* Larry DiTillio, Story Editor/Writer
* Michael Donovan, Voice Director
* John Grusd, Director
* Marc Handler, ADR Story Editor/Writer
* Carl Johnson, Composer
* Bill Koepnik, co-owner of audio post house Advantage Audio
* Christy Marx, Story Editor/Writer
* Jan Nagel, Marketing Diva
* Josh Prikryl, Overseas Supervisor
* Sander Schwartz, Studio Executive
* Tad Stones, Producer
* Brooks Wachtel, Story Editor/Writer
* Greg Weisman, Producer/ Story Editor/Writer
* Robert Winthrop, Producer
* Tim Yoon, Production Manager

I haven't seen it yet, but it sounds invaluable if you're looking to understand how this thing works. Should be available at most big chains and can definitely be ordered on-line or by any bookstore! It's out there now, so support one of your own and grab up a copy!


Bookmark Link

Billy Kerfoot writes...

Hi Greg, me again. Sorry but I forgot this other question I've been meaning to ask:

What type of animation did you guys use for the show? Was it dark deco like in Batman: The Animated Series? And although I know you didn't work on TGC, from the looks of it, do you know what animation they used as well? Thanks a lot!

Greg responds...

"Dark deco" isn't a type of animation, it's a term coined for the styling the creative team used. The type of animation was cell, i.e. as opposed to 3D CGI. Same for us. I'm afraid we never bothered to coin a term for our style.

Response recorded on July 18, 2007

Bookmark Link

Justin writes...

I know this will not reach you for awhile. But I was perusing internet movie database and found an outstanding review of the series I thought and hoped you might enjoy.

This person captures the spirit of the fans in every way, on every level. We have bought the DVS's we WILL buy the comics, and Yes, I believe we will bring this timeless show back.

We cannot do otherwise guys.

I have just one question: How can Disney Television Animation produce such a wonderful show as "Gargoyles" for a couple of seasons and then go back to being Disney Television Animation? I simply cannot understand it, and if anyone has any thoughts, PLEASE share them with me! This show was a breath of fresh air on every level. If this wasn't a groundbreaking show, it certainly raised the bar sky high.

Voices--Many's the time I have thought that they could have chosen a better actor for a part in animation. Not here. The voice cast was so good that to this day I cannot imagine anyone else filling the bill. In the role of Goliath, Keith David demonstrated that he possesses one of the greatest speaking voices of any actor in the business. Jeff Bennett was also great as Brooklyn, my favorite character. (Loved the white hair!)

Music--Carl Johnson's scores were great. They beautifully set the tone and underlined the action and the drama.

Animation--Excellent. Dark, moody and stylish. The shots of the clan as stone statues are downright eerie at times. To this day, I still can't believe Disney did this one.

Plot--Action, drama, technology, mythology, humor and a little Shakespeare on the side. Folks, WHAT MORE COULD YOU POSSIBLY ASK FOR? This series had the most tightly structured story lines ever--there was not a single moment of dead air anytime.

The best thing about the series, however, was the characters. For being a clan of gargoyles (with a couple of humans), these characters were as real as you and I. Things HAPPENED to them! They actually got HURT as a result of violence. They matured, sometimes in ways unexpected. They found out the hard way who their friends and enemies were. And they had to live with the consequences of their actions, which sometimes came back to haunt them in later episodes.

Here's hoping Disney will realize the error of their ways and bring this show back. If you are already a fan, may you continue to enjoy the show. If you haven't seen it, give it a chance. But be advised: Once you have seen television and the world through the glowing eyes of a gargoyle, you will never want to settle for "standard kiddie fare" ever again.

I hope you enjoyed this Mr. Weisman

Greg responds...

Thanks, Justin. It's always nice to read praise. (I'm not shy about admitting that I like the ego-boost.) But I have to say that I don't see or understand the need to praise Gargoyles by BASHING Disney -- in particular the shows which preceded Gargoyles at Walt Disney Television Animation. "The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh", "Disney's Gummi Bears", "DuckTales", "Darkwing Duck", many episodes of "TaleSpin", "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers", "Aladdin" and a select few of "Bonkers" and "Goof Troop" strike me as some of the best TV Animation that's EVER been produced. Likewise shows since Gargoyles, like "Kim Possible" and a few episodes of "Hercules" and "Buzz LIghtyear of Star Command" also send me. (And there may be more, but I don't watch cartoons as much now as I did back when I was a Disney Exec.)

Obviously, not all these shows are going to send every Gargoyles fan. And that's fine. But I can't really understand not recognizing how superior they are to most of what's out there.

And remember: NO GUMMI BEARS; NO GARGOYLES.

Response recorded on January 15, 2007

Bookmark Link

Rylynx1285 writes...

Mr. Weisman this would be my first time asking a question. I have to say I have been a big fan of Gargoyles since the beginning. The show really change my feelings about people who are different. Thank you Mr. Weisman for introducing this show to my life. As for my question. Do you feel that Animation in America has been on a steady decline? These days that aren't that many animated shows that are made with the same quality as Gargoyles or any animated shows during the ninties which I dubbed the golden age of animation. I just want to know your opinion on this subject. Thank you and I hope you can bring Gargoyles back in any shape or form in the near future.

Greg responds...

It would be easy for me to look back on shows like "Batman the Animated Series" and "Gargoyles"; "Ducktales" and "Gummi Bears", "Roughnecks" and early "Simpsons" etc. and play the old curmudgeon and say THEY JUST DON'T MAKE 'EM LIKE THAT ANYMORE.

Cuz, well, they don't. But they do other things VERY well. I really like Kim Possible. I like Ben Ten. And I'm very, very proud of the work I just did on the second season of W.I.T.C.H.

I honestly don't watch as many cartoons now as I did back then, when as an executive at Disney it was my job to know ALL of our cartoons and ALL of the competitions'.

We certainly, with the loss of the syndication market, have less S&P freedom than we used to. But that's nothing new. Last night I watched the classic "Charlie Brown Christmas" with my wife and kids. And they did stuff in that half-hour that we would NEVER have been allowed to get away with in the 90s, from an S&P standpoint.

Response recorded on November 29, 2006

Bookmark Link

Joey Conaway writes...

Hey Greg I bought the GARGOYLES DVD today and I have enjoyed it already here is my question
to ya

How long did it take yall to do the animation and get the voice overs
for Disney at that time please let me know thanks

Greg responds...

It took ten months for every step. (It's called a ten-month sliding schedule.)

That is we had ten months to write the scripts. Ten months to record the voices. Ten months to storyboard. Ten months to animate. Etc. But all of those various "ten months" overlapped. The whole process was probably more like 14 months.

Response recorded on September 21, 2006

Bookmark Link

Zel writes...

have you thought of pitching a non-gargoyles Animated-Action-Fantasy-Drama to Disney (or Fox, or Cartoon Network, or whoever)? I'd watch it. It's bound to be loaded with Gargoyles inside jokes

Greg responds...

I'm always pitching. Pitching is easy. Selling is hard.

Response recorded on October 27, 2005

Bookmark Link

Joshua P. Christie writes...

Hi Greg-- first off before my question I want to say that my previous question regarding Goliath using the Phoenix Gate to not return to Scotland in order to save his clan when he used it to save Griff in London-- I submitted that a year and a half ago and when I didn't see an answer I took it upon myself to copy and paste it during the chat you had a couple of weeks ago (Nov./03). So it was not a double post but you had answered it twice. For what it is worth, I understood it the second time around. :)

My question for 2003 is, with Gargoyles being property of
Disney and the reality of not being able to do much with
the show without their blessing, have you ever considered
coming up with an original idea for a show and trying to
get something new off the ground? Perhaps not even a
syndicated show but something more akin to Todd McFarlane's
'Spawn' on HBO? I am not suggesting any particular idea, just one of your own which created a new universe of characters and storylines that perhaps one day could be funded and see the light of day notwithstanding our hopes
of Gargoyles one day returning to the air. It is encouraging to see Fox considering reviving 'Family Guy'
after the syndication and DVD sales surprised the hell out
of everyone. Maybe Gargoyles can see the revival it needs
on DVD to open Disney up to that possibility. Thank you for your time and I hope to see you at the next Gathering that comes stateside again.

Greg responds...

I am constantly trying to sell new and original ideas. It's harder than it looks from a distance.

Response recorded on September 29, 2005

Bookmark Link

Julius Jacobson writes...

First off, thank you for creating a masterpiece. Undoubtedly one of the greatest animated shows of all time.

Now some questions about the TV industry:

1.You are quoted in the FAQ as advising aspiring television authors "If you can be happy doing anything else, do that thing." Working in the industry for all these years, do you feel that most of your peers have taken this advice, or do you feel surrounded by bitter and disillusioned cynics?

2. Why is it that you were given such a position of significant control with "Gargoyles" relatively early in your career, yet have been unable to find a position in similar role since adding that credit to your resume? Despite being a moderate hit, did losing the ratings war with Power Rangers attach a stigma to the show (and thus you) as "not being able to hit a homerun ", making it harder to get future opportunities (you have done some good work since, but nothing with the creative control or depth of Gargoyles)? Or is the industry understanding of what Gargs was up against (A barinless "Pokemon" like monster) and don't disparage it as a "failure" simply because it couldn't defeat a (ratings) behemoth, and your current situation is just the brakes of a volatile industry?

3. I don't necessarily want to be a TV writer (I'm into prose) but I am a big fan of animation. Do you think the FoxBox and the new Ninja Turtles cartoon (the blocks highest rated program by far), in going up against Kids WB, is in the same position Gargoyles and Disney Afternoon was in in 1995/96? Foxbox has moved to Sundays ostensibly to avoid the competition. As a creative Producer once in a seemingly similar situation, could you just objectively tell a worried fan if this is a sign of The End? ( TMNT has, however been signed on for more episodes up to 52, which according to you is succesful in todays market.) As an aside to this question, how much of keeping an animated show on the air has to do with sales of merchandise as opposed to pure ratings?

Thank you for your time.

Greg responds...

1. I am indeed surrounded by bitter and disillusioned cynics. Though most of us are pretty cheerful about it.

2. Mostly it's just the breaks. But I have been stigmatized here and there by various individuals who were in power... some of whom are no longer in power. Also there were a unique set of circumstances at Disney at the time of Gargoyles that resulted in me getting so much creative freedom and control. Circumstances that would be hard to duplicate. But since then, I have had substantial control over my ten Roughnecks episodes. I had some control over the first season of Max Steel. And on the show I'm working on now, W.I.T.C.H., I've had more control, more freedom -- and more fun -- than on any show I've done since Gargoyles.

3. I'm just not up to speed on the Fox Box/Kids WB situation, though I know that Kids WB is phasing out their weekday afternoon kids block. As for merchandise vs. ratings... Both can be HUGE factors. A network can't survive on bad ratings, but most shows have trouble making their budgets without merchandising revenue.

Response recorded on September 06, 2005

Bookmark Link

Dragon girl writes...

hi there!!
Im a fan of yours!!! and im a fan of manga, comics and drawing, i wish one day i could illustrate my own story
i only want to ask you: What things do you need to do
to have a nice story and character desing?,please answer me
My mail.- beautifulbeast_10@yahoo.com.mx
bye!!

Greg responds...

I don't know where to start. I'm not an artist myself, so I'm not the best person to advise you on that.

As for story, I'd recommend education. Read a lot. (And not just manga and comics.) Write a lot. Proofread. Read some more. Write some more. Proofread. Go to college. Get a solid liberal arts education. Read the classics. Read the daily newspaper. Read some more. Write some more. Proofread.

(Get the idea?)

Response recorded on August 30, 2005

Bookmark Link

Dragon boy writes...

Greg, i am making some "comics" cause my dream is becoming a professional japanese comic maker (mangaka) ,here is my only question:How can you become a good drawer and how can you make things that people really like?
here is it, please answer me,ops! and im a fan of yours n.n !!!!
n_- bye !!!!

Greg responds...

I wish I knew how to "become" a good artist. I'd love to be able to draw. But I don't have that talent, so I'm not the greatest person to answer that question.

As to how to "make things that people really like"? I usually start by trying to make something that I really like. If I'm not passionate about it, how can I expect anyone else to be?

Response recorded on August 26, 2005

Bookmark Link

Vashkoda writes...

Hey Greg. Concerning all the different series you've worked for and all the jobs you've held in them (creator/producer/voice director/writer/etc.), which do you think actually "sells" your talent to companies to make them want to hire you? Do you feel any particular works of yours outshine the rest and really impress the execs? How well is "Gargoyles" regarded by these company execs, for instance? Or do you think it is instead the fact that you've worked for big name companies in the past, like Disney and WB, that impresses the execs, rather than any particular works you've done? Or when you apply as a freelance writer, for example, do you just submit several sample scripts of your ideas, and they decide from that whether to buy the story or not, regardless of your actual background? I'm just curious how it all works. Thanks!

Greg responds...

Uh.... all of the above, really.

There was a time when clearly Gargoyles was actually a liability for me on my resume. Thankfully, that time has passed, at least for now, and it is once again my biggest selling point and calling card. In part, this is because a new mini-generation of execs has surfaced. The group that I was part of respected my work on the show. But then a slightly younger group came in that didn't know the show and didn't care about it. Now we've got a group that remember it fondly from their youth.

Yes, I'm just that old.

But frankly, my "Resume" is GIGANTIC, and I think the mass of it is impressive to people who value experience and good credits. To people who are intimidated by those who might know more than they do, I think it's a roadblock.

Obviously, everything depends on the job at hand. The folks at Disney (but not SIP) were nervous about hiring me for WITCH because they were convinced I wasn't funny enough. It occured to me that they might not have read my comedy scripts, and so I sent a couple of them over. Having read the stuff, I was funny again -- and hired for the job. So the work itself can help. When asked to submit script samples, I have a ton to choose from. So it becomes a guessing game. I try to get a sense of the project or kind of project they're interested in me working on and then choose scripts that seem to fit ... in tone at least. But you never know if you're sending the right material or not. And sometimes they don't bother to ask for it.

It also truly helps to be able to talk a good game. I give good meeting. I have off days, but I generally do pretty well in a room. That helps. It's ironic, because I'm shy and lousy at small talk. But ask me about creative stuff, and you pretty much can't shut me up -- as anyone who's attended a GATHERING can attest to, including, I'm sure, you, Vash . I am also a pretty consumate bullshitter... and yet not afraid to admit that I haven't figured EVERYTHING out yet.

I think that covers the basics.

Response recorded on August 26, 2005

Bookmark Link

Francois Ferland writes...

Sorry, it's me again. I know you must be getting tired of me, but I just rediscovered Ask Greg after five years, and I have tons of questions to ask.

I have an animation question.

1. I'm fairly certain without being 100% sure that all the episodes of a multi-parter are being done by a single studio. Is that true? It sure seems that way, like "Awakenings" and "Hunter's Moon" having gorgeous animation throughout and "City of Stone" and "Avalon" having moderately good animation all accross their parts.

I can see how it might be better this way. It insures a lot more consistency within the same story, and that includes scene continuity from one part to the next. Character models and background for all parts will be done by the same staff or supervised to make sure they fit together. I can't see communication ever being good enough between two distant animation companies to insure that two episodes would mesh together seemlessly.

Of course, sometimes it might be difficult for a company to complete 3, 4 or even 5 episodes at the same time, but I assume that those studios had their episodes assigned a lot of time in advance, with as few other episodes as possible being expected from them while the multi-parter was being done.

You mind shedding some light on the matter?

Thanks!

Greg responds...

As far as I can recall, multi-parters went to the same studios... although often not to the same exact crews. (Often a studio has multiple crews.) For all the reasons you stated above, it makes more sense.

Response recorded on April 20, 2005

Bookmark Link

Mike Cohen CKayote@worldnet.att.net writes...

Topic: Weisman, Greg

As a result of watching 'too much' TV as a kid, I find myself wanting to work in writng TV and movies. I'm starting my freshman year of college in August, and I have no idea about how to get into my chosen profession. I tried asking my school's advisors and the film department people and looking on the internet,etc. but nobody knows anything about it.
So I figured that ask someone who's been there is doing that.

So how did you end up with a job writing all those Disney shows? Where did you go school? What did you major in? Who did you have to meet to get where you are?

Thank You Very Much,
Mike Cohen
CKayote@worldnet.att.net

Greg responds...

Well, let's see. By now, you must be almost done with your Sophomore year, and I hope you haven't been waiting that long to hear back from me.

My bio in brief:

B.A. Stanford University in English with an emphasis in Fiction Writing.
M.P.W. University of Southern California. M.P.W. stands for Masters of Professional Writing and my emphasis was in playwrighting.

In between, I worked on staff at DC Comics for two years. And I freelanced for them for about eight years -- beginning during my Junior Year at Stanford and ending after I was well-ensconced at Disney.

Before I left USC, I interviewed at numerous places... and hit it off with Gary Krisel, who was putting together Disney's TV Animation unit. A year later I started there as a VERY junior creative executive. It was supposed to be my day job while I wrote at night. But I didn't do much writing over those five years. Instead, I got steadily promoted, eventually rising to Director of Series Development. I developed numerous shows including Gargoyles, and then moved over laterally to produce that show.

Eventually left for some unfulfilling years at DreamWorks, and then went Freelance.

My first recommendation to anyone who's interested in the biz is to find something else to do... unless you just feel like NOTHING ELSE could do it for you. It's a brutal business full of rejection, so unless you have the passion to carry you through, over and/or around all that brutality and rejection, I'd go elsewhere.

Second rec is to move to L.A. That's where all the action is.

Third rec is to write, write, write.

Fourth is to read, read, read.

Fifth is to learn how to proofread, and practice the art religiously.

Response recorded on February 28, 2005

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

In a previous question, you told someone to send a script to a production studio, as a way to break into the business. I was just wondering if someone would actually read the script, or just throw it away?

Greg responds...

Did I really say that? It doesn't sound like me at all.

You are correct, they'd either toss it or send it back to you unread. Unsolicited material is dangerous for studio execs to read, particularly if its based on that studio's properties.

I believe what I suggested was to send a sample to an agency. They still might throw it away, but they are much more likely to read it.

Response recorded on January 21, 2005

Bookmark Link

Haleigh Costantino writes...

I am a digital imagery student and freelance artist in Arizona. I wanted to know how you got started working and if you can tell me about any companies that accept freelance artists for concept art, etc. And please keep the idea of that Gargoyles movie going!

Greg responds...

All the animation companies go through phases of hiring and not hiring. You posted your question in early 2003, and I'm answering in late 2004, so I assume you haven't been waiting on me to pursue your goals.

My oft-repeated story is elsewhere in the ASK GREG archives under "Weisman, Greg". But the short version is that I've wanted to be a writer since grade school. I eventually got professional work as a freelancer at DC Comics. From DC, I transitioned to graduate school. While at graduate school, I interviewed at Disney and eventually got a junior executive position at Disney TV Animation. I developed and supervised numerous series for TVA, including, finally, GARGOYLES, which I then moved over to produce.

Response recorded on November 30, 2004

Bookmark Link

Justin writes...

Greg,
This isn't a question, so much as a comment. I just rewatched Awakenings Part 2, and I must say it was absolutely stunning. The part that really sticks out for me is when the great acting the voice artist do in the opening scene. The parts that stick out in my mind are as follows:

"These bowstrings have been cut... there was betrayal here."
As you said Hudson was falling back on his training.

And Keith David and Bill Fagerbakke were excellent in their exchanges.

The animation during this scene is amazing in my book. Maybe not the models that I liked in episodes like Hunter's Moon, but it is still amazing. Each character display such emotion. I know Bronx is only a beast, but it even feels like he gets what happened. I loved the scene. Hudson knocking some Vikings into hay as he swoops in. Broadway using what he knows best... food! The action really picks up here and I feel so sorry for these characters. I must admit that in October 1994 when this first aired I thought many more died than about forty. Which is the number I think u said. But nonetheless it is so sad. I just lost a friend of mine back in November. So it taught me that if even one life is lost is just hard if hundreds are lost.

Anyway Kudos on an awesome episode.

Greg responds...

Thanks. Glad you liked it.

Response recorded on June 29, 2004

Bookmark Link

roxanne writes...

last night I whached the episode "seeing isn't believing". I think it's the second to last episode in The Goliath Chronicals. Anyway, the animation style was really really weird, I wondering if you happened to know what that was about.

Greg responds...

No.

Response recorded on June 21, 2004

Bookmark Link

Jim Tate writes...

I was watching Max Steel with my 2 year old son and was curious what software was used in the making. What about Lip Synch software.

Greg responds...

I have no idea. Sorry.

Response recorded on April 19, 2004

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

I would like to ask a producer his view on what an aspiring director and/or producer should major in college? Should it be filmmaking? Or media arts? Or is it something else all together? Thanks!

Greg responds...

Two years later, I'm guessing my answer comes late. And I'm afraid you didn't provide me with enough information. I assume we're talking about Animation, right?

I'm a producer, and I majored in English w/an emphasis in Fiction Writing. But a director (as opposed to an animation director or a voice director) ....

I don't know.

Depends on the programs available....

Response recorded on January 16, 2004

Bookmark Link

Lord Sloth writes...

I have a few questions about the Leica reel for Bad Guy's, as I've never seen it (but really want to).

1. If you can't/don't want to spread the reel all over the net, could/would you write a detailed/some what detailed report on how the story goes. You of course don't have to, but I'm sure it would satisfy a lot of people who have never gathered to a gathering.

2. What IS a Leica reel? Is there anything animated about it, or is it more of a montonage <sp?> of art work with voice-overs from key characters?

3. How much detail is shown in the animation/stills (i.e.: sketches or paintings or stuff the like I see in Gargoyles)?

4. How long dose it run for?

*Note* I could have asked the CR about all this, but I enjoy the way you write, when you do :^B (enough flattery?).

And I hope to see it for myself someday, not in Virginia, but in NY, 2003 if all goes well.

Greg responds...

1. No. Sorry. It's a special treat for Gathering attendees, and I don't want the story in it to become common currency. I still have hopes of selling it someday.

2. A leica reel can be many things. The spelling suggests it has something to do with a Leica camera, but I've been assured that it really is code for IT'S LIKE-A REEL. It's also sometimes called an ANIMATIC or SIZZLE TAPE. There is no true animation, though I've seen some recent stuff using flash. It's basically a filmed storyboard, with a few fancy editing tricks, like panning, scanning, pushing in, pulling out and maybe a few dissolves or wipes. That's put with actual recorded vocals and hopefully some music and sound effects. It's an effective way to tell a story, like a glorified comic book for the screen. But it's supposed to be done for a relatively small amount of money. A few thousand dollars as opposed to tens of thousands of dollars.

3. It depends. Some are very detailed some are very sketchy.

4. Again, it depends. I think BAD GUYS runs about 7 minutes, which is probably too long for anyone but garg fans.

Or maybe you can come see it in Montreal in August of '04.

Response recorded on September 26, 2003

Bookmark Link

jjwspider writes...

Who-hoo! An update, thanks Greg!
Onto the questions:
1) Will we ever see the Gargoyles episodes collected onto DVD? I would love to own the collection and think that it could possibly lead to more Gargoyles toons, as a Direct to Video thing maybe?
2) What projects are you currently working on?
3) As an aspiring cartoon creator can you give my any advice on who to contact or how to break in to the business?

Thanks!

Greg responds...

1. Disney tells me that the DVD of the first season will be released sometime in 2004 to coincide with the series' tenth anniversary. Further releases will obviously depend on the sales of the first release.

2. I'm in development on a number of potential projects, but nothing definite. My current paying gig is for Platinum Studios, where I'm writing a bible for their entire Universe.

3. Where do I start? How about referring you to the "Animation" achive here at ASK GREG, where I've answered this question before.

Response recorded on August 04, 2003

Bookmark Link

Michael Gibbons writes...

First off Gargoyles is a fantastic show. Back in college I used it for many media research theses and got stunning results. Thank you.

I'm not filled with questions regarding continuity, what if, or whatever happened to, rather I'm more interested in technical production.

Is there a resource that offers animator's model sheets from the Gargoyles production?

Again thank you for your work and dedication.

Sincerely,

Michael Gibbons
Strydus@yahoo.com

(Feel free to edit)

Greg responds...

Thanks for the kind words, Michael.

Unfortunately, no, I can't think of a resource offering model sheets from the Gargoyles production, though samples have occassionally been on display at the Gathering.

Response recorded on April 02, 2003

Bookmark Link

Kelly L Creighton/Kya White Sapphire writes...

I know you generally dont DESIGN characters, as to give the artists more freedom, but do you (or would you) ever say "i really want this character to have this specific trait" or "i want them to look kind of like this" or would you never even go there. (please dont take the words 'ever' and 'never' to be all inclusive, i just mean generally. :)

Greg responds...

I often do exactly what you describe. For some characters, I have a real clear picture in my head. For others, almost nothing. Depending on how strongly I feel, I'd give guidelines to an artist... and I certainly give feedback. But I try very hard to keep my mind open, to allow the artist to surprise me with something I hadn't thought of but just feels right.

Response recorded on March 19, 2003

Bookmark Link

Another design memo...

We got more designs from WDAJ. Here's our response back to them...

To: Motoyoshi Tokunaga 8-26-93

From: Greg Weisman 818-754-7436

Re: GARGOYLES DESIGN WORK

Dear Mr. Tokunaga,

This is in response to the designs sent in your fax dated August 21st. (We've looked over the originals you sent as well.) Although we have substantial notes, I want to emphasize that we're learning more with each submission. Things that did not occur to us initially are now becoming clearer. For reference purposes, I'm going to refer to the page numbers of the fax. In the future, you might want to number every drawing on every page for easier reference.

PAGE 3
Seeing the four Gargoyles together raised a number of interesting problems. Goliath seems to have lost some of the upper body bulk that made him so imposing. And Broadway seems to be on an equal level with Goliath. We need to make Goliath more special and unique. And although the trio of Brooklyn, Lexington and Broadway must each be unique from each other, we'd like to see the three of them as a natural grouping. As it stands now, Goliath, Broadway and Brooklyn all seem of a piece, with Lexington as the odd man out.

I might propose the following possible solutions:
--Let's give greater stature to Goliath relative to the other three, particularly Broadway.
--Let's make Goliath the only one of the four who tends to stand erect like a man. If Broadway and Brooklyn existed in a crouch as Lex does, we could cheat all three of them larger and still leave Goliath with greater stature.
--We already have two unique wing constructions (Goliath's and Lexington's), but we could stand to create a third type. Leaving either Brooklyn or Broadway as is, if we gave the other a third style of wing, then when we looked at the trio of younger gargoyles as a unit, each of them would have a unique wing-type and Lexington wouldn't seem like such the odd man out.
--If I haven't mentioned it before, we think of Goliath as being in his late twenties (in Gargoyle years). We think of the trio as being between 17 and 19 years old (in Gargoyle years). Keeping them youthful should also help in making them into a visible unit and still distinguish them from Goliath. Broadway, in particular is looking a bit too old.

PAGES 4 and 5
We'd like to make Goliath more imposing in size. Perhaps by slightly reducing the size of his head relative to his shoulders and chest. Bulking up his upper body.

We're also divided over here on the issue of the tail. Some of us feel it adds an inhuman element to help make Goliath cool and different. Others, just feel it's another thing that'll need to be animated.

Love the way the wings drape on page 5.

PAGE 6
One of Gary Krisel's concerns is that the face have depth. He doesn't want it to look like a mask connected to Goliath's thick neck. I'm not sure I see that problem in these drawings, but it's something to watch out for.

Another important point is Goliath's attitude and expression. He is highly intelligent. Noble. Gary was also concerned that some of the expressions here (and on page 4) made him look a bit like a thug.

A third concern is whether or not we might still have too much pencil mileage in the facial design to animate effectively.

PAGE 7
I love the top two head shots. Goliath looks terrific surprised. And I think the trick with the pupils vanishing in anger is very effective with all the characters. I also like Goliath amused in the lower right corner. But I'm not sure about the lower left shot. I'm not clear what emotion is being expressed. Something about the teeth and maybe the eyes is unappealing. I apologize for not being able to pin down my problem further. Maybe we should reserve his jagged teeth for extreme expressions? I don't know.

PAGE 8
Both poses, particularly the kneeling shot, are wonderful. In the first pose, however, I think we should be cheating his wing-span much, much larger.

Page 9
Great.

Page 10
I like his slimmer "teen" build, but perhaps Brooklyn should "stand" in more of a crouch. Not simply bad posture, but keeping at least three limbs on the ground.

PAGE 11
Again, Brooklyn needs to remain 18 or 19 years old. Particularly in the lower left and right corners he seems much older than that. We also probably need a greater range of expressions. Remember, he is the irrepressible leader of the trio. Out to find adventure. Are his horns too far apart? As opposed to being slicked back like his cool young hair, are the horns scooping up, giving him a more demonic look than necessary? Have we created a mouth that inhibits expression too much? You can see, we have more questions than answers, still.

PAGE 12
I think Lexington works as a basically horizontal character, but we don't want to make him too diminutive relative to the others...stretch him out in poses. Remember that his middle set of limbs function as arms as well as legs.

His wing design may be more complicated than necessary. We may not need the rib construction coming out of his back. For him, it may be enough that he has this wing like webbing between his two upper sets of limbs. Perhaps it's more elastic than draping.

Again, we need to keep him young. Lex is highly curious about the modern world around him. Everything interests him and fills him with wonder. He's more naive and innocent than the others. These qualities should help compensate for his slightly more demonic look.

PAGE 13
My favorite shot is the third from the left on the bottom row. And as usual, the angry glowing eye "battle" version works great. The upper right shot is cute. And I like the surprised version in the second from the left on the bottom row. But we're not getting the sense of wonder or excitement from him in the upper left and upper middle. And I don't really care for the sinister shot of him in the lower left corner. He's not angry or primed for battle (we know this cause his eyes aren't glowing), so I can't figure out what would give him that kind of nasty, almost hungry expression out of a battle context. Again, it may be that using jagged teeth outside of battle mode makes them too demonic. Another question: do his cheekbones need to be so prominent?

PAGES 14
Body-wise, Broadway looks pretty good outside of a context of scale with the others. We like his gut, his sumo-like quality. But like Brooklyn and Lex, he should be a croucher. Like the center on an American football team. And we may want to scale him down; he doesn't necessarily need to be that tall or broad relative to Goliath.

Our biggest concern is that he looks way too old. Mostly in the face, but when scaled with Goliath, as on page 3, in the body as well.

PAGE 15
Again, in all these shots, he looks too old. In some ways, he looks too much like Goliath. He should be a nineteen year old party animal. He just likes to have a great time. Always laughing. The only shot that really works for us here is glowing eyes shot in the lower left corner. In battle, it's appropriate to have the jaw distended and grotesque. In the others, we might try to give him more youth by making his head shape more horizontal than vertical. Less cheekbones, maybe. Rounder, perhaps? I'm not sure.

That's it for now. Looking forward to seeing your next pass.

Thanks. Greg.

cc: Bruce Cranston, Barbara Ferro, Eddy Houchins, Lenora Hume, Gary Krisel, Paul Lacy, Tom Ruzicka, Dave Schwartz.


Bookmark Link

More correspondence with Tokyo...

Another old memo from my development files. It's pretty self-explanatory.

To: Motoyoshi Tokunaga 8-4-93

From: Greg Weisman 818-754-7436

Re: GARGOYLES DESIGN WORK

Dear Mr. Tokunaga,

Just a quick note to let you know we all looked at the Clayface episode of Batman that you sent us. We thought it was terrific. If you are confident you can animate to this level, I'm confident we have a great show in the works.

Greg.

cc: Bruce Cranston, Barbara Ferro, Lenora Hume, Gary Krisel, Paul Lacy, Tom Ruzicka, Dave Schwartz.


Bookmark Link

Chapter XXXVII: "Shadows of the Past"

Time to ramble....

This chapter (episode) was brought to you by:

Director: Kazuo Terada
Story Editor: Michael Reaves
Story: Michael Reaves
Teleplay: Michael Reaves & Brynne Chandler Reaves

Plus the usual suspects, including Frank and me.

The title is one of Michael's. I had the impulse to shorten it to "Shadows", but I didn't.

THE WORLD TOUR

As the recap ended and Tom shouted out: "Avalon doesn't take you where you want to go. Avalon sends you where you need to be!" My seven-year-old daughter Erin said, "Uh, oh."

"Uh, oh," indeed.

And so we begin Tier Four in earnest. Our quartet of travelers weren't headed straight home. Of course you couldn't know at that time just how long they'd be gone. And frankly when we started writing, neither did we.

It wasn't just the quantity of episodes (23 counting the Avalon three-parter, Kingdom, Pendragon, The Green and Future Tense) that we'd spend before everyone was reunited in Gathering One. It was the reruns in between.

What was supposed to be a five week trip became a five month trip. And so, for many of the fans it became interminable.

Why all the reruns? Well, the schedule finally just caught up with us. When Gargoyles was picked up for a second season by Buena Vista, I was asked how many we could reasonably produce for the fall quarter (between September & December of 1995) without interruption.

I told them that we were prepared to do six more. That was all the scripts that had been ordered (Leader, Legion, Metamorphosis, Lighthouse, Beholder, Vows). But I said we could do 13. We had done 13 the first season with a ten month sliding schedule. Now we had just under twelve months so we could certainly do 13 again.

I was asked what's the most we could do. I said, well if we start right now we can do 18.

Not 52? They asked.

52? Are you nuts? (Well, I didn't say that exactly.) I said we'll never get 52 done for the fall quarter. We'll wind up with a lot of repeats. You (Buena Vista) will not be happy with all those repeats.

They were disappointed. So disappointed, that instead of ordering 18, they only ordered six. (If we can't have 52, then forget it. [Okay, they didn't exactly say that either, but that seemed like the basic attitude.])

So we get to work to do six. Two weeks pass. Buena Vista comes back and says. No, do 13.

We respond with, uh, okay. Of course we've lost two weeks, so it'll be a bit harder, but we can do it.

Two weeks pass. They come back and say, "No, do 18."

We grumble a bit, because now we've lost a month of prep time when we could have been building crews, etc. But okay, I said we could do 18. We'll manage.

Two weeks pass. They come back and say, "Do 52."

Now we balk. We warned you we couldn't do 52 in twelve months. Now you want us to do it in 10? It took us ten to do 13.

Do 52.

And so we did. We built multiple crews. Our staff increased exponentially. We expanded to four writing teams from one. We expanded from one pre-production team (in Japan -- waves at Roy) to three and a half (one in Japan) and two and a half here in L.A.

And we worked like little demons to bring you 52 for the fall quarter. But it was never going to happen.

We wound up doing pretty good. I don't have my old calendar in front of me, and I can't remember exactly how many we managed to air in the fall, but it was considerably more than the 18 that I thought we could do.

But it wasn't 52. And so we had reruns. And reruns. And reruns. And most of those reruns came in the middle of the World Tour. And thus... yes... it seemed to go on forever.

Whoops. Sorry.

Of course, other people didn't care for it for other reasons. They felt it got away from the series strengths of the gargs in Manhattan. Obviously, it left behind four of our characters, and I'll admit that I underestimated the trio's popularity a bit.

But I felt it was important. The World Tour gave our series breadth and hope. It expanded the Gargoyles Universe, added many new characters and in particular added at least four other clans of gargoyles.

And I think some of the stories really kicked ass.

So I apologize for nothing. NOTHING, do you hear me, nothing!!!!!!

Except for that outburst. Sorry about that outburst.

WYVERN, SCOTLAND

Anyway, our first stop was no place new. Goliath immediately recognizes the ocean cliffside as "home, my home."

Even before Hakon and the Captain start to drive him crazy, his dialogue is laced with nostalgia.

He's so into being back in Scotland, that when he climbs the hill, he doesn't even take Elisa with him. Elisa goes with Angela. Which is no big deal. But usually, G's more of a gentleman than that. Particularly with Elisa.

TIDBIT

Angela: "It was always summer on Avalon."

Just wanted to give a sense of things on the fair island. Seemed to fit the legends as well.

TOKYO, JAPAN

I can't say enough good things about the animation in this episode. It's just gorgeous. The work of Disney's studio in Tokyo. WOW! Production AND Pre-Production was done there. All sorts of little touches, like Elisa slipping briefly and regaining her footing. And GREAT, GREAT character animation. Great lighting as the characters enter the tunnels. STELLAR effects animation in the megalith chamber. Just wow gorgeous stuff.

And boy, did we fight over this episode. [Roy, I'd love to get your perspective on this.]

When we got the storyboard from Japan, Frank and I each found something that just drove us nuts.

For Frank, it was the Wyvern cliff. The castle was gone, of course, as Xanatos had taken it away. But the cliff seemed to otherwise remain in tact. Frank was adamant that a chunk of the cliff had clearly been taken away and was part of the Eyrie Building. You could see it on that design. So obviously, we needed a crater of sorts to exist back at Wyvern.

When Frank pointed it out to me, I agreed with him. It didn't bother me as much as it bothered him, but I agreed.

What bothered me was Elisa's parka. In the storyboard, Elisa was wearing a parka with a hood. Of course, she looked great in it. And it kept her warm and safe and dry. But there was of course, no way and no place where she could have acquired that parka. (The Avalon Eddie Bauer, maybe?) So I insisted the parka had to go.

Frank agreed with me after I pointed it out. It didn't bother him as much as it bothered me, but he agreed.

So we gave Japan both these notes. And to our surprise, they balked. They felt that the only changes we were allowed to make to their boards were S&P changes.

We couldn't believe it. Finally, they relented. But on the cliffside ONLY. They felt that was a fair compromise. Since that had been Frank's BIG note, he was appeased. But obviously, I was not. All sorts of people came to me asking me to back down.

But I wouldn't. And I can honestly say it was for you guys that I refused. I knew even then that OUR FANS paid attention. That we couldn't get away with Elisa suddenly having a warm coat from no where.

So I put my foot down, and Elisa stayed cold and wet.

And our Tokyo Studio had another reason to be annoyed with me.

I regret the tension, certainly. But I still think I did the right thing, so I apologize for NOTHING, DO YOU HEAR ME? NOTHING!!!!

Except for that outburst, I apologize for that outburst.

GASLIGHT

A great movie. A husband tries to convince his wife that she's going insane. It's now a staple of melodrama everywhere. And we used it too.

So the ghosts of Hakon and the Captain try to gaslight Goliath.

We tried to gaslight the audience a bit too. Tried to let them think for a bit that Goliath might just be losing it. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, maybe.

You can hear it in Goliath's voice. How he's lost in the past. Angela tells him that he did the right thing all those years ago by saving the Princess.

His only response: "Still, I wanted revenge." I love Keith David's reading of that line.

But we also wanted to play fair, so we dropped a hint: when Goliath hears Demona's voice, Bronx howls. He senses something. Always trust Bronx.

Bronx has a pretty important supporting role in this, btw.

THE AXE OF HAKON

When Goliath and friends first enter the caves, Goliath picks up an old Viking axe. Hakon's Axe. The one he uses in "Vendettas".

Should have been a mace by the way. Should have been the same mace you can see in the opening titles EVERY episode. The one that Hakon used to smash the gargoyles at Wyvern.

Shoulda been. My fault.

Okay, for that -- I apologize. I screwed up. Dang.

THE STREET PIZZA TRADITION

a.k.a.

A CLASSIC MICHAEL REAVES' ELISA LINE:

"This place is creepier than the morgue at midnight."

Michael was great at giving Elisa this tough contemporary feel without taking us out of the moment.

Another good one: "Old wounds bleed as bright as new ones sometimes."

GETTING TO KNOW ANGELA

When Goliath pretends that he's NOT freaking out and having hallucinations, Angela can tell he's lying.

I love Brigitte's read there. She sounds SO SHOCKED: "He's not telling the truth."

You can tell she was raised in a world where there was little cause for lying.

COOL CLIFFHANGER

Goliath attacking Elisa and Angela, thinking they are Hakon and the Captain.

Very dramatic. And again, we don't know yet, objectively that he isn't just going nuts.

What did you guys all think at this point? Did you suspect the truth?

Anyway, Bronx saves the day.

And Goliath runs off. He also has a nice stumble here. Again, parka aside, much amazing attention to detail and character in all this animation. Stunning.

STAR TREK INFLUENCE

No, I'm not talking about the voice cast.

Finally, we objectively reveal that Goliath is being influenced. We see two floating entities hovering over the scene. He doesn't see them, so they're not part of his dementia. Ergo (I don't have much opportunity to use the term ergo you know), ergo, they must be what is causing this.

Of course, they look like energy beings right out of Star Trek.

We also see Demona, Othello and Desdemona.

More of us playing fair. Sure they're identifiable. But of course, they (plus Iago) would be the souls LEAST likely to be haunting Wyvern and Goliath.

SALLI RICHARDSON

Yeah, Keith was the star. And we're always going on about Jeff's versatility. But we really were blessed with an amazing cast right down the line.

Salli does Elisa SO DARN WELL. It's the little things really.

Like when Angela explains about the fissure and how Goliath could die in it. Elisa says, "Swell." Just, "Swell." In one word, she says everything that needs to be said. It's hard. Try it sometime.

SPEAKING OF FISSURES

Bronx saves Goliath (temporarily) from falling by chomping down on his arm. Always thought that was cool. Would have liked to have drawn some blood, but we knew we'd never get away with that.

And the fissure itself is way cool. I love Goliath's fall.

And Elisa's determination, as she starts to climb down feet first. And I love the contrast, as Angela and Bronx, by virtue of their claws, climb down head first.

THE TURN

Some fans have felt, I know, that the Captain's change of heart at the end comes suddenly. That may be so. It's hard in a mere 22 minutes to achieve these arcs and turns. But as usual, we tried to drop subtle hints that he wasn't fully on board with Hakon.

Hakon is enjoying tormenting Goliath.

The Captain says: "Make an end to it." Hinting at his ambivalence. Torturing Goliath doesn't give him pleasure.

And while we're praising voice actors, how about a toast to the late Ed Gilbert, voice of the Captain of the Guard. Wonderful work here. Evil. Tortured. Redeemed.

Ed, wherever you are... THANKS!

THE FATAL FLAW IN YOUR PLAN

Demona. The Captain must have assumed that Demona died in the massacre. He and Hakon figured that her appearance would be the coup de grace. That Goliath's will would just dissolve when faced with her ghost.

They were almost right. But of course, G is no idiot. A bit slow sometimes, but not stupid. Demona's ghost shouldn't be here. Cuz the dame ain't dead.

[By the way, the idea to have her fist morph into a mace was mine. Just a little post-storyboard tidbit that I suggested amid bitching about the parka. They must have liked the idea because that wasn't one I insisted on, but they did it anyway. When push came to shove, everyone -- on both sides of the ocean -- was just VERY dedicated to making the show better.] [See. It's a mace because that's the weapon that we associate with the Massacre. Hakon's axe should have been a mace. How did I miss that?]

Anyway, Goliath figures out the truth and, hey, we've awakened the sleeping giant. He trashes the phony Demona. And we think he's going to smash all the others.

But something even more chilling happens. They all begin to dissolve around him. It still gives me the creeps. Very cool animation AND music and effects. (Props to the gang at Advantage Audio too.)

HOW

Or rather how come we don't have ghosts hanging around ALL the time. I didn't want this episode to open a spectral floodgate, where any character that was killed or had died in the past was available to haunt us.

So the Captain offers two possible explanations: Hate and Magic. Both present in ample supply. Plus Guilt. His guilt. Unfinished business.

THE DANCE

Again, very cool effects on the Megalith's here. But the idea emerges from an old (if not very original) idea I've had since I was a teen. The notion that Stone Dances, that Megalith Circles were like Medieval Mystic Dynamos. Circles of power. That build and generate.

Really came to life here.

I love Hakon's line: "I can feel it. I can feel again." I love that transition halfway through the line between where he can feel that the process is working and when he realizes the simple fact that he can feel things again.

But again, watch the Captain feel his own hand. You can see the ambivalence there. Particularly when Goliath becomes the Ghost and Hakon is beating on him. Cap doesn't participate in this.

And Goliath helps him remember what he has forgotten. The Captain doesn't HATE Goliath. His problem is that G's presence has reinforced his own guilt.

But here's an opportunity to redeem himself: "I can't let this happen again!"

He pushes Hakon back.

Hakon: "You've crossed the lines of power, you fool."

You can almost here the Ghostbusters say, "Don't cross the streams."

RESOLUTION

So Cap hated himself, not G.

G forgives. He forgave the Magus last episode. Now he forgives the Captain. Shows that he's a pretty decent guy.

You think if Hakon made an effort? Nah.

Anyway, I like G's line: "One enemy. And one friend."

And then a positively angelic Captain returns briefly to say goodbye and thanks. I also like the "shackles of hate and guilt" line. And the way he calls Goliath, "Old Friend".

Elisa thinks she's in for a long story.

G: "Centuries long."

And as the sun rises, and Elisa -- as usual -- leans against her stone beau for a nap....

Hakon: "Don't leave me here alone!! Not without anyone to hate!!"

Many people think I should have left him there forever. But evil doesn't rest in peace in my opinion. When left alone it tends to get out of control.

Besides I already had this fun idea. What if Wolf was Hakon's descendant?

Anyway, that's my ramble. Where's yours?


Bookmark Link

Audra writes...

Was Gargoyles animated in the widescreen version? I know Gargoyles is a TV show, so it was meant to be seen in standard version on a standard TV, but I know movies like The Lion King II Simba's Pride was direct to video, and never shown in theaters, but there is a widescreen version of the movie. Thanks, I just was curious.

P.S. What do you think of both Lion King movies?

Greg responds...

No. Gargoyle's aspect ratio was strictly designed for the tv set.

I thought the first Lion King was wonderful. (Not perfect, but wonderful.) And the opening still gives me chills, despite the fact that at one NATPE, I must have seen it five hundred times in one day.

As for the second one, I've never seen the whole thing. Just glimpses here and there, so it's not fair for me to comment.

Response recorded on March 28, 2002

Bookmark Link

LIFE IN THE REAL WORLD

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

Life in the real world.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SO WHAT DO WE DO?

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

Then we go on and try to win the war.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GREG


Bookmark Link

Thomas E. Reed writes...

Hi there. With the understanding that Disney's animation division (heck, every Disney division) is in turmoil right now, what direction do you see them going in the future? For the last few years, Disney's TV projects have abandoned the direction of "Gargoyles" (serious action-adventure) and gone for "Kids In School" shows such as "Pepper Ann," "Doug" and "Recess." Most of these have been from cartoonists/artists/creators not specifically tied to Disney, like Sue Rose, German/Ansolebehere and the like.

While "Atlantis" may have seemed disappointing to Disney, it looks like the "Kids In School" shows aren't doing well either. ("Family Dog" practically died on the vine...maybe Nathan Lane should have sold 25,000 percent of the show to some old ladies.) If there is anything successful in TV animation, it's split between Cartoon Network's original shows and some of the dubbed anime kid adventures.

So, based on what you've heard (without prejudicing yourself or Disney or violating nondisclosure agreements) what do you percieve Disney's direction in animation to be? What kind of shows do they think will be the "next big thing" in animation? Bearing in mind that there have been big shakeups there, of course.

Greg responds...

I assume by "Family Dog" you really are referring to "Teacher's Pet."

Otherwise, I swear to god, I have no idea. Disney seems determined to stay the course with shows like Filmore and Lloyd in Space.

They've got something interesting coming up for the Disney Channel: Kim Possible. (I haven't seen it, but it was done by some talented friends of mine.)

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

Vega writes...

Hey again.

I assume you're a fan of animation in general, considering your career choice. What are some of your favorite animated shows?

Do you find that the North American preconception of animation as being "for kiddies" as a hinderence to making quality shows like Gargoyles?

As a side note, I really have to heap some praise on everyone who worked on Gargoyles. There are some subtleties in the series that would do a top quality anime justice. The subway rescue in Hunter's Moon, as well as Goliath at Elisa's window. To be more specific, Goliath greets Elisa on the train, Goliath overhears Elisa talking to Jason Canmore. Silent, but eloquent beyond words. That kind of subtlety of expression is very rare in North American animation.

Greg responds...

I like animation, of course.

I know I've answered the 'what are your favorites' question before... so I'm not going to attempt a comprehensive list again. But it's hard to top the original Johnny Quest. And I liked the Herculoids a lot. And Batman the Animated Series. Gummi Bears, etc. For a more complete list check the archives.

And yes, of course, it doesn't help that the country almost exclusively views animation as a kids medium. On the other hand, I don't mind writing for kids. I think kids are a lot smarter than most people give them credit for.

Response recorded on September 06, 2001

Bookmark Link

Denis writes...

Hello, Greg!

Sorry that I didn't got to attend the Closing Ceremonies, last monday, at the Gathering. Anyway, to the question.

During the Auction, I bought the script of the ROSWELL CONSPIRACIES' pilot, and frankly I loved it! WAAYYY better than the one that was aired!. My question is purely 'technical' and concern one of the terms used in the script:

when you write "OTS on <Character's Name>", what does mean the OTS? And how does it translate on screen?

Thank you for your time

sincerly,
Denis

Greg responds...

OTS stands for Over The Shoulder. It means the Camera is placed at an angle looking over the characters shoulder onto the subject of the shot. (It foregrounds said character and puts him or her in relation to the action or background).

And I'm glad you liked the Roswell script!

Great to see you at the Gathering again, by the way.

Response recorded on July 17, 2001

Bookmark Link

Yttrium writes...

Why is the second season so long in comparison to the first and TGC seasons? What I mean is, could you not have you divide up the fifty-two episodes in the second and said they were several seasons, each the size of the first? It makes it sound like a short series when you say it only had two (or three) seasons to it.

---Ytt

Greg responds...

These were business decisions -- not emotional or "how it sounds" decisions.

Initially, Buena Vista only ordered thirteen because Gargoyles and "Action Friday" was an experiment.

Keep in mind that the first season's thirteen episodes represents thirteen weeks of airing the show once a week. That's enough to fill "one quarter" of the year. (52 weeks in a year divided by 4.)

For the second season, they decided that they wanted the series to air FIVE days a week. So multiply 13 weeks by five episodes/week and you get a total of 65 episodes. We had 13 made already. So subtract 13 from that 65 total and you get the second season order of 52.

The third season wasn't produced for syndication. It was aired on ABC's Saturday Morning. And for ABC, it was going to be a bit distinct. (Thus the Goliath Chronicles title and the little sermons Goliath gave at the head of each episode. Neither of which I cared for.) So they started over. Saturday is once a week, so they ordered 13 episodes to cover the 13 week quarter.

Now the obvious question is why 13 weeks? What's so magical about one quarter of the year? Why not 1/8 of the year or 1/2? I don't have a good answer for this, but at that time the conventional wisdom was that kids needed new material in the fall through Christmas. After that, stations could get away with airing reruns.

It's actually gotten worse since. Five-day-a-week series used to be 65 episode orders. Now they've dropped to like 39. It's not so much that conventional wisdom has changed -- rather the economics have gotten so bad, that 39 is the lowest number that networks and studios think they can get away with. Until recently it was forty. Eight weeks of five new episodes a week instead of the old 13 weeks. We did 40 Starship Troopers, for example. (More or less.) But Team Atlantis only ordered 39. There's NO rhyme or reason to that number that I can see other than the fact that it is one less than forty. Thus having mentally adjusted the audience to 40 down from 52 down from 65, they've now chipped one more episode off the total order.

It sucks.

What was your question?

Response recorded on July 11, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Why is it that you couldn't afford to design the Avalon clan yet you could afford to design Raven's fake clan?

Greg responds...

Can't you see the difference?

Raven's "fake clan" had, what, like three members?

We didn't have the man-hours to design 36 separate gargoyles for Avalon. But we did design some members of the Avalon clan. Angela, Gabriel, Ophelia, Boudicca, at least.

Response recorded on June 29, 2001

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

You once said that you had a medusa character in NO that was eventually replaced by Sphinx. So did you take out the medusa character because you wanted to show that there were also human looking NOs?

Greg responds...

Sphinx isn't particularly human-looking. She's certainly less human looking than Boreas, for example.

Mostly we took out Medusa in a lead role, for two reasons...

1. We thought she'd be very hard to animate. So we wanted to be able to use her sparingly.

2. I liked the ability to use angelic imagery for the first meeting of Terry and Sphinx.

Response recorded on June 10, 2001

Bookmark Link

Bethany writes...

This doesn't neccesarily have anything to do with gargoyles per se, but i was wondering if you had any advice for me on something: I'm a theater major, and looking into voice work, either for animated shows or commercials..is there anything in particular I should avoid/definetly do in looking for this sort of work? I am in the dark.

Greg responds...

For starters, where do you live?

If the answer is anywhere but L.A. or maybe New York, then my second question is When are you moving?

It's not impossible to have a voice career elsewhere, but the odds are stacked against it.

Once you're here there are classes I can recommend. But you can't take them long distance.

Response recorded on May 30, 2001

Bookmark Link

Duncan Devlin writes...

I noticed a contuning theme with the drawing of Xanatos. When there are other characters around, he seems to dominate everyone in size, with the notable exception of Goliath.

This was strongly evident in Future Tense, when Demona kicked him. She was about 1/3 his size.

Any comments? Did this happen on purpose? Was it your idea or animation's?

Greg responds...

Part of it is a function of design.

Some of it I'm sure came from the board artists/director and producers.

Some from the animators.

Response recorded on May 04, 2001

Bookmark Link

Sapphire writes...

Wouldn't it be cool if gargoyles was done in amine?

Greg responds...

Do you mean "anime" or maybe "mime"?

And what exactly do you mean by that? Do you want bigger eyes?

Response recorded on March 13, 2001

Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

Thanks for giving my comments about AWAKENING (the portrayel of the Trio and the cut prologue) a fair explanation. (I'm glad to hear that you would've preferred the prologue, too -- maybe I just wanted to know it wasn't cut for quality reasons.)

I understand the usage of the Next Time and Last Time segments better now, too. Though I have to ask: Is the quantity of bad animation you got back on GARGOYLES typical of an animated show?

Greg responds...

No. Actually, on the whole, I'd say Gargoyles got much BETTER animation than the average tv show. For starters, many of our episodes were done by Walt Disney TV Animation Japan. Those guys kicked ass.

And we also did very well by our Korean sub-contractors. Not every time. But often enough that I don't want to complain. Well, to be honest, there were always things to complain about. From every studio. That's the nature of tv production. But we got pretty lucky over all.

Response recorded on March 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Jim R. writes...

I am curious. You were an "executive producer" for Gargoyles, right? What does an executive producer do for an animated series? Did you work on any of the artwork? Any of the storyline? The voice actors?

What is it that an executive producer does? In a nutshell, of course, I know you're busy...

Greg responds...

Haven't I answered this a hundred times?

No. In those days, Disney TV Animation did not give out "Executive Producer" credits. I started as a "Co-Producer". Then became a "Producer". Then "Supervising Producer". Through all these title changes, my duties never changed. [Which is to say, that a title doesn't necessarily give a consistent read on an individuals responsibilities or efforts. So I can't speak for all Executive or even Supervising Producers. I can just tell you what I did.]

I came up with all 66 story springboards and supervised the writing staff. Though I didn't have the title, since my producer credit rendered it redundant, I was the Supervising Story Editor for the series. I personally wrote and story edited "The Journey". Though I did not produce the Goliath Chronicles episodes, including Journey.

I also supervised all recording sessions with the actors. I voice directed one episode (VENDETTAS).

I don't draw, but I did give notes and approvals on all designs and storyboards. I also supervised post-production. Called retakes, supervised final edits, mixes, on-lines, etc.

I didn't do any of this stuff alone. But along with Frank Paur, I was the final word on everything.

Response recorded on March 02, 2001

Bookmark Link

Pyro X writes...

Hello;

Generally, what does an Executive producer do, as in preparing a show like Gargoyles?

Greg responds...

Well, I wasn't an Executive Producer. Gargoyles didn't have any executive producers.

I was a Supervising Producer. I came up with all the springboards, reviewed all premises, outlines, scripts. Supervised Voice Recordings, edit sessions, sound mixes and on-line sessions. Gave notes on all designs, storyboards and animation. I was a busy boy.

Response recorded on February 15, 2001

Bookmark Link

melcelestial@hotmail.com writes...

Seriously, how'd you get noticed by the world of your high-qualitied animations, A-Z starting from college? What inspired you to start the career as a cartoon animator? Do prefer 2D or 3D? What gave you the inspirations to start a cartoon????????

Greg responds...

O.K. First off, I'm NOT an animator. I'm a writer. And largely, at the time, I followed the work and the opportunities. I got a job in animation and followed that course until it eventually led me to create Gargoyles. But it was in that order, not the other way around.

As for 2D and 3D, I have no absolute preference. I like good animation, no matter the format. I like well-told stories. Some subject matter works better in 2D, some in 3D. And I like doing shows where the content and the format are working together as opposed to at odds.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

SEM writes...

Given what you learned from STARSHIP TROOPERS and MAX STEEL -- if you were told that you could do GARGOYLES again but only if it could be done in 3D Animation would you? Do you think GARGOYLES could even work in 3D?

(I know it's a hypothetical, but this was the main selling point that got VOLTRON back on the air after 10 years as VOLTRON: THE THIRD DIMENSION for 26 episodes.)

BTW for the person who asked what program MAX STEEL is rendered in -- I know Netter Digital (now defunct) used Lightwave, and that Foundation Imaging used Lightwave for season one (as well as for the work they did on STARSHIP TROOPERS). I presume its still being used for the current season but not sure. Lightwave's major competitor is a program called Maya.

Sorry if I wandered too far off topic, Greg, but since I knew this came up thought I'd answer it for the archives.

Greg responds...

Yes, I think Gargoyles could work in 3-D. And if that was my only option for bringing it back, I'd jump at the chance.

If I had multiple options, however, I'd use the animation style that best suited the subject matter of the series.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

In your latest beat sheet for the series opener, I see that the idea of the Trio being young and inexperienced was still prominant. I understand where you came from in eventually changing that, but when I first watched AWAKENING I was distraught by the Trio. Every gargoyle we saw was a full-fledged warrior. Where _were_ the inexperienced kids? The elderly? It seemed slightly out-of-sync that the Trio were such able-bodied fighters. Was the Viking attack a real threat or wasn't it?

That is just my original impression of the events of the initial Viking attack. Later on, when the gang counterattacks the camp, I can understand their participation.

I guess the battle just came off too light-heartedly when we glimped the Trio, starkly contrasting with characters like Goliath's and Demona's scenes. A real sense of danger is added by Hakon drawing Goliath's blood, boulders crashing into stone, refugees huddling about, the Captain barking orders, etc. But then we have the Trio gallavanting through the battle like it's, as Brooklyn puts it, just "fun."

I think their innocense could have been portrayed in a way that didn't detract from the realism that was so effectively installed earlier on.

This isn't intended to come off as pure criticism. AWAKENINGS was brilliant, especially Part 1. But I thought I'd mention my first impressions.

Another little thing I noticed from the beat sheet is that the flashback originally began showing the refugees entering the castle, with the Marauders/Vikings on their tail, and then both parties camp for the day till dusk. This struck me in two ways: First, it gave me a better grip of realism. Enemy attackers camping right outside the castle, both sides waiting for the battle to begin... that could've added a cool flavor to things, and immerse us more into the medieval setting. Secondly, showing the refugees herded into the castle beforehand would've better clarified the events surrounding the battle. In the final product, we jump straight into the fight and, as a result, a reason is not even necessarily needed. The Captain's off-hand comment about refugees comes off as superfluous. I remember shrugging. 'That's nice' I thought. We were in the battle. Who needed backstory? Of course, the refugees were an important component, for the sake of Tom and his mother, and to better portray the environment of 10th century Scotland. If we'd seen the prologue to the battle, that's included in the beat sheet, I think it would've been much more effective.

I guess what this comes down to in the end is my earlier message I sent to you, in which I asked about trimming episodes with Last Time and Next Time segments. You defended, saying they were useful for tightening the episodes, but I put forth, as shown here, that some valuable stuff can be lost. Of course, it's doubtful you would've wanted or could've gotten a 6th Part to AWAKENINGS, but don't you think you could use ANY extra time you have to better flesh things out?

Greg responds...

The trio are new to this warrior thing at the time of the Viking attack. Brooklyn takes it more seriously, and unfortunately we don't see much with Lex (not enough time in the episode). Broadway enjoys the battle and doesn't take it as seriously as he should. We did this on purpose in order to contrast his response in the second battle at the Viking encampment.

I don't think the realism was damaged (though, of course, you're entitled to your opinion). I just think we were showing a variety of responses to the stimuli at hand.

And we did show the elderly -- in the person of Hudson. We couldn't show everyone, so he stood in for all of his generation that still survived. The only group we didn't show at all were kids (Bronx's age). It was felt that it would just be too brutal to establish and show these kids -- only to have them smashed later.

As for the prologue, well, I liked it too. But talk about superfluous...

I mean, what would you have been willing to cut from the episode in exchange for adding that prologue. It's not like I can say, "Hey, we want this prologue. Let's animate an additional three minutes here." Ultimately we have an absolute time limit to every episode. A footage limit (based on budget concerns) that we are allowed to send overseas to be animated. Something had to go. And I think the Captain's line covers the necessary info. It might not be elegant. But it's servicable.

But don't start on the Previously and Next Time segments. They don't count. What I'm talking about is how much we were allowed to ANIMATE at our budget. That was limited to about twenty-two minutes and thirty seconds. Putting entire new sequences in would require us to speed up the pacing of everything else. Using thirty seconds for a PREVIOUSLY segment allows us to tighten pacing and cut out bad frames of animation once something is animated. Because, the truth is, nothing ever came back to us PERFECT. NOTHING.

So AGAIN, had I cut all those previously and next time segments you would not have gotten any extra scenes. You just would have had the scenes you saw with some bad animation and pacing left in. And if there's still bad animation and pacing in there -- well, trust me, we used those thirty seconds to cut out the worst of it.

We clear now?

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Baal writes...

Had to ask this and I didn't see it in the archives, so here goes:

1.What companies did the the animations for the two episodes, Temptation and Future Tense? I was wondering because they did an awful good job considering some of the animation I've seen on some other nameless television shows.

2.(This may have been asked already but I don't think so.)If you had a chance to get the series going again, would you use CGI or the old animation style if you could. I guess it kinda depends on what is actually more expensive. I was always a little partial to the regular animation myself.

Greg responds...

1. This is from memory, but I'm fairly certain both of those were done by Walt Disney TV Animation Japan. It says on the episode credits, though.

2. Largely it would depend on what I could sell the higher-ups on. I'd do either if either were the only option. If given my choice (which rarely happens in this business), said choice would be based on issues of content.

Response recorded on February 01, 2001

Bookmark Link

Jim R. writes...

Did you ever work with computer animation when developing the Gargoyles series? I know you did some stuff for Toy Story, right? Toy Story was made by Pixar which is operated under Steve Jobs, who is also CEO of Apple. Being how I am a die-hard Macintosh person, (but do own some PCs too), do you use Macs if you've done any computer animation for anything? Mac is the best for that sort of thing.

Greg responds...

Uh, I never worked on Toy Story. I worked on Buzz Lightyear of Star Command, but that was animated traditionally with cels.

I use Macs myself. I have iMacs here and at home and some other kind of Apple something or other at my Disney office.

I have worked on some computer animated shows. Not Gargoyles, that was strictly cell. But Max Steel and Starship Troopers. But I don't personally animate anything. And I have no idea what kind of machines the animators of those series were using.

Response recorded on January 31, 2001

Bookmark Link

LSZ writes...

In general and on average, how long does it take to complete a whole season of say, 13 episodes of a half-hour animated show?

Greg responds...

A year.

We wrote the first season of Gargoyles (13 episodes) in ten months. Every other step in production had more or less that same ten months on a cascading schedule.

We wrote the second season of Gargoyles (52 episodes) in ten months. Every other step in production had more or less that same ten months on a cascading schedule. Obviously we had a MUCH bigger staff the second year. But we still had a harder time keeping up.

Response recorded on January 17, 2001

Bookmark Link

Wesley McGee (for whom Toon Disney doesn't air nightly) writes...

When you were talking about the studio that animated "Enter Macbeth", it wasn't Startoons was it? It did have that 'unique style' of theirs. Anyway I did not like Startoon's ANIMANIACS eps. (I liked the style of TMS when they did Animaniacs, who incidently are based in Japan.)

Anyway, which company -ies did the animation for Gargoyles.

Greg responds...

Most of our best animated episodes were animated by Walt Disney Television Japan. It's been so many years, that I don't remember the names of all the other companies. I have a vague recollection that Han Ho in Korea did the City of Stone four parter. But I'm not even 100% sure of that.

I don't remember who did Enter Macbeth specifically. I think it was a studio in Korea. But again, it's just been too long.

Response recorded on December 22, 2000

Bookmark Link

Demona Taina writes...

Heya, Greg!

I was wondering what happened to all the unseen footage of the show Gargoyles. Do you have it? If not, who does? Somebody has to have them! :P

To animate all those scenes just to have them cut and thrown in the trash? No, that can't be..

Thanks! :)

Greg responds...

What unseen footage?

Almost everything is used. We time shows to within a minute of their air lengths, before we send them to be animated. And that minute that we wind up cutting is like a frame here or three frames there.

It's not live action where entire scenes wind up on the cutting room floor.

Response recorded on December 22, 2000

Bookmark Link

Peter C. Roblejo, MD writes...

Hello greg. Just thought I'd respond for the third(and last) time. I'd like to thank you for your "advice." It was, of course, a lead, so I won't complain, especially given the legal position you claim to be in. It's just a terrible....truly terrible...shame that I wasn't able to impress you due to my 'prrofreading" errors. It could simply be that in my haste to respond to you, I clicked that little old button just a bit too fast. Or, it could be that I am even less impressed with your merits and capacity than you are with mine. I pore over proofreads when I deem it worth the effort. In this case, I obviously did not. In retrospect, I suppose my sub-optimal efforts were justified. Thanks again and good luck to you!
P.S. No need to write back. I can't check back. I've got other plans.

Greg responds...

Dr. Roblejo,

You seem to be upset with me. Which I don't really get. You said you won't be checking back, but just in case...

And at any rate, this info might be useful to someone else.

You write about the legal position that I "claim" to be in, as if perhaps I'm kidding about that. I'm not. I'm a creative writer, whose livelihood is based on me constantly coming up with new ideas, stories, etc. I've already been through two lawsuits with Disney, so believe me, I'm not exagerating the legal risk I take should I break policy and start reading other people's original work now. So I don't take that risk. I realize that the downside of this is that I can't mentor strangers creatively. But I teach and I try to bring new writers into the business, so hopefully I'm giving SOMETHING back.

You're clearly not happy that I picked on your proofreading skills, but I was trying to make a point that's valuable to everyone here. Like most of you, the internet makes me lazy about proofing. There are probably some proofreading errors in this message as well as all my other responses to you. I'm not going to try and justify that; I was simply pointing out that given what you were trying to accomplish, it's DEATH to have proofing errors. If you're asking for career help and advice from someone (no matter what you think of that persons "merits and capacity") then you need to "deem it worth the effort", or else why should they?

The fact that you aren't impressed with my merits and capacity (capacity?) is fine. I can't win 'em all. Though I'm not sure why you asked me for help in the first place. I mean why would you want help from someone you don't respect? Should I infer that you were just being opportunistic?

At any rate, as I tried to indicate, I'm not sure how much help I could have been anyway. I won't read your work "over the transom". And I don't live in New York and have no connections there. I therefore gave you the best advice I could under the circumstances. Proofread carefully. Try to find an agent. And pitch to networks that air stuff that is similar too, but not the same as, what you've got.

Given the forum, I'm not sure what else you expected to get out of our exchange.

However, if I was rude in any way, I do apologize. That was certainly not my intent. Good luck with your work.

Greg Weisman

Response recorded on November 15, 2000

Bookmark Link

Fontaine writes...

I'm writing a paper on computer animation and special fx and I was wondering if you could describe the process by which you create the animation...like what programs do you use, how much time it takes, etc.

Greg responds...

I know nothing technically about how computer animation is made -- regarding things like programs. Sorry. You might try asking Roy Sato in the comment room. (Sorry, Roy.)

Response recorded on November 13, 2000

Bookmark Link

Peter C. Roblejo, MD writes...

Dear Greg-
To respond to your response: you're not being snide, just honest. I live in the New York City Metro area..within 40 minutes in fact. As for prrofreading, as a writer, editing and proofreading is essential in every way. I assure you my material has been edited several times and is imminently to be published by 3 separate online web companies. Of course, the chances are small, yet I would defer to your wisdom and experience in this field for a way to crack it! I believe this has serious possibilities because the material is different from what's out there, and yet very much within the genre. Can you help? Thanks for your first response. (I'm being presumptuous but here's my e-mail just in case: kevlarpcr@aol.com)

Greg responds...

I can't help. Or rather, as I state in the rules for this site, I won't. Because if I help you, I'd have to offer the same help to everyone -- and I'd just be overwhelmed.

In addition, I can't read your stuff, because it's original, and that would put me at legal risk. And I can't recommend what I haven't read. So you see the bind.

[And of course, the reason I made the proofreading comment was because there were proofreading errors in your last post, which didn't exactly impress me. You also misspelled "prrofreading" in this post, but I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that was a joke.]

I am willing however to make general recommendations. Unfortunately, though I know there is some animation production in NYC, I don't live there and I don't know much about it. I guess my first recommendation is to get an agent to represent your work. Then depending on what the material is -- and, no, I don't want to know -- you should pitch that material to the network that airs stuff that's (a) similar to but (b) not duplicated by your stuff.

Good luck.

Response recorded on November 13, 2000

Bookmark Link

Peter C. Roblejo, MD writes...

Dear Mr. Weisman,
I am home sick today and for the first time was exposed to the Max Steel show. To see an entertainment medium of this kind on regular TV was amazing. It also occurred to me that this may afford me the opportunity I've been looking for to further my own ideas: I am an author, published through the internet. My chronicles deal with characters similar to those on Max Steel, and although this is not a request for employment, advice on how to penetrate the industry would be most appreciated. I feel my ideas could inject some fresh variety to this action genre. In fact, I think it was made for it. Please help.

Greg responds...

Well, Peter, not to be snide, but my first bit of advice is to proofread. (And just cuz I don't, doesn't mean you shouldn't.)

After that, there's no quick or surefire way to get into the biz. Where do you live? (I mean what city. I'm not interested in your address.) If you're not living in L.A. (or maybe New York) than you're clearly not serious about being part of the animation business. People with established careers, like Cary Bates for example, can afford to move to the city or town of their choice and communicate via e-mail, etc. But newbies need to be where the action is. I'm sure there are exceptions. But not many.

Response recorded on November 09, 2000

Bookmark Link

Michael W. writes...

Hi! I was wondering if it is possible to ever see layouts/sketches/blueprints? of Xanatos' building with the gargoyle's castle in it. I am really interested in not only the Gargoyles show but also the incredible settings. I really enjoyed the creativity in the design of the earlier episode's airship. I really enjoy the show and feel that is one of the most original series ever to be produced. I appreciate that you have taken the time to read my question and please answer it.

Greg responds...

Layouts must exist in the Disney Archives.

I doubt actual blueprints were ever made. I don't think we had time for that.

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Frank writes...

Why doesn't Elisa change her clothes?

Greg responds...

She has 102 black t-shirts. She changes three times a day.

Or were you looking for a real world answer? We couldn't afford to redesign her every episode. And the more different looks we gave her, the more we were inviting animation errors.

(No one mentions why Owen seems to wear the same suit every day?)

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

aXvXia writes...

*hope you enjoyed the gathering cause i couldnt go! poop!*

I know what you're thinking, mr. weisman: "NOo! Not another August 7th post! I'm just one man, dammit!" i totally sympathize with you, but i just have to ask:

**How much money (on average) would you say it took to produce an average episode of gargoyles with the normal character cast having speaking parts??
I just wanted to know, cause i know alot of people who would, if they knew where to send it, give money to see GARGOYLES back on the air.

Thanks for your time and efforts Mr.Weisman, and if there is anything you need for me to do for you (posts,etc) just say so in your answering post.

Greg responds...

You mean just the voice recording or the entire episode?

If the latter, it cost just under half a million dollars per episode.

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Demona Taina writes...

Well, I was reading through the "Questions Answered Archive." Somebody noticed the anklet drawn on one of the gargoyles in "City of Stone 4." I can't remember who posted it, but whoever did, he/she was right.

One of the gargoyles had an anklet on his right ankle when the sky was in flames. And guess who it was? [drum roll] It was Goliath! He was watching the show in the sky, and there it is, an anklet like Demona's on his ankle. Well, this isn't the only mistake.

They once drew Goliath in Angela's clothes, how about that? "Ill Met by Moonlight." When Angela, Gabriel and Goliath collapse, you can see it.

Once, they made Elisa's hair slide back in "Monsters."

They forgot to draw Goliath's tail in "Walkabout."

They drew a shirt like Demona's on Angela in "Mark of the Panther."

They've forgotten to draw Goliath's underwear countless of times. They've forgotten to color Hudson's shirt. They've colored Goliath's wings wrong.. and I think they DID draw a mustache on Macbeth in "Enter Macbeth."

Just the little details of life. [chuckles] My question is.. how can those animators mess up so much? I mean, I've drawn the characters plenty of times, and I don't make mistakes like those. Even when I color them.

I understand that they have to color thousands of drawings but.. well, it's a little unbelievable. What do you think of all this?

Thank you for your time. :)

Greg responds...

I think you have very little sympathy or understanding for the pace and speed that all these things are done at. Most of what you cited above are actually painting errors, not drawing errors. Think about having to fill in all those little lines on hundreds of cels, day after day after day. Frankly, I'd go insane. Mistakes happen. We caught as many as we could. Fixed as many as we had time to fix. But mistakes happen.

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Karen writes...

One of my favourite parts of each Garg episode are the gliding scenes. I just finished watching the Hunter's Moon episodes over the last two nights and was particularly impressed with:
1. When Goliath rounds the building and sees the Hunters' airship, he backwings and lands on the building. Very nice.
2. My all time favourite: the battle at the dam, when Goliath dives down and soars back up, he does the most wonderful wingover over the top of the dam. It's so powerfully graceful. I loved it.
Unfortunately, there are cases in some eps where the aerodynamics didn't always quite ring true, but hey I'm no pilot to criticize, and what looked to me like gaffs generally were pretty minor. So, to my actual question: Do you know if the animators studied any sort of flying in order to protray this sort of thing? IE, did they look at acrobatics with airplanes, bats, etc?
Thank you for your time!

Greg responds...

I don't know. There were times when it felt wrong to us too. The animators would, for example, on occasion allow the Gargs to hover like Superman. We'd have to call a retake to get them to (at least) keep the background panning behind them.

Some of the stuff did look great though.

Response recorded on August 18, 2000

Bookmark Link

BloodBane writes...

Hello Greg.

Ok, I have noticed the animation in some of the episodes was relly great!For an example in Hunters Moon there was a part where the oldest brother picked up Maza, and put her to sleep with the tranquilizer and in that few seconds the animation was really good.Do you no why they didn't draw the whole series like that?

Greg responds...

It's not like they didn't try. But animation involves a huge quantity of people and not everyone is as good as everyone else. Not all the episodes, for example, could be animated at Disney's Tokyo Studio, which was collectively superior to the other studios that worked on the show.

We got the best that we could get in the time and with the budget that we had at our disposal. It's not ALL as good as Hunter's Moon 3, but I'm pretty proud of most of it.

Response recorded on August 02, 2000

Bookmark Link

dracolich5 writes...

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

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

Greg responds...

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

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

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

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

Response recorded on August 02, 2000

Bookmark Link

The Gatekeeper (repost by Aris) writes...

I have some questions on how the voice recording was done.

I've looked through the archives, and it appears that you get all the actors together at one time but I'm not getting an entirely clear picture. You have mentioned doing some editing on the voices for rhythms and the like. Is this possible to do when the recording is done in a group session? I know the partial answer, each voice is on it's own track, but wouldn't the natural bounce (if you would) of all the actors playing off each other make for a natural sounding dialogue?

Were the recording sessions filmed as well, so that some of the facial expressions of the actors could be incorporated into the animation? I can just picture Marina Sirtis sneering at Keith David.

What is the sequence that things are done? I think the script and story board comes first, but are the voices recorded before or after the animation, or it is a kind of hand in hand process?

The reason I ask, is because I remember listening to an interview with a voice actor (back in the mid '70's) and he said that all his lines were sent to the studio on a tape that he did at his home.

Greg responds...

Anything's possible but that last scenario sounds awful strange to me.

Here's the basic order:

1. Write the scripts.
2. Design new characters. This begins even before the script is finished sometimes.
3. Record the voices.
4. Storyboards are drawn. (This sometimes also begins before all the voices are recorded, depending on deadline pressure. But ideally it waits for the board artist to get the voice tape.)
5. Direct the board. (For timing, etc.)
6. Send materials overseas for animation.
7. Animation.
8. Post-Production. Retakes, editing, sound, etc.

As for step 3 itself, we tried as often as possible to get all the actors together in one room. This was almost never completely possible. There'd always be someone who wasn't available or was out of town or something. (For example, Keith David spent most of the second season performing in SEVEN GUITARS on Broadway. We would pick him up by "phone patch" from a studio in New York. One time, I seem to recall, we had to get Jim "Fang" Belushi by phone patch from Australia, where he was shooting a movie.

So we had to edit in anyone who wasn't in the session. Plus sometimes the best takes weren't consecutive. Say, Thom "Lex" Adcox did a great reading of a question. And Jeff "Brooklyn" Bennett stuttered when answering. Jeff probably did two or three great takes of his line. But we'd still want to use Lex's great take. So we'd edit it too.

And sometimes we'd tighten things up for pace. Since, as you noted, we had to allow each line to be on a separate track, that meant we couldn't overlap dialogue in the recording booth. But in real life, people often interrupt each other or talk over each other, etc. So sometimes we'd edit to create that overlapping effect.

Still the reason we TRIED to get everyone together is because we'd generally get a better, higher energy performance from most of the actors by allowing them to play off each other.

Response recorded on August 01, 2000

Bookmark Link

Blaise (repost by Aris) writes...

TEMPTATION

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

Good ep.

Greg responds...

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

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

Response recorded on August 01, 2000

Bookmark Link

HEATHER writes...

Hello. My dream ever since I was 4 years old is to be a Disney animator. I know that you no longer work for Disney, but are my chances pretty good at making my dream come true? I have just completed my sophomore year in college, as I am majoring in art. Any job openings?? (I know you wouldn't know this now, but it's worth asking you.) Also, when I get to work for Disney (thinking optimistically), I will do all I can to make them bring the "Gargoyles" show back, and see that you are re-hired as the producer, since you did such a FABULOUS job with the show. I love that show to death. I will do all I can to help bring it back. Thanks for your time, Greg!! :)

Greg responds...

Thank you.

I don't know how to answer your questions, however. As you pointed out, I don't work for Disney. You say your majoring in art, but are you studying animation specifically. Do you really want to be an ANIMATOR, or do you just want to work as an artist in the animation industry?

Disney TV Animation, where we pre-produced Gargoyles, doesn't hire animators. They hire designers, board artists, color stylists, directors, etc. (I'm not saying that some of these guys or gals don't know how to animate, I'm just saying that's not what they were hired for.) The actual animation was done overseas in places like Japan, Korea and Taiwan.

Disney Features Animation, where I've never worked, does hire animators.

Heather, if this is your lifetime goal, your best bet is to learn all this stuff backwards and forwards. At least to start.

Response recorded on July 26, 2000

Bookmark Link

Fenrir writes...

Greetings Mr. Weisman!

Thanks for answering our questions. It means a lot.

I apologize if this has been asked before, but I did not see the answer in the archives. Approximately how many Gargoyle-Beasts were at Castle Wyvern in the year 994? There was at least one (Bronx) and presumably at least one female (to lay the Boudicca egg at the Wyvern rookery). What I'm getting at is: Who are Boudicca's biological parents? Is Bronx her father? Or would he be too young?

Greg responds...

Bronx is not Boudicca's father. He's too young. I don't know exactly who her bio-parents are. They had no names after all. But there was a goodly number of Garg Beasts at Wyvern. Animation budgets prevented us from showing you the full clan. Sorry.

Response recorded on July 26, 2000

Bookmark Link

Amethyst Delena writes...

Did you come up with, draw and design...etc. Golith?

Greg responds...

No. I can't draw at all, which Aimee and Jody's sketchbooks can now attest to.

Greg Guler did the orignal design for Goliath. This was adjusted by Mr. Takeuchi of Walt Disney Television Animation Japan. Frank Paur also had input into the final model. (I had input too, I guess, but not with a pencil, just a memo.)

Response recorded on July 26, 2000

Bookmark Link

Chapter XVII: "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time"

Written by Brynne Chandler Reaves & Lydia C. Marano
Story Edited by Michael Reaves

Well, I watched "Lighthouse" again last night with my family. First thing I noticed was the bad "Previously" recap. This is all my fault. The recap features Macbeth, because I wanted to make sure the audience knew who he was. But that blows out the first act surprise reveal that he's behind it all. Up to that point in the story, you'd be thinking Xanatos. But because of the dopey recap, you know it MUST be Mac. Later in the season, after I got hammered over these recaps by the folks on the Disney Afternoon e-Mailing list, I learned never to put anything into the recap that wasn't revealed in the first five minutes of the show to follow. But here's a perfect example of me screwing up my own mystery.

We introduce archeologists Lydia Duane and Arthur Morwood-Smythe. Dr. Duane was named after writers Lydia Marano and Diane Duane. Professor Morwood-Smythe was named after writers Arthur Byron Cover and Peter Morwood. Arthur is Lydia's husband. Peter is Diane's husband. I don't know anyone named Smythe.

Macbeth episodes, at least up to this point, seem to be cursed with mediocre animation. (Of course, everything's relative. Mediocre on Gargs was still better than most series got. But relative to our expectations, this ep is pretty weak.) I bet Elisa would have really looked cute in that red baseball hat if the animation had been even slightly better.

I don't know how clear it is in the prologue. The idea there, was that the wind was blowing through the lyre. The haunting sound drew the archeologists further into the cave. They read the warning which indicates that the seeker of knowledge has nothing to fear, the destroyer everything. They are supposed to hesitate, look at each other, decide that they are seekers not destroyers and then open the chest. Merlin's clearly put a safety spell of some kind on the chest. An image of the old man appears and basically checks to confirm whether the archeologists are in fact seekers or destroyers. Satisfied, the spell disipates. But you can imagine what would have happened if a Hakon type had stumbled in.

Anyway, it never felt like all that came across. Did it?

Brooklyn (re: Broadway): "Ignorance is bliss." In High School, I had a classmate named Howard Bliss. We had chemistry together with Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller once asked the class a question that we all should have known. No one knew the answer, and our own idiocy generated laughter among Miller's students. He just shook his head and said: "Ignorance is bliss." He forgot that he had a student named Bliss. It generated more laughter. I don't know why I told you that. But it's what I thought about when Brooklyn read that line.

There's a semi-heavy-handed "Read More About It" feel to the clock tower conversation regarding Merlin. Goliath practically quotes those public service announcements, saying there are many books about him in the library. I don't mind. I had wanted to cite a few actual books -- like Mary Stewart's THE CRYSTAL CAVE -- but our legal department wouldn't give us clearance for that. Very short-sighted.

A connection is made between Merlin and the Magus. This was not an accident, as at that time, I had planned to have the Magus journey with Arthur on his Pendragon quests to find Excalibur and Merlin. I later changed my mind. But the Magus does at least play a Merlin-esque roll in the Avalon three parter.

I always wonder who was playing in "Celebrity Hockey" that night.

Macbeth's standard Electro-Magnetic weapon was my idea. I didn't design it exactly, but I did make crude little drawings of something that looked vaguely like a staple gun, with two electrodes that generated the charge. I was always proud of that weapon. It was uniquely Macbeth's (and Banquo and Fleances'). Set him apart from all the concussion, laser and particle beam weapons we used elsewhere. (I did the same kind of thing on the Quarymen's hammers.)

It's fun to listen to B.J. Ward voice both sides of the confrontation between Fleance and Duane.

Banquo's model sheet showed him squinting out of one eye. Some episodes, not so much this one, but some took that to mean he only had one eye. So he walks around looking like Popeye for the entire episode. (His big lantern jaw helps accentuate that.) There are a couple of Popeye moments in this ep. But more in his next appearance I think.

It was my idea to just have Mac's mansion rebuilt without explanation. I don't exactly regret it, but it's kinda cheap. We burned it way down. He has it rebuilt. It makes sense. But we usually dealt with consequences more than that.

When he rebuilds it, he installs those cannons. They were supposed to be giant-sized versions of the hand-held E-M guns. But they don't come off that way. Instead they fire at the gargoyles. And mostly seem to destroy the various turrets of Macbeth's own place. Ugghh.

As in "Leader" we get another scene of Goliath and friends confronting Owen at the castle. Looking for Xanatos, when in fact Xanatos isn't the threat. It made sense in both episodes. And it's always nice to showcase Owen a bit. But after two of those in four episodes, I wasn't gonna do that again. (At least not until KINGDOM.)

I love the "Macbeth Theme" that Carl Johnson created for the villain, which is featured at the end of ACT ONE.

Macbeth opens the "second scroll" and starts to read Merlin's seal. This caused tons of fan confusion, as he read "Sealed by my own [i.e. Merlin's] hand". No one seemed to get that he was reading that. They thought Mac was saying that he [i.e. Macbeth] had sealed the scroll. Of course that notion renders the whole thing confusing as hell. But it never occured to us that anyone would take it that way.

We also introduce Jeffrey Robbins and Gilly in this episode. Gilly is of course short for Gilgamesh, one of the legendary characters that Robbins once wrote about. It's just a bit odd, because Gilly is a female.

Robbins is a very cool character. Wish we had had the opportunity to use him more.

I like how when Robbins and Hudson are introducing themselves, Robbins gives his first and last name. Hudson says, I'm Hudson, "like the river". An echo of how he got the name. And a reminder that names aren't natural to him. Even if they are addictive.

John Rhys-Davies is just fantastic as Macbeth. I love his speech to Broadway. It accomplishes everything we needed it too. That line about the "human heart" by the way is a reference to the Arthur/Lance/Gwen triangle.

I also love his line: "I'm Old, but not THAT Old." This was a little hint to what we'd reveal in CITY OF STONE. Sure Macbeth's from the eleventh century, but not the fifth or sixth. It's like someone saying to someone my age, "So what did you do during World War II?"

Lennox Macduff. That was a cool touch. Also a hint as to how Macbeth feels about Shakespeare.

I like the Phone Book scene too. Hudson says "Hmm. Magic Book." Robbins replies: "Aren't they all." Great stuff.

By the way, as Robbins goes through the phone book, scanning names, he passes "Macduff, Cameron". One of my college roommates was Cameron Douglas, who was really interested in his Scotish heritage. That was a mini-tribute to him.

My daughter Erin reacts to the fact that Macbeth threatens to use Merlin's spells on Broadway. She points out that Macbeth had promised to let Broadway go after he had the scrolls. She's surprised he hasn't kept his word. My wife at that point reminds Erin that Macbeth is the villain. Erin gets that. But you can tell it isn't quite sitting right with her.

Later when Macbeth DOES let everyone go without a struggle, Erin is clearly not sure what to make of him.

And on one level, that's exactly as we wanted it. Macbeth is a troubled guy -- a hero who's devolved into a villain. A suicidal villain on top of that, though we hadn't revealed that yet. But he is a villain. Later, it's debatable, but here he's taken to being an ends-justify-the-means kinda guy. And even his ends are hazy at best.

I love Broadway's "precious magic" speech. It's so wierd hearing poetry from the big galoot. But that's so Broadway. The soul of a poet. Bill Faggerbakke was a huge help.

And I love Robbins "They are lighthouses in the dark sea of time..." speech. I love that it's not exactly the title. Brynne and Lydia did fine work on this one.

I wonder what happened to that lyre?


Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

In an earlier response of yours, you state that the "Next time on Gargoyles" teasers were actually advantageous in that they padded out air time.

This confuses me. Well, actually, it somewhat disturbs me. You man having less time in which to tell a story was a good thing?

For me, in any half-hour program, I savor every minute because I know there are only twenty. It's not the same in hour-long shows. Yet, they often have the briefer teasers.

Greg responds...

By thirty seconds... DAMN STRAIGHT.

Budgets forced us to send shows overseas that timed out almost to the exact length that the show would air. But bad animation happens. Mistakes. Bad timing. Things we overlooked in board. Etc. If you can't cut anything because you're already more or less at the correct airing time, that limits what you can and can't fix. Having the freedom to cut another 30 seconds allowed us to tighten things up immeasurably. Action sequences have more punch, move quicker, I guarantee.

It's not like we were losing scenes or even lines of dialogue. It's not five minutes, it's just thirty seconds spread out over nineteen minutes worth of footage. It helps make each minute much more savory. Trust me.

Response recorded on July 05, 2000

Bookmark Link

Chapter XV: "Metamorphosis"

STORY EDITOR: Michael Reaves
WRITERS: Brynne Chandler Reaves & Lydia Marano

The first appearance of Anton Sevarius and the MUTATES: Maggie the Cat, Fang and Claw. Derek had appeared before, but this was TALON's "first appearance" as well.

In our original development, the Talon character was called CATSCAN. He wasn't Elisa's brother. In fact, he was sorta Sevarius. That is, he was the scientist who created the mutagenic formula. At first he works for Xavier (Xanatos), but later -- when he realizes that Xavier was responsible for the "accident" that turned him into Catscan -- he tries to hunt Xanatos down, forcing Goliath to actually protect Xanatos in order to save Catscan's soul. This version of Catscan was basically the inspiration of my good friend Fred Schaefer, who was a Disney Development Associate at the time. Part of the team. Oh, and Catscan was a solo act, there were no other Mutates. And he didn't have wings either. He fired some kind of radiation bolt from his eyes.

Later, we began to prep Derek for the Catscan/Talon role. I don't remember if we knew Derek's fate way back in "Deadly Force", when he was introduced, but we definitely knew by "Her Brother's Keeper". One of the reasons we made him a pilot was to give him some flight background to justify how quickly we needed him to learn to fly. This was emphasized HERE by putting him in a glider.

Anton Sevarius became a separate character obviously. Michael Reaves, I believe, came up with his name. At first, I didn't like it. I thought it was too cartoony. Now I think it suits him.

Rereading my memo, it seems I was thinking of Brent Spiner to play Sevarius. I hadn't remembered that. Of course, no one else could be Sevarius except Tim Curry. And Brent was a perfect Puck for us too. So all's well that ends well. (But can you imagine if somehow the rolls had been switched?) Tim has some great lines here: "...Or has that changed?" is one of my favorites. He's so hungry.

FYI - That's Jonathan Frakes voicing Fang's one-liner in this episode. We couldn't afford to hire a separate actor for one line. So Jonathan stepped in. Of course, later Fang was taken over by Jim Belushi. But I don't think anyone noticed.

Gotta love the Snidely Whiplash reference.

As I mentioned in my last Ramble on "Leader", Xanatos' plans were getting more and more sophisticated. Here we had two humdingers in a row. The one in "Leader" is just a lot of fun. This one is cruel. Throughout the story, we (I think) tend to believe in Xanatos' mea culpa and his outrage regarding the Mutates ("They'll crucify you. And if they don't, I WILL!!"). Why? Because he's so darn likable we want to think well of him. (Who was fooled? I'd like to know.) Also his story rings true. When he tells Sevarius, "I've been in prison before." We know he has. We believe he could take it again. It's that touch of truth amid the lies that makes him so sharp.

And Owen was complicit. On one level, that shouldn't be surprising, yet there's something of the Mr. Spock about Owen. As faithful as you know he is, you don't actually expect him to lie.

And frankly, the plan is SO complex. I hope it's believable when all is said and done. We made a real effort to make sure that it could have worked, that if it hadn't gone EXACTLY as depicted it would feel like there would have been alternative scenarios that would have generated the same result. Of course the master-stroke is Sevarius' death. Our S&P executive raised an eyebrow over that, as she finished reading Act Two. Fortunately, she was the type who finished the script before knee-jerking us with an objection. We got away with depicting a violent death on-screen -- because it was fake. (But who was fooled?)

We tried to play fair with a number of clues throughout. We used Xanatos' own security team as the "hired mercenaries" that Sevarius was using. Only Xanatos checks Sevarius' pulse. When Matt and Elisa are later investigating the scene, there's no body and NO CHALK OUTLINE either. They have no idea that anyone even theoretically was supposed to have DIED there. And Sevarius is SO OVER THE TOP. That should have been a stylistic clue. It was way fun to do -- and it took great acting on Tim's part to act that badly and still make it play.

For once the script came in a tad short. So the board artist added the bit where the gargoyles break out of stone and we see the debris rain down on the people below. Pigeons fly off into the night. (Just a little touch of realism.) Very nice.

I was never too fond of Elisa's Zen Master joke. Still, in the comic book story I wrote before the Marvel comic book was cancelled, I created a Zen Master character. (Just compulsive I guess.)

My original plan for Gen-U-Tech was to abreviate its name as G.U.T.S. As in the company that twists yours up. (The full name is Genetic Undiscovered Technical Systems.) Instead it became Gen-U-Tech, which is probably better. But I can't remember who made the change. The script has plenty of GUTS references in the descriptions. But it may have escaped my notice that it has none in the dialogue. And the logos designed all read Gen-U-Tech, not guts. I wonder if Frank & Michael were slyly protecting me from a mis-step?

I like the conflict between Brooklyn & Broadway here. All the interplay with the trio is very well handled, I think. Were people really rooting for Brooklyn & Maggie to wind up together?

Not our best animated episode. Both the modeling and the animation leave a bit to be desired. Derek's ears look mid-transformation long before he's hit with that dart. Makes me cringe, but I guess if the audience isn't expecting him to get changed, they don't notice the subtle pointyness to the ears, until after the contents of the dart are revealed. But on a second viewing...?

Maggie Reed: "I'm from Ohio." As if that should explain EVERYTHING. I love that line.

"Morgan Reed", by the way, was one of our may early names for what eventually became Elisa Chavez, Elisa Bluestone and finally Elisa Maza. (I never waste anything.)

Observations from my daughter Erin:

1. "I like the click of their boots." [Erin complimenting the foley during the recapture of Maggie in the alley.]

2. "His hands ARE tied!" [My clever Erin catching the irony. Elisa says "My hands are tied." Brooklyn responds, "Well mine aren't." But then he turns to stone, prompting Erin's observation.]

3. "Hudson and Bronx always stay home." [Erin commenting on our proclivity for leaving Hudson & Bronx behind at the castle or clock tower when Goliath and the Trio go off. It is kind of a rip.]

Another great series of endings and false endings.

Xanatos tells Owen to bring him the "best geneticist on the planet."

The gargs arrive and fight the Mutates. Elisa arrives. Xanatos asks her to "stop this senseless violence". [Ahh, what a lovely bastard he is.]

Maggie makes the accurate observation that Brooklyn wants her to stay a monster. And yet despite that incite, she clearly still believes that both she and Brooklyn ARE monsters. She's as bound up in appearances as he is.

Talon names himself. It's kinda odd. But I think it works.

Elisa declares war on Xanatos. And for a split-second it registers on his face. Something has actually given him pause.

And then Owen brings in the best geneticist. I still wonder if it's immediately clear that this "new guy" IS Sevarius. He looks SO different. And Tim wasn't using the hoky accent anymore. Was anyone else confused, even momentarily? But anyway, it's another stunner Xanatos Tag. Did your eyes bug out? Or did you know by this time?

And finally, back to the Tower. Brooklyn is in a funk. But Elisa...

This entire episode is obviously a direct sequel to "Brother's Keeper". Right down to the end. In the end of that one, Elisa can do nothing but stare sadly out at the snow. But we're past that now. Now she cries. Xanatos doesn't wind up with the Mutates, though he correctly predicts there eventual return, but this is his clearest victory yet. The Mutates blame the gargs. Talon still believes X is his best chance at a cure. And he has an emotional and physical weapon against Elisa and the gargs. I was proud of us for ending a "cartoon" on such a relatively down note. Can't always have happy endings. How many people were surprised we ended it that way?

That's it. Comments welcome...



: « First : Displaying #60 - #159 of 188 records. : 100 » : Last » :