Storyseeker writes...

Just to let people know that I received the Garg DVD, and it was absolutely brilliant! The special features were ace, I loved watching the interviews from folks at the Gathering. It was the closest I've ever come to actually going to the convention, so it was cool to see what the place was like. It was quite funny when I saw some of the original pictures for the clan and I saw the one of Hudson, as he looked more like a dog than Bronx ever did. And all the sound and picture quality on all the episodes was excellent, I enjoyed watching the 1st season again and again and again...

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the "Sentinel" ramble, Greg!

I can no longer remember a lot of my initial responses to the episodes in "Gargoyles", but I can for "Sentinel". And what I remember most about it was this: when I saw the two archaeologists from "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time" in the "Previously On" section, I eagerly thought that the episode would have something to do with King Arthur and Griff's quest for Merlin (which I wanted to see more of), since Morwood-Smith and Duane were the ones who'd discovered the Scrolls of Merlin. And I was at first a bit disappointed when it turned out that the background mythology was Easter Island and ancient astronauts, instead - though at least it had that "Holy Grail" line. I've come to accept that since then, however (I suspect that the Quest for Merlin would have worked far better in the projected "Pendragon" spin-off, anyway, since it would be too artificial to have Arthur and Griff constantly bumping into the Manhattan clan on their search).

You can feel reassured that I never thought that the gargoyles were aliens, either before or after the episode. Mostly this was due to the fact that I'd always seen them as fantasy creatures rather than science-fiction creatures; living gargoyles are found far more often in fantasy than science fiction, Goliath and his clan originally hailed from medieval Scotland (and medieval settings fit the fantasy genre better than the sci-fi genre, though they aren't necessarily incompatible with it), their means of being brought into the 20th century involved a wizard's spell, etc.

The business with the amnesiac Elisa struck me as well-handled, although I'm afraid that I don't have anything more to say about it than you already have.

And, yep, I'm afraid that Elisa does wear her short-sleeved black shirt on the Avalon World Tour - and what makes it all the more embarrassing is that we see it on the preceding episode, "The Green"!

I will confess that, although he showed seriously faulty judgment at first, I rather like Nokkar. Despite his stubbornness in believing the gargoyles to be agents for the Space-Spawn, he also displayed a strong sense of concern over the world that he was supposed to protect. After subduing Goliath, he immediately turns to Elisa and asks her if she's all right. He trusts her enough to give her the guided tour of his spaceship. And he chooses to ask her first why she helped the gargoyles escape instead of taking a "shoot first, ask questions" later attitude - and accepts her answer, recognizing that he'd been in the wrong. It makes the resolution at the end (including his finding some new friends) all the more convincing - and makes it clear that he truly is a "protector-figure" like Goliath and Elisa.

Gingitsune writes...

I don't have a question, actually I was just directed here from another part of Station 8 were it was said you wanted commentary on the DVD. Best DVD Ever, for the best show ever created, I cannot thank you enough for creating this great series. I was fascinated by the commentary on the "Awakening" and even more thrilled when it directed me to this site. Thank you again, I cannot wait for season 2 to be released on DVD, which hopefully is in the works!

WingedBeast writes...

I recently got the DVD and there's little enough I can say about the episodes without launching into long rambles.

I looked at the extras, the commentary had a lot of nice information that put little bits in a light. Kieth David's growl not needing reverb... there are odd lengths I would go through if I could count on getting a voice like that.

But, above all, let me thank you for making the changes to the series that you did from the original pitch.

I do think that the more rounded image of the Gargoyles would have been a nice look to them. It reminded me more of the savagery of a rabbid gorrila than the Gargoyles I know which are animalistic in the proud vissage of an eagle. (sort of, I mean, Lexington is a little too cute to be eagle-esque, but there you go).

But, mostly, I like the fact that the Trio aren't just a mischevious group of kids. They're warriors from a time when you had to grow up fast. Yeah, they get in trouble and act pretty much like you'd expect brothers to act, but the seriousness in them makes the funny bits all the funnier.

Finally, best for last, thank you for making Bronx not into an ear-flapping comedy piece. Bronx is so much better as this dog-like beast than he is as something that chews on fire-hydrants.

And, to look to Awakenings, Bronx's reaction to the Trio giving him a name is far better comedy than eating various things. It's just such a perfect dog-like animal reaction, the kind that makes you think he knows exactly what's being said. If I could put words to his reaction, it would be "If you're going to name me, leave me out of it."

All in all, thank you for making the changes you did.

El Kevo writes...

I loved this show when I was but a young lad but, as many people do, I grew up and forgot about it. Then one day two years ago, quite by accident, I found this website. It rekindled my love for the show and brought me back to a place I hadn't been in years. I started to watch the reruns on Toon Disney almost religiously and become obsessed all over again. I started checking this site daily, hoping to hear some news that Gargoyles was coming back in some way, either in a new form or a release of the classic in DVD format. Finally the news came and I was ecstatic.

Got the Season One DVD for Christmas and I must say FANFREAKIN'TASTIC!

Comments:
Starting with the menus, I loved them. Slow? Yes, but I didn't mind, they looked good. Then I selected to watch Awakening with the commentary. Loved it. Most of it we have read here on Ask Greg, but there were some other things that I hadn't and was interested to find out.

And I have to agree with Mr. David, one of my favorite lines from anything ever is "Know her? I named her!"

All the other episodes looked great! Haven't looked better. Even Enter Macbeth, which in my opinion was lacking the most visually, looked great.

The sound quality was great too! Hearing that music clear and crisp and all the great voices, I was in heaven.

Complaints/Botherings
There's only one thing I would have liked to see and that's more commentary. I'm sure all of you are busy and probably don't have a whole lot of time to just sit around and talk about episodes, and yes we have your Rambles here on Ask Greg, but it would have been nice. Other than that, loved it!

And though the other extras were few, they were great. I loved seeing the original pitch, seeing how the ideas started out and then comparing them to how they turned out.

In conclusion to this rambling collection of praise and my personal story with your amazing show I would like to say thank you and I hope the DVD does good enough for a Season Two release and hopefully the rebirth of Gargoyles.

StarCreator writes...

I just finished watching the first season DVD. Since Ask Greg seems to be open for questions again (probably proving how infrequently I stop in), I figured it would be as good a place as any to leave my comments.

The first thing I checked out was the commentary. It's always interesting to hear the staff talk about their work, and you get some gems of information you would never hear otherwise. However, I'm a bit disappointed that Keith didn't talk a little bit more frequently in the three episodes of commentary that he participated in. Not that disappointed though, since he did have a few good bits here and there.

That bit about the gun change surprised me; even though my old VHS tape from TV had all the next ep previews/credits/openings cut to run the whole thing in sequence, I had never noticed. Nearly fell out of my couch for that one.

One bit about "The Thrill of the Hunt": one scene that I definitely didn't remember from previous viewings was a gargoyle statue's head being smashed as the Pack scaled the building to chase Goliath and Lexington. Nice to see some cut bits of episodes put back in their rightful places - this little bit makes that scene make that much more sense.

By the time I got to "Deadly Force" (and wow, I just typo'd that as "Deafly Force" there for a minute), I was impressed at how far the envelope was pushed in this series, considering the target audience and timeslot it had. In this episode alone, we not only have the dead body chalk outline on the street, but Elisa actually flatlining for a bit. Wow.

We also have Goliath referring to the first meal of the night as "dinner" here, while two episodes later in "The Edge", Broadway refers to it as "breakfast". I wonder if that means their food choices for said first meal are similarly different...

I think that's all I really wanted to say about the content of the show - since if I went into complete praise and gushing, I'd probably have a novel on my hands. I'd probably also end up derailing myself even further with all my random comments I keep inserting. But rewatching these episodes reminded me of how impressive and epic the series is, and even with a decade of age, that feeling hasn't changed.

Whoa, hey, the blurb about the DVD to my left that I've been staring as while writing this mispells Keith David's first name.

Woo, derailed again.

On the technical side of things now...

DVD menus were fairly OK. Transition times are a bit too long for my taste, but for the most part didn't bother me that much. The imagery is interesting - I was a little bit put off with the main menu animation at first, but I warmed up to it after letting it loop a couple of times. I like the use of the theme song in its original incarnation to depict a duality between the calm of the gargoyles' stone sleep and their nighttime awakening.

I also like how both the Sun and the Moon rise and set in the same direction.

One big thing that surprised me was the lack of chapter stops within each episode. A long history of collecting anime DVDs has taught me that episodes should always be chaptered for quick and easy seeking - in this case, I expected chaptering for Opening, Previously+Act 1, Act 2, Act 3, End Credits. With every episode stored onto its own chapter, I ended up having to memorize the times of points I wanted to return to should I want to jump around, which I think is a tremendous inconvenience for something so easily implemented.

Video quality was impressive, as far as I could tell from the old TV I was watching on. The show pretty much looked just the way it did when I first watched it on TV, without nasty artifacts from our poor terrestrial reception. I was particularly impressed that all the scenes I spot-checked didn't show any combed frames as I stepped through. I bet this would look marvelous on the HDTV.

Keith's growl bit at the Gathering amuses me. I wonder how many times he can do that consecutively. I'd probably have no voice left after one attempt.

I'm left wondering why, after there was a decently-sized Gathering featurette, that there was no link to the Gathering website or any information on the Gathering at Las Vegas in 2005. I thought it would have been the perfect place to put it, unless there are some legal reasons that prevent such a thing. (I was also kind of expecting a disclaimer stating that the Gathering was not affiliated in any way with Walt Disney Co., etc., etc...)

And I think I'll end my disjointed mad ramblings here before inflicting mental harm on any who would happen to read it. Again, I'm glad I finally have the DVD in my hands, and aside from a couple of minor technical gripes, it's fantastic and I have all hopes for getting some more in my hands too.

Anonymous writes...

I do not have a question, but a swell comment. Thank you Disney for my favorite cartoon on DVD! Out of all the Disney cartoons that I have seen, Gargoyles tops the cake. Please hurry out with Gargoyles Season 2 on DVD. You will make all of us fans of this show quite happy!

Marc writes...

I picked up the Gargoyles box set 2 weeks ago, and must say I really enjoyed it. The time the DVD makers put in on the menus really impressed me. I haven't watched the show in a long time, and about forgot how great it was. I am really looking forward to the second season comming out on DVD.

Great work, on a great show.
Marc

Todd Jensen writes...

I finally bought a DVD player yesterday, and watched much of the Gargoyles DVD on it; to be precise, all five parts of "Awakening" with the commentary on, "Deadly Force", the original pitch, and the Gathering documentary. I very much enjoyed the experience as well (once I got used to how to work the DVD player, of course).

I very much liked the commentary, though I'd only recommend it to people who've already become familiar with the series since it contains a number of spoilers (such as Owen really being Puck, the prediction of Xanatos creating the Mutates and Thailog, the prediction of Xanatos making peace with the gargoyles at the end of Season Two, etc.). I did have a little trouble sometimes working out whether it was you or Frank Paur speaking (though I didn't have that trouble with Keith David; his voice is definitely unmistakable).

While much of it was information that I'd already learned from "Ask Greg" and my visit to the 2001 Gathering, there were some new things there that stood out to me, as well as a few old things that I thought I'd briefly comment on:

1. You mentioned about how much of the set-up of Part One of "Awakening" (with the opening scene of the stones falling from the top of the Eyrie Building and the preview of Part Two with Xanatos, the Eyrie Building, the commandos, etc.) was to reassure the audience that "Gargoyles" would be mostly set in the present-day rather than in the 10th century, for fear that they would be turned off the series if they thought that it would be set in the Middle Ages. Interestingly enough, for me when I started watching "Gargoyles", it was the reverse; my favorite part of "Awakening" was the 10th century introduction, and one of my biggest thoughts during it was "Pity that this is just the origin story and that the bulk of the series is going to be in the modern world". (How I'd have enjoyed the "Dark Ages" spin-off!)

2. You mentioned about Goliath being in the wrong to send the trio and Bronx down to the rookery (though with the irony that he thereby saved their lives). When I saw the episode, I always thought that Goliath had done the right thing in punishing Lexington, Brooklyn, and Bronx, however, since regardless of the fact that the humans had started the fight, the three of them were still helping to escalate the hostilities (and all that growling with eyes glowing obviously would only reinforce the humans' fear of gargoyles). Where I did think that Goliath was in the wrong was in sending Broadway with them, since he hadn't been in the fight at all, but was merely peacefully eating at the time.

3. One little bit that still amuses me (part of "Awakening" itself, I might add, though not part of the commentary) is that, directly after Xanatos's line "Pay a man enough, and he'll walk barefoot into Hell", we see one of the workmen dismantling the castle for transportation, with the close-up on his feet (although they're in shoes).

4. I honestly hadn't realized (until you pointed it out here) that Goliath's request of the Magus was suicidal, maybe because I was then aware of the fact that the series was just starting and that the gargoyles were going to be somehow awakened in modern times. But when I looked at it from his perspective rather than that of a viewer who was aware that it was a television series, I realized that it was indeed the case, that Goliath couldn't have known that someday, the castle could rise above the clouds. Which meant that he wasn't asking to be placed under the spell so that he could be there when Hudson, the trio, and Bronx were awakened (as I'd subconsciously assumed) because he didn't think that that would ever happen, but just to gain release from the misery of loneliness.

5. Your remarks about Xanatos being designed to appear deceptively heroic definitely brought back memories for me. When I first saw "Awakening", I didn't know for certain whether Xanatos would be a friend or an opponent to the gargoyles until Part Five, but I wanted to believe that he was on their side, that he was on the level, even though a part of me had suspicions that he would turn out to be the antagonist. And it wasn't until Elisa revealed to Goliath in Part Five about what had really gone on in the Cyberbiotics raids that I had to accept that Xanatos was up to no good.

6. The significance of the Alice in Wonderland sculptures during the scene where Elisa was being chased by the commandos was definitely new to me; I had only thought of them as part of the background, and hadn't realized that they were also symbolic of the new world that she'd just discovered.

7. And thanks for confirming my suspicion that Demona's "a thousand years of solitude" remark was a hommage to Gabriel Garcia Marquez.

8. About Demona revealing her name: that scene always worked for me as dramatic and threatening. What stands out to me about it now, though, was how the expectations or assumptions that I'd had from that line turned out to not match what actually happened in the series. I had believed then that her name arose out of terrified humans whom she was preying upon viewing her as a nightmare straight out of Hell, and then, in "City of Stone", it turns out that she was given that name by a then-ally, and as a means of praising her fighting skills. Talk about skewering the audience's expectations!

I enjoyed seeing the original presentation again. One thing that stands out to me about it now is that, even though the series had by this time clearly switched to a more dramatic genre, there was still a much more strongly comical tone about it than the final version, as in:

1. The depiction of Goliath reading in the 10th century, while seated on a few annoyed-looking smaller gargoyles to keep them out of mischief.

2. The picture of Goliath and Elisa on a subway train, with Goliath wearing a lot of heavy garments to hide the fact that he's a gargoyle, but still getting a lot of attention from the other passengers (which I honestly can't imagine happening in the series itself, though we did get to see Broadway in the trenchcoat and fedora a couple of times).

3. Bronx (looking astonishingly anthropomorphic there) chewing on a fire hydrant.

All in all, I really enjoyed the DVD, and am looking forward to the Season Two ones.

Blaise writes...

THE GREEN

I mentioned back in MARK OF THE PANTHER that I feard that episode would be focused on the illegal poaching angle, and become less of a story, more of a "public service announcement" of sorts. I said back then that, in my experience, when a show is focused on (or does an episode focused on) certain issues (especially environmental ones for some reason) it seems to sacrifice plot, character, and even believability to force its moral across.
Thankfully, that does not happen in this episode, or in any episode of GARGOYLES that I can think of.
Granted there are *some* lines that come close to being preachy. I find myself laughing at the "Forget me, save the trees!" line. And Zaphiro's "There is no such thing as a few trees," while admittidly cool and well-delivered, initially struck me as so absolutist and dogmatic.
Now, in that last case, I would have felt better if the conversation between Zaphiro and Elisa continued after that (maybe with Zaphiro pointing out that rainforest soil is absolutely worthless for farming). This is another one of those times I really wish GARGOYLES had hour-long episodes.
Actually, I really do like that scene between Elisa and Zaphiro because Elisa plays devil's advocate--she actually tries to see things from the side of the "forest defilers." Going back to what I said about other "environmentally-minded" shows and episodes, things have a tendency to be drawn completely in black and white--anyone who chops down a tree is evil to the core, basically. Broad strokes and caricatures.
Let's look at "Captain Planet and the Planeteers," for example. From what I remember, they had a cadre of "Eco-villains" who largely seemed to be destroying the environment because they enjoyed doing so. And it was specifically the environment that they enjoyed destroying. In some cases, they had a motivation (oftimes greed, though one character needed radiation to survive), but mostly they seemed to do it because they enjoyed polluting. If a normal person was doing "bad things" it was because they were under the influence of one of the big bad-guys, and by the end said normal people saw the error of their ways and turned around. Thus, it doesn't seem terribly realistic to me.
Contrast this with MONONOKE HIME ("Princess Mononoke"), one of my favorite animated movies. The "forest defiler," Lady Eboshi, while she can be quite ruthless and capitalistic, has a heart. She frees women from prostitution and takes care of lepers. She has depth, and this makes her more realistic and identifiable. Thus I was able to take this movie seriously, and more fully appreciate humanity's impact on the natural world.

And thankfully, THE GREEN is much closer to MONONOKE HIME than "Captain Planet." Much of this comes from Elisa. In addition to the scene I already mentioned, I LOVE the scene between her and Goliath at the pyramid when he leaves to protect The Green. She argues from the human point of view, in essence still playing devil's advocate, but she can fully sympathize with the gargoyles. And while Goliath can understand Elisa's point of view, he can see little other choice for the gargoyles trying to save The Green than the guerilla attacks. Even the Mayan clan seems to understand (Turquesa is a bit snappish about the "misguided laws," but Jade seems downright cheerful towards Elisa).
And as for the "villains" themselves, Jackal and Hyena are the only real ones, and their primary interest is the money. They don't show any specific enjoyment out of destroying the rainforest (even Jackal's destruction of trees stems from his trying to keep the gargoyles from doing anymore damage and--heck--he just likes destroying stuff, period). Vogel, and through him Cyberbiotics, are the "big bad" employing Jackal and Hyena, but again it's about the money and not a gleeful hatred for the environment (Environmental Ethics for Businesses: "Care about the environment unless it costs you money."). Even the workers are just doing their jobs (and they're probably as unnerved by Jackal and Hyena as they are the gargoyles). The destruction of the rainforest is, as is often the case in real life, the direct side effect of pursuing other goals (as opposed to the ultimate goal of some malefactor).

Okay, NOW we can get down to smaller details.
I LOVED seeing the new gargoyles. Zaphiro's design was excellent! And Hector Elizondo's voice-work was wonderful. The whole cast did a great job, in fact (and was the Jesse Corti playing Jade the same fellow who played Le Fou in BEAUTY AND THE BEAST?).
The "flesh by day and night" thing was nice--we don't often get to see the gargs in sun-lit environments.
And it was great seeing Jackal and Hyena again, and they actually managaed to be more unnerving than ever. There are the scenes you and Erin mentioned (a headless Hyena is pretty intimidating), but the whole "retract eye/ear" thing creeps me out, too. Those long cords are rewinding into their SKULLS!! And the sound Hyena's earpiece makes when it goes back in her ear...[shudder].
Admittidly, Jackal did have a nice plan, and if it weren't for the amulet being in New York it might have worked. I find it strange that Hyena seems to think being in NY again is a good "omen." Then again, she likes fighting the gargs, so....

I was pleased to no end to see Broadway and Lexington show up again. And their fight with Hyena was well staged (though the destruction of the various exhibits sets my teeth on edge, as well). You brought up Broadway's clan mentality towards maternity (the plural "mothers"), but what I find interesting is Hyena's use of the singular ("mamma"), which almost seems to indicate that she already in her mind sees these guys as brothers.
RE: the head injury. Yeah, that's another one of those things Toon Disney cuts out. Hyena's holding her head in pain was actually a nice touch, though.

I like the look on Jackal's face when Vogel points out the little "contractual oddity." I almost wonder if Vogel enjoyed needling Jackal on some level.
Actually, I must say I was surprised to see Vogel here. I mean, if any corporation was supposed to be "behind it all" shouldn't it be Xanatos Enterprises--the "bad guy's" company? Instead, it's the company headed by a good man, but run (while said good man is ill) by a rather unemotional businessman. It actually helped with the message and increased the depth of both Vogel and Renard. You get the sense that while Vogel may not like Jackal and Hyena (or their actions) he puts it aside in favor of results.
Still, his deciding to pull Cyberbiotics out of the rainforest entirely seemed a bit too pat. Despite that, though, it's pretty well handled.

I would have loved getting a chance to listen to Broadway and Lex's rationale for ultimately not destroying the amulet. I kind of figured they wouldn't, and having seen Obsidiana lose her pendant and Bronx find it I kind of figured out what the ruse would be.

Dang, but Morgan's casual with Hyena the killer cyborg. Unconcious or not, I'd wait until I was packing a nuclear weapon before I got near her.

Jackal doesn't kill Elisa. He tasers her unconcious, but doesn't kill her right off. Why? I just find myself wondering if he didn't have even WORSE things planned for her.

Elisa comes up with a sort of back-up solution that I had been wondering about for quite some time before this episode aired. It always struck me as being advisable to collect "genetic samples" of endangered plant and animal life "just in case." So I rather liked Elisa's contribution here.

A couple final thoughts: I liked that the gargs never referred to the rainforest as such. It was always "the forest" or, even better, "The Green." I love their using a title for this land they hold in reverence.
Also, the "Oxygen" line you mentioned. It is a valid point (one that I keep forgetting, I'll admit), but, yeah, it may have been a bit difficult to pull off without feeling preachy or forced (I could only see Elisa saying this line since the Mayan clan strike me as mostly knowing their own turf--they know the forest is important, but they may not know how globally necessary it is).

It's a good episode, and a well done "special message" ep. And hey, more gargoyles (and cool looking ones at that)!

Kettir writes...

This is regarding the Gargoyles first season DVD set--

Hurrah! I love this series and hope very much that the remaining seasons will be put on DVD as well. This is my favorite Christmas present for 2004!

Enigma writes...

I got Gargoyles for Christmas!!! I was/am so happy, especially since I've been reading everyone else rave about the DVD during the past 2-3 weeks. I started screaming with joy when I opened the box and found Gargoyles inside. I think I was even more excited than my little sisters were about any of their presents. (They're usually the ones shrieking for joy). All of I got to say is that it looks awesome. I watched all five parts of Awakening yesterday morning and Trill of the Hunt this morning and it looked and sounded awesome. The funniest part is that my eight year old sister kept going "that wasn't in the movie" when we were watching Awakening, since we have the Gargoyles: The Heroes Awaken movie and she's seen it a million times.
Anyway, I just had to share my joy! Now, we just need season 2! <My sisters keep asking me if we have "the episode where that guy picks Elisa up on the motorbike" <for example, she's referring to the end of Hunter's Moon Part 2> and keep having to tell them that no that episode is from season 2.> Now they're convinced that all the good episodes are from the second season. <sigh> It's funny though too...

SDOHT writes...

Rambling on Demona

Hello,
I just finish watching awakening part one to five, from the DVD, witch I love by the way, and it reminded me of the first time I saw Demona. She is my all-time favourite TV Character. I actually feel sorry for her. The talk between her and Goliath at the end when she revels for the first time that she made a plan with the Captain of the guards moved me. I love the way she is written. She sounds alone and I feel and hear her pain.

See I'm a 22 year old gay guy, so when I first saw this I was 12. I didn't really know that I was gay but I knew their was something different about me. Seeing that scene helped me in a weird way. Hearing Demona's pain and loneliness about what the humans "did" to her kind sort of mad me feel like I wasn't alone. Demona's way of blaming others for her mistakes is something that most people do in one way or an other. I can truly say that I felt like she did allot of the time( I didn't want to kill all straight guys) but I felt like they didn't except me and that I couldn't trust anyone. Demona's actions were also mostly responsible for her pain, as the sisters pointed out in COS part 4, just like my fear of being different mad me feel alone.

Later in life I realized that people fear what they don't understand. The whole show is about creatures being different and misunderstood by "normal" people. It help me better understand the other's way of looking at things, that to them I was like a monster( not really a monster but I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.) As the show when on, it helped me realize that different wasn't always a bad thing. The Goliath and Elisa relationship gave me hope that maybe someone could love me for who I was and except my differences.

I understand Demona's pain, Marina Sirtis is so amazing in this role. Demona is written so fantastic and realistically that its like she was a voice for me( in a good way, again not the killing part) like she mirrored what I felt. Now I'm fully comfortable with my self and in a way I have Gargoyles to thanks for that. I herd in the commentaries that ( I'm typing from memory, so please forgive me if I'm misquoting you) you indented the show, among other thing, to have or be a voice for the little people. I just wanted to say that at least for me it help me a lot when I was younger. I felt like the were other people in the world that were different. Thank you for that.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say. I been wanting to thank you for a long time. I truly hope that Disney bring this show back, because people like me need more shows like this, with real characters that are normal.

Greg Bishansky writes...

Some thoughts on our favorite characters and love.

So far in the "Gargoyles" Universe, the characters that all in real true love all have a deep understanding for one another. David and Fox understand each other better than anyone else on the planet does, and David acknowledges her as his equal. Maybe both of them didn't understand themselves well enough to think they were not that capable of such emotions, but they knew each other.

Goliath and Elisa are similar, it was clear even early on that they had something there, they grew to trust each other with their lives. There was always respect, and they understand one another, even when they disagree.

Likewise with Broadway and Angela, he saw her for who she was, unlike Brooklyn. All these characters seem to in a way share the same soul.

Now in regards to Demona, she's failed in love twice because that deep, emotional, soul sharing understanding faded as in the case with Goliath, but even before then she went behind his back, tried to push him to seize leadership of the clan, which he would not do, and could never understand why he put up with the humans. Not that she didn't understand him, in some cases she knew him only too well, since she saw the sparks between Goliath and Elisa long before they realized they were there. As far as Thailog goes, she thought that he was the Goliath she always wanted, and turned out to be flat out wrong, since he just planned to use her (in more ways than one) and finally discard her when he was done.

You've said in the past that Demona will have two more great loves, what will be interesting to see is by standards set by other characters where there is a similar "sharing of the soul" as it were. This deep, emotional understanding and knowing of one another. Problem is, it would be very hard for anyone to truly know her without having experienced similar tragedies. Everyone has their tragedies, but how many people have been alive for centuries, being hunted, bearing strong grudges and longer hatreds. Demona is her own worst enemy, and is likely to sabotage such things, and that's on the big assumption that she even opens herself up to anyone again.

One or both of those next great loves had better truly be someone special, if she's going to come out of her shell and really learn to care for someone intimately again.

Vicious writes...

Finally aquiring the Gargs dvd has gotten my mind spinning on the possibility of the story's return in any format, but specifically television, and what kind of audience and content it would aim for.

I am watching temptation right now, and the first part of it is fairly heavy material. Demona showing Brook domestic trouble, violence and her general talk of humanity's evil (which i have taken to heart, she's right you know) wouldn't get past S&P or any such triff nowadays. Censorhip seemed to get in the way back in 94 as well, there are examples i could site but that would take a long time. I'll just say mobsters aren't really known for using tear gas in high jacking, at least if the supranos is any indication. The only recent show i can think to compare to Gargs is X-men Evolution, and Justice League, one is cancled and the other I've never seen on Saturday morning but rather prime time weekends.
The point and question it raises are thus: Gargoyles was always more mature than any north american animation of it's time, and television content limitations for the age bracket Gargs was originally intended for have gotten more restrictive.
If it was your choice, what kind of maturity level in terms of target audience and content would you aim for?

My opinions:With disney no doubt s&p would be cutting out everything not soft and fuzzy if it was intended for the 6 to 12 set again (or whatever demographic it was, don't remember). The fan base, such as myself is 10 years older and hopefully has matured accordingly. I would think the show itself would work best as an action drama on the same level as say, Angel, 24 or even some anime like Inuyasha.

It's all speculative, but the dvd release gives one hope we'll see the Gargoyles animated again.

SDOHT writes...

Hi, my best friend got me the DVD for Christmas. I was so happy, when I got home I played it writhe away and was not disappointed. I love the commentaries and the behind the scenes stuff. Thank to Disney for relising the best animanted series to us. I can't wait for the second season! Thanks Greg for creating the series and I hope u will do more commentaries and the second season. Demona is my favourite character. Goliath's voice is cool, I was surprise to see that he (I forgot the actor's named) has the same voice. It was so perfect for Goliath.

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the early Christmas present in the form of the ramble on "The Green", Greg!

One thing that stands out to me now about this episode is that we get another look at the difference between Jackal and Hyena. Hyena just wants to charge in on the Mayan gargoyles and wipe them out. Jackal, rather than going for a simple all-out attack, comes up with an actual strategy, namely, having Hyena destroying the Mayan Sun Amulet so that he can then dispose of the clan while it's in stone sleep. Again showing that he's the more cunning one.

(I liked your method of having Jackal winding up attacking the gargoyles at night after that - when Vogel uses a bit of his own cunning and points out to Jackal that he won't get paid as much if the Mayan gargoyles do more damage to the Cyberbiotics operation - meaning that now Jackal doesn't have the option of just waiting for dawn after all, not if he wants a full paycheck!)

And I get a kick out of their response to Goliath showing up - "Must Goliath follow us everywhere?" "Hey, he's a fan!"

In some ways, Jackal's fantasy about altering Goliath's features is even more disturbing than his death-god phase in "Grief". Truly chilling.

The episode may be a bit on the preachy side (I know that many of the fans see it that way), but I think that it still has a good message. I particularly liked Elisa's uneasiness with the Mayan gargoyles' tactics and wanting to find a way of saving the rain forest that was within the law - and at the end, coming up with the solution of planting some of the rain forest plants on Avalon.

I find the "Quetzalcoatl" design for Zafiro interesting, in that it fits in with one additional aspect of gargoyles that revealed itself during the World Tour. Before the World Tour, we'd simply seen gargoyles in a "conventional gargoyle" form. However, when we were introduced to other gargoyles during Goliath's odyssey (and even the legacies of other gargoyles), we saw that they'd inspired other myths and legends besides just the familiar gargoyles of medieval Europe - unicorns and griffons in "M.I.A.", the "black dogs" of the British Isles in "The Hound of Ulster", and now Quetzalcoatl. (Not to mention that the Ishimura gargoyles of "Bushido" also have a certain evocation of tengu about them.) It gives an additional dimension to them that I think is neat.

I'd caught the significance of Broadway using "mothers" and how that fits into gargoyle parentage.

That was a nice touch about Broadway and Lexington considering the possibility of destroying the Sun Amulet - but, fortunately, not doing so after all.

Again, thanks for the ramble.

Sabina writes...

My DVD-Set arrived finally oversea.

I think it is just great and I'm very happy that I finally can retire my worn videotapes.

I hope that we get audio commentaries for the whole second season. There's just one fly in the soup: I'd really like to have a German version, because the German synchro is just as great as the English one and it would be a real pity if it never sees a DVD release.

Greetings,
Sabina

Bleu Unicorn writes...

My DVD review - originally posted at my blog (http://bleuunicorn.livejournal.com/56300.html)

I was fifteen when Gargoyles debuted on the Disney Afternoon and while ten years have gone by, I can honestly say my enjoyment and affection for the show have not waned. If anything, watching these remastered episodes exactly as they aired was an incredible treat for me. The first season was released years back on VHS and I own that entire set, but those old tapes pale in comparison to this set. A fact that not only was expected, but greatly satisfying.

Secretly, I was a bit skeptical when sitting down to watch the show again. Ten years is a long time - almost half my life! Deep down I was fearful that the decade of basic separation from the series had made my memories of it far grander than it was. My fears, however, were completely misguided. Here's a show that truly does withstand the test of time. And I really shouldn't be surprised, considering even when it first aired it was appealing to me and I wasn't part of that "target audience" - a fact which only drew me into the show more!

The series (in 75 words): The aptly named Goliath and his gargoyle clan are cast into a thousand year slumber, only to awake in New York City to learn they are now the last of their kind. While acclimating themselves to their new surroundings, they discover both allies and enemies alike. And soon renew their vow of protection that defines their species to include all of Manhattan and its inhabitants, both gargoyle and human.

Video: Here's where DVD transfer really can shine, but also where a cartoon can fall most miserably. Gargoyles, though looks absolutely stunning, the colors just look so beautiful. Not surprising with, considering the wonderful palette of colors used. I did notice some minor interlacing (mostly in "Long Way to Morning") and some dirt and dust in some scenes. But nothing overly bad. Definitely one of the best transfers of an animated television series I've seen.

Audio: The episodes on the set are all remastered and while for the most part the audio is superb and better than I remember listening to on my TV - Certainly an improvement over my ancient VHS copies - I did notice some odd fluctuation at times. At first, I thought it was my copy (or my hearing was going), but I've talked with other people and it's definitely not just me. It's pretty infrequent - I noticed it the most in the five-part "Awakening" pilot, but it was apparent in disc two as well.

Special features: I love special features, especially done well. I can't say I was jumping for joy over these, though. The commentary on "Awakening" was very interesting and entertaing, though I'm ashamed to say that anyone who isn't a big fan may find themselves kind of bored. (Of course, I'm usually bored by commentaries and as such rarely listen to them.) I always hate it when commentaries consist of long pauses of no talking, but you won't find that on this set! These guys - mostly Greg - have lots to say and they don't let little things like recaps and credits stop the flow of words.

The featurette on "The Gathering of the Gargoyles" convention was...okay. I didn't really find it all that interesting, but it was pretty neat to see. It's nice to know there's still a loyal fandom out there.

The original show pitch was pretty interesting to watch. It's the one thing on the set that shows how old this show really is. I'd already listened the commentary before watching this, though so it wasn't very informative or earth-shattering. Still, the original character designs were very intriguing - lots of changes were made from that pitch to what finally became. Stuff like that is just nifty.

Packaging & setup: Thankfully, Disney has never gone the route that Warner Bros. did with the horrid snapper cases. Instead, we get the standard double-disc case. Though, I can't find much love for the rather blah disc and cover art. And for a show with so much history...the only insert is just a chapter/episode listing - with equally blah art. The menus, though were really just...ugh. There's so much great artwork from this show that Disney could have used and didn't. And the animation? It was cool the first time, but afterwards I just found it annoying and distracting.

Frankly, considering how long fans have waited for this release, it's plainly obvious that there wasn't that much work put into the frills of the release.

Over-all: Scrutinizing this set is really hard for me. I'm finding myself quibbling over minor things that don't necessarily bother me because in all truth it really comes down to the content for me, which is just beyond amazing. Having the first season in remastered quality, uncut is like a dream come true. And I'm fervently hoping for a release of the second season to complete this collection!

Rebekah writes...

Hi, I just wanted to say that I love the Gargoyles DVD, the scenes are so vivid in color and detail!!! In the scene where the Trio are exploring David's kitchen, I noticed there was a part that was never shown on the Disney version. That of Brooklyn checking out the stove, was this left out because of commercial time, or cause they thought kids would go playing with stoves if they saw it?

Also, will they be releasing DVD's of the other seasons soon? I really want to see the Mirror episode on DVD - it's animation should be really awesome! - Thanks!

Charisma writes...

Hey there! Just wanted to tell you that I loved the DVD of Gargoyles. So, when are they going to have the next one out? It better be soon. I think the best part of the DVD was the commentary given by yourself, co-producer, and goliath's voice. The only downfall to that was that it was only for the first five episodes. It would've been better if there had been more commentary on other episodes. When you guys do another DVD, there needs to be more commentary than just five episodes. It would also be cool to have other voice actors for the series to come in and help with that. I also liked the main screen when the gargoyles would be stone, then come to life, and then turn back to stone, over and over again. It was done very well. I'd like to thank all of you guys who helped make this DVD possible. I started watching Gargoyles when I was seven (when it first came out) and now I'm seventeen. I've been waiting 10 years for this. Good going. *tear drop*

Well, I'm sure you have a lot of these to read, so I'll leave you to your unfinished work for the time being and I'll stop rambling on and on.

BIG FAN writes...

I love the dvd! The quality is great, and the comentary alone makes it worth while. Greg, Frank, and Keith did an excellent job giving entertaining tid bits and information behind the scenes. I especially love how they gave some general comments about the series (warning to first timers, there are spoilers! At LEAST watch the Awakening eps before watching the commentary, or it will spoil a very nice, complex plot). I wish there had been more on the Gathering of the Gargoyles. But seeing just enough of it really makes me want to drop everything and go to one! Also, the showing of Greg's pitch of the show was cool---loved the drawings! I can't wait for season 2 to come out...any idea when that could happen? Thanks all!

King Cobra3 writes...

My DVD review, copied and pasted from the Gargoyles X message board.

I FINALLY got to see it last night, both the episodes and the features, and I thought I'd drop in my two cents.

THE PICTURE - It was very crisp, and well animated. I actually found it to be darker and more developed then the reruns on TV, which also made it a little scarier. The darkness factor in the episodes made the animation very well polished, considering that these episodes are over 10 years old and that alone was enough to make me drooling like a rabid Cujo on PCP. LOL.

THE SOUND - It was very wicked, listening to Bronx's growling or the stone cracking and etc. on Dolby Digital. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and look forward to my next viewing (or hearing, in this category.) with great relish.

THE VOICE ACTING - Anyone who's heard the actors on TV (and who hasn't?) can expect the same stuff here, only better, given that it's on, like I said, Dolby.

THE FEATURES - The Commentary was fun, cool, and informative, all rolled up into one. Keith David and Greg Weisman, in particular, talking through "Awakening" alone was enough to please the fanboy part of my otherwise dark and brooding soul. The Gathering featurette was also a pleasent little ditty, with interviews, episode footage, and more. I personally would've liked more input from the other VAs, however, though Keith David did have some camera time, which semi-made up for it. Seeing the activities at the G2003 was bitching and I am looking forward to this summer's Vegas offing even more.

All in all, I was proud to have purchased this DVD, it was worth the cash it took out of my debit card, and I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Season 2. Come on Disney! Bring it on! Show me the season 2 goods!

Yeah, that's all I've got to say.

Looking forward to possibly meeting you in Vegas, Greg!

Chameleongirl writes...

As you ask, so shall you receive. Although, not so much a review, as a reaction.

Amazon.com did a great job with delivery this close to Christmas - they predicted the 17th at the very earliest. I *had* planned on sleeping in this morning, but having the DVD in my hands meant getting dressed as quickly as possible and sitting in front of the TV.
The Gathering documentary was awesome! I loved that I could sit there and go "I know her/him!" Not to mention "Look - there's me!" ^_^

The episodes themselves .. well, I was a whole mass of 'squee!' I have missed watching Gargoyles *so much*, the DVD is a dream come true. The opening theme gave me goosebumps and Goliath's heart-broken "My Angel of the Night" ... brr.

I did notice how clean the animation and sound were, they've certainly done a wonderful job.

So, now many of us begging on our knees would it take for Disney to release Season 2? :D

Avalon1178 writes...

This is more of a comment than a question, and considering Greg is still a couple of years behind, chances are that my post won't get reviewed until some time much much later (ah, this is where a Phoenix Gate comes in handy). Anyway, so it feels like writing something for a time capsule, but anyway...

I just want to rave about the DVD! I purchased mine at Amazon and it arrived 2 days later when the DVD came out. Anyway, what an awesome purchase.....all the episodes in the first season in the palm of my hands and hoping by the time this is read that Season Two DVD would've come out...wait, better yet, one of those Gargoyles sequels to already be airing on Cartoon Network or out on yet another DVD! Anyway, thanks for this and keep up the good work! Thanks for keeping our imaginations alive!

Blaise writes...

My DVD review:

Well, I liked it, of course!

I mean, it's great having this level of clarity in both visual and audio. And of course, the commentary track is great. But, as someone else pointed out, there is just SO MUCH you guys are trying to say, and so little time for you guys to say it in. One of you is expounding on one particular subject, while another has to chime in about what's happening on screen (as with your little "Nice mask" moment, Greg). I really wish the folks at Disney Home Video had given you guys a commentary for all thirteen episodes.

The Gathering featurette: Great, now I have another reason to feel bummed about not being able to go (oh, the trials of being a non-union actor trying to catch a break in LA). Since things have been picking up a little for me, though, I might be able to come to the Gathering in Vegas.

The Original video pitch: Words cannot express how glad I am to see this on here. The original concepts for Hudson and Bronx, Elisa's former last name, the pic of Goliath on the subway car, and the last picture of the kid in Goliath's shadow...I remembered those from the Gathering 2001, and I always wanted to have my own copy. Now I do!

And, of course, the presentation itself. They did a great job with the box art and the menus. The transfer from day to night and back again is well done and timed to make a perfect loop with Carl Johnson's score.

Pass on my kudos to the folks at Disney Home Video for their work here. I'd track them down and thank them myself if they'd given us the other eight episodes worth of commentary.

Jeffery writes...

I have, and love, the Gargoyles Season 1. I got it the day it came out! (Actually, 3 days before it came out, I snuck it out of the store where I work and paid for it on release day.) It's just glorious. The care was put into this that made the show so great in the first place. I love the commentary, I only wish there were 5 times more. This site provides the best commentary of all, but to have Greg's rants right over the scenes grounds the observations very well. I've been watching these with my wife and it's like torture. Even the smallest things have a deeper meaning and greater significance (see that boy Tom, he's not just a throwaway character, he'll be back later; that's not the last we'll see of Hakon; you'll never believe what becomes of Jackal; and Owen...my Lord!) and I want to connect all the dots, but it would be cruel to blow the surprise. What would be even crueler is if we never got a chance to share the surprises, so I'll get down on my knees now and beg Disney to put together Season 2. And don't worry, my money will be where my mouth is. Such beautiful storytelling shouldn't be buried in a vault. Such wonderful wisdom should be allowed to touch people. I had a woman today in the book store where I work ask for a copy of the Jeffrey Robbins quotation on books I have posted: "The written word is all that stands between memory and oblivion. Without books as our anchors, we are cast adrift, neither teaching nor learning. They are windows on the past, mirrors on the present, and prisms reflecting all possible futures. Books are lighthouses erected in the dark sea of time."
Beautiful.

Thanks

Siren writes...

My DVD Review

First let me tell you of my "fun" search for the DVD. I had pre-ordered it through my local Blockbuster 2 weeks ahead of release date. All seemed well enough. I went there December 7th and they couldn't find my order, my form, nothing. And they weren't even selling it on the shelf. I'd have to wait for another 2 weeks to get it. So I rushed over to my Wal-Mart. They didn't have it either. It was 2 days later before I got a chance to go to Daytona. Circuit City didn't have it. But Best Buy did. One last copy. Then 2 days later, Wal-Mart in my town got about 20 copies. Frustration!

Anyways, onto the review...

I had seen the coverart online and loved it from the moment I saw it. I was suprised Disney didn't print their name on the front cover though. I liked how the gold banners pointed out it's anniversary and it was 2-discs. Which is often an eye catcher. And the cover itself is beautifu;. The purple-gray Goliath was great. Unlike the VHS Heroes Awaken cover, this DVD cover did not soften the look of the show. The VHS cover could have been decieving to some who figured it for a light-hearted children's show. This cover respected the show. The back cover too was nice. I was expecting screenshots of the show, but it was respectful in a way. And it listed the bonus features, critic acclaim, and a little summary. Very nice.
I liked the insert, using the old pictures from The Hunted and Force of Goliath VHS. And it fit well with the cover art. The DVD discs themselves were all nice. And nice to have the episodes listed straight on the discs.
Pop in the DVDs, skip the previews, and go right to some great menus. Again, respectful of the series. They looked great. And the sound was perfect too. I was shocked frankly at the menus. Most menus don't jump out at me, I really don't care to look at them. But these were perfect and eye catching. I also like the moments when you choose and you get a little bit of different characters. The video itself for each episode was crisp and beautiful. Better then I ever saw on TV even. The sound was great as well. It was wonderful to have each episode uncut. Disney had originally cut the egg scenes out of the Heroes Awaken VHS, because they never planned to release season 2. Seeing the egg scenes again, gives me hope that they will. Even for those who never saw the series before have to wonder about the eggs. Even though Xanatos said they were gone. He lied a lot afterall, so it's only natural to think he lied about the eggs. It just gives me a lot of hope since they included stuff that would come out later in the series, perhaps they may just bring season 2 out.
I LOVED the Gathering feature. That was so well done. The interviews intercut with the show were excellent. And again, respectful of the series. They taped a lot of stuff. They included so much. It was great! I wasn't expecting them to go that far with it.
Greg's pitch was also fun. Nice to see the history some more. And be refreshed on stuff I had forgotten. I also never saw some of that concept art. Very interesting and neat!
Commentary was great! Most of the stuff I knew, but it was nice to hear them talk about it again.
All in all, one of the best, if not THE best DVDs I ever have owned. I plan to buy more copies for Christmas gifts and to donate to local organizations. :)

Phoenician writes...

Glad to see that we can post again . . . I got the DVD on Tuesday Premire!!!!

I was so happy!

Went over to Best Buy to buy it. Turns out, my little brother, 10 years old, today, was the won to find it. They were in a box somewhere in the 'TV Shows on DVD' aisle.

We politely asked a worker there to properly display the boxed set in all it's glory. Unfortunatley, I don't know if they ever did. :I

I read the back cover for the first time. It said it all, surprisingly. "The victems of Human betrayal" Humans? Betraying Gargoyles? To the unwise ear, that sounds ridiculous, and that those who read it must surely see how could perfect humans do evil to 'monsters.'

Hey, that's just who I am.

I saw the commentary in the Pilot episodes. (Isn't cool that "Gargoyles" has more than one pilot episode?) I loved how you (as in Greg, Frank, and Keith) mentioned every little thin we loved about the show, and the quirks that cam ealong with it. "Bronx kicks A**, or tail, as the case is!"

Loved it.

I also never truly realized the TRUE signifigance of Goliath asking to join the others in stone sleep. I never knew that he meant to commit suicide, but now that makes it all the more meaningful. It also reminds me of the Demona's anguish when she sees Goliath that way in City of Stone Part I, where she cries and kisses Goliath, not even trying to find a way to wake him.

Sad indeed.

I also loved the dog joke. Once an actor, now on the streets . . . cliche', huh?

I am glad that Carl Johnson also got the recongition he deserves. I mean, hard not to, right? Everytime the comentary began, you gave praise to the man who came up with that "BUMMMMM!! BUMMMMM!! BA BU BU BUM BUMMM BA BA BUMMM!! Epic indeed.

But it was truly a rewarding thing to see the show on DVD at last.

"I always survive" -- Demona, "Temptation" That is how this fandom is. No matter how hard we hit the ground, we always come back alive!

AND WE LIVE AGAIN!!!!!

Onward to Season II !!!!!!

Arazia writes...

DVD Review

My first reaction to the little box from amazon.com arriving was a childish giddiness of having some great prize finally in my grabby little hands. My first disappointment was opening the container up and seeing that the first disk had come loose either in shipping or sometime prior and had been rattling around inside. On closer inspection of the case itself, I'm a bit disappointed in the construction of it, as it is very easy for the discs to slide loose and get damaged. Luckily for me, there wasn't any trouble with it, even if the first disc did get a few scratches.

The gathering footage was a great addition, and really interesting for someone like myself who has never gone. Of course, I went through the special features first, and then went back and re-watched the entire show. It probably would have been better to have some chapter breaks within the episodes, as I had to fast forward through the intro each time. I did encounter a technical glitch of some sort while playing the DVD on my laptop. There was quite a bit of jumpiness to the opening of the DVD, but a good cleaning of it seemed to fix it fine. Perhaps a balance issue?

Away from the more technical aspects, Gargoyles was very close to what I remembered of it. Seeing it again was very much like seeing it for the first time. With the DVD quality and my laptop, I was able to see a lot more details, especially differences between various animation companies that did different episodes. The sound was amazing, and I was able to pick up on a lot of little sounds that I missed as a child.

Overall, I'm very happy with the DVD, although not so happy with the quality of the discs or their packaging.

Audra writes...

Gargoyles DVD Review

Hi there Greg,
I read that you wanted DVD reviews for the new Gargoyles DVD… So here goes…

I have been waiting a very long time for Gargoyles to be released on DVD. I am very excited and hope that this DVD will sell well. I wish Disney would of advertised this DVD more though… Maybe some TV commercials? I have met people who love Gargoyles, but don't keep up with the Gargoyles news on the internet, and they would of have had no idea it is on DVD now without me telling them.

This DVD is awesome though, thank you Disney for releasing it. The quality is great, and I love the digital surround sound. I never heard Gargoyles sound so well. And it's great to have some bonus features. I really like the audio commentary Greg. And the DVD is nicely made… I really like the animated menu, and when you go to certain things on the DVD how it shows the Gargoyles doing something cool, like growling, hissing, etc. All the episodes are unedited… What more could a fan ask for? I even got my friend to buy a copy, and he has never seen even one episode before! I told him about this show, why I loved it so much and what made it so great to me. I knew he would like it. And after watching the DVD, he loves the show. He asked me if I wanted to go to the Gathering with him, and I am so excited! I have been wanting to go to a Gargoyle Gathering for years, but no one ever wanted to go with me. There are so many fans out there that haven't been able to go to a Gathering. I have been spreading the word for the DVD… I at least got one friend to buy a copy who never saw the show before then, and I turned him into a fan. I hope Disney releases the second season on DVD, I really think the second season only gets better. Greg, I know you have heard this a thousand times, but there has never been another show like this to me… And I really do miss it. I miss seeing new episodes, new stories, to continue this wonderful series.

I am a 19 year old girl, I have been a fan since 1995 or 1996 I believe. (No unfortunately I didn't become a fan right at the beginning) This has been my favorite show since then, and I really don't think any show will replace it, ever. My friend that bought a DVD really wants to see the second season now… I hope that the second season will be released on DVD! Greg… You don't know me, I only posted a few times at "Ask Greg" over the years, but this upcoming summer you will probably get at least two more people coming to the Gathering. (My friend and I) What more can I say, this DVD is awesome and I am so happy it is finally here. I look forward to season two on DVD, and hopefully more! You have a great show here Disney, don't stop now!

Jordan Cooper writes...

Greg asked to post DVD reviews here, so that's what this is --

I've never posted to Ask Greg before (any questions I might have had about the series were very much answered, and I couldn't think of any more), but I've been reading it consistently for maybe 2 years now!

I watched all the extra features. I spread out the 5 commentaries over 5 nights so that I could make it last. Sigh, now it's over.

I wish there were more commentaries. They get so addictive, and I didn't want them to end. They were VERY very good commentaries. Non stop talking, obviously you (Greg) has a LOT to say about the show (obviously), and there were no long dead spots like in so many other commentaries I own. It was inspiring for you to sound so excited talking about the show, none of the spark has gone down at all. It was also just very funny to hear Keith David on the commentaries. It wasn't interesting or informative, just kind of funny.

The pitch to Disney is an incredible thing to have on the DVD, and way more than I was expecting. It was adorable to hear you describing the show and the characters. I don't mean adorable in a bad way, it was just really sweet, like someone telling a children's story at bedtime or something. Except with more explosions and stuff.

The feature about The Gathering was fun and interesting, though I felt weird watching it. Maybe cause I'm not ULTRA-Obsessed with the show (just normal obsessed) enough to wear costumes and stuff (I wanted to go to the Gathering in NYC but did not have the money). It was nice to see. I would have preferred to see more stuff with you/Greg at the Gathering and I was also hoping to catch some of those inside things that are Gathering-only, oh well. BUT all in all it was a good way to let people (and Disney!) know how much the show means to a lot of people.

I'm so glad to have all these episodes on DVD. And I WANT MORE!!! MOOOORE!!! Season 2 will be like a million discs but I WANT IT! And more commentaries!

Jordan Cooper

Ryan writes...

My DVD Review.

I've already posted several thoughts I had on the DVD so I'll be brief here. Decent transfer. Picture not perfect but it looks good enough even blown up on my 103" screen so that's good news. Sounds much, much better than my copy-of-a-copy-from-cable VHS versions, another plus. Commentary was cool but it sounded like you still had stuff left to say even after five episodes.. so why not extend it out to cover the whole series, maybe even bring in some other people on the creative team or some other voice talent on different episodes and have them guest comment like Keith did. A lot of commentary tracks on movies or TV series run out of steam after the first 45 minutes or so and then listening to the rest becomes repetitive and boring but it sounded like you could have kept going so why stop? Extras were alright, I already mentioned the bad flashbacks the Gathering footage gave me, the original show pitch was interesting to see, wish that there was more stuff like that but I realize there may not be more stuff like that. If Disney gets you more involved on the next DVD maybe you can put in some more extras like the Bad Guys thing that you did at the Gathering or whatever else you can come up with to help expand and flesh out either the genesis of the show or the unrealized portion of your Master Plan. Chapter breaks would have been really nice. More extras would have been nice. Better packaging would be nice. "SEASON 2 COMING SOON!" in big bold letters on the back of the box would have been nice. But ultimately I'm just happy that it is out and I own a copy... Season 3 was terrible, season 2 had some great shows but was at times hit-and-miss and the world tour was boring.... but season 1 is solid gold and I loved every minute of this DVD.

Luke Perry writes...

what is with people that like Buffy so much? Is the show really that great if you watch it all the way through? Every individual episode that I've seen has been, on its own, just plain terrible. Cheesiness abounds, bad jokes, very poorly coregraphed action sequences with a very unconvincing lead- both in action sequences and regular acting but especially in action sequences, vampires that aren't scary or cool or intimidating or in any way interesting who die in seconds to some waifish looking little high school brat (c'mon guys... Paul "Pee Wee Herman" Reubens in the original more-appropriately-titled-because-it-was-a-comedy movie was more threatening than some of these throw-aways), corny special effects, oh, and John Ritter as an evil robot. What is there to like here, seriously? You're obviously a huge fan, Greg, as your geekily obsessive Buffy character lists prove. Maybe you can shed some light.

To Buffy's credit, I haven't seen any episodes that were as bad as some from The Goliath Chronicles (A Bronx Tale, the one with the cloned clan and little Anton- stupid idea to begin with made worse in the hands of and inept creative team, the EGON PAX!!! episode, et cetera)... and a few of the Buffy episodes I've seen, though not many, have been better than some of the bad episodes of Gargoyles season 2 (most of the later Dracon episodes (Turf, Protection/Jalapena!), anything with Anton Sevarius in it (Monsters, Metamorphosis), and the weaker eps on the world tour (Easter Island, New Olympians, some of the ones already mentioned) If you're still not familiar at all with the Goliath Chronicles as I know you've previously claimed in Ask Greg you out to at least check out A Bronx Tale and the Egon Pax one... I forget what that episode was called... it had the Illuminati in it. They are just really, really, really hilariously bad. Mind-bogglingly bad. Funny, funny stuff... but sad at the same time. If it makes you laugh and cry that's supposed to be a good thing though, right?

Greg Bishansky writes...

My DVD review.

The powers that be did a terrific job with this DVD. All thirteen episodes of the first season of "Gargoyles" uncut, unedited. Great picture and audio, nice transfer, the menus are great. They didn't let me down.

The episodes all look gorgeous, and after almost ten years of VHS tapes recorded off the TV, it makes a real difference. I'm even hearing sound effects and bits of music I never heard before, it's just wonderful.

The audio commentary on all five parts of Awakening by Greg Weisman, Frank Paur and Keith David was fun to listen to, they're all great guys... and I know as I've met and spoken to all three of them, and Greg I speak to a lot.

But first a little response directed at Greg... Was going through the fifth part of the "Awakening" commentary and when we get to the reveal of Demona's name, you go on about how you're not sure if it played well or not, if it was impressive enough for such a reveal.

Just thought you'd like a little feedback on that. I was thirteen when that episode first premered, and that scene made quite an impact on me, it was about then that she became my favorite character (up till just before Demona starts shooting at Goliath and playing out their 'little drama' Xanatos was the front runner, but as you know I love him too) but damn the reveal was dramatic, red smoke, her silhouette and she steps through it with her eyes flashing red holding the bazooka, and the character animation on her and the way Marina acted, and I knew her name was basically (demon) and that it was both well... demonic and beautiful, deadly and elegant all at the same time. I thought it was perfect.

So yeah, as far as this fan goes, the scene worked wonderfully.

The Gathering extra turned out very well also. It's 15 minutes, but it's well covered. I'm surprised at how much of me they use. And it's official, all these years of being a Demona fan boy, and now it's officially documented and I even appear on screen with her (split screen of me and her), just a little thing but it means something to me. Aaron and Mara are the other two Demona groupies in that part of the documentary. But lots of great stuff, lot of Greg W and Keith David. Sapphire appears just about every other shot (and I'm suddenly picturing the director of this documentary with a big blown up poster of her on his bedroom wall ;)). Everyone looked great, the bit where Aaron and Xanatos say the "Pay a man enough and he'll walk barefoot into Hell" line in sinc was just awesome.

My only complaint was that they didn't show Aaron's Demona tattoo, and that the Gathering website's URL was not flashed on the screen. Aw well.

Overall, I give it a 9.9 out of 10. Would have gotten a gull 10 but no tattoo and no Gathering URL... still, the set is terrific, and overall exceeded my expectations.

Lord GargFan writes...

Here's my DVD review:

First, the Power Rangers commercial made me laugh. Someone brought up how it was like the murderer speaking at the victim's funeral.

The animated menus were GORGEOUS!!! Absoulutely beautiful.

The clarity of the pictures were awesome. Ditto for the audio.

The commentaries, doc, and pitch were enlightening to me. It's a pity that they didn't make the Gathering featurete longer.

Anyway, that's my review. Short and sweet.

Thank you, Mr. Weisman, for creating such a good series.

Thom writes...

I am so sorry the last post was meant to read "Thank you for helping to stop them from driving the clan apart in the final episode" not for "not helping".
Once again thank you for an amazing series, forgive me for the mistake in the previous post.

Thom writes...

More a comment than a question. I am new to this forum but have been a fan of the show for a long time now. I just read the posts about the third season and am relieved to see that it was not under the same direction as the first two seasons which explains the extremely different feel to those eps as apposed to the first two seasons. I am sorry that the series was taken from you ( I cannot believe that they felt the need to do so seeing the job you had done with the previous eps.) but I am happy knowing that these were not your works. You are an extremely talented person to have done so much with this series and the overall feel of the series was increadible. You are amazing!
P.S.- Thank you for not helping stop them from driving the clan apart by the end of the third season. I can't believe that was even considered!
Thank you again for your time. I still look forward to seeing the rest of the series on dvd and have purchased season 1 already ofcourse, but I now have a whole new outlook on the Goliath Chronicles. Once again I am sorry you were unable to complete the series the way you had invisioned.

Blaise writes...

THE NEW OLYMPIANS
(I had written a rather lengthy ramble on this last night, but due to some glitch or other, lost it. So, here I try to recreate that which was lost.)

This episode is always a little difficult for me to watch, mostly because of the unreasoning hatred and bigotry displayed by many of the New Olympians. It "angers the blood" in me, if you will. Things like Helios' "What a foul stench, it must be coming from the human!" just rankle me. I mean, I know that they have legitimate grievances (or, at least, their ancestors had them), and if they had only avoided Elisa, I might be a bit more tolerant. Despite the wrongness of his decision, I can like Boreas because he at least seems to try. Even Taurus, who has the seed of hatred inside him, does not always make decisions based on it, and even breaks up the riot. But the behavior of the rioters and their ringleaders--Ekidna, Kiron, and especially Helios (I don't know why I single him out, but if feels right)...it's just completely inexcusable (and loathsome).
Oddly enough, I don't feel the same way about Proteus, who is arguably more evil than any of the rioters. I mean, this is the guy who performs evil acts BECAUSE they're evil, right? And yet, I enjoy watching him. Why is that? Is it because Proteus does not make any excuses for his evil (at least, not here)? It's like...okay, you watch ANGEL, right Greg? You've seen that episode with that one guy, Billy (I think that was his name), the Hell-freed misogynist who could incite instant and violent hatred for women in any man he touched? (If you haven't, please skip to the next paragraph) It turned out that Angel was immune because he had worked past hate a long time ago, but he admitted that even as Angelus (his evil side) he was never motivated by hatred so much as a perverse sense of glee from inflicting suffering. And while I can actually kind of enjoy watching Angelus work (no matter what he does), I could feel only raw disgust and hatred at Billy, who tries to justify his bigotry. It's the same way with Proteus and the rioters, here.

Anyway, on with the episode.
I loved the music that played when the skiff passed through the "shimmering" area and New Olympus was first revealed.
Also, the designs for this episode were great--I love the many and varied character designs of the New Olympians themselves, especially Boreas and Helios.
And I echo Erin's assessment of the city: "Wow."

As soon as Elisa shoved the gargs off to the side and said, "No telling how they'll react to gargoyles," I immidiately put two and two together and figured out where this episode was going. I mean, whenever anyone says something so obvious like that it's almost like asking for the reverse to happen.

Interesting restraint system the N.O.s have. There's not much more I can say about it, but I did find it rather peculiar.

I agree with you about the Senate House walla, Greg. I must have heard that one guy say, "Humans can't live with us! They're dangerous! They're animals," or something like it, about two, maybe three times.
Also, theres a moment here that I always find a bit odd. When Taurus removes his helmet/mask, the way it's staged--the camera angles, and Goliath's spreading his wings--seems to indicate that this is some sizeable revelation. And yet, it was rather anticlimactic. Taurus, if anything, looked exactly as I expected him to look.
I like it that the "Leader" of the New Olympians holds a "lightning staff"--sort of harkens back to Zeus. Or is that thing particular to the Boreas of New Olympus?
And there's a moment towards the end of the Senate House scene that I missed until the third or fourth viewing: Goliath and Elisa embrace.

I do have to wonder about Boreas' decision here. What did he expect to happen? Did he have too high an opinion about the behavior of his people or did he suspect what would happen (which would make his decision somewhat malevolent)? I'd like to believe the former, but if that's the case, then he may be just a bit too optimistic.

And then we have the riot, which I've already touched on. Helios gets things rolling with his "stench" comment (kind of a racial slur), but Kiron throws the first punch. Like Todd, I find these two particularly reprehensible because they're supposed to be peace-keepers. Ekidna I actually find myself being more tolerant towards (maybe she reminds me of Demona). It's odd, but the way she talks about how the human's treated the N.O.s in the past sounds almost as if she experienced it personally. Then again, maybe I'm reading too much into that.

While Taurus' arresting Elisa is unjust, it did probably save her life in the immediate moment.

Actually, I find Taurus very interesting here as he's walking Elisa towards her cell. Whatever hatred he may have for humans, it doesn't stop him from telling Elisa about his father's murder by Proteus. He even manages to sound a little nice when he says "Make yourself comfortable, you could be here awhile." He also breaks up the riot, threatening to arrest everyone, and fire Helios (I love Helios' meek, "Y-yes, sir!"). Of course, I think a little of Taurus' own bias still shows through when he says "If you've got a problem, take it up with Boreas." It almost sounds as if he has a few things he'd like to say to the winged-one. Of course, I may again be reading too much into this.
Like I said, Taurus strikes me as someone who, while subject to prejudice, TRIES to act in spite of it. He's not always successful (he arrests Elisa instead of just moving her out of harm's way), but I'd like to think his effort counts for something.

And now we come to Proteus. I have to admit, my interest in him increased when you mentioned in a previous response that he was probably the closest thing to "pure evil," "evil incarnate," what-have-you that we have yet encountered in the GARGOYLES universe. There are many reasons I would have wanted to see the New Olympians spin-off, and a further exploration of Proteus' character was one of them. I would have loved seeing him in action beyond the scope of this one episode. And the late Roddy McDowell...what a great voice and performance.
I love how Proteus immediately begins quizzing Elisa about her mode of transportation. You can tell he's already thinking of escape.
Admittidly, Proteus may not be the best actor--"Who's that guy?" is probably the worst Goliath impression I've ever heard--but then again, he didn't have a heck-of-a-lot of time to study his subjects. I mean, if any of us had shape-shifting powers we could probably pull off a decent impression of the characters because we've watched and studied them so much. For what little time he had, Proteus' acting got the job done (up to a point--I'm not sure how convincingly he can turn to stone).
I find it interesting that Proteus' voice doesn't change when he becomes the Cyclops (is that a sort of secondary, "preferred form" for him?). I also find it interesting just how easily he seems to be hurt in that form. His fist connects with a collumn and he's in pain, and immediately after this he is felled by one punch from Taurus (granted it's to his EYE, but...).

One of my favorite sequences is in this episode. Proteus-as-Taurus, heads up to the Collinadium (however that's spelled) and begins to overload it. As he's doing this, Talos is explaining why this is a bad idea, and asking him to stop (while displaying missles) in such a frustratingly calm voice! I find it hilarious! Maybe that's why I feel sad when I see Talos' inert body hanging from Proteus' fist--I like the robot.

Angela does real well at dodging the restraints. If the sun hadn't rose, she probably could have kept it up for a while.
I always wince when Kiron tips over Bronx. It looks like something might have broken off.

Back to Proteus really quick--I love his transformations in this episode. The way he just sort of liquifies. The change from Goliath to Cyclops (with the two eyes becoming one) was especially well-done.

Taurus has his "I don't understand" moment, which is kind of required for episodes tackling subject matter like this. When the character actually says those words, I usually find it a bit too on the head, but Michael Dorn's acting helps make it work. And I love the wink Taurus gives Elisa.

One thing that I think many viewers may miss the first time is that Elisa DID NOT change the whole island--which is what would happen in another, more standard series (kind of like what TGC did with ANGELS IN THE NIGHT). Only Taurus and Boreas have really come to trust Elisa (Taurus even waves to her).

"The time may soon come when the world will have to face the New Olympians." When I first watched this, way back when it first aired, my mother watched it with me. As soon as Boreas said this, she turned to me with a smile and said, "I smell a spin-off." If we only knew how right we almost were.
(Then there's my brother, who thought that line sounded more like a threat...).

A little note on voices here. Having been an admirer of Rob Paulsen's work, I was glad to see him finally show up on GARGOYLES. I only wished I'd gotten to see more of him as Helios.
Overall, the voices were all well done (especially when the actors played Proteus-as-their character).
Yes, Taurus and Coldstone do sound a little too much alike, but Taurus has a slightly different speaking style than Coldstone, so that helps somewhat.
Of course, now that you've mentioned that Taurus, Talos and Proteus each had different voices originally, I'm going to be going crazy trying to figure out who they were!

This is a nice episode, with some rather difficult subject matter for me, but I like it. And I know I would have loved to see the NEW OLYMPIANS series.

Entity writes...

Mr. Weisman, I watched "The Edge" today and found myself amazed by how well you and the writers (in this case, Michael Reeves) pulled off your surprise endings. They were always shocking without feeling 'cheap.' This is because they always make perfect sense in the context of the episode, once you know what's really up. I think the way you accomplished this, without resorting to manipulative or dishonest tactics, was to make the viewer feel like he was in control. For instance, in "The Edge," the viewer is happy to believe Xanatos has created a new, more advanced Steel Clan robot. That would have been a cool plot development in and of itself, and something the viewer felt he grasped better than the gargoyles did. In "The Price," the viewer knows that Macbeth is immortal, while the gargoyles do not, so he feels more in control than the gargoyles. Perhaps this even results in a sort of gracious laze-of-mind in the viewer, by which you and the writers used the gargoyles' naivete, both of the modern world and of the show's arching plot, as a way of lulling us into a false sense of security. Was this a conscious tactic? Is it something you and the show's writers saw yourselves pulling off or was it business-as-usual? Is such stuff taught in television writing classrooms? I've never seen another show pull off its surprise endings quite as remarkably as Gargoyles. The very first time you pull one off is "The Thrill of the Hunt," an episode that could well have ended, just as "The Edge," after the gargoyles turned to stone. But like "The Sixth Sense," you kept going, and in the process, turned what would have been merely "good" stories into great ones. These episodes and the others like them were not created for the sole purpose of their surprise endings. They were flesh-and-blood stories that you and the writers ended with surprises nonetheless. Most of the praise for Gargoyles goes to its multiethnicity, its voice cast, its music, its gothic atmosphere, the dialogue (which you claim was sixth-grade level, but I've never read a newspaper article as verbose as Goliath), and all deservedly so, but one of the most enduring aspects of all were the shock endings.

Patricia Lovelady writes...

While utilizing the nifty SEARCH function, I decided to look up responses for "the whisper". I came up with this:

Question received on Mon, August 07, 2000 03:01:14 AM
Vasy writes...
1.What did titania whisper into fox's ear at he end of the gathering part2

Greg responds...
1. Do you think they'll be wondering about this in Ask Greg four years from now?
Response recorded on August 23, 2000

And given the most recent Q&A on that subject was recently posted.... 4+ years after that Q&A was done.... I think your answer holds true.. heh :) We were still wondering that in Ask Greg.. in 2004 :)

The fandom that you didn't anticipate has bugged you about something that you didn't think you would have been bugged about.

Keep it up, it's fun being confused, etc. :D

Blaise writes...

EYE OF THE STORM

(And a Happy Thanksgiving 2004, BTW.)

This was the second time the Eye surprised me--the first being when it was revealed to be more than a mere bauble. Now we find out it really is Odin's eye, and he's looking for it.

I love Odin's "old wanderer" guise. The "star-cloak" is nicely done. His final, "Warrior-King" ensemble is a little less impressive to me, actually, but still nice (and hey--having little exposure to the great Kirby's work, it looked pretty fresh to me).

This is one of those episodes where, after watching it, you realise just how EASY things would have been if everyone had been honest and open from the start. As you pointed out Greg, Odin could have just said, "Hi! Welcome to Norway! I'm Odin, I'll be your resident supernatural being today. Oh, by the way, could I have my eye back please? I really miss having depth perception." He might have actually got his Eye in less time than it takes to watch the first Act. And poor Gunther and Erik wouldn't have lost a wall of their house!

Erik is an interesting fellow, to me. He know's Elisa's hiking story is suspect, but he doesn't want to press her about it, and in fact seems to have a rather cheerful attitude in spite of the deception. He also, to me, never seems to quite trust Goliath. Even after Elisa's first brought him up to speed he says, "From what you've told us, it sounds like we're in good hands with your Goliath." He doesn't sound completely sure about that.

Gunther's reaction to the gargoyles and the world they open up is great--wonder and enthusiasm. Pretty much what you'd expect for a boy his age. I love his eagerness to see Angela and Bronx wake up, along with his happy, "Hi, you must be An-GEL-a" (I love his strange pronunciation there).
I also love Angela's response to that greeting--"Uh...yes, I am." You go to sleep and then wake up on top of a car with a young lad happily saying your (mispronounced) name--yeah, that can be disorienting.

"The Fall of Goliath"--This was very well done. I liked how you guys developed the way in which the Eye "corrupts" Goliath. It takes his caring, protective nature and twists it into a rigid, tyrannical, "It's all for your own good" sort of thing. I have to admit I was at first surprised when it was revealed that he had been creating the storms, but afterwards it made perfect sense.
Actually, it's interesting that, after riding away and yelling "This isn't over," Odin really does cease to take any action against our heroes. He doesn't surface again until Goliath calls him out.

That battle is very well-done, BTW. It's pretty obvious that in terms of raw power, Goliath's got the edge, however Odin is the one who uses more subtlety--such as freeing Goliath's friends.

Goliath has some real "villain" moments in this piece, the most obvious of course being his line to Odin, "How frustrating for you, Old Man. To be so close to Death, and Rejuvination at the same time." Did anyone else hear a "Darth Vader Breath-Track" there?
Others would include the one you pointed out, Greg, where Goliath just says they'll "pack" Angela and Bronx--that always threw me off for some reason--and just the way he says, "A cave...yes, a cave would be ideal."

Before I forget, "Odinized Goliath" had a great design--and I like how it was tied in with Odin's "Warrior-King" design. The starry (sp?) wings were a nice touch, too.

SOME RANDOM THOUGHTS:
Goliath: "Believe it or not, we've hit ice."
Elisa: "I believe it." (A fun little exchange.)

I love how Goliath holds Elisa at the beginning. Obviously, it's to try and keep her warm...but there's, to me, a pretty strong undercurrent of attraction there. And I love his line (and the way he says it), "It is my duty to protect you."

Dang! In trying to get the Sturllisen's (sp?) car to stop, our heroes nearly send them over a cliff! Good thing Goliath can pretty much bench their car.

Elisa tries to outrun a man on a horse...well, I guess it beats just standing around, but they both have the same outcome.

I really wish more had been done with Goliath's first sight of the sun. This time, though, I began to wonder if Goliath was more enamoured with the feeling of the sun, or the feeling of the POWER coursing through him.

"Maybe you should take the Eye off now." I love how Goliath pauses ever so slightly before answering that.

I recall someone once saying that they were glad neither Gunther nor Erik became a new hero for Norway. :-)

Angela and Bronx are crusted with ice before they awaken. I rather liked that.

"The Eye! The Eye has gone to your head!" I love the look on Goliath's face after that--the raised brow ridge. It's almost like he's reacting to the (unintentional on Elisa's part) pun.

Goliath's turn around was a bit too quick and pat, but it nevertheless touched on Goliath's love for his daughter. I rather like Elisa's admission "Wish I'd thought of that." Maybe I'm reading too much into that, but it seems to me like it touches on Elisa's feelings for Goliath. Elisa may not be much for being the "Damsel in Distress"(tm), but all the same, I think she sort of likes being "rescued" by Goliath.

BTW, when'd the Eye get its "neck-chain" back?

To me, Odin's putting his Eye in its socket wasn't anti-climactic. It was just right. I mean, that's all he really wanted it for. And his and Goliath's final exchange was very well-done. I like how they admitted that each of them had kind of screwed up.

At any rate, I really enjoyed this episode and was glad to get a chance to see what happened when Goliath wore the Eye of Odin.

BTW, way back when you rambled on TEMPTATION (3 years ago, I think?) you said there were 3 toy tie-ins throughout the series. The first was the motorcycle in TEMPTATION. The second was supposed to be the helicoptor in HER BROTHER'S KEEPER (which wound up becoming a "sky sled"). And the third was supposed to be in this episode. So, what was the toy supposed to be?

Blaise writes...

PENDRAGON

I have to admit, when this first aired, I was more than a little surprised to see Arthur showing up again (or at least, so soon after AVALON). Likewise with Griff. And it was even more surprising that you guys teamed them up like this. Surprising and delightful.

I was also pleased to see the return of Macbeth (for the last time in the regular series). I have to admit, at first I was a little disappointed that Macbeth was the antagonist, simply because after CITY OF STONE and SANCTUARY he had become such a tragic and sympathetic figure, you wanted to root FOR him, not against him. Also, I'm not sure, but I think a lot more of Macbeth's reverance for Arthur could have been shown. In fact, when he and Arthur are crossing swords (well, sword and mace) he says, "You will kneel to me" in an almost spiteful way. Of course, in the end, Mac shows himself to actually be a bigger man than Arthur when it comes to admiting defeat--he does so instantly, unlike Arthur who had to be coached (and I had never thought about the similarity to those who had challenged Arthur's legitimacy back in the legends).

Anyway, back to London. I agree with your reasonings for not giving Arthur a sword (though, personally, I would have preferred a double-bladed axe to a mace, but that's just me). I just love Arthur's surprise at a locked church--says a lot about how times have changed.
BTW, you said that one of Arthur's trips was to the Guggenheim in NYC--New York City, yes? I must say, I find that a bit surprising. Since he didn't run into the clan, I can only guess that it must've taken place during the day. And if I were him, I would have been more than a little cheesed-off that my path looped on me like that ("Aww, I just LEFT here!").

The Stone was a surprise, but cool (and I love Frank Welker's voice). If the Stone's speaking didn't surprise Arthur, though, I wonder what Arthur was reacting to when he gasped and lept back into Griff. He might have felt someone else in the room, I guess.
As for Griff's design, for the most part it's okay in this ep, except for where he recites the poem (nice poem, BTW). At this point, he loses his neck. It just looks like there's this huge LUMP in the middle of his shoulders that has a beak, eyes and a mohawk.

At any rate, I really like Arthur's portrayl (sp?) here. A lot of times in popular culture, it seems, he's turned into this infallible, wonderfully wise, Paladin-like character. While that is definitely a side of his personality, I like that it's only a side--Arthur is a human, and as such, imperfect. He's not terribly humble, he perfers acting to thinking (like you said), and continually refuses to accept the possibility that he may NOT be destined for Excalibur again. Actually, this makes him easier to identify with.

One bit I like: As Macbeth is performing the summon spell, Banquo yells over the wind and rain, "HE AIN'T PAYIN' US ENOUGH FOR THIS!" In hindsight, it's like a bit of foreshadowing for him and Fleance leaving Macbeth's service (and joining up with Castaway).

Arthur immediately recognizes Macbeth (no fond memories there), and Macbeth, of course, has no memory. I like how that doesn't really phase him, though.

The gargoyles expertly handle Macbeth and his goons (it's great how they disarmed them all in less than 5 seconds). Brooklyn displays his leadership of the clan when he opts to stay and collect "some answers" rather than pursue Macbeth.

And then the clan gets a big ol' 1-2-3 punch. 1) There's a gargoyle standing right in front of them--when they thought they were the last all this time. 2) King Arthur is there as well--THE King Arthur. 3) Both the gargoyle and King Arthur have seen their missing leader and friend, Goliath. It's a heck of a lot of information to take in, and that (coupled with their trying to find Excalibur and deal with Macbeth) kind of numbs them to the ramifications of Griff's very existence for the moment. Or, at least, that's my guess. I would have loved to hear them wonder whether or not Griff was the only other one.

One nit, here: The poem says "Ebon glass in emerald frame." And they (correctly) figure it's the lake, but the lake is just a dark blue. Ebon should be black. Oh, well.

Finally, we meet the Lady of the Lake. A fun little note, here: a few months ago, I turned some of my friends onto GARGOYLES, and sometimes they had interesting observations. One of them was along the lines of, "The Lady of the Lake would HAVE to be a Child of Oberon to have a body like THAT in the Dark Ages."

I like how Macbeth plugs in his crystal ball, and uses a monitor screen as his "scrying pool." Ah, the conveniences of modern technology.

Can't add much to what you've already said about the Water Djinn sequence, mostly because I find myself agreeing with you. Still, you guys only had 22 minutes or so to work with.

I got a kick out of the whole "Brooklyn" exchange. There are some inconveniences to being named after a location.

Like Todd, I was a bit surprised that Banquo (and Fleance as well, it seems) know about Macbeth's true identity. Mac must have a LOT of confidence in them.

At about this point, the Trio and Hudson largely take a backseat to the main action--Arthur and Griff vying with Macbeth for the sword. That's not to say that they don't have some good fight moments with Banquo and Fleance.

While it was never readily apparent that Banquo and Fleance were wearing power-suits, that knowledge does help explain a couple things I'd always wondered about: 1) How Banquo didn't lose his legs when Hudson hit them with what looked like the sword's cutting-edge, and 2) How Banquo wasn't crushed under the weight of both the tree AND Broadway.
Actually, Fleance seemed to be the more competent of the two in this battle--almost single-handedly taking out all four gargs. And she's got a tough hover-bike, one that crashes, but can still be used as stairs later on.

Griff encourages Arthur to continue fighting for Excalibur--yup, our king's found his first uber-loyal supporter.

The dragon...I am a BIG dragon buff, and I was indescribably pleased to see one in GARGOYLES, even if it was technically made of stone. The "vents" on the neck were an interesting and unique touch. And of course the whole "fight-and-flight" sequence was fun. The Trio and Hudson seemed to have the roughest time of it, being knocked back at the first, and then dodging fireballs while flying around the dragon's head, (Hudson whacking it with his sword...which right now reminds me of "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" where Lancelot whacks the French castle with his sword before retreating).

One thing that never ceases to amaze me is Griff's way of freeing Arthur--making the dragon drop him and then grabbing him by the *corner of his cape* as he starts to fall! Arthur never even blanched. Then again, this is the same guy who a few seconds later plunges his had into the magical fire to retrieve Excalibur. I loved that part, BTW.

Poor Macbeth looks so sad when he drops the remnants of the false sword. I like that Arthur asks Macbeth to join him. As I recall, that was something he often did in the old legends: make a friend and knight out of a former foe. Of course I also recall reading somewhere that Excalibur could burst into blue flame or some such thing, so what do I know?

Arthur pretty much states what his next quest is (find that old fart, Merlin), and then does something I didn't quite expect...he knights Griff. I have to admit, maybe it's a bit prejudiced on my part, but I never contemplated the idea of a gargoyle-knight. I like it though.

I didn't get the idea that this was a sort of "backdoor pilot" to a spin-off, but once I found out, it made perfect sense. If this ep was any indication, it was already shaping up to be a fine show.

There's my ramble, and tomorrow I start replying to EYE OF THE STORM.

mari-ann writes...

j like gargoyles palun saadeke mulle golitah ,brookyln , lexi ,broadway.ühe groupis

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the ramble on "The New Olympians".

I've always had a soft spot for this episode, largely because I really like the notion of a whole society of "Greek mythology creatures/beings" out somewhere. I still hope that you can get to explore it some more later on; that spin-off sounded like a lot of fun.

Despite your mention of avoiding the actual gods for character models for the New Olympians (since the Greek gods were famous for looking too human to provide dramatic designs in the same way that a minotaur or centaur would), I did notice in the crowd scene (at the point when Helios is exaggeratedly coughing and retching in Elisa's presence) a woman carrying a bow who did bear a strong resemblance to Artemis (at least, as she's customarily depicted in myth-based art).

Ekidne at times struck me as almost channelling Demona in her cries of "Treacherous human!" and her eyes glowing red when angry. (Of course, Demona strikes me as another good case of "bigotry bringing about more bigotry", so it fits.)

Helios and Kiron's participation in the riot struck me as even worse than that of the other New Olympians; these guys are police, and should be discouraging such displays rather than encouraging them. (Whatever else you can say about Taurus, he had the decency to break up the demonstration outside Elisa's cell.)

Proteus struck me as a fun villain, with such lines as "They really don't like you, do they?" or his habit of tormenting Taurus by shape-shifting into his father. (I agree with you that Proteus doesn't seem to bother to do his homework; I'd caught all three of the flaws in his performance as Goliath that you'd mentioned - saying "Who's that guy?", providing a weak excuse for why he doesn't turn to stone in the daytime, and wanting to blow up New Olympus, which last - again - sounds more the sort of thing that Demona would do.) I also caught a moment when he's waving at Taurus with what appears to be an extra-large hand (which I assume is part of his shape-shifting again and not an odd-looking piece of animation).

One of my favorite bits is Elisa empathizing more with Taurus after discovering what they have in common - both police, and both have fathers who are police. Especially the bit where she wonders aloud how she'd respond if Peter Maza were to be killed in the line of duty.

Knowing your interest in Theseus, I certainly can't say that I'm surprised that one of the main New Olympian characters in the story would have a link to him, in the form of being descended from his most famous adversary. (Or that you'd do another take on Theseus and the Minotaur when you wrote an episode for Disney's animated Hercules series.)

The "humans of legend" bit reminds me slightly of a short story by J.R.R. Tolkien, "Farmer Giles of Ham"; in one scene, a giant is telling many other giants and dragons about his excursion into human territory, giving an exaggerated account of the food to be found there and of how little resistance one can expect from the local humans. The dragons promptly say eagerly "So knights are mythical, after all!"

Re your remarks about Talos - I wonder whether Talos could be described as truly prejudiced, being a robot rather than a flesh-and-blood being. (He certainly seemed the most pragmatic of the lot, as you put it.) Though, then again, maybe I'm displaying a bit of prejudice against robots and machines in not believing that they can develop feelings as humans and other flesh-and-blood beings can.

I'd caught the similarity of Goliath's "I cannot wage war upon an entire island" line to the earlier line "I cannot wage war upon an entire world" in "Awakening" - what made it most stand out to me is that the original line was spoken to Demona, and here he's saying something similar to Demona's daughter.

A neat little detail: the flying cars on New Olympus have little eyes painted in the front, just like those on an ancient Greek trireme.

Another of my favorite bits is Elisa's run-in with Helios, where she tells him about how Proteus is planning to blow up the island, leading to:

HELIOS: And you had to attack me to tell me that?

ELISA: Would you have listened to me if I'd just called you over?

HELIOS: Frankly, no!

Somehow I never spotted the hint of a spin-off at the end of this episode as I did for "Pendragon" - at least, not until I found out about the Master Plan. Now I find it an appealing idea, as I said above.

50 episodes down and only 16 to do. You're really making good progress on this one, Greg. Thanks.

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the ramble on "Eye of the Storm", Greg! This is another episode that I'm very fond of, especially because of the Norse mythology elements (which I've long been interested in, ever since reading the d'Aulaires' "Norse Gods and Giants" as a boy). While I had from the start taken a strong interest in the Eye of Odin on account of its name, I had not even suspected, before this episode aired, that this really was the very eye that Odin had given up for a drink from Mimir's well. And the revelation that it was definitely excited me.

I'd suspected that the Sturlissons were named after Snorri for some time; thanks for confirming it for me.

This episode answered one question that I'd had about the Eye for some time. I'd noticed the dark effect that it had had upon Fox and the Archmage, but I also knew that both of them had been "bad guys" before they ever donned it. So I was wondering what impact the Eye would have upon a "good person" who donned it, and whether it would corrupt them or not. This episode definitely answered my question, and made it clear that nobody was safe with the Eye except for Odin himself.

(As I mentioned in an earlier remark here, the Eye in this episode reminds me a bit of the One Ring in "The Lord of the Rings". Odin is attempting to recover his Eye for (more or less) the same reason that Sauron was attempting to recover the Ring; much of his power had passed out of it when he parted with it, and he needed to regain it to recover his old strength. And the impact that the Eye had on Goliath paralleled the element of how anybody who would try to use the Ring to defeat Sauron would become corrupted enough by it to become almost another Sauron. There's even the "eye imagery" in both cases. Of course, a major difference between the two stories is that giving the Eye back to Odin turned out to be the right thing to do - not to mention that Sauron definitely wouldn't have apologized to Frodo afterwards for all the trouble that he'd caused in trying to get the Ring back.)

I still find it a bit ironic that Odin would be ruefully admitting, at the end, that he was out of practice in dealing with mortals; in the original Norse myths, he was the only one of the Aesir who regularly interacted with humans much. All the other gods seemed to have dealings mainly with the other mythical races (dwarves, frost giants, etc.); Odin alone took part in human actions, often turning up in the human-centered sagas in his "old wanderer" disguise (such as thrusting the sword meant for Sigmund and Sigurd in the pillar of the Volsungs' hall, advising Sigurd on the correct means of slaying Fafnir, or engaging in a riddle-game with King Heidrek and winning when he asked a riddle - "What did Odin whisper in the ear of his dead son Balder?" - that only he knew the answer to). I can't help but think that if Odin's getting rusty in dealing with mortals, it's a good thing that Goliath and Co. didn't run into any of the other Norse gods while they were in Norway.

As I've also mentioned before, I was initially a bit disturbed by both Odin and the "Odinized Goliath" wearing horned helmets, since the series had shown earlier, in its character designs for Hakon and his Viking followers, that Vikings didn't actually wear those helmets, so my response was one of "The animators know better than that." I've come to accept this more, however, since both Odin and Goliath are "fantasy beings" rather than human Norsemen, and could be expected to dress more in accordance with popular notions about how Vikings dressed.

I hadn't picked up on the callousness of how Goliath spoke of transporting Bronx and Angela, but I did notice a couple of other acts of Goliath's while wearing the Eye which did, for me, serve as "danger signals". One was the way that he spoke when he was eagerly talking about seeing the sun for the first time; he delivered it in a very "over-the-top" fashion, almost straight out of Sevarius's style. (Though "over-the-top" in a good acting way, of course.) The other came when he, while reassuring Elisa that he was under control, patted her on the head in a very patronizing fashion.

(One thing that I'd really like to know was how conscious Goliath was of his motivations. Was he aware that his goal was to dispose of Odin so as to remove his chief rival claimant to the Eye, or did he believe that he was doing it to protect Elisa and the others, with his true motives buried deep below the surface without his being conscious of them?)

Perhaps the one thing about Odin getting his eye back that I find a bit of a pity is that his having one eye (and, as per the cartoon, in the original Norse myths, this was a feature that he had no matter what form he took on) was a major distinguishing feature of his; Odin having two eyes again feels to me, well, just a bit like Owen's stone hand returning to normal. But it certainly provided a great way to write the Eye of Odin out of the series.

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the "Pendragon" ramble, Greg.

This is, of course, an episode that I'm very fond of because of my being an Arthurian buff. I've been therefore eagerly awaiting your ramble on it for a long time, and I'm glad that the wait is finally over.

I hadn't expected Arthur and Griff to team up before this episode, but I very much liked the concept. I still think that it's a pity that the "Pendragon" spin-off never got made to show us their adventures. (It's still my personal favorite of the projected spin-offs in the Master Plan.)

Although you don't mention it, there's an echo here of the first Arthur-related episode in "Gargoyles", "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time", with Macbeth again as the antagonist and Banquo and Fleance as his assistants. And again Macbeth is going after an Arthurian artifact.

A couple of bits about Macbeth in this episode still stand out to me. One is the fact that Banquo and Fleance know that he's *the* Macbeth; that got my attention at once. The other is that Macbeth, after drawing the fake-Excalibur from the statue, describes himself as "Macbeth, son of Findlaech". I very much enjoyed the little reference to his father, who thus gains a certain posthumous presence in the series long after "City of Stone Part One" (I find myself also recalling his cameo in "Avalon Part Two", when the Archmages are spying on Macbeth in 1020). Even when characters are dead, they're not forgotten.

I was initially a bit taken aback by the Stone of Destiny being the stone from the Sword in the Stone legend, since the Stone of Destiny was in either Ireland or Scotland at the time rather than in London (where the Sword in the Stone was set up), but I've since grown to accept it. It certainly makes sense; I've read a couple of commentaries on the Sword in the Stone legend which connected it to the Stone of Destiny, so equating them is certainly feasible. (I hadn't even considered the possibility of the Stone actually speaking those words to the assembled British nobles and knights until you mentioned it, I might add.)

I very much like the concept of Arthur's role being somewhere beyond Britain, even if it does take a different course from the traditional legends about his future return. (Arthur becoming ruler of Britain again would have made the Gargoyles Universe too different from the real world, of course, which gives an additional good reason to go in the direction that you chose.)

I hadn't even noted the parallel between Macbeth and King Pellinor, but I really like it. Thanks for sharing it with us. (I always was fond of Pellinor, from the time that I first met him in T. H. White's "The Sword in the Stone".) I certainly get a kick out of Arthur and Macbeth as allies - two of the most famous legendary kings of all time, if with dramatically different reputations. A real crossover concept, in fact.

Maybe the one weak point about the Gargoyles take on Arthur is that he seems a little too influenced by T. H. White - in the sense that he doesn't seem "uniquely Gargoyles Universe" enough. Other characters from traditional legend who cropped up in "Gargoyles" in major roles did so in a way that felt true to their originals, and yet in such a way that you could still, when meeting them, say "This is the Gargoyles Universe version of the character" at once. Macbeth was definitely this way, as is Puck, and so are the Weird Sisters, Oberon, and Titania. But Arthur feels maybe a bit too "conventional Arthur" in his appearances. Although I assume that, if you'd gotten to make the "Pendragon" spin-off, you'd have found ways of making him stand out a bit more from other writers' take on Arthur.

The bit about the fake Excalibur (which Arthur recognizes at once to be a fake) reminds me of a story in Malory where Morgan le Fay stole Excalibur from Arthur and replaced it with a worthless duplicate, while then giving the real Excalibur to one of her knights whom she then manipulated into attacking Arthur - obviously Arthur isn't going to be taken in by the lookalike ploy this time around.

And I certainly liked the concept of a different take on "the sword in the stone".

I can't help wondering a little what Leo and Una must have thought about Griff going off with Arthur so soon after he'd rejoined them, though I doubt that it was quite as bad this time around. For one thing, I get the impression that a major point behind it was that they didn't know for certain what had happened to Griff in "M.I.A.", and whether he was dead or not, which wouldn't happen this time around (since I recall that you mentioned that Griff called them up from New York long-distance). Also, there was the "buried guilt" issue over the fact that they knew, deep down inside, that they should have gone with him - and since now, after "M.I.A.", they've returned to being protectors, that isn't an issue any longer either.

At the end, I was eager to see Arthur and Griff go on their quest for Merlin, and thought it a pity that that story wasn't continued. (This will touch slightly on "Sentinel", but I'm saving my comments on that for when you ramble on it.) At least we get to see Arthur knighting Griff, which I thought was a great scene. And a fine way to begin a new set of adventures.... (Here's hoping that someday you'll get to tell them.)

Entity994 writes...

WALKABOUT

I'm not big on relating my entire reaction to an episode, but highlighting certain key reactions of mine that stand out. I'll start with the negative. The idea that this Matrix could be so rapidly developed by Xanatos along with all his other projects struck me as reaching a little far. That he never chooses to use the technology for commercial gain in industry (nanite construction) or medicine (nanite healers) also threw me.

Of course, this was Fox's and Anastasia's experiment, not so much Xanatos'. I liked the notion that perhaps Anastasia infused the Matrix with magic in order to accelerate it. I also choose to believe that the Matrix represented, for Xanatos, a sort of dark temptation. I like to think that after the failure in Australia, Xanatos decides it was for the best and that transfiguring the whole world for his purposes is not him, it is the deep inner demon in him that must be silenced. I think Xanatos is a guy who values reason and considers it the barrier and interpreter between his dark, inner demon and his outer surface of grace, charm and tact.

Anyway, I loved Dingo, the Shaman, and the Dreamtime. Neither the Shaman nor the Dreamtime were very thoroughly developed, but that is what I liked about them. The spare dialogue made the Shaman and the Dreamtime feel more mysterious and therefore attractive. The way the Dreamtime was used as a bridge of communication with the Matrix was a stroke of brilliance, I thought.

Finally, in the Dreamtime, I loved the way the Matrix is represented -- as that mechanical set of arms and gyroscopic "eye" that zooms in on Goliath like an insect as he gives his gloriously-written and very eloquent speech, which I also loved. Tha whole scene is perfect and made the episode for me. I love the stuff Goliath will say in a tight spot that manages to convey desparation and maintains eloquence at the same time.

Blaise writes...

MARK OF THE PANTHER

And with this I should finally be caught up.

In the first few minutes, I found myself fearing that this episode would be focused primarily on our heroes stopping poachers. To me, it just seems that whenever a series does an episode like that, it turns into something where story and character are put on hold for the sake of a message or moral. Even if the message or moral is good, if that's all the episode is about it just winds up feeling hokey and forced.
Thankfully, that was not the case with this episode.

I loved the whole "I've saved you--OOF!" thing at the waterfall. A nice way of continuing, and yet making fun of, Goliath's "always being there to catch Elisa" habit.

I actually didn't recognize Diane Maza--it had been a while since I'd seen her (or even heard her VOICE), and her character design looked a bit different (not just in wardrobe, something in the face, too). Regardless, I'm still glad she appeared, and I was VERY pleased that Elisa finally got word to (at least one of) her parents.

The Panther Queen story was, of course, fantastic. It never ceases to amaze me that it all took place in the first Act. It just seems to be "bigger" than the space allotted it. I was actually kind of surprised to learn that you guys made it up yourselves. Actually, I was even more surprised to find out in the original outline, "The Jaguar Queen" that you guys didn't even have Anansi!

Angela tries to view the world through the prism of her experience, wondering if Diane is a Queen or Magus. I always loved that.

Elisa's sheepish excuses around her mother always threw me--considering the circumstances (which any reasonably intelligent person would know could not be explained with "being on a case") the truth was obviously the only way to go. But like you said, Greg, Elisa's a little selfish with her secrets.
I sincerely wished that you guys had had enough time to put in some reference to Elisa's leaving Matt an (unreceived) message.
I love the looks on Angela and Goliath's faces during the, "You're right, parents and children should be able to discuss anything" sequence. Just as I like how when the gargoyles do join the action, Elisa just smiles while Diane's face takes on a more terrified/surprised expression.

One thing that always bothered me, though--Angela BENDS a spear, as though it were metal. Maybe it was, but it sort of looked like wood to me.

I loved the were-panther transformations. Especially in Karadigi. Just the way the humans stayed on four limbs for a bit after having transformed back.

I, too, enjoyed Goliath's rather surprised/pliant "Of course not" to Diane's proud statement, "I don't need looking after."
Actually, another interesting character bit here--Goliath was going to send everybody else off in one group and travel his path alone. He seems to have this kind of "I'm the big and strong one, so I can handle anything without any help," mentality. Shades of where the Eye of Odin would eventually take him?

Diane wonders why Goliath can't just fly out of the hole--again playing to human's initial assumptions on gargoyles. I just love how Goliath is so nonchalant about the tiny spiders crawling over him, or their webs hanging off him.
Elisa, Angela and Bronx's trap is pretty darn creepy--being entirely covered in a "web blanket."

The talks on parenting are well handled--they get the point across without being overbearing. Actually, it took me a while before I realized that Goliath's treatment of Angela was more out of personal fear rather than just following clan customs. And now that I think of it, Elisa's complaints about her mother reminds me of how she disagreed with Goliath's keeping Angela in the dark in SANCTUARY. Maybe that's why Angela's words meant so much to Elisa--she thought of how unhappy Angela is at NOT being able to talk about things with Goliath.

I was surprised with Tea's story about how Fara Maku marked her--it kind of switched who was the victim between the two. I loved Diane's line, "That's not love Fara. That's selfishness." That leads me to wonder how many people have let their own selfishness outweigh their love in relationships.

When Anansi finally makes his grand entrance, all I could think was, "DAMN, that's a BIG SPIDER!" Don't ask me how, but I just knew LeVar Burton had to be in this episode somewhere, and he did a great job as Anansi, though I could barely recognize his voice. If Anansi had ever taken human form, I would have loved hearing LeVar's un-altered voice.
When Anansi starts losing the battle, I love how his eyes take on a very worried look (almost makes me feel sorry for him), and he starts trying to placate our heroes with wishes.

I was surprised that you guys actually "killed" Anansi--I hadn't thought the little spider at the end was actually him (possibly because that spider was brown instead of purple), but I am glad for the thought.

As for Tea and Fara Maku's reconciliation...yes, I'm afraid I can't help but find it a little too easy. Again, this is one of those times that I wish GARGOYLES could have run longer. Heck, if Tea had been awake (and reacted) when Fara swore to serve Anansi forever if Tea was freed, it might have worked better for me.

The resolution between the parents and children was well done. Yeah, Goliath and Angela's was pretty sappy (mostly because of Angela's reaction, and the swell of the music, IMO--Goliath's always cool), but it was still okay. Diane's and Elisa's was just great, and I love Diane's line that sometimes love can be about "letting go".

Funny thing about Elisa's "No" at the end--I didn't even hear it until the second or third time I watched this ep. And I think you're right that the ending plays better without it.

GOLIATH THE PANTHER-GOYLE: Sometimes you can only see these things through the eyes of a child. ;-)
Seriously, though, it wasn't necessary, and from what I saw in the "Panther Queen" sequence, it looks like it has to be done in a very specific fashion. So I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

My ramble's a bit all over the map, but trying to do two rambles in one sitting is enough to tax anyone's brain. Suffice to say, this really is a great episode all around, and I enjoyed sharing my thoughts on it.

Looking forward to your next ramble!

Blaise writes...

WALKABOUT

This is one of those episodes that has a lot I like, and a lot that I felt could have been better.

One of the latter was, of course, the "off" portrayal of the Dream Time. As Todd already said, the Dream Time is basically Antiquity. In that view, the Shaman's statement that the gargoyles come from the Dream Time makes sense. That being said, I DID like the battle that took place in the Dream Time (more on that later).

One thing that really struck me this time around was just how CALM everyone was when the Matrix started to go overboard. I mean, Fox and Anastasia are just calmly talking about the "Grey Goo Scenario" and how the world will end in just this straight (and sometimes rather flippant) manner while everyone else largely just stands looking serious. I mean, it's like everyone's going "Hmmm, we'll all most likely be dead in less than half an hour and the world will end...Hmmmm." In the case of Anastasia it kind of makes more sense (or will after will learn about her "double life") but with everyone else? Elisa seems to be the only one even close to panicking.

And, of course, the whole "Law and Order" thing.

But there was a lot about this I still liked.

Dingo was the big one. I'd been wondering what happened to him since GRIEF, and now here he is, trying to start over. I liked this--we've already seen good people "fall" throughout the series (Demona, of course, but also Macbeth, the Captain and even Renard for an episode), and some of those people redeemed themselves, of course. However, this was the first time that someone who we first saw as a villain actively tried to reform of his own volition. Not only did Dingo prove himself perhaps one of the smarter and more able-bodied members of the Pack when they were human, but also the most sane and...well, like you said, Greg, HUMAN. Actually, Dingo showed even more than the "quest for redemption"--his discussion about the nanites and comparing them to enzymes and the like indicated that he was probably far smarter than anyone ever gave him credit for.
On the subject of that conversation, two things that always stood out: Dingo's mention of Coyote (more continutity, and a bit of added depth to Coyote), and the "voice reverb" on the helmet. The way it subtly changes Dingo's voice right in mid-sentence when he puts it on (kudos to the sound team).
Also, Dingo's utilization of his suit was great. I loved how he used it as a sort of missile against Goliath by remote control. The removal of the helmet was a bit different here than in UPGRADE (Dingo had some sort of yellow hood, the front of the helmet rises like a mask, etc.).

Moving away from Dingo for a bit, I was also happy to finally meet Anastasia Renard, and extremely pleased to see a visibly pregnant Fox. That last part was important, simply because in most visual mediums there's a little "If you don't see it, it didn't happen" mentality, so this made Fox's pregnancy that much more REAL.

The Matrix itself was fairly interesting. I must admit, I was a bit surprised that the ultimate solution was not to destroy it, but to "convince it of its error."
Also, the "Grey Goo" did seem a bit more random than it perhaps should have been, but at least it was well animated.

I rather enjoyed the interactions between Dingo and our heroes. The first instinct on either side is to attack first, of course. And after escaping from the the Grey Goo together, our heroes' first thought is that Dingo had something to do with it (and they're actually right, but he's not THAT involved). And Dingo gets a bit defensive and even territorial about them being in Australia (loved the slang that Mr. Cummings put in there, BTW). When Dingo suggests that only he and Elisa see the Shaman, Elisa gets this great, almost disgusted look on her face, like someone asked her to swim through garbage. And, when Dingo's participation in Fox's research is revealed, and he tries to explain this isn't what he expected, he takes a step towards Elisa, who in turn takes a step back. I somehow get the feeling that Goliath's more apt to trust Dingo than Elisa would ever be.

Loved the music during the "Matrix chase" scene. Not so sure about the "white glow" that occurs whenever the goo passes through a surface.

Fox did have a rather "cliched villain" idea--a machine to transmogrify the world to suit the controlling individual. Yet, it seems to me that Fox is more enamoured with the *idea* and having the capability of doing that, than actually doing that. Again, she displays that she's more interested in fun than results (unlike her husband).
Actually, that's the funny thing--Xanatos is connected with this episode, but he really has nothing to do with what's going on (kind of like in MONSTERS).

The revelation to Goliath that Fox is Halcyon Renard's daughter was nice, I'm glad it made it in there, but it always just feels too quick. If only there had been more time--I would have loved Goliath's musings on that new bit of information.

Now, the Dream Time battle. I did notice that the combatants used what was familiar to them (in fact, a few of Goliath's gestures looked like he could have been invoking magical spells, and his psuedo-clan shot lightning from their hands). Of course, the Matrix still manages to best them, and only relents when Goliath says what I consider to be the best line in this episode, "Your peace is that of the grave!"

When Dingo talks about being a hero again, he's smiling. Think about it--how many times has Dingo given a genuine, happy smile.
And then the Matrix bonds with his suit, and Dingo becomes a new kind of hero; one whose adventures I would have been most interested in watching.

RANDOM NOTES:
When my brother watched this with me (after having seen THE HOUND OF ULSTER the previous day) he remarked about the gang creating heroes wherever they go.

Batwave...y'know, it's funny. You probably started these rambles, before "The Batman" was even in development. :-)

And there's my ramble!

Demona writes...

hey,Greg. What´s up??I am from argentina and yes :We love Gargoyles here too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. I always see Brooklyn and Demona figthing when they are together but Who is more stronger?? I really think that Demona would kill him very easly if some one would give her the chance but...you know....
I really love when Demona and Macbeth start figthing is very cool. In the reckoning, Macbeth "lost" the figth,but Demona would shot him if Eliza would not stop her. She wanted die because wath had happened with Tailog or she was just angry at Macbeth and she really wanted to see HIM death.Besides it mas not posible.Allrigth, it is done. Chau

Blaise writes...

THE HOUND OF ULSTER

At last!! I say that both because it's a new ramble, and I'm finally able to add my own. I'll play catch up with your other additions over the weekend.

When I first saw this episode, both the "Previously on" segment and the title indicated that Bronx would get some exposure. I wasn't sure HOW since there's only so much you can do with a dog (or even a dog-like beast) without giving them some anthropomorphic qualities. Consequently, I think it makes since that Rory Dugan became the protagonist.
And yet, that in itself is unique. Here we have a non-regular being the main character of the episode--hightlighted with that wonderful "hero-shot" where the camera circles around Rory's face (well done bit of animation, that). I mean, I don't know of too many other series that do that (well, maybe there were some old "Batman: TAS" episodes that seemed to focus more on the villains, but they're the VILLAINS!)
I love Molly's character design--the hair-style, the eyes, the three belts (in technicolor!) around her waist.
Rory's vision of Crom Cruoch really threw me the first time I saw it. Then I completely forgot about it until the Banshee transformed at the end.

BTW, time out here to say kudos to the voice work all around. Colm Meaney's (sp?) guest turn was great. Scott Cleverdon did excellent work (and HE added the battle cry?! I love that thing!). And as for Sheena Easton, hey do I really need to say anything?
Loved the Banshee's keening! I have to wonder though...it seems to me that gargoyles have a stronger sense of hearing than humans, yet the Banshee's cry is apparantly more fatal to humans.

Anyway, I was a little surprised at our heroes sinking into the bog right off. Very tense the first time you see it, and a nice little character bit for Goliath--he turns from Elisa to try and save his daughter, but can't and turns back to find Elisa has already sunk beneath the surface. For a guy so big on protecting his loved ones that must have been a truly hellish moment.

But Bronx escapes and we get our first glimpse of the Banshee.

Rory's discussion with his Dad is interesting to me, mostly in how pessimistic and cynical Rory acts. One line of his that I always like (even if I don't agree with it): "There are no heroes anymore! Only villains! And they've got us all beat." Sometimes it's very easy to think that.

Our main heroes wake up trapped in the Cairn, and Goliath says that "a whole clan of gargoyles could not batter down these walls." That line always struck me for some reason.
A bit disconcerting that Elisa's muddy in this scene and clean in the next, but "meh".
And although Cuchullan's remains would have been nice, I don't really miss it (unlike the whole Anubis thing). Besides, how much of an unmummified corpse would be left after 2,000 years?

Rory meets Bronx and between the pooch's outlandish appearance and the legends of his father, Rory reacts in a perfectly reasonable way...he runs like hell. And falls off a cliff (looking at it from the wide shot, I can't help but think it's a miracle he survived).

BTW, the little memo you posted finally clears up why Bronx singled out Rory--the Banshee's scent. Yet Bronx can still sense that Rory's not an enemy.

The Banshee talks with our "main heroes." I can never stop noticing her rather exaggerated gestures. She must be a bit of a drama queen. I like her "ghost" form, though.
The Banshee does have that one character trait (which Todd has already mentioned) that annoys me to no end: she does not even consider the possibility that her prisoners might be telling the truth. And as you pointed out she could have just mesmerized it out of them (no fuss, no muss), which makes her behavior even more inexcusable.

After the Banshee hears Bronx and splits, and Angela says that Bronx will save them (she's got more faith in her pooch than I've ever had in any of mine, I'll admit), the camera starts to briefly zoom in before cutting to the next scene. I'm always wondering what got cut, if anything.

When Molly transformed into the Banshee...I figured they were both one and the same. At least, until Molly appeared in Rory's house the next day and said she'd go with him to the Cairn because she loved him. THAT cast some doubt in my mind.

"Be still little mortal and come quietly with me, into the dark." That line still sends my dirty little mind reeling with possibilities. ;-)

I like Mr. Dugan's attitude towards his son's visions: he may not entirely believe in them, but he's not about to go tempting fate in regards to them, either.

A little animation bit I only really started noticing after you mentioned exploring more of the relationship between Rory and Molly--when Rory strides down the hill towards the Cairn, Molly gets a sad/worried look on her face. Rory isn't looking at her so she doesn't have to act, but it's still there. It's more than just avoiding an old enemy that makes her want to keep Rory in the dark.

I love the voice acting in the Cairn--as the two characters talk, a bit more of each's "other" starts to creep into their speech.
I love the whole "Gae Bolga" scene.

"Skills may rust indeed, but true friendship stays bright." Y'know, because of the accent, I didn't understand what he was actually saying there for YEARS!

I always noticed how you guys had Goliath and Angela, the usual heavy hitters, get knocked away by Crom Cruach the instant they try to join the battle. Makes sense--this was Rory and Bronx's show!

"And there's no kind of training schemes for this job, I'll wager." Nope, and no pay either! Just ask Spider-man!
On the "Thor" subject, I never knew that much about Thor (either comic or mythology) until a bit after GARGOYLES, so for me this was fairly fresh.

Dog's (or gargoyle beasts) can look smug! I've seen it myself!

RANDOM THOUGHTS:
I always thought the "Previously on" segment for this episode felt awkward towards its end--your ramble helps clear that up.

One thing that struck me this time out was the Banshee's character design, especially in the face. It can move from beautiful to rather corpse-like.

Yes Cuchullan was the "Hound of Ulster," but only because he killed the original hound and vowed to act in its place until a new one was raised. Who's to say these hounds weren't gargoyle beasts?

Great ramble!

Todd Jensen writes...

One other thing about "Mark of the Panther" that I forgot to mention: I find it somehow amusing and appropriate that Elisa and Diane Maza would have a run-in with humans magically transformed into panthers in light of how a member of their family had already been turned into a panther-of-a-sort (though through science rather than through magic).

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the ramble on "Mark of the Panther". (Boy, we're really coming along well with the rambles now! Isn't it great?) Here are my thoughts on it.

One of the moments that still most stands out to me is the legend of the Panther Queen that was incorporated into the story; the change of animation to set the old tale apart from the present-day action was a particular delight for me. (Although I hadn't even thought until you mentioned it that somebody tuning into "Gargoyles" during this story could have mistakenly believed that they were watching a different television program.)

I've read a little about Anansi before the series came out, though I'm no expert upon him. One thing that I had learned about him, which I think that the episode captures accurately, is that his tricks and schemes had a tendency to backfire upon him - and this is what happens in both the Panther Queen story and the main action. In the Panther Queen story, Anansi, indignant about having to turn the Panther Queen's son into a panther, banishes all the humans from Karadigi - and then realizes too late that he's just sacked his entire hunting force, so who's going to bring him food now? And in the present day, Anansi's getting Fara Maku to hunt for him worked too well - he gorged himself to such an extent that, once out of his web, he was too fat and unwieldy to fight the gargoyles effectively.

Diane's helping to resolve satisfactorally the problem of Goliath's difficulty in acknowledging Angela as his daughter reminds me of something that you once said about why they generally leave mothers out of Disney movies: the mother, if she was there, could have found a solution to the problem so quickly that there'd be barely any story. And once Elisa's mother shows up, she does indeed help solve the Goliath-Angela problem (though without preventing there from being a story).

And I picked up (by the last time that I saw this episode, a few months ago - I regularly watch my "Gargoyles" tapes every summer) on the link between Diane telling Fara Maku about his desire to keep Tea by his side "That's not love; that's selfishness" and her telling Elisa at the end that love is about letting go.

The moment that you mentioned about Diane telling Goliath with a certain indignant dignity "I don't need protection" and Goliath saying "Of course" always amused me - and I found myself also thinking of "mother-in-law" towards Diane at that moment.

The first time that I saw this episode, I thought that Anansi had indeed been slain at the end, though "The Gathering Part One" proved me wrong on that. And, truth to tell, I'm kind of glad that the Children of Oberon are so difficult to kill and that we haven't had any genuine deaths among them as yet in the series. After all, they are (or the bulk of them are) traditional figures in humanity's own myths and legends, part of our cultural heritage. Obviously, a genuine death for Anansi wouldn't result in everyone forgetting the tales about him, but still, his passing, or the passing of any other member of the Third Race, would somehow (to me, at least) diminish the "tapestry of story" that we have gained from them. (When we get to "The Gathering Part Two", I'll mention how Oberon's sentence upon Puck has a similar, if not as strong, impact upon me.)

Thanks also for telling us about how Bronx somehow reminded you and your family of Norman again. (I wonder now how the Cagney scenes in "Gargoyles" would have affected me if I'd seen any of them between the time that my old cat Merlin passed on, two months ago, and the time that I adopted my new kitten Obie.) Norman sounds like he must truly have been quite a dog.

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the Election Day present, Greg - namely, the "Walkabout" ramble! Here's some thoughts of mine on it in response.

For a start, I missed this episode the first time around (due to my moving to my first Central West End apartment the day that it first aired), so I only got to see it during later showings (by which time, of course, I'd seen "The Gathering" and knew the real story about Anastasia Renard). Fortunately, it didn't ruin the episode for me.

Generally, I have difficulties with the notion of an artificial intelligence as the antagonist (whether a computer, a robot, or what-have-you) - when it's a deliberate antagonist, that is, as opposed to just following orders like the Steel Clan robots or Renard's cybots - because I find it a little too difficult to imagine a machine becoming evil. I believe (like Goliath in "Outfoxed") that it takes a living being to engage in motives of good or evil. So, for example, I usually have a hard time accepting a computer or robot out to conquer the world since that would require it to have emotions (power-hunger, greed, paranoia of the "I've got to conquer them before they conquer me" variety), which I can't imagine an artificial intelligence developing. That said, I found that Matrix's actions in "Walkabout" worked for me since it wasn't out to reformat the world out of "villainous motives" but merely because it was obeying its programming, to create order, and thought that it was carrying out its duty. It might not even have understood, at that stage in its development, that its bringing order to the world would mean disaster to all living things on the planet. So the Matrix worked for me.

(I might add that one of my favorite bits in the episode comes when Goliath is protesting repeatedly to the Matrix in the Dreamtime that its form of order would bring about death to everyone on Earth, and the Matrix replies, in this almost desperate fashion "But we must have order." It said that in a way that felt, to me, as if it was beginning to understand at last what Goliath was saying, but still had the problem that its programming demanded that it produce order, and it couldn't go against its programming.)

I'd gotten fond of Dingo after "Upgrade", and so I enjoyed seeing him again, wanting to make a change for the better. The touch that I especially liked was his mentioning about how he'd used to be a hero to a lot of people when he was on the Pack's television series, and wants to go back to that, only this time being a real hero rather than just playing one on television.

You're correct about the "Dreamtime" being not quite accurate; a friend of mine who knows more about Australian Aborigine legend than I do pointed out that the Dreamtime was actually a "mythical time period" when the world was being created rather than some sort of other dimension.

I liked your mention of how the Avalon World Tour was supposed to take the cast to every inhabited continent (the "inhabited" part would explain the absence of Antarctica - which you were planning on sending King Arthur and Griff to, anyway). Technically, they don't set foot in South America unless you enlarge its boundaries to include Central America (in this case, Guatemala), and don't set foot on mainland Asia (as opposed to Japan) in the television series (though there's your Himalayas story that you'd planned for the Gargoyles comic to make up for that).

I got a chuckle out of Erin's response to the name "Matrix" in connection to the movies.

Of course, another big element is the introduction of Anastasia Renard on stage at last, plus seeing Fox pregnant. (I've sometimes wondered whether there were any S&P issues with that part.) I especially liked Goliath realizing that Fox is Renard's daughter after being introduced to Anastasia.

Again, thanks for the ramble. I'm really looking forward to more to come.

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the first new Ramble in a year, Greg. I really enjoyed reading the "Hound of Ulster" one, and hope that this is the first of many more to come in the last couple of months of 2004; I've been eagerly awaiting the rambles for the last 22 episodes of "Gargoyles" that you worked on, after getting the rambles for the first 44.

I only saw the first half of the episode the first time that it aired (I was in the middle of a move from the suburbs to the Central West End of St. Louis in early 1996, and so missed the end due to working on the move with my family). And by the time that I got to see the whole thing through, I'd already seen "The Gathering", complete with the Banshee's fate at the hands of Oberon. Not that it hurt things that much. Since then, I watch my taped version of it regularly each St. Patrick's Day, as a holiday tradition. The big pity is that I can no longer remember my initial response to it (such as whether I thought that Molly was a person independent of the Banshee whom the Banshee merely masqueraded as once or twice, or whether they were one and the same). Sorry about that.

I was amused to discover that you'd originally thought of calling this one "A Bronx Tail" in light of how the Goliath Chronicles used that title later on. (I recall that they also used that title in the "Gargoyles" comic book series, at one point.)

I honestly hadn't thought of the Lassie connection with Bronx until you mentioned it (but then, I know Lassie more by reputation). (I did catch the Wizard of Oz quotes right away, though.)

I'm a bit puzzled by your mention of a certain "Liscoo". Is that the name of Rory's hometown (if so, it obviously didn't make it into the dialogue of the completed episode)?

You were correct in not using the term "Barghest" for that episode, since it's indeed linked to northern England (those viewers who were already aware of the discrepancy from the original Cuchulain legend would have let you have it even more if the term "Barghest" had gotten into an Irish story!). But I like the notion of associating gargoyle beasts with the "black dogs" of Britain and Ireland. The "black dogs" of British and Irish folklore do match gargoyle beasts; they're generally nocturnal, are awe-inspiring creatures that can strike fear into people's hearts, and yet often appear in the role of protectors, despite their fearsome quality. So Bronx playing the role of one of them works.

I find the "dwarves made my shoes" line appropriate, since one of the most famous mythical denizens of Ireland is the leprechaun, and leprechauns are dwarflike shoemakers. (Was that line intended as a direct reference to leprechauns, or is it just another neat coincidence?)

(Another piece of trivia: the Cromm-Cruach - the Banshee's "death-worm" form - or, more precisely, its namesake in Irish mythology, was the source for the name of Crom, the god worshipped by - or, more accurately, sworn by - Conan the Barbarian. Robert E. Howard, the man who originally created Conan, had the habit of borrowing almost all of his names from actual legend and ancient history.)

I'd thought myself (after a couple of showings of the episode, though not right away) that there is a certain similarity between Rory/Cuchulain and the Mighty Thor of Marvel Comics (both modern-day people who become "real" mythical figures after discovering a stick that transforms into the mythical figure's traditional weapon). Hopefully you'll be able to solve it if you ever bring the series back long enough for Rory to show up again.

And, yep, the Banshee did pass up the opportunity to mesmerize her prisoners. (She also showed that annoying tendency that so many interrogators have of "I've already made up my mind about whether you're innocent or guilty, so all the evidence that you're innocent won't mean a thing to me." A bit like Nokkar later on in "Sentinel", in fact.)

I share your delight in Rory's dad's lack of enthusiasm at seeing Molly. I also enjoy the parts where Rory warms to Bronx (particularly where he actually rides him).

And, yep, it wound up being mainly Rory's episode - but Bronx still got a big role in it.

SomePerson writes...

Hello Mr. Weisman,
(Not really a question, just putting in my two cents.)

I have recently learned of the Gatherings but do to my
crazy college schedule & budget I have not been able to
attend. After reading some of the Gathering journals it is
incredible to see how one show can bring so many people
from across the country together. Gargoyles has inspired
many people to read more, put their own thoughts in writing
and appreciate some of the greatest works of literature. I
hope one day that the dream/goal of bringing Gargoyles back
will come true/be accomplished. It is wonderful to find
out that such a dedicated person, such as yourself, takes
time out of his life to answer questions from the fans. I
have heard about the DVD and will be purchasing it as soon
as it comes out. The show has truly opened the doors to an
amazing world where everything, even the smallest things,
contain some kind of meaning that holds true in everyday
life. Please excuse any grammatical errors on my part but
I have my first nursing exam tomorrow and need to get back
to studying so I was rushing a bit. I know that there are
many other entries for you to answer before mine so I don't
expect a reply right away. I just wanted to thank you for
creating a fantastic show and letting the fans know that there
are more fans out there.

French Kitty writes...

Hello Greg! How are ya? This is just part of my ramble for the Awakenings. I will have to post the rest later. :(

My ramble for Awakenings...(sorta)

AWAKENING part I

The Awakenings are some of my favorite episodes of the series. You kind of have to see these first episodes to understand the entire series. I have decided to watch all my tapes beginning to end to observe more carefully for things I have been meaning to ask but forgot over the years.

Scotland, 994 A.D.

I like how the episode starts,right in the middle of a battle between Castle Wyvern and the Vikings) I have always been interested in history, and wars are a big part of history. It looks like a real battle,(arrows flying everywhere)and I see a huge rock thrown at Wyvern and breaks off a large part of the castle.

And this is how far I got before the VCR ate my tape. I got stuck and i am afraid to try it again. I wouldn't care much because it is mostly The Goliath Chronicles episodes, but I also taped the "Awakenings" and "Hunter's Moon" part II and III. I have four tvs in my house, two have VHS, I have an individual VCR and NOTHING seems to work! I'm going to have to tape the episodes again(because they're my favorites!!) but I don't have a GOOD tv to do that with AND I do not have cable, satellite, DirectTV, etc... So it will be a LONG time.

Sorry for wasting your time but I'm frustrated and I needed to share this. :D
[I can't wait for the DVD.]

Thankx for your time.

Allan Ecker writes...

This isn't a journal, I guess. It's just a shout-out. It isn't a journal because I didn't get to the Con, but if it had been anywhere within, oh, a 500-mile radius of me, I would have been there, so I feel justified in at least writing that I would have been there. (Heck, if I weren't moving around so much due to internships and such, I'd have gone anyway.)

I just need to give applause to Gargoyles. It was beautiful, cool, and fun, truly a jem of animation. The Shakespearian references layered over deep characterization and even deeper character -development- truly light my heart afire. I'm aching for this DVD. I can garantee that, unless all the copies are snapped up in, say, the first week of them hitting the market (which I honestly hope for, since that will likely mean more would be on the way), I will get it. I have two other friends who will do the same, -almost- as much to show support for the incredible talent (and any applicable forces of managerial mojo) involved in producing Gargoyles as to have DVD-quality sound and picture as opposed to our moldering, commercial-break-laiden, misordered VHS's.

Gargoyles, is, in my humble opinion, the single best animated series American animation has to offer. Gargoyles is better than the sublime Batman animated series and the inspiring X-Men Evolution, both of which have been released on DVD already. It has also done what I previously considered the impossible in unseating Tale Spin from the pinnacle of my Disney Pantheon of Good Shows.

Gargoyles didn't find me until long after it had stopped airing. In fact, you might say I walked in just in time to see this pivotal moment in its growth. I just wanted you to know, Greg, that I will be voting with my wallet (possilby twice) to get Gargoyles the recognition it deserves.

To Greg, and to all who gave Xantos, Goliath, Brooklyn (and of course, PUCK!) life, thank you.

PS, an actual question:

Just how "voluntary" is stone sleep? You mentioned in a recent (well, two years ago by now) response that sunlight was "a powerful psychological cue". Could a gargoyle fight off stone sleep for as long as (or longer than) thirty seconds? Would this have any short- or long-term side effects?

Also, sometimes gargoyles roar after waking, others not. I take this to mean that it is semi-voluntary, like yawning and/or stretching. Is it more or less voluntary than yawning? Will some circumstances make a gargoyle less or more likely to roar upon waking?

Justin writes...

Greg,
To add a little more to what I was sort of rambling about the other day I would like to say a few more things.
First I think it is really cool that you continue to push the boundaries of the show. I am well aware that the target audience was boys ages 6-11, but I think the mark you hit was seriously more for adults.

I know there certainly were elements that made it a kids show, but there was always that sub element of adult themes, thank you.

I think, once again the choice to make Lexington gay was a bold and good move. I think he represents the homosexual community in a good way, not the stereotypical, blatantly affeminant sort of way. Not that that isn't a norm in the segment of the population but not all homosexuals are like that.

Thanks again.
Sincerely,
Justin

KJC writes...

GREG WROTE:
Saw RETURN OF THE KING. And I really, really liked it, although I didn't really, really like the first hour. Overall, I enjoyed the first two movies more, but don't get me wrong. I'm not comparing this to the awful Return of the Jedi, at all. I still loved it, and I can't wait to see the extended version.

The movie that actually caught me by surprise was PETER PAN. I really liked it a lot. It's so melancholy and bittersweet. Peter looked terrific (and was about 50/50 on the acting). Some things may have been a bit on the head, but it's Neverland, not Subtletyland. Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's a better movie than LOTR, but I thought the reviews of Pan were way harsh.

KELLY RESPONDS:
I had the opportunity to see both RETURN OF THE KING and PETER PAN on Christmas day. Excellent films that fulfilled my expectations and left me feeling quite content - despite the fact that I cried my eyes out during a few touching scenes (I'm such a sap). I look forward to purchasing the boxed set when it's released but I'm trying to stop myself from buying all of those irresistible marketing tie-ins like script-books, action figures, One Ring and sword replicas etc.

And PETER PAN holds a special place in my heart, as it was the very first story my mother ever read to me in bed as a child (I still have the tattered and faded book my mother read from, tucked away in my closet), and I grew up watching the televised stage production with Mary Martin as Peter (yes, I'm THAT old). I thought Jeremy Sumpter did an excellent job in the role of Peter, and Rachel Hurd-Wood was quite charming. I agree the critics were too harsh, but I also felt slightly uncomfortable with the not-so-subtle sexuality between Peter and Wendy, and the odd pedophilic vibe I got between Captain Hook and his delicious little prey, Wendy. But I still loved the film and will probably buy the DVD when it's released.

Greg, if you had Peter Jackson's 300 million plus budget and could make any movie you wanted, what would it be? A medieval epic (a la Gargoyles or Robin Hood), a modern-day drama (i.e. House of Sand and Fog) or a gritty, futuristic tale (Blade Runner, The Matrix)?

Msil writes...

It´s about the Random stuff... on Thursday, December 18, 2003. I know it will be a while until the time you read this...but anyway..I love The lord of the rings: Return of the King and I understand you! I was Dying to see it. And its a fantastic adaptation.
By the way, I love the idea of "*I'd like to see a music video from Goliath's POV -- but featuring Elisa -- of "Amazing". (I think that's the title. I'm not sure who the artist or band is.) " And the band is Aerosmith (My fauvorite)

Stella writes...

not a question, just a compliment!
great job......... the storyline of Gargoyles.

I wish eternal damnation upon the bastards who have canceld the show.

Vitor writes...

Greg,
the show is great. Really great. It remembers me "Dungeons and Dragons", another really great show (first and second year, because third was horrible). Michael Reaves made both. But gargoyles is just...incredible, the personality of the people and gargoyles are more real ( changes all the time!), its the real world. I think another show like gargoyles will take a long time to be made...
Thank you , Greg. I really wish when you ready this ( I think this will take 3 years, more or less) the show will be back , with another amazing episodes.I really wish.

Emperor Auladarr I writes...

Mr. Weisman,

I was perusing the Hudson archives and read your ramble on "Long Way 'Til Morning," where you invited response to the episode. Of all the episodes of Gargoyles (the REAL episodes, not those GC episodes that made no sense), this is one I remember most vividly as one of my absolute favorites. Rarely do we get to see the elderly character in a series be the hero, or have the spotlight on him for almost every second of the show. It was refreshing to see Hudson as the hero and not some doddering old coot who needs to be saved by his fellows.

The things I remember most about the episode are the good lines the characters had. Some of my favorites from Demona are: "Ciao." (Ms. Sirtis's callous tone there just made it work), and "Your courage is admirable, but ultimately futile." Mr. Asner had the best one's, though: "Just dreaming old dreams, I guess." "I can face her. I just can't beat her." And, of course, his speech to Demona at the end about growing old and waiting.

The flashback scenes are great, too. The planting of the Archmage and that whole plotline was brilliant, as was the Prince's faux pas on "the gargoyles will get you," and the whole snowball effect that had on Katharine.

But, again, above all else, Hudson stands out in this episode. He's not sitting at the clocktower watching TV with Bronx--he's in his element, both in the past and in the present, as a warrior. "He favors speed over stealth, which could mean he has traps waiting for us." Brilliant. His heading underground where neither he or Demona could use their wings--clever.

The whole episode just struck me as excellent because it showed Hudson as a competent, wise, and experienced warrior. I don't know...maybe because my grandfather seems like he knows how to do anything under the sun I took more to Hudson craftiness.

Well...those are just my thoughts. Kudos on one of MANY great episodes.

The MythMaker writes...

A long time ago, you asked if anyone knew the origin of the "eye in the pyramid" symbol for the Illuminati/Masons/etc. Since I saw no update on it, I thought I would give you the short version (the long version would take several pages).
The pyramid represents knowledge, taken directly from ancient Egyptian mythology (before the whole "Pharoah's Tomb" fiction was created) but the pyramid in the symbol is truncated, representing lost/suppressed knowledge. The eye is the "All-Seeing Eye" (God) and placed in a triangle above the truncated pyramid to point out that no amount of official supression will destroy the knowledge forever, it's still out there to be rediscovered.
The second layer of interpretation is part of where the Illuminati as "bad guys" comes from: they were "enemies" of the authorities throughout history (some rare exceptions) because they had managed to retain the missing/forgotten knowledge, and the authorities (who were seen to not be wise/good enough to be given access to the knowledge/power) were jealous and either wanted the knowledge for themselves or wanted these "outlaw" groups killed, or preferably both. The official church declared them to be Satan-worshippers; these groups considered themselves to be the true believers of God and the church to be full of Satan-worshippers (or at least selfish opportunists). So, the symbol shows that they believed in God (in spite of what the authorities claimed) but also shows their own recognition that they would always be in danger from outsiders who would try to supress the "truth".

Your "grey-area" approach to Duval and the Illuminati is a great way of showing that, in spite of what we are often taught, black and white are ALSO in the eye of the beholder...

Siren writes...

This isn't a question, but more a comment, perhaps a suggestion. It's unbelievable the amount of people who post what essentially are usless questions. Ones you know they already know and are just trying to be smartass about or one's who are obviously too lazy to look it up for themselves. It annoys me to no end. And I don't want to signal out anyone so I won't list the names or questions they ask, you know who they are and they know who they are. A best example is asking what a certain character's name is. How hard is it to look it up? There are 100s of Gargoyles sites. Have you ever thought about having someone extra to weed through the unimportant and "cute" questions just so you can get to the important ones that serious people really want to know? I think if the person is too lazy to at least make an attempt at finding it out for themselves, then perhaps they shouldn't be posting in the first place. I think if you really want to know something, you look it up first and ask questions later. Not to mention there IS a comment room here, that is pretty much a message boards for fans to discuss the show. Why not ask questions like, "What's the name of the young white haired gargoyle?", there? I think a lot of these people are just out to pull your leg, thinking themselves cute or just so desperatly want attention, they'll take anything they can get. It's just a pet peeve of mine and it wastes time for you and for us, the serious fans and readers. I just wanted to make a small rant. I hope I didn't waste your time. ;-)

Twin_Kitten writes...

Um Hi. I saw a post about why we like gargoyles? and i wanted to answer..

I like all sorts of 'dark' things i read lots of vampire and witch books and your cartoon was awesome when i was little and i think it was a nice way of introducing those concepts to me. I wish there were more new episodes, and that the show was on lots more. I loved the charicters most of all, i still do. I used to sit in front of the tv and then during the commercials i would pretend i was part of the show then when it came back on i would sit down again. My favorite charicter of all was Brooklyn, he always reminded me of myself, and i would just like to thank you for creating the show.

Twin_Kitten
kittin@epals.com

The evil forces (again...) writes...

Excuse, I have mistake forgive with forgoten.

The evil forces (o Las feurzas del mal, segun idioma ^_^) writes...

Dear mister weisman,
I'm a fan of your serie "gargoyles" and I tell this with admiration and respect.

Your behaviour with some fans is not very kind, I know you must be very tired to stand some fanatics of the serie, but remember, the word fan not always mean fanatic.
I Know, I Know, you are always answering the same question one time, and another and another and another, I understand it's must be very dull and boring, but understand us, we don't know the other fans´ questions and your answers, and we want to know all the details and tiny things of the serie.

Because is very possible that Disney will forgive the serie and we like to know , for example, what happen with Thailog or maybe Angela and Demona would be friends someday?, and only you have all the answers of our question, please, treat us with more respect and kind.
Remember, Disney could have forgive you, but we don't.

With all my respect and greatings from a group of fans of Spain (But this letter have been writing for only one person)

The evil forces and a group of fans.

Pd: forgive me if you didn't understand this letter, but my English is not very good ^_^.

Lovel writes...

Hi, Greg it's Lovel again. I wanted to apologize to accidently posting twice. I didn't know how it happened. So I wanted to apologize for making you read my ramblings twice,*snicker*. With that said, I guess I want to add something that I forgot to put in my other posts.

It REALLY irritates me when fans refer to the Wyvern and Ishimura Clans as "GENERIC" Gargoyles. Being a intense Biology nut I fully see the differences between the two clans, and being a Anthropology student I can see the clear differences between the two clan's cultures. I see nothing similar about the Ishimura and Wyvern clans. I appreciate each distinct curve of their horns and the beauty of their wings, and tails. Sorry to post all that I just figured that it probably bothers other fans,lol. Thanks for everything.

--Lovel

Lovel writes...

Hi Greg, this is my first time posting a question am almost reluctant to do it because of the amazing volume of questions that all the other Gargoyles fan post. I guess it's just an amazing testament to the show.

First off I wanted to express my love and admiration of the show. I have been a fan since the show first came out and I was about 10 or 11. The best part of watching the show now is that all the subtle nuansces and social commentary that was slightly lost on me as a child is fully realized and appreciated in me as a college student.

Second, I wanted to say that I spent the last 3 days LITERALLY reading all the archives I could to find an answer to my questions....Some I found answers to and some I thought up as I was reading some of the other questions posted by other fans. Which is why I wanted to say what a wonderful resource this website is...so having said that it prompts this announcement "THANK YOU GORE FOR HOSTING THIS SITE!!"

Now, on to the questions. Okay you are probably going to flip when you read this one....yes it is yet another "Gay Gargoyle" question...so sue me I'm gay and it's a topic that staunchly interests me. I wanted to ask if a Gay Gargoyle would imprint upon his or her mate just as a Straight Gargoyle would? I only ask this question because I figured the answer would be "yes" since in all your other responses about Gay Gargoyles you indicated that there would be no difference between Gargoyles, Straight or Gay. But I figured that since this is your universe and that since you are the author of said universe that it would be highly unethical of me to assume something without asking the creator.

Now that I got my first question out of the way, I wanted to ramble alittle of how much my appreciation of Gargoyles has grown from reading the questions in this forum. I never knew any of the subtlies that existed in the show such as the stroking of hair and horn, the tradition of not naming things, the practice of the whole clan being the Fathers and Mothers to all the rookery children, and the wonderful Wind Ceremony that you went into detail here in the forums. This all highlights the amazing differences between Humans and Gargoyles. This intensely intrests me now that I'm in college and am a Anthropology student,(yes I do realize the oddness of the situation, a Anthropology student getting a kick out of studying culture that isn't that of man). I particularly love the not naming tradtion in Gargoyle society. Both of my parents are deaf so growing up my first language was Sign Language, not English. This put me in a unique position of knowing 2 names for everything, and knowing 2 different ways of expressing my own name. One being that of my spoken English name "Lovel" and the other being the expressed gesture of my Sign Language name (which I can't even express in writing becasue it is something you have to see instead of read). So when I read your response to a ramble of one of the fans that Hudson would have been put off by the odd tradition of giving the sky a name when it already has a name, and that he would think it odd of giving himself a name since he is already known as "Friend,Father, Mentor, Old Friend etc." This delighted me when I read it since it made me reflect on how my name is not really who I am and I never identify it as "ME". When I try and think of who I am I think in adjectives, kind, friendly, smart, jolly, the last thing that comes to mind is my name. I also enjoy knowing that I can also think of myself as a gesture instead of a spoken word or a sound. Having said all of that,(thanks for putting up with it for this long), my second question would be, How would a Gargoyle refer to the great Hudson in a story? To clarify you once repied that a Gargoyle would refer to another one in a story as "The one of Broadshoulders". This made me wonder how would the clan refer to Hudson in a story. For that matter how would Golaith be refered to in 2198? Would he be refered to by his human name of Golaith or would he have a Gargoyle "name" to which they would refer?

Thank you for your time and I appreciate everything you have done for all us fans. I also want to thank you for coming up with such an amazing universe and introducing it to everyone here. Thanks

--Lovel

Blaise writes...

GRIEF

I've been waiting for a long time to ramble on this one.
I like this episode mostly, I think, because of how it deals with death, and even the personification of that concept. Anubis' change when going through the three personae really does reflect the faces of death: it can be horrifying and gruesome (Jackal-avatar), or it can be a peaceful release (Emir-avatar), and finally, outside of those faces, it just exists as a constant part of life (Anubis).
I thought Anubis was well done (and I cannot describe how thrilled I was to hear Tony Jay's voice in GARGOYLES). Actually, Mr. Jay also played an incarnation of Death (the Grim Reaper, in this case) in an episode of DARKWING DUCK (a slightly less dignified portrayal, but a fun one). At any rate, I also thought it was cool that Anubis talked without a mouth or any outward expression. In fact, he strikes me as the type of being who really doesn't care what form/name he takes on. I could be wrong on that count, but he seems to take his office very seriously and place it above all other concerns. I, too, felt it was out of character for him when he laughed in THE GATHERING part 1.
On a tangent, here, Greg, I feel I must disagree with your description of laughter as "petty." I, for one, think laughter to be one of the best things there is in life--heck, I watched "Treasure of the Sierra Madre" last week and one of the best parts is the laughing at the end (I'll say no more for fear of spoiling it). Anubis, of course, is one who for ages has been "guardian of the gate" so he would be less likely to laugh at anything in this world (certainly not at the Banshee falling on her bum), but I still don't think that in any way diminishes the "power of laughter," if you will. Of course, I could have just been reading too much into that statement. Okay, enough out of me on that.
I was VERY surprised to see the Emir actually appear. I had always figured (as I have said in earlier rambles) that Xanatos' dealings with the Emir would be something of a running gag, always in the background of the series. Instead, he turned out to be a person with a past and an agenda all his own. I don't condone his actions here, but I do understand, and even sympathize with him. I cannot fully know his pain, that of losing a child (and I pray I never find out), but I have lost family and friends over the years, and felt the wish to turn back the clock, if only for a little bit. Tony Shaloub did fantastic work here. I especially like his one line: "To hold [my son] again...I would move Heaven and Earth with my BARE HANDS!" Indeed, he seems to be doing that. I may be wrong in assuming the Emir is Islamic, but if he is then calling up a deity of the Egyptian pantheon shows just how desperate and determined he is to regain his son.

Okay, now let's back track and start at the beginning.
I was glad to see the Pack again, though a little disappointed that Dingo wasn't among them (I was starting to find him the most interesting), but then he always did seem to be the odd one out. Coyote's new design was cool, and I was glad the head was still there (though I was puzzled, since last I saw it was smashed--now I know it's an image). My eyes widened at Hyena's line to Coyote, "Wanna make sparks fly?" That had to be one of the most sexually tilted lines I had ever heard in the series. And then there's Jackal's look at the Anubis carving. I know Jackal liked Anubis for being jackal-headed, but I sometimes wonder if the connection to death might not have sweetened the idea.
The old "hidden temple in the Sphinx" concept. I know it was at least used in an old computer game before GARGOYLES came out, but is this an idea that dates even further back?
The travelers arrive, and Angela describes the Sphinx as the world's "biggest gargoyle" (and yes, I did expect that connection to be made!).
I looked at the scene where Goliath spys on Coyote and from what I can tell the face is in the bubble. Also, Coyote and Goliath seem to press the same carvings--maybe that got fixed in later airings?
Shortly thereafter a battle ensues. Jackal and Hyena, with their prediliction for blades, are still unnerving. I love the little "Uh-oh" Elisa says before Coyote knocks her out.
One more thing about Anubis, here. It always fascinates me how he refers to death as a "boon." Actually, his lines about death really got me the first time I saw this ep. It actually made me think about the nature of death and look at it in a slightly different way.
The Pack has some nice interplay with each other in this ep. Pity it's the last we'll see of it for a while--a fact I didn't really pick up on until the second or third viewing. The Pack had always been a group (except for HER BROTHER'S KEEPER, where it was Jackal and Hyena), and them splitting up was as unthinkable to me as the Manhattan clan splitting up. But I digress....
Jackal to Coyote: "You're not exactly Mr. subtlety." And the understatement of the year award goes to.... :-)
I agree that a great opportunity was missed by not having our heroes get blasted and survive. It would have really driven the magnitude of the situation home. However...even as I think of that, I can't help but wonder if their bodies could still be damaged, which may open up a whole other can of worms. Ah well, it's all moot now.
I knew Jackal would try to take the Emir's place as Anubis' avatar. I thought it was a great job with the character design and voice mixing--not only did I like having both Anubis and his "vessel" talking at the same time, I kind of expected it. It seemed right.
Jackal-avatar's attitude and use of power are indeed chilling. Heck, by the time he ages Elisa he's doing it just for fun (she wasn't even moving to attack him). The skeletonized crocodiles were pretty eerie, but that WHOLE TOWN (obviously inhabited) being wiped out was horrifying. I had wondered for years if Emir-avatar had been able to undo that damage. Now I know that he couldn't...and that makes the whole scene all the more disturbing.
I never picked up on Jackal using the promise of reuniting the Emir with his son as Jackal's way of keeping the Emir from stopping his fun--I always took it that Jackal would kill the Emir last of all. But now the Emir's refusal to act sooner makes more sense to me.
Goliath anashamedly refers to Angela as his daughter here. He doesn't do it to her face, but still....
The Emir-avatar's design is cool, too. I especially like the soft blue eyes (as opposed to Jackal-avatar's one ghost-white eye and Anubis' glowing red eyes).
Backing up, again, I like the "black light" energy that Jackal-avatar gave off. I had always wondered how something like that would be accomplished, and this was a pretty darn good way of showing how.
Emir-avatar destroys the temple, and I remember worrying (even on the second viewing) that the Sphinx would be destroyed as well. I was also thankful that it survived. (Like Todd, I saw that "X-Men Evolution" episode, and recalled cringing when I saw missles hitting the Sphinx in the face and back).
I already knew that gargoyles aged at half the speed of humans (again, that Disney Adventures article), but it was nice to actually hear it onscreen.
And I loved that final summation by Goliath. Very poignant.

This was an episode I really loved (the title is great, too).

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for the ramble on "Grief", Greg.

I was amused by your remark about Michael Reaves and a Batman episode that he'd written involving Egyptian elements that had gotten changed. As I'd commented in an earlier question (which you should have gotten to long before you read this response to your ramble, since it's that much before me in the queue), I'd seen an episode of "Batman: TAS" once named "Avatar" with some moments strongly evocative of "Grief", and I suspect that that was the episode that you alluded to.

I hadn't picked up the double meaning of the title (though I did recall Wolf's use of the word). Thanks for pointing it out.

I certainly wasn't surprised that Dingo was absent, after "Upgrade". I *was* surprised to see the Emir actually becoming an on-stage character, and agree with you that his role was an effective one. (Another bit that I hadn't picked up on was your remark about Jackal's semi-promise to reunite the Emir with his son was what kept him from acting earlier, and was deliberately uttered by Jackal to keep him from interfering.)

I might add that I was certainly not surprised to see your remark about "I should have had the Pack kill Goliath and Co. only to discover that they couldn't die while Anubis was trapped." (Incidentally, the situation of "While Anubis is imprisoned, nobody can die" reminds me of the Greek myth about how Sisyphus put either Hades or the death-god Thanatos - which one he imprisoned varies from which version of the story you read - in handcuffs to wriggle out of being taken away to the underworld, with the result that nobody was able to die - until Ares, fed up with the fact that the "nobody could die" business was taking all the "fun" out of war, freed his prisoner.)

Jackal becoming Anubis's avatar and causing all that devastation was one of the creepiest moments in all of "Gargoyles" for me - especially when he aged Goliath and Co. (The fate of the crocodiles was certainly chilling). I think that the fates of Hyena and Wolf served as a good "comic relief" counterbalance to it to keep it from getting too dark. (Wolf being turned into a puppy was great!)

(I can see one flaw in Jackal's plan, though; if you wipe out all other life on Earth, what do you do after that, with nobody else to torment?)

I can agree with you about the "cringe" moments over the gargoyles and the Pack destroying ancient Egyptian antiquities, and the relief that they didn't destroy the Sphinx. (It's odd, since a couple of days ago I saw an episode of "X-Men: Evolution" where there was a battle between Apocalypse and some Sentinels at the Sphinx, and I had a shuddering moment when one of the Sentinels blasted a hole in the Sphinx's back.)

And the end with Goliath hoping that the Emir was reunited with his son in the afterlife was a touching moment.

matt writes...

i just watched "MIA" last night. i wrote down some notes:

- first off, the English gargoyles. for years i didn't like them, i mean physically. they seemed so different from the other gargs around the world and they looked like birds, lions and horses. that really irked me, but i've gotten over it. i started to think of different reasons they look like they do, and Greg had some theories as well, so i'm ok wth it now, and frankly, they are now my favorite gargoyle race to draw. i find them really neat. i did notice that they are the only gargs we've seen whose eyes seem to be tinted when NOT glowing. Leo and Griff's eyes were tinted tannish-gold and Una's were more light blue. interesting.
- it made me sad for years that there were only three gargoyles in the English Clan. i remember thinking to myself that they were another clan that was dying out, just like the Manhattan Clan. much to my surprise and excitement, i discovered the fandom online and soon discovered a whole Clan was never seen on the show! and they are one of the more populated Clans at that! very cool.
- it always amazes me how good a likeness of Griff and Goliath those statues are... guess Leo, Una and the pilots had excellant memories.
- when the English thugs surround Elisa i think how rascist they must be against her. kinda feel sorry for them... esspecially when the gargs kick their @$$! i LOVE Angela's line, "Surely we were sent her for something more important than this..." she gets that from her mother i think,
- i remember thinking that it was weird that Angela instantly recognized Leo and Una as gargoyles. esspecially because they were robed and she had recently been tricked by Raven. plus Leo and Una look so different than most gargoyles. maybe she smelled them or something. or maybe she was somehow familiar with the idea of what English gargs looked like.
- i like how comfortable Leo and Una are around humans. so used to them. its certaintly new to not see humans running away in fear of gargs.
- good touch when Goliath transports into the 1940 sky and falls cuz he was standing up. kinda like having the rug pulle dout from under you.
- i instantly love Griff when he saves Goliath from a propellor blade and says, "You know old boy, that could've been a bit nasty!" love his accent, hes great, i love Griff!
- when Griff honors Leo and Una for "minding the store" i think about how Hudson and Bronx are always left behind and how that is honorable too.
- when Goliath and Griff take on the pilots its great animation, it reminds me of the Trio taking on the Pack's helicopter. i like these sky battles, i guess.
- every time i see Goliath's wing get shot, i cringe. "OW!" thats gotta hurt, i mean theres a hole in his wing!
- destiny really had it out for Griff, one thing after another tried to kill him. i remember i was a little afraid that Goliath would be unable to prevent his death and hjave to go back to tell Leo and Una how Griff had died. fortunatly, Goliath was smart enough to get out of the warzone and back to the 90s.
- and back in the 90s theres a reunion, but a weird and awkward one. talk about your love triangles. Una is stuck between the gargoyle she loved in her youth and has been missing for so many years and the gargoyle who has been her companion for all those years! it doesn't help that Griff and Leo are such good friends either. its an ugly situation, i think and i totally understand why Griff would want to stay with King Arthur, but thats a story for another day...

Alex Garg writes...

"Although I don't know if they actually used the M.I.A. acronym as far back as WWII. I associate it with Vietnam. Does anyone else know?"

The farthest back I've seen militaries use "Missing," not necessarily "M.I.A.," on casualty lists is the Crimean War. I know the U.S. used "Missing" during the Civil War. Before then, armies had "Unclassified" casualties because it was nearly impossible to tell if someone was missing as a result of a battle, was mixed up with another unit or had gotten scared and ran from the battle.

But going back to your actual question, the acronym came about during WWI (or at least that's when the U.S. began keeping track of M.I.A. figures) and was very much used in WWII. The U.S. Department of Defense Defense Prisoner of War/Missing Personnel Office's mission of recovering M.I.A.'s begins with those missing from WWII.

Probably the reason why you associate the acronym with Vietnam is because the U.S. added the acronym M.I.A.P.D. - Missing in Action Presumed Dead - to its acronym-heavy lexicon either shortly before or during Vietnam, and because the government didn't want to keep reporting PD's to the media, they more readily reported those who were M.I.A. and might be found alive (of course, they might have been reporting PD's as well and just never informed the general public about the acronym's extension).

Sobering statistic time: Of the 217,000 U.S. soldiers reported M.I.A. from WWI through Vietnam, 42% remain unaccounted for; 88,000 of those still missing are from WWII-Vietnam.

Anyway, that's the best I can do with that - maybe someone else knows more. Thanks for the ramble, I hope you have more on the way.

Battle Beast writes...

I loved the ep. Not just to see a new clan of Gargoyles, but it brings up memories of the war stories my Grandmother told me.

Every time I watch it, I can see my Grandmother running for cover from the Nazi's as a young girl. And then I can see my Grandfather shooting them down. Every time I watch "M.I.A." I think of my Grandfather very fondley.
To me, my grandfather was, and still is a good 'ole Canadian war hero.

Thanks a million, Greg!

Blaise writes...

M.I.A.

Ahhhh...a new ramble! Glad to hear your thoughts on the episodes again, Greg!

Anyway, as soon as I saw Una and Leo I kind of figured them to be gargoyles--I don't know why, exactly, but it just seemed so obvious. I love the idea of the magic shop, too--I know it's the type of shop I'd like to visit.
While I'm talking about the London clan (or at least, the three that we've met), I just want to talk about their designs. Not just their physical designs mind you--their clothes and such as well. I'll admit, I didn't know much about "heraldic animals" at the time I saw this, so I didn't quite pick up that layer of it. I still liked it, though--helped make them unique, even from Raven's illusion clan. The feathered wings were also quite beautiful. Their tails, though, don't look like they would be as strong as those in the other clans we have seen. Griff's and Leo's maybe, but I doubt Una would be able to wrap her tail around someone's gun and jerk it from their grasp. Their attire is similarly unique, with them wearing quasi-medieval armor and dresses (I especially like Una's dress; very elegant). Griff's is different, yet still evocative of armor, which IMO makes him seem more "modern" than his cohorts. Leo and Una's cloaks are nice, and color-coded as well--green for Leo, violet for Una. Other small things: Leo's eyes seem to have a yellowish tint while Una's have a blue one, Leo's mane is tied back in a pony tail (never noticed that before...). And, even after your ramble, Greg, I look at Griff and cannot see a bit of Foghorn Leghorn in him.
Okay, long digression. Anyway, seeing Leo and Una's coldness to the plight of the man from the street made me feel a little cold to them myself. Leo seems to be a bit more aware than Una is though. By that I mean, he's the one who looks out the window and says "There goes the neighborhood." This sort of thing leads me to believe that Leo's final "revelation" in ACT 3 is something that he's been pondering over for quite some time. Sure, he still doesn't do anything, but I can't help feeling there's something there.
The weary travelers arrive in London, and spot the memorial. I instantly recognized Goliath's statue and became intrigued, as for Griff's...I think I had some vague recollection of his portrait, but I didn't really dwell on it.
Elisa apologizes to the cabby for the "American money." It's a little touch, but I really like it.
Then the thugs show up. I think I've finally figured out the actors who did the voices of the three who talked:
Jeff Bennett--Baldy.
Neil Dickson--Red Mohawk.
Gregg Berger--Big Guy with Torn Green Shirt.
(I could be wrong, though...)
Anyway, the gargs show up and make short work of them (I especially love Angela's disdain over her foe). Leo and Una arrive on the scene, and Goliath (and this audience member) start to become confused. Elisa, noticing the growing crowd, suggests that everyone go inside the shop.
When it comes up that Goliath met the London clan in 1940, I remembered the "Previously on..." segment with Goliath saying he's going to make sure nobody uses the Gate again, and kind of figured out what would happen.
Maybe I really am cold, but I don't feel much sympathy towards Leo and Una at this point. Even in hindsight, I still feel cold. They don't even bother to listen to Goliath's story--I would have thought the mention of "being frozen in stone hibernation" would have at least piqued their curiosity in some way. Instead, they just feel like doling out punishment--even if it means shackling up an innocent third party in the dungeon for no other reason than their association with Goliath. I never noticed the parallel between Una and Demona before you mentioned it, Greg, but I definitely see it.
I didn't think Goliath's "inner monologue" was terribly awkward. I mean, Matt Bluestone, a supporting character, got pretty much a whole episode to do it. Who are we to begrudge the series lead just one line.
I like Griff's reaction to Goliath's "You saved my life--it was suppossed to work the other way around." I also like Goliath's tentative "Pleased to meet you" when he "first" meets Leo and Una.
Back on the London Clan designs again--I really liked how the artists aged them (or "youthened" them as the case may be). Lines on the face, the grey in Leo's hair. Also the voice actors did a good job (I especially liked Sarah Douglas).
I never heard the name of Douglas Bader before this episode. And even then I didn't know he was a real person (nor how exceptional he was) until I read about it in one of your responses to something. I'm glad you got the chance to meet someone like that (hell, you got to go to DISNEYLAND with someone like that--that's got to be an honor). Even in this ep, he was the one who stood out, and (knowing who he is now) it makes his dogfight with "the Skull" all the cooler.
Funny you should mention using the Goliath/Una/Leo/Griff scene in your voice seminars, Greg--I remember reading that scene in the one you held at the Gathering 2001. I was Goliath, as I recall (very hard trying to follow in Kieth David's footsteps), and Crispan Freeman was Griff. What a fun time!
I like how Goliath doesn't say a definite "Yes, let's fight" or "No, stay here" but just states a simple truth. He's trying to stay out of trouble, of course, but it also just seems, to me, like the most intelligent and even-handed thing to say. And in the next 55 years, Leo and Una apparantly twisted the whole darn thing around in their heads....
Leo expresses some doubt even at this point, asking if Griff thinks less of him and Una for not going out to fight. I like the arm clasp, too.
By this point I had definitely realized that Una and Griff were an item this far back. I also kind of guessed that during the interrum (sp?) she and Leo got together.
The Battle of Britain. I had never made the connection between the wee lad running with his sister, and the old cab driver in the present. Makes the scene even cooler now, though.
Nor, I must shamefacedly admit, did I single out the skull-and-crossbones plane ("the Skull" as I have already called him) as unique. I feel like an idiot now though--it just seems so obvious. Heck, even after the pilot's gone the PLANE continues to be a threat; the last thing Goliath and Griff have to escape. It's an old trick--you have a lot of similar enemies (planes, in this case) you give one a distinguishing (sp?) mark to set it apart and mark it as the "alpha enemy" (kind of like Stripe in "Gremlins.")
Speaking of gremlins, I kind of like the connection with the gargoyles (come to think of it, I always saw Lexington as being gremlin-like--greenish-brown with a prediliction for tinkering and all that). I also like that Bader notices them, and instead of being frightened, actually becomes a sort of ally.
The "no-dying" rule...I have to admit I get kind of sick of that sometimes. Several other animated shows I've seen (western animated) actually managed to have planes explode and no parachutes shoot out. Heck, at least they should have had "the Skull" be stuck in his plane. (And maybe I'm sadistic, but I would have liked a shot of his screaming face just before his plane crashed....)
Goliath's wound. Ouch. I still say that every time I see him get hit. He still manages to pull off some great ariel manuevers on that injured wing, though.
And talk about a tough time getting home. First they're nearly shot out of the sky by friendly fire, then a building nearly falls on them, then a truck nearly hits them (and rudely interrupts Goliath while he's speaking).
And finally Goliath realizes what we the audience already knew--that time is immutable--and to avoid the final danger ("the Skull's" plane) Goliath sends both he and Griff back to the future (pun intended). Pretty much what I expected would ultimately happen.
Leo and Una look in on their captives in the basement (the fact that Elisa and the rest are in chains lessened my respect for them another notch), and after Elisa figures out what Goliath's plan is, both of the London gargoyles pause. Una recovers and continues to rant and rail against Goliath, while Leo closes his eyes and realizes the truth. I love Leo's speech here. And how he admits that while protecting their home may have been "the right thing to do" it's still their own guilt they've been feeling. I find this scene even more fascinating with the revelation that Una is the leader of the London clan. A leader is a person, too, with all the foibles (even Goliath shows that from time to time).
Goliath and Griff show up and Griff experiences major culture shock. I love the punk playing the gameboy--he just walks right by these two huge, winged monsters and doesn't even notice. In fact, Griff is the one who nearly faints (into the path of an approaching car). I just love Goliath's "Let's not start that again." Keith David just delivers it so well.
The reunions commence. I already started warming up to Leo and Una after the cellar, but now it really is great to see the joy on their faces. Griff is also joyful, but it's easy to sense a bit of awkwardness as well.
Goliath tries to explain the time loop, and Elisa does the "smile, nod" thing and asks for the explanation just one more time. "And take it slow."
The thugs pester the "foreigner" again--it wasn't until now that I realized they were racists as well--and then find themselves reaquainted with the fact that there are people out there even more different from them. Leo and Una kick two of them away (and Una has HOOVES--triple OUCH!), and stand proudly...in front of a crowd of humans. I thought that was rather interesting. I especially like the shopkeeper (the guy in the apron). He has his arms folded almost as if in pride.

Well, there's my ramble (and a long one, too). Can't wait for your next one (though I may have to--but I'll do so gladly).

Todd Jensen writes...

Wow! A new ramble! This is the best Columbus Day present that I've ever had! (Actually, it's the only Columbus Day that I've ever had, but it was still a very pleasant surprise).

I really liked "M.I.A." and still do. A major reason is that it was set in London and I'm a Anglophile (particularly since I spent a lot of my boyhood in England, from between the time that I was 9 to the time that I was almost 13). Plus it was a time travel episode involving a bit of English history (the Battle of Britain), and on top of all that, I really liked Griff. I found him a great character.

I found your vision of Macbeth and Shakespeare visiting the Mystic shop together a delightful one (even if you don't see it as having literally happened in the Gargoyles Universe). I considered it appropriate that the London gargs be shopkeepers, on account of Napoleon's famous description of the British as "a nation of shopkeepers" (which you even alluded to in your ramble). (Of course, I've sometimes wondered if Napoleon might have reconsidered his dismissal of the British after those setbacks that he received from Lord Nelson and the Duke of Wellington.) And they show themselves to be further "anglicized" by even having tea! (I liked the little touch of Una apologizing for the absence of sugar on account of rationing.)

I've sometimes wondered what the London public's response was to the gargoyles' memorial statue; since they didn't know then that gargoyles were real, it must have seemed to the bulk of them like - say, raising a World War One monument to the Angels of Mons.

I also thought that the racist thugs in this episode were almost the English equivalent to the street thugs in "Awakening Part Three", "Avalon Part One", and "Hunter's Moon Part One". Rather appropriate that they'd be racists, as a parallel to the Nazis in the 1940 sequence (and definitely fitting in with Griff's comment of "The more things change, the more they stay the same.")

I hadn't even realized the similarity between Demona and Una before you mentioned it.

One thing that amused me about the episode was Leo and Una's response towards Goliath's using the Phoenix Gate - just a mild stare. (Maybe it's not so surprising, given that if you work in a magic shop, you start getting used to things.)

I liked your description of Griff, and was amused by your description of him as a "Robin Hood of the 1940's". It strikes me as particularly appropriate in light of his later on team-up with King Arthur; after all, Arthur and Robin Hood are the two leading "legendary heroes" of Britain. While a literal team-up between them in the Gargoyles Universe doesn't strike me as probable (I assume that Robin Hood is long since dead by the present-day portion of the series), Griff can serve as an equivalent to him. (Of course, T. H. White did manage to pull off a literal team-up between Arthur and Robin Hood in "The Sword in the Stone".)

I hadn't known about Douglas Bader before I saw "M.I.A." (I recall that it was Stormy who first informed me about Bader being a real historical figure when I joined the Gargoyles fandom at Station 8, back in late 1996 and early 1997). I really liked him in the episode, especially his being another human who could see gargoyles for what they really are (my favorite moments involving him being his saying "They're real, and they're on our side!" and he and Griff giving each other the thumbs-up after he shoots down the Nazi pilot). And I enjoyed "Reach for the Sky" (it even brought back memories of my boyhood in England, even though they were from the late 70's), after you recommended it in early 2001.

Goliath's line "human problems become gargoyle problems" is a favorite of mine; indeed, a close inspection of the series (as I've said before) shows how true it was. For one thing, we've seen how all those struggles for the succession to the Scottish throne between 971 and 1057 impacted the gargoyles in Scotland (the alliance between Prince Malcolm and Hudson, the flight of the eggs to Avalon after Constantine's usurpation, the rise of the Hunters, Macbeth and Demona's short-lived alliance). And it still goes on in the modern world, where Castaway's vengeful war on the clan arose from a human problem (he shot his brother and couldn't take the responsibility for it, so he goes after the gargs instead to take it out on them).

Another favorite bit of mine; Goliath tells Una that he won't let anything happen to Griff "this time", and Una puzzles over the "this time" part.

Since (as I mentioned in my comments on "Avalon Part Two") I've been working on a fantasy novel for some time now (begun even before "Gargoyles" came out) which uses the same rules for time travel as "Gargoyles" did (that you can't change the past because your travels there are already part of it), which were there even before "Gargoyles" came out as well, I had no difficulty following the time loop. (One reason why I'm grateful for having come up with those rules for time travel independently before the series aired - it made the Phoenix Gate episodes easier to follow!)

Your comment at the end about Leo remembering "what his business is supposed to be" reminded me of the scene in Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" where Scrooge tells Marley's ghost "But you were always a good man of business, Jacob", and Marley replies "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

At any rate, it's great to have a new ramble again. Let's hope that there's more in the weeks to come.

Todd Jensen writes...

I just thought that I'd mention that I enjoyed your account of your visit to Scotland, particularly your getting to visit the Stone of Scone/Stone of Destiny and your reading "Shakespeare's Kings" (I've got a copy of the book myself, and very much enjoyed it). Thanks for sharing it with us.

Francois Ferland writes...

If nothing went right, you recently got a post I made by mistake that included every previous questions I asked you. But if everything went right and the webmaster got my mail, it's gone and you don't know what I'm talking about. I'm hoping for the former, so here's the question I was trying to send last time:

I'm still making my way through the archives (hey, it's been four years since I read it all) and each day brings forth new ideas to me, so forgive me for swarming you with so many posts in a row.

I've been reading several of the comments you made when seeing Gargoyles episodes with your family, and where you where interested in how we reacted at first to some events. So I decided to dig up those old memories and list a few key moments from the show where you (and your staff) managed to really surprise me.

Deadly Force:

This one surprised the hell out of me. When Broadway fires the gun and we hear silence, I was certain that this was a fake-scare. I mean, one of the show's hero shooting another one? Get real! And then I saw Elisa on the floor. And not just lying there with no sign of injury like is often shown in cartoons with serious accident, but resting in a pool of her own blood! If there ever was a moment where I finally took for granted that Gargoyles was a cartoon far beyond any other in terms of sophistication, that was it. And even better, we got that from Disney? Damn, I wish they'd take that kind of risk again for a TV series...

The Edge:

The opening scene where Xanatos, responding to Owen's offer to pretend to lose, replies "I'd fire you if you did". Almost any other cartoon (or live action show for that matter) would have had the villain either beat up or berate his underling for daring to beat him. You just expect it, as it's one of the most popular stereotype on TV. At this point, I still didn't know enough about Xanatos to expect that from him. It's also a defining moment where I also realized that Xanatos wasn't your ordinary bad guy. I don't think he ever really surprised that much afterward.

A Lightouse In The Sea Of Time:

Having Xanatos shown as the one responsible for the theft at first was actually refreshing. You don't know how many shows I've seen where even for very obscure reasons the right villain is always suspected right away, or how a mostly forgotten villain will suddenly be mentionned for no reason at all just to be revealed as being the brains behind the evil scheme of the day.

Maybe producers feel they don't have time to waste on a false lead, or that it's better to give the upcoming villain some introduction, no matter how clumsy it might seem.

Outfoxed:

When we meet Preston Vogel, there was an immediate alarm in my mind. We get another executive assistant type-guy who happens to look exactly like Owen? Can you say lazy Character Model re-use? It felt very cheap, and even though the rest of the episode was good, that particular detail always bugged me. That is, until several episodes down the road, we get to...

The Gathering:

First off, the scene where Petros comments on Vogel and Owen's ressembleance was hilarious. At first, I thought it was only a bit of self-derision, being aware the animators hadn't been very subtle about Vogel's character model, until Puck tells us Vogel was the inspiration for Owen. Great stuff.

And while Oberon was wasting his energy fighting the force field, I kept yelling "Just get in form the underside, it's not protected dummy!". It always seemed stupid in cartoons and comics when nobody ever thinks to go UNDER the blasted force field. Imagine my surprise when our favourite lord and master does just that.

I'm sure there are other instances where the Gargoyles staff played on our expectations as an audience. It gives the series a much more polished feel, that you were quite aware of what we might think and expect and deliberately used that to your advantage as often as possible to surprise us.

Francois Ferland writes...

Hello yet another time Greg! Sorry to flood you with questions as of late but keep fate, as I'm running out of things to ask you.

1. This one's simple and concerns the Children of Oberon.

Almost everyone uses Children of Oberon and Fae interchangeably. But after going through the archive for said beings, you once mentionned that Fae (or is it Fey? No one seems to agree on the spelling) are only one particular group of Oberon's Children akin to the Norse or African pantheon.

I'm not really knowledgeable in myths and legends, so could you tell me who the Fey are, with example from the show? I assume (perhaps or should I say probably wrongly) that it simply represents another pantheon, maybe the Anglo-Saxon one (is it Anglo-Saxon if I'm refering to England, Scotland, Ireland and other countries nearby) in which case, Puck, Oberon and Titania might be a part of it, being quite ingrained in English litterature.

But then again, what do I know?

2. This one's not a question but a personal comment, so I can get away with it not being on the same subject :) . It just dawned on me that by creating such a complex and (in itself) realistic universe with Gargoyles, you ran the risk of the viewers not "getting" many of the subtleties of the show, its universe and characters.

With your average TV show, things are often very clear. Heroes, while hardly perfect, are almost always morally right, while bad guys, which are not always purely evil persons, are almost always despisable no matter how they try to justify themselves. You rarely see a character that can't basically be classified as "good" or "evil", or to use more appropriate terms, morally "right" or "wrong".

Also, most of the time, what you see of a character on screen is a pretty accurate representation of who that person is and what they do all the time. So if someone is always seen giving money to the poor and never seen doing anything reprehensible, you assume that person is caring and generous. It never dawns on you that the man in question might actually beat up his wife everyday, because it wouldn't "fit" with the image shown to you. Yet it would not be impossible, as people are known to have very selective values sometimes. He might feel bad for those less fortunate while thinking that "disciplining" his wife is the right thing to do for a husband. Like I said, such is rarely the case, and what is shown is often intended to be representative of the whole truth.

And finally, things are often easily explained in most TV shows. The villain did this because of that, the aliens invaded for such reason, etc.

What am I getting at? That a lot of the questions you get at Ask Greg are due to the above. Although the fans recognize and live the show for its maturity and above-average (and that's putting it lightly) complexity, they fail to realize that things in the Gargoyles universe, just like in real life, don't have easy answers.

The seemingly benign Weird Sisters lost a large part of the popular vote when it seemed all their interventions were geared for the sole purpose of revenge. Yet, you said yourself that the Sisters have many aspects, with vengeance and fate being a part of them. We at first ASSUMED they were completely (or close to) benign, and then we changed our perception to one where they are only after revenge. And yet, like you said, things aren't that simple, and we STILL don't know much about who the Sisters really are. The fate part might play a larger role later on, or they could yet reveal another part of their identity. In the end, they are complex characters who cannot be summed up in a few sentence, which is what most people seem to want.

Oberon is another victim of this. I admit that I too, thought he was a big arrogant jerk, whom Titania manipulated all the time to get what she felt was best for everyone. But like you made me realize, he has a lot of quality, the first being that he cared enough about mortals and how his Children dealt with them to force them out in the real world for a millenium in the hope of them gaining some maturity. And in every story we saw with him, he always ended up being generally fair to most. He isn't perfect (and who is?); is not above pettiness and anger for example. But his behaviour, from his POV, is perfectly acceptable, if not admirable. And there is so much about him we don't know and haven't seen to be able to judge his being accurately. For all we know and despite appearances, Titania might not be THAT more mature than him.

The list goes on and on. People (and I'm guilty of that as well) want easy answers where there are only complex explainations. I hated the concept of Anubis on my first viewing of "Grief" because it seemed at first that all death on Earth were and had always been caused by the guy. It just seemed so cheap, yet I accepted it at face value because it was what was shown at the time (and like I said, we tend to not question things seemingly presented as fact). Now, thanks to you, I know better, with what little you let on about death-gods and their connection to death and such. And just like there's no solid rule as to wether the Children can go against Oberon's law. It depends on all sorts of things, like intent, bending the law itself and people's words and so long and so forth.

In short, thanks for Ask Greg, I've gotten a better perspective on the complexity of the Gargoyles universe. It doesn't mean I'm no longer looking for easy answers, but I understand why you might reply that "there are no easy answers" or "it isn't that simple", because in your mind, that's really the case. Thanks again for your patience and dedication!

Punchinello writes...

Hi Mr. Weisman.

Have you ever noticed that anonymity cant disguise transparent stupidity?

I have.

The Cat writes...

I'm going to ramble and rant, so I hope you can forgive me if I confuse you or loose you along the way.

Response from Greg to Vanity's question that was posted January 6th 2002:

The notion that vengeance begets nothing more than a vicious cycle of further vengeance, is not only true but is if anything UNDERSTATED. Hardly exaggerate. One only has to look at a newspaper to see that the Montagues and Capulets of this world simply refuse to recognize this obvious, obvious FACT. It drives me insane. Your casual dismissal of the notion doesn't thrill me either. (Sorry.)

Okay, I'm going to ramble on this one a bit. Chew it up spit it out type deal.

Okay, what has always confused me about Demona is that she supposably hates humans. She wants to kill them and wipe them off the planet.

If that is true then why didn't she kill the Canmore brat when he was young and not any sort of threat to her. She could have gotten away with it to, to an extent of the imagination anyway, saying that she was protecting herself from attack and that she just happened to rake the young child's jugular vein with her talons would have worked rather nicely as an excuse. The thing is Demona knew, sort of, that Canmore would become vengeful. I mean, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out that this little bratty prince is going to go looking for revenge. He's so spoiled he still needs some one to wipe his butt! If that doesn't say"I'm going to go seeking revenge because somebody lower than me hurt my pride I don't know what does. She could have easily nipped it in the bud and there would no longer be any Hunters. Of course, you put them into the show to keep the plot rolling, but that really didn't work out did it. Of course not.

Also, Demona is suppose to be insane. She could have easily taken out the humans with her plague. Why tell Goliath that all he had to do was destroy the praying gargoyle and then she wouldn't spread the plague. Insane people are not known for having morals! What got me to was she wouldn't spread the plague because it would kill Angela. That made no sense. Demona has always tried to kill Goliath and the clan, saying that they've been corrupted by the humans. Now, the interesting thing is Angela has been the most corrupted. She was raised by humans and taught by humans, so Demona should have wanted to kill her to. Especially her. That would have definitely reinstated the fact that Demona was a villain.

Perhaps I'm looking into this too much, but Demona had the opportunity to kill a lot of people in the last thousand years and save herself a lot of heartache later. I highly doubt that anyone would defend the Canmore brat. I highly doubt anyone would have been capable of stopping her from killing the last hundred or so Hunters that came after her when Canmore didn't succeed.

However, I think I can answer this for myself I just want to know your thoughts on it.

Demona is not evil, per say, and she's hoping that the humans realize that they've treated her kind wrong and will repent, however, she doesn't see that time coming up anytime soon. She also saw that Macbeth's way of handling Canmore was better, not as fulfilling, but better. She, I suppose, was expecting Canmore to realize, later, that she had spared his life and that he might realize that it was out of the goodness of her heart not out of the fact that she couldn't kill him. Men are extremely short sighted in this fact: A woman can kill you! A beast can kill you! *shrugs* I've never understood how come it was so hard for some men to understand this.

Also, I think Demona's looking at the whole revenge thing a bit wrong. If I'm correct she's looking at it as though its her against The Hunter. She's not looking at it as though it is a war. That it is a campaign that she has to plan for. That she has to choose her ground. She needed to think things through!

I honestly have to wonder how many times she has planned out her schemes. Aside from the plague thingy, I don't think she's ever thought any of her things through to the very end. I'd have to say that she never thought about what torture Puck would put her through the night she stole The Mirror, if she had she probably wouldn't have stolen it. The one time she does plan for years upon years she hamstrings her own plan by telling Goliath how to defeat her. Stupid! Utterly stupid!

So, now I've ranted and I want to know am I right? Even to some degree.
Also, I'd like it if you read this. It was the main reason I began this rant. The book is titled: Oathblood and was written by Mercedes Lackey. One of my all time favorite authors. (I know you don't read fan fiction, quite understandable really, but I usually incorporate some aspect of her stuff into my fan fiction.) This book is a bunch of short stories pulled together and the last one is the one that inspired this rant, however, the whole book is good and I would suggest reading the other two that go with this one as well. Their titles are "Oathbound" and "Oathbreakers". They're good books and a must read for anybody because they go into details that most fantasy novels just don't go into. Especially, the ones published back in the 1980's when it was still "a man's world".

Punchinello writes...

<<Gargoyles as well can type on keyboards and relay thought. Lexington with very little experience in terms of years and could only practice at night, was able to punch a keyboard judging by the "clicking" sound of the keyboard at nearly 129 words per minute, without looking and locate Coldstone in MacBeth's mansion. Quite impressive really.>>

Breathtaking.

<<Yet his thoughts were in English.>>

No. They were not. Look. Mental concepts (especially highly abstract concepts) do not emerge from language. It works the other way around. Concepts are formed internally. We can use language to describe them but we don't need to. That's the important distinction.
Consider the acquisition of tool use. A tool you have never used before. Lets consider something like a construction crane. You see it's controls. By experimentation you might begin to discern the function of each control. But none of this is the product of some mental narrative. Pretend you've never seen a crane before. Maybe you're an aboriginal who has never seen western devices. Better yet, pretend you're Lexington. You're a gargoyle transplanted from 10th century Scotland into contemporary America. Lexington has never seen a lever. He's never seen a gas pedal or a start button. If you sit him in a crane and point to controls and tell him what each one _is called_ what do you think it would mean to him? Nothing. Simply calling something a gas pedal gives it no context. You have not imparted anything about it's function. Lexington has no concept that these structures in front of him have functional relationships with the larger device. However, if he experiments, he can begin to observe that if he pushes the lever forward, the crane rotates clockwise. If he pulls it backwards, the crane rotates counterclockwise. He can make associations now, and he can begin to detect patterns. He can anticipate that if moving a control in one direction corresponds to one function, then moving it in the other corresponds to the opposite function. This process of observation, association and anticipation is an example of conceptual thinking. In order to understand the crane, he would have needed to think about it in concepts. Not in English.

The corollary to the computer should be clear. Lexington simply could not have considered the novelty of the computer in words. He would have no words to describe it's properties, it's function or it's nature. If you were transplanted 1000 years into the future and someone handed you a solid metal sphere and told you to use it to write words, how would you contemplate the thing they handed you? It's surface is smooth. No obvious control mechanisms. No obvious surface features of any kind. So how the devil do you write with it? Speculating about it's functionality is a highly conceptual and visual process. If handwriting and typing are both lost arts in 1000 years, then you don't even have words to describe this thing's function.

Think about how Lexington would actually interpret a computer. You have a conceptual understanding of what a keyboard is, but Lexington doesn't. He's never seen a typewriter. He's never even seen a printing press. Do you suppose that when Lexington ponders this device, his thinking takes the form of mentally spoken instructions? Instructions to do what? To type? He has no concept of typing. He would be as mystified by this thing as you would be by the sphere.

However, if he can observe the device in use, and if he can experiment with it, then just as with the crane, he can begin to infer the functional relationships of the keys. He can form a mental picture of how this device works. At that point, he's certainly free to attribute words to the concepts if he want's to communicate them to someone else, but he doesn't need to. His ability to think about the device is not contingent upon his ability to describe those thoughts linguistically.

Proponents of the idea that thought is a purely linguistic process cling to this fantasy that thought is a perpetual little personal narration providing us with instructions. As though a little person were sitting on our shoulder whispering to us. Even if this ridiculous picture of the thought process were verifiable, consider that it would be useless as a medium for thought. Instructions mean nothing without concepts. Even simple concepts.

What about Bronx...

The point of my original thesis on sentience was that it is frequently treated in an uncritical and mentally lazy way. It enters popular culture, not as anything analytical, but as an imagined distinction between those we have to respect and those we don't have to treat with any kind of consideration.

So, is the mental world of Bronx (or Cagney) diminished by their not being able to articulate it? It should be evident that the notion their thought hinges upon language is ridiculous. Can we say they are sentient? Can we say they have the ability to observe, make inferences and anticipate? Can we say they are aware?

Of course. It's not just a matter of our having significant evidence for the ability of non-humans to have this type of mental experience. It's profoundly unreasonable to maintain that they are not aware and intelligent when we consider the emergence of intelligence in pre-history. It's often supposed that these mental abilities just suddenly appeared in homo sapiens, as if by magic, once we passed a certain threshold in our evolution. Nothing compels this feature to emerge, according to popular mythology. It just shows up unannounced. And it renders homo sapiens capable of language and tool use in a single second of evolutionary history.

Now, evolutionary psychologists have realized for a long time, that this picture of the development of intelligence was as silly as they come. Highly ordered structures like awareness and intellect don't just appear all at once. They emerge over time from more primitive systems. Intelligence evolved under the pressures that all species face in nature.

Awareness and thought did not emerge from nature as a means to get us into college or to allow us to write resumes. They emerged as a means to avoid large predators and distinguish things we can eat from things that can eat us. Living beings need to be able to distinguish between these two things in order to survive. The ability to contemplate concepts of things in our environment is just the natural product of species adapting to interact beneficially with it. All of our mental abilities are inherited from our earliest ancestors and were developed as an instrument for them to survive. The development of these faculties simply could never have delayed emerging until after we developed language.

If you consider it, you will discover that abstract concepts frequently defy linguistic expression, because our ability to think abstractly developed independently of language. You can't really describe a sophisticated mathematical concept or a work of music in words. They can only be contemplated conceptually. In fact very common things defy linguistic expression. Try this experiment.

Describe the color red.

The reason we cant is because the linguistic structure to describe it does not exist. It didn't emerge because it does not serve to benefit our species survival in any way. Yet you can picture red mentally. Or any number of colors. Doubtlessly, a variety of hues, which you might not even have a name for, exist in your mind. They exist as concepts. Mental pictures. And their inability to be defined linguistically does not diminish them. You can picture red. You can apply it to various forms. You can anticipate what would happen if you mixed it with another color. But you don't need language to do that. The imaginative process, the conceptual process, has nothing to do with language.

<<Eskimos have something like seven words that really just mean "snow". Yet an Eskimo thinks like an Eskimo and can judge the minor differences in the type of snow they see and to them one kind of snow is not "a" snow but a "d" snow and ect.. >>

This anecdote about Eskimo's having such a plurality of words for snow is often referred to in arguments for the dependence of thought on language. I don't know why. It does not appear to lend anything to this position. I guess the idea is that the way Eskimo's think about snow is supposed to be structurally different from the way english speakers think of snow. If they do, then it's not evident that it follows from their having more words for snow. In fact, I'm pretty sure there are at least a dozen words for snow in the english language. Flurry, Slush, Hardpack, Frost, Powder, IceLens, etc. And if we include all the descriptive lexemes that we count when we talk about the Eskimo words for snow, then there are probably dozens more in english.

This really is not an indicator that thought is contingent upon language. I can provide an analogous example though, which begins to demonstrate that thought takes place in the absence of language. Colors end up being a good example again, because they are such a large part of our visual world.

In Swedish, there are probably as many words to describe various colors as there are in English. Possibly more. I know they have a special word for light gray. Linguistic relativists would take the position that the Swedish or English must be thinking about colors in a way that is fundamentally denied to people of other cultures, who do not have all these words for colors.

There are many, such cultures. For instance, the Tiv language of New Guinea, where there are only two words for colors, equivalent to light and dark. A Swedish scientific study done years ago sought to test the theory that thought must be absent where language to describe something is also absent. However, when tested, it became apparent that Tiv speakers were able to recognize as many colors (and with the same facility) as Swedish speakers. This is certainly an indicator that thought exists without the benefit of language.

<<Luckily for us I suppose that as humans we all relatively think alike even with our differing way of thinking.>>

I find some arguments for deep structure very persuasive Vanity, but you treat the concept in a way which is very far removed from those arguments.

<<This allows for learning multiple languages each human no matter his language that language has the ability to "learn" or adapt to the use of another language and that is quite a remarkable thing. Almost too remarkable to be chance. >>

Has this become a prescription for theology now?

Punchinello writes...

<< (if you infact cannot speak Russian). In fact the communication would very much be like that between man and an animal.>>

I'm not confident of this, Vanity. I think you need to be more careful in the way you treat the issue. What are you basing this similarity on?

<<When he wants a drink and says (whatever in Russian means 'I want to drink your water'); you will overtime perhaps reckognize what he wants through mere repitition. Never though be able to ask him if he liked the water, describe the compositional qualities that make up the glass, or how the purification system(s) in your water plant makes that water safe for you and your family to drink. >>

I don't understand what your point is here, Vanity. What are you trying to say?

<<You can say it he won't know it.
Yet he can still make the moral judgement on his own princibles that he understands in his own language as to if he will leave the toilet seat up or not. >>

Moral judgement? What relationship do moral judgements have with your thesis on thought and language? This tangent about morality doesn't seem to be anything you could reasonably infer from a theory about language. I confess that I'm a little uncomfortable with this avenue of argument. I suspect that by injecting your thesis with reference to moral principles, you're attempting to take what should be a purely normative argument and turn it into a prescriptive one. I'm anticipating that you're going to advocate the application of some kind of value system down the road, and that you're going to take the position that what you say here demonstrates the validity of that system.

You're going to need to demonstrate the legitimacy of the Wharf hypothesis in this thesis if you want to use it as a prescription for moral behavior. Right now, it would be premature. Even unethical. Of course, your point isn't entirely clear to me. I have to guess at your meaning. What I'm guessing you intend is that the Russian's internal self, his "moral principles," are based in a faculty for language. This would be a strange position to take. I think you're confusing the idea of values with the idea of thoughts.

Maybe it would help to clarify your meaning if you considered the following.
1. Assuming that the Russian's "moral principles" have a foundation in language faculty, does this mean anything? It doesn't seem to reinforce any argument you make.
2. Do you assume that moral principles depend on language? It is not apparent that this is so. But if it were apparent, what would it mean? Would it mean sentience was dependent on language? I don't think so.

<<His sentience is still very much intact as is yours, but in communication most of what we consider humanesque intelligible relay of thought is lost. >>

Why don't you just say..."we don't understand someone when they are speaking an unfamiliar language."
I'm bothered by the way you treat this statement as though you have provided a demonstration of the Russian's intact sentience. I think you're implying that we can agree that his sentience is unique among species and incontestable, but nothing you have written demonstrates that the Russian's experience of awareness is even marginally different from a non-human.

<<He can learn but he may not learn English just as you can but may not learn Russian. Words are words, but diction, structural differences, and phonetic discrepencies between the two languages make changing your thinking process from thinking as an Englishmen(English speaking man not man born on England) to thinking as a Russian quite likely impossible.>>

What do you mean by "changing your thinking process?" I can't make sense of the above statement . Is it a linguistic relativist position? It sounds like maybe you're proposing there is a unique type of deep structure in the mind for every native language? The thesis that thought is dependent on language is frequently attributed to Noam Chomsky's theory of deep universal generative grammar, but you need to understand that Chomsky is referring to the basic universal structures that language emerges from. He is not correlating thinking with regional languages. People who attribute that position to him wildly misunderstand his intent. There is no school of linguistics or cognitive science which advances the notion that there are different deep structures for Russian and English. Wharf and Humboldt have attributed different structure to various cultures. But I don't think any of this amounts to deep structure, and certainly not structure based upon language.

<<Even if you learn Russian as to be able to go to Moscow and fool everyone into thinking that you are indeed a native Russian. Your nueral networking will still under most serious probability process thought in English>>

What is "neural networking?"

I think your position hinges upon this notion of how thought is processed. This is where I fundamentally disagree with you.

Thought is not "processed" in English. Or Russian. I'm supposing you borrow this notion from linguistic relativism even though you seem to subscribe to theories of innate language faculty. I would emphasize that even Chomsky, who is the most prominent proponent of deep structure for language, has explicitly conceded that we also think _without words_ in his response to John R. Searle's critique of his theory. Introspection is not a narrative process.

You should consider that it's probably not appropriate to be treating concepts of deep structure in language as linguistic relativist concepts. Eric H. Lenneberg is a deep structurist, and in his study of the biological basis for language he explicitly defends the antithesis of linguistic relativism. He states clearly "that cognitive function is a more basic and primary process than language, and that the dependence-relationship of language on cognition is incomparably stronger than vice versa."

If it begins to sound like deep structurists consider language independent of thought, that's probably because they do. Their position is a much more realistic one. They regard language as a product and expression of thought. But only one of many such products.

Punchinello writes...

<<You say you don't have the full answer. I'm just not clear what the question was. I don't disagree with anything you said, except for the notion that Punchinello and I were defining sentience as simply the ability to communicate. I don't think either of us ever did that.>>

Neither of us did. I should stress however, that I disagree with Vanity, strongly. I take this very seriously. Maybe that appears strange. As I read Vanity's thesis though, I think I detect an effort to base a prescription for moral behavior on what he believes sentience is. And if we're going to do that we need to be very careful. It won't be enough to guess at who we judge worthy of some investment of our ethics. We can't limit the moral worth of some creature because we have a feeling. I imagine people couldn't be bothered to have a disagreement over an obscure philosophical issue. Perhaps if it were just a normative argument being made, I wouldn't care either. That's the problem though. Philosophies are never purely normative. They're always potentially prescriptive.

And since you have opened the floor Greg, to really have an exchange about what sentience is, and by extension, what thought is, responding to this provides a good opportunity to do that.

<<(note if you were in Madrid when you first seen Gargoyles and they spoke in Spanish and of course you did too you might argue they thought in Spanish and you would most likely be right mi amigo). But not as an English Man but and English Gargoyle again not as a nationality but as a tongue. Still Lex's moral judgements can be made too stand on thier own and can communicate with anything Man or Gargoyle or Oberon's Child that also speaks English, whether they think "English" or not. >>

<<Language is not merely a tool for communication it is a way of thinking >>

<< Punchinello and yourself discussed "sententiousness"
in quite lenghty detail. If I remember right the main buckling of the topic of one's being sentient was ultimately his ability to communicate ideas. I don't seem to remember any talk about awareness of thought and decision.>>

Well I've reviewed what I saved of that thread, and I cant find any indication that anyone participating intoned that sentience relied upon communication of ideas. _I_ certainly never did. The idea you're describing in your thesis, that thought depends on a faculty for language, arguably originates in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and the work of Boas and Humboldt. I'm familiar with this work, and I've never been persuaded that it possessed any kind of intellectual legitimacy. Particularly where Whorf is concerned. The magnitude of error in his thinking is almost comical. Also, while I am unsure of how you are treating the Sapir Whorf hypothesis here, Vanity, it sounds like you suppose that it is not seriously contested by anyone. If that's the case, then you need to understand that it has been the subject of alot of scholarly level criticism among cognitive scientists. In fact, there has been harsh critique in the literature from both the cognitive-neuro camp and the linguistics camp. It's reliability as an hypothesis is alot more tenuous than you might suppose.

<<If a Russian speaker was adopted into your household, and could not understand nor speak a single word of English, you cannot communicate with him on any level of aphroristic expression>>

Aphoristic expression?

Punchinello writes...

<<Well, let's start with the "buffet"/game-playing writing style. I think it's awful. >>

I agree.

<<Having said that, I have this friend, a garg fan who's now a pretty darn successful writer. When I read her first book, I felt that the first half of it was written in that way. As if rolls of the dice determined who each character was, what he or she could do and what happenned to them.
When I asked her about it, she confessed (if that's the word) that I was dead on. The first half of the book was her almost literally setting to prose a game of D&D that she had played.
I don't recommend doing that, but look at the result. The second half of the novel, inspired as it was by the first half, was wonderful. And she's moved forward with these characters into other books as well. >>

When I indicated that I thought this game-players writing style could be exploited profitably, I wasn't really thinking of more mature, conventional writing emerging from it. Although, that obviouly works too. I was thinking, if you were writing something, for instance, where there was a consistent theme of game-playing, then maybe you could exploit it as a device. I'm thinking of game-playing themes more along the lines of George Perec than dungeons and dragons. So maybe there would be subtle games embedded in the text. But at the same time, maybe there could be a section of the book, or a certain character, which you treat in the game-players writing style. Sort of in the way you could mimic the writing style of the Victorians. I have given no serious thought to what properties make game-player writing read the way it does. But it _is_ recognizable. You've identified it, yourself.

<<But your second question is more serious. Does this process in fact impair the reader/audience. Forget that some of these guys will never be great writers, will this make them bad readers?
I don't know. But my guess is that it's the same (or similar) percentage of people who would have been bad readers in the first place. The good ones will transcend. The others won't. That's my hypothesis.>>

I suppose so. It's just that I keep on detecting subtle trends in the way people in our culture think about things. And I worry this game-players thing will worsen. It's like that business of an incomplete idea of "sentience" invading popular culture. It seems ridiculous to speculate that the idea migrated into the culture from star trek, but if you observe carefully, you can see it. I think people in our culture, are less and less informed by critical thinking today.

Ten years ago, for instance, I don't think I saw game-player writing anywhere. Now, even before this conversation I had, in which we began to put a name to this thing, it seems pervasive. I think the novelty has become the institution. Consider that twenty years ago, aspiring authors could not have seen this in literature. Today, I have waking nightmares that the kid who would have been the next Paul Auster is going to become intellectually deranged when he picks up a dungeons/dragons book for the first time and gets the idea that "this must be how people write."

I'm probably thinking of something along the lines of memes here. Ideas enter the culture and become dominant over time. Usually, stupid ideas. They begin to define the way that people think about things and even the way they value things. It doesn't just erode our intellects. It can erode sensible ethics. Consider this...

I saw an episode of star trek recently, and it really alarmed me. The premise was that the characters travel to a planet where the human population reproduces exclusively by cloning. For some ridiculous reason they could no longer continue cloning themselves, so they ask the characters to donate genetic material so their culture can survive. The characters hostility to the idea is so irrational that I wouldn't know how to describe it. And when the clone people sneak away some of their genetic material to make clones of them anyway, a demonstration of some of the most demented rationalization of science fiction occurs.

The characters go to the lab where their clones have already developed into full grown reproductions of themselves, and use their death rays to obliterate them. And I should be clear that these were not blastocysts in test tubes. These were obviously fully grown and autonomous people. And this is all treated by the authors as though it were the most natural thing in the world. It's simply understood that being cloned "diminishes you" as a human being, and that their absurd indignation was somehow righteous. Precisely how this diminishes a person is never elaborated upon, and I'm sure that the authors never even thought about it. They assume, with remarkable vacuousness, that the cloned people in the lab do not possess any type of intrinsic worth. I know that star trek authors have never picked up a science text, but the poverty of ethical thinking here, compelled me to think they had never read a book or had a thought about anything.

Of course, it's just a silly TV show. Right?

And yet, it's conspicuous that the range public debate about bioethics is defined by these concepts. I'm not talking about the range of debate in the literature of science or philosophy. That remains very isolated from the public forums where most people in our culture consider these issues. In popular magazines and network news journalism, the dominant logic is that a person is rendered somehow, "lesser" by having been cloned. The idea has been in ascendancy for a decade despite the depth of it's ignorance. The people who define and limit public discourse about it have certainly never thought about it critically. Their positions frequently contradict themselves and more frequenly rely on popular myths and emotional appeals to people's superstitions.

And it gets worse. Something far more sinister has emerged from popular, misinformed dialogue about cloning. In popular disputes about it (I heard the notion resurface on CNN about a month ago) the question of "what kind of rights would a clone have" is routinely brandished about as though it were an intelligent thought. To practicing ethicists and scientists, this notion probably would not have even entered the dialogue if it had not been thrust upon them by popular culture. That the question is being asked at all assumes, uncritically, that there is something meaningfully distinguishable about a cloned person which would compel us to assign a different worth to them. A worth, lesser than a person who came into the world by conventional means.

I have a suspicion, that the people most vocally shrieking about the moral dilemmas of cloning, are actually theologically threatened by it. I have no evidence of this. But a few inferences they have made, have got me thinking that their theological picture of "personhood" follows a very rigid prescription, and their indignation may originate with some inept idea that a clone would not have a soul.

"Soul" becomes a good parallel to "sentient life." One is from religion and one is from science fiction, but both of them are shortcuts people use instead of actually thinking about the internal properties that imbue something with intrinsic moral worth.

I hope it's apparent why I think this is important. Magical thinking can be dangerous. The worth of a being can't reasonably be described in these terms. If the distinction between ruling class and underclass or the difference between pets and meat is being determined by distinguishing one as sentient or soul-containing, then we have not really distinguished anything. We're just making things up. We might as well assign moral worth based upon who has stars on their bellies.

I don't remember what Goliath's reaction to Thailog was precisely. I remember that he was alarmed by the prospect of there being another version of himself. How would you describe his feelings about the issue. I suspect since he would have no concept of cloning technology, his perception of it would be unique.

Punchinello writes...

Hello Mr. Weisman.

<<So sometimes, it does get annoying. But mostly I enjoy doing this. (I do think that doing a little a day has been a much better system than trying to do big batches of questions all at once. I get less annoyed when not burdened with the cumulative effects of annoyance.) Do I wish this could be more of a forum for ideas and discussion? Well, yeah, duh. I've invited that in the past, and, P., I always enjoy reading and responding to your posts.>>
<<I hope that 18 months later you're still checking ASK GREG and reading this. I hope that you'll compose your response and hold on to it, submitting it when we finally get things back up and running. But even if you're not, even if you're long gone, thanks for raising some interesting issues.>>

All this sort of diminishes some of my apprehensions about submitting things to this forum. Most of the time I have assumed it's a huge hassle for you.

<<(Although what you quoted at the head of your post:
<<You idiot! Did you not read the no ideas clause on the main askgreg page or are you just pretending to be stupid!>>
is a bit lost on me out of context. I can't believe I wrote the first quote.) >>

You didn't write it. I'm sorry. That must have seemed strange to you. When I submitted this post (all those many years ago) there were two posts in the list directly before mine. The first was from someone who I don't think had ever posted a message here before. I don't remember his name or what he wrote, but I do remember that he was speculating about something you did in the show. His post seemed pretty benign to me. He was just curious about something.

The second post was from...some anonymous idiot. He was the one asking the curious guy if he was "pretending to be stupid." I got the impression he was trying to demonstrate his superior knowledge of "gargoyles forum culture." I found his invective incredibly offensive. Apparently so did your mr. Gorebash, because he deleted his post after I responded. That's why you didn't see it.

I think the guy rematerialized shortly afterwards, as Master Debator, who had never posted before and most likely never will again. I almost regret you decided not to dignify his contest for "king of the garg fans" with a reaction, as I'm sure your reaction could have been very amusing.

<<So a lot comes down to the intent of the questioner, and you can usually tell, if not in a single post then in the range of posts that that person submits. If I get 16 posts in a row asking something like, "Who is Maggie's father?" followed by "Who is Claw's father?" followed by "Who is Fang's father?" or if I get requests for laundry lists of things, "Name all the ancient heroes who have encountered Oberon," then you can bet that the questioner was looking for a question to ask, as opposed to trying to deepen his or her understanding of the show or character.>>
<<And again, I think you can often (though not always) tell by the question itself if that's what the questioner is seeking. A deeper understanding about some aspect of the show.>>

I understand. I think part of the reason that I responded to the anonymous character in the way I did was because I had gotten the idea in my head that it was the same anonymous character that is persistently demanding that you elaborate on the most trivial minutia. From my perspective, it seemed like someone had just asked where fox got her tattoo six times in a row, then had the unmitigated gaul to call someone else an idiot for asking an innocent question.

Gothic Cowboy writes...

Hello, again. I have a question/observation concerning Oberon. I have noticed an unfortunate trend among fans of the series (particularly in fanfiction, although I understand you don't read such material) to present Oberon in an unfavorable light. Even The Gargoyles Saga, which normally boasts excellent characterization, consistently depicts Oberon in a manner which I feel is grossly unfair. I liked Oberon. I thought that he was stern, but fair, and was also very concerned with the proper use of power. Granted, he possessed character flaws. But he banished his Children from Avalon, forcing them to live amongst mortals, because he felt that they didn't have proper respect for the rights of mortals. His Law is also shown in an unfair light. Most fans seem to like to show him as an uncaring, distant figure, who could care less if the bulk of humanity simply died off. I interpret his Law differently, though. Perhaps its simply because I am an inveterate comic book fan, and the topic has been frequently used in comic books. But I believe that Oberon forbids direct magical intervention, even to help mortals, because he understands that mortals must stand on their own. He understands that, if he were to direct his Children to use their powers to shelter and care for mortals, we would come to rely on them for everything, even the problems that we could solve on our own. Our potential would be stunted. We would eventually become little better than pets for the Children of Oberon. Obviously, he doesn't mind non-magical intervention. Puck interferes a great deal, but as Owen, without magic. Grandmother has seemingly guided and advised mortals for centuries. Many of the Children (including Oberon himself) have sired or beared Half-Fae children with mortals. His emphasis seems to be on ensuring that mortals don't become reliant on the Children of Oberon, that we feed our own poor, treat our own sick and wounded, fight our own battles. In short, that we make our own mistakes and stand on our own two feet. Was I off the mark?

Audra writes...

I know that the Gargoyles Movie on VHS has scenes cut out from the Awakening episodes that were shown on TV. You guys did a pretty good job editing it I think. (I'm not sure if you did that or not though.) This is just my opinion, but I'd just like to tell you about one small scene I think should of been kept in the movie on VHS. The scene where Goliath is talking to Princess Katherine and Magus, right before Magus turns Goliath to stone, Goliath says, "The eggs in the rookery will soon hatch, they will need guidance." And then Princess Katherine says, "Never fear, we will watch over them as if they were our own." I think that small scene should of stayed in the movie. If you never saw the Awakening episodes on TV, and started watching the other Gargoyles episodes on TV, I think that small scene is important so people know that Goliath asked Katherine and Magus to take care of the eggs. Maybe that's just me, but that's just my opinion, and I thought I'd like to tell you about it.

P.S. I also think on the Awakening episodes on TV, it's funny when Hudson is flipping through the channels on the TV, and there is a scene from the Lion King. Since I'm also a big Lion King fan.

Blaise writes...

Hey there! Welcome back!

Just finished reading your summer vacation..."Escape from New York" is right! Man, that must've been a tense ride at the time. I guess no harm no foul, but I still don't envy your experience. I envy Greg "Xanatos," though--he got to be your chauffer for the day!

BTW, I didn't realize you were a "Harry Potter" reader! I read through the whole of book 5 in about three nights and a Saturday morning. Yes, it has grown up some, but then, so has Harry.

LXG: I was introduced to that last year, read the collected graphic novel at the house of a friend I was visiting for Thanksgiving. I thought it was a great, fun read (though I, predictably, shook my head at the whole "Freemason" thing). I have to admit I had no idea who Quartermain was, originally. Still not sure if I'll see the movie though, considering the changes they've made.

I'm also not sure if I'll go see Sindbad in the theaters. I'm tempted to see it just for Eris--I like her look, and her animation style seems nice--but frankly, my biggest turn-off is the dog. From what I've heard, he originally wasn't in that much of the movie, but after viewing their test audience's reaction to him (and they were predominantly young children) they added 7 more scenes with the dog. Of course, since I have not seen it, I cannot judge. What rubbed you about it?

And the Gathering...man what a great time it must have been. I wish I could have gone. Heck, I wish I remembered to do the Honorary Attendee thing (I'm still kicking myself over that). The thing I actually missed most about this one, is that I wasn't able to sign the Sperlings' card--that was a great thing that everybody did, and I really regret not being a part of that.

Well, that's about all I have to say right now. But just wait 'til you post your next ramble, Greg--I'll have a whole book written for you then! Of course, by the time you read this, a LOT of what I've written will be outdated. Oh well.... :-)
Later!

Blaise writes...

SANCTUARY

Naturally, Notre Dame had to be brought into this series *sometime* (especially once they started the world tour).
I don't know who I figured the "winged sillhouette" (sp?) at the beginning to be, but I think I may have suspected Demona, because she struck me as the most well-traveled gargoyle I could think of.
Then we see Macbeth with a babe who sports a heavy French accent. It wasn't until she said "we have all the time in the world" (accompanied by a not-too-subtle music sting) that I recognized her (by voice anyway). I knew I was in for a good ep.
And Elisa pretty much admits her romantic view of Goliath. I find it interesting how she so naturally moves from talking to herself to talking to the "snoozing" crew. And of course we have yet another "D'oh" moment when Elisa starts to call her parents...and stops to follow Demona and Macbeth.
Pointless note--I like D & M's costumes here. Very nice.
Elisa eventually makes her way back to the others with the paper and they're off and running after the plot.
Something I'd point out here, Angela never says that Katharine or Tom told her about Notre Dame, yet I've seen several people make that assumption. As far as I can tell, Angela didn't hear about it until Elisa mentioned it.
I believe, when I first saw this, I took Goliath's rebuking Angela for calling him father as him preserving tradition--even though he pretty much states he's concerned about keeping Angela away from Demona the next minute. Gradually, I began to see that this was mostly just his excuse. Unfortunately, in doing that, he was actually pushing her away.
I love Elisa's shocked "What?!" to being put in the role of "helpless damsel who needs protection." Goliath didn't even ask her (or wait to hear what Elisa had to say after "I can sympathize, but--"). He just did it. Yet, Elisa goes along with it. She can barely look Angela in the eye when she says it.
Every time I see Goliath clawing the wall of Notre Dame I cringe. Have some respect for historic sites, will ya?!
I only really noticed Demona's line "In here, my love" the second time I watched it. I think the first time, her actual reaction upon seeing Goliath pushed it out of my mind. I like her line "New York is your protectorate--Paris belongs to me!" This is especially fun in hindsight, because, as we learn later in HUNTER'S MOON (and the unanimated TEAM ATLANTIS episode THE LAST) she has quite a history with this city.
There is some weird animation here. At one point, Demona sends Goliath hutling through the tower and he knocks the head off a stone gargoyle next to Bronx--but there's no sound! I recall that some folks assumed said gargoyle to be Boudicca ducking (probably because of its coloring) before they slowed down the tape. Also, when Demona says "You're not leaving here alive" she seems a bit skinnier than usual (and her halter-top seems to be a bit more...[ahem] revealing).
Enter Thailog. In new threads too! I don't know when/where/how he got that armor, but it does end up making him look even more distinctive from Goliath. And, as per the memo, gives him a little more of a Xanatos quality. And reintroducing him as Demona's love interest! It was a twist but felt so natural at the same time!
Thailog is great here, and Demona's taunting of Goliath is really...something, I don't know. All I know is it's aggravating enough to make me want to strangle her (and that's with the knowledge that I'd be dead within .2 seconds). And Goliath's actions here are endlessly fascinating. He accuses Demona, and tries to save Thailog. I have to wonder at his thoughts about his "son" getting together with his ex. I love Thailog's offering "to share [his] santuary" with Goliath--that is SOOOO Xanatos. And of course Goliath brings up the obvious objection, which Demona taunts him for (honestly, who wouldn't be a little paranoid around that woman?).
Angela, being the good little helper she is, and still eager to stay close with her father, has run to what was supposed to be a battle, and finds herself eavesdropping. I wonder if maybe she regretted having done that once she got back to the skiff. It almost looks that way.
It wasn't until my second viewing that I caught the name of D & T's company--Nightstone Unlimited. Very nice indeed. And we finally hear the human aliases of these two plotters. BTW, much happier that you went with Dominique Destine (sp?) over Dierdre (sp? again). I like their embrace--Thailog's wrapping his wings completely around her, Demona snuggling into his chest when they share a villainous laugh. This is one of the steamiest scenes in the series, I think. You always said, Greg, that although Thailog intended to betray Demona from the beginning, he still found her physically attractive. I'll bet he had his kicks while he had her around.
Anyway, it made sense that Demona had hoarded treasure. How much money does she have anyway?
Meanwhile, Goliath and Angela get into another "family discussion." As someone else has pointed out, Goliath really seems to get angry here...and Angela matches his outrage. Little animation nit though--after our heroes turn to stone, we get a back-shot of Angela, and...she has Demona's hair. A bit distracting.
Elisa talking to herself in the cafe was alright--she has a long established habit of doing this. As for her last line...I recognized that it was a Superman reference (and I probably would have appreciated it more had I known that Cary Bates wrote for that comic way back when), but still...I'm sorry, Greg, it just doesn't do it for me. I do appreciate the referencing behind it, though.
The wedding. Demona really looks good in that wedding dress--and it's a testament to her acting that she looks more comfortable in that than Banquo and Fleance do in their respective outfits. Seriously, those two look so out of place in such fancy clothes--I bet they were happy to be out of them.
I feel real sorry for Macbeth in this episode. He marries this woman, starts to tell her about himself, and it turns out that his "bride" has been his enemy all along. His shock is excellent, and I can only imagine what his initial thoughts were upon coming to in his cell.
I love the animation on Demona's transformation. Very nice, and we see her without her tiara for once.
I also like Macbeth's "Who the blazes are you?!" when he sees Thailog. I wonder what he might have thought about this gargoyle that sounded like Goliath and shared a remarkable number of physical features.
Then Thailog hands Macbeth a gun...and I am left totally clueless. I admit it, I didn't fully grasp Thailog's plan until he spelled it out. Maybe I'm slow, or maybe by this point I just wanted to watch the story unfold. But Thailog is excellent at diverting suspicion from himself. And I love his little "Have a blast, you two" followed by his laugh.
And then he leers at Angela. I partially agree with Airwalker that this might in some part be to creep Goliath out, but I also find it more interesting (and preferable) that Thailog did feel some bit of lust upon seeing her. It just darkens his character more and, IMO, adds a whole lot more fun to him. I don't know why, but I love how Thailog holds Angela by her belt, too.
Thailog reveals the truth, and NOW is, in my mind, when Goliath views Thailog as a true enemy instead of a lost soul. And the amazing thing is, for having so little battle experience, Thailog holds up pretty well. Mostly because of his particle-beam rifle, but that of course also gets him into trouble with the water tower. All that "vast knowledge" and he doesn't try to run when the tower starts to creak--he *is* inexperienced. I also like Goliath's double-fisted punch to Thailog, and Thailog's fall (accompanied with EXCELLENT music thanks to Carl Johnson). Then Thailog gets up and attacks Goliath full force, and it's only through the intervention of Angela and Bronx that G is able to get the upper hand. Seriously, they have Thailog cornered, and only stop when they realise that the battle INSIDE the building has stopped. Thailog is such a cool bastard as he smilingly says "I enjoyed the exercise, Goliath" and soars off the rooftop.
While all of this has been going on, Demona and Macbeth have been having a pretty good scuffle. The highlights for me include that three barralled particle cannon, the bit with the globe (one person gets bowled over by the globe, the other by...NOTHING!), and Demona's oft-mentioned stagger (seriously, how often do you get to see a character "punch drunk" like that?). Then Elisa hits on the solution both I and my brother (who had been watching this with me) figured right away. I like her uncertainty, though--it is a bit of a difficult concept to swallow.
Goliath and Macbeth, who had started out this series as enemies, now are almost like comrades. Similar experience probably paves the way for this, but it really is nice to see the hero show genuine sympathy for a former foe, and for said foe to accept it. And hey, Goliath tells a pretty good joke and even gets Macbeth to smile!
Of course, there is another moment between Elisa and Goliath, fleeting, but still wonderful.
Demona gets her first glimpse of Angela, and her reaction is just right. Of course, before the matter gets pressed, Thailog reappears. He salvages the situation for himself wonderfully (and it's so odd to see Demona being carried off like that...one isn't used to seeing her in such a vulnerable position). And both Macbeth and Goliath have, again, a moment of shared regret.
The episode wraps up with a somber ride into the mists, as Angela seeks the final confirmation for her question. Since Goliath won't answer (won't even look at her, it's too painful), she turns to Elisa, who pretty much admits the presence of the elephant in the room, allowing Angela to cope with that knowledge as best she can.
In case you can't tell, I think this is a great episode--and there's so much in it! Not the least of which is Thailog. I knew from his first episode he'd be someone to watch out for, but this episode cemented him as one of my favorite villains, and led to my brother dubbing him "evil incarnate in GARGOYLES."

Todd Jensen writes...

My ramble on "Sanctuary", in response to yours.

"Sanctuary" is one of three "Gargoyles" episodes that I like to watch (from my tapes) once a year, on holidays. I watch it on Valentine's Day. (The other two are "Eye of the Beholder", for Halloween, and "The Hound of Ulster", for St. Patrick's Day). It does seem appropriate for Valentine's Day, with all the romance in it. (Although, at the same time, it's mostly "failed romance". Macbeth falls in love with Dominique Destine, only to be betrayed by her. Demona falls in love with Thailog, but is betrayed by him - though she doesn't even find out that he's no good until "The Reckoning". We get references back to Goliath and Demona when they were a couple - and we know how that one turned out. The only romance here that's got any real hope is Goliath and Elisa - and even that hasn't quite begun yet, with Elisa still holding off on it, as you pointed out).

I couldn't help but think that Dominique's French accent sounded more than a little hokey.

After marrying Macbeth, of course, Demona now could be called "Lady Macbeth" - and I'd say that she fits the imagery surrounding that name a lot better than Gruoch does.

One of the moments that I find especially touching in this episode is where Macbeth is getting ready to explain to Dominique all about his true nature. (Come to think of it, the real challenge that he'd have here - if the situation was what he thought it was - would be having to counteract the "murderous tyrant" image that Shakespeare had built around him, given that almost everybody who's heard of Macbeth is more likely to be familiar with the Shakespeare version of his story than the real history behind it).

I'll admit that I cringed at Elisa's "This is a job for the gargoyles line" (I honestly don't see the gargoyles as being "super-heroes", at least, not the same variety as Superman or Batman). But I agree with you on Thailog's cunning in immediately derailing suspicion from himself with his "Didn't you search him?" line. And on how unsettling it is when he leers at Angela (and, frankly, I don't think that he'd be at all bothered by the incest angle).

I also noticed how Thailog bears the same first name as Xanatos's biological son - and it's definitely creepy, especially given that Thailog and Xanatos couldn't even have come into contact with each other about it.

So you noticed those paintings that appear to be of Elisa, too? I was wondering about them myself.

One odd little thought from the first time that I saw it: I'm not sure why, but for some reason or other, the first time that I saw this episode, I actually thought, when Angela got buried under the rubble, that she wouldn't make it out alive. It does appear that I wasn't quite certain that she'd make it to the clock tower (too much influence from "status quo" television here, perhaps?).

I liked your analysis of Goliath's fears over Angela meeting her mother - but I wonder if Demona really could pose a danger of corrupting Angela. Angela's overall interactions with humanity have been much happier than Demona's - three loving human foster-parents who raised her and her rookery siblings, plus Elisa - that'd have to outweigh even the worst that an anti-gargoyle mob could do. But I suppose that it would be like Goliath to not want to take that risk.

(And re Elisa being Angela's "stepmother" - well, you've got to admit that it would definitely break the Disney cliche there - the first time that they do a "good stepmother" - and with the biological mother as the "wicked witch", at that).

Blaise writes...

GOLEM

As soon as I saw the title, I instantly thought of the connection between this legendary figure and our gargs. It's fitting that Max's description of the Golem resonates with Goliath.
Actually, when I saw this, I had not realized that there really was a Rabbi Loew, and that legends had connected him with the Golem. You learn something new from GARGOYLES every time.
I liked a lot of the animation and character work in this episode. Especially the shots of the gargs climbing and gliding. They were very well done.
Brode interested me mostly because of his look (and Clancy Brown's voice). He's given some nice facial expressions and character moments. I don't think he's on a level with Xanatos, but he does seem a bit more competent (sp?) than Dracon--that boy's biggest chance to shine came only at the very beginning of DEADLY FORCE when he knocked down Bruno. Otherwise, Dracon seems to avoid direct confrontations, whereas Brode is far more hands on. And, as has been said, he can think more in the long-term.
Max Loew--another budding hero our travelers meet. Unlike Nick, Max seems to have some belief in ancient legends, and though he is reluctant at first (and voices his doubts) it takes very little prodding from Janus or anyone else for Max to do what must be done. I really like some of his and Janus' exchanges. In terms of character, my favorite is Janus telling Max, "YOU are the Chosen One," with Max responding, "Which doesn't leave me any choice." In terms of comedy, I like Max's "What if it doesn't like me?" to which Janus can't help but smile.
I really wish more could have been done with Janus. He seems like such an interesting character (heck, he seemed even less taken aback by the gargoyles than Max--and even that boy took the whole thing in stride).
I loved the flashback of Prague 400 years ago. That moment where the old man falls down, and then we pan up to see the shadow of the Attacker beating him...that was one of the most chilling moments in this show. Of course, it's undercut by the same old man appearing in relatively good condition later, but still.... And the ceremony of the Golem's Awakening was breathtaking. I loved the scenery with all the candles, and seeing Loew through the Golem's POV. And I pretty much fell in love with the Hebrew incantations. Of course, the rest of the scene has some very anime moments. Not just the pink hair on the woman with the baby, but also some of the facial expressions of the Attackers seem straight out of "Speed Racer" or something. It's somewhat distracting, but not terribly so.
I like how Act 2 begins only with the striking of a match. A nice moment.
Now, for Renard. I was mildly surprised to see Vogel with him, but I didn't think it a real discrepancy. It wasn't too great a stretch of the imagination to think that Renard had forgiven him. What did surprise me was their being in the company of Brode. That, and Renard's "reveal" (hidden in shadows at first before coming into the light) lent a sinsiter nature to his appearance here. One of my friends, who had never seen the show before, had caught a glimpse of this and assumed "the old man" to be the main bad guy or something close. For my own part, I was instantly intrigued. Why would Renard have this dark aura about him?
I knew Goliath would try to get in touch with him, they are friends after all, and was surprised at how curt Renard was with G. I like how Goliath's mouth hangs open for an instant after being rebuffed, and then he broods away.
This episode was the first time I realized Renard had an illness. I had thought before that he was just very old, but with this...it adds even more bitterness to his situation (more than if it had been just a natural aging) and makes his fall more believable. When Renard does become the Golem, he has a very telling moment, where after crowing, "I can walk," he touches the cheek of his human body and quietly murmurs, "I can feel again." That got to me--that he was robbed not only of movement, but of feeling as well. Of course, he abuses his new-found power (and now I finally know the name on the tombstone he knocked over, and as for the car Greg, it is a bit battered, but whole enough for Renard's smashing it to crush in the top and windshield). Still, he seemed to degenerate rather quickly for me. I found his turning back towards the light, so to speak, more natural. But I KNEW that at some point, Renard-Golem would say "It's not my fault"--that just had to be there to show how much he betrayed his ideals. While I may have found his turnaround rather jarring originally, in later viewings, especially this last one, I notice how much Robert Culp is able to do with his voice. He actually portrays the doubt, frustration, fear, everything. His acting goes a long way towards making Renard's changes work. Still, a little more "breathing space" might have helped.
One thing I really thought about just this last time--Renard orders Vogel to guard his human body. Even there, Renard has doubts about being in the Golem.
And I also like Goliath's line about "Giving up all you believe in--for a piece of CLAY!"
For his own part, Vogel seems to have thrown himself even more into the role of "yes-man" than usual (probably to make up for his earlier betrayal). He only comes out of it once when he chastises Goliath (he's got guts, that one).
I had figured that Goliath and the others would have tried to get in contact with Renard or someone to get home eventually, but when Goliath decided to stay the course and finish out going where Avalon sent them to go...I was almost cynically expecting that. Yet, I was not really disappointed--it made sense for everything and everyone up to this point. So I sat back and tried to stop worrying about when they'd get home.
Misc. stuff: When Goliath gets hit by Brode, it's with a stun gun--that looks very much like his regular bullet gun.
One of Brode's goons is the thug from the park in DEADLY FORCE. And the driver of the car that nearly runs into the Golem looks like the guy who tried to buy a gun from Glasses in the same episode, except the guy here has black hair (a second cousin, maybe?).
While on the subject of cars--the guy above was on the left side of the car, driving the right side of the road, whereas Brode was on the right side of the car, driving on the left side of the road. Which is the right one in Prague?
Anyway, while it's not on my "top ten list," I do think this is a pretty cool episode. Of course, only now, after reading your ramble, Greg, do I actually realize the importance of it in regards to the focus of the World Tour. Very nice that.

Todd Jensen writes...

About "Golem".

The funny thing is that I was watching "Golem" this morning, as part of my little custom of rewatching my "Gargoyles" tapes each summer. Which means that it's still fresh in my memory as I'm writing this ramble-reply.

I will confess that I don't have as many observations to make about this episode (beyond the fact that I quite enjoyed it). I'm not much of an expert on the Golem legend (beyond the overall concept) - Airwalker did a splendid job of analyzing the use of the Golem legend in his comments at the comment board - so I can only give some general remarks here.

Brod struck me as more akin to Dracon than to Xanatos, truth to tell (partly because Brod was an open criminal, which Dracon was but Xanatos wasn't). I hadn't even noticed the parallel between the Golem about to kill Brod and Goliath about to kill Xanatos in "Awakening Part One", until you mentioned it.

I hadn't realized the parallel between Elisa and Max, either - though I did pick up on the parallel between the gargoyles and the Golem pretty quickly.

One of my favorite little bits: Bronx nudging himself against Janus, who then scratches Bronx behind the ears.

I liked the development of Renard, including his and Goliath's reversal of roles from "Outfoxed" - and I picked up at once on the significance of his "It's not my fault" line. I was one of those who thought that his change of heart came a little too quickly, but you provide a good explanation for how Goliath convinced him so quickly.

I was quite impressed, by the way, with the dedication that Max Loew showed in firmly speaking to Renard-in-the-Golem's-body, as well as with the Golem when it's about to drop Brod into the pit.

I was also pleased to see that Goliath caught on to the significance of the Avalon World Tour at the end of this episode (definitely making it into a turning point). Obviously, he'd have to catch on soon in order to keep from looking slow.

Not much to say, I'll admit; I do have more comments, though, for "Sanctuary", which is coming up next.

Wingedbeast writes...

Ramble on Golem.

A great episode this.

On the climbing. I've got to say, my favorite Gargoyle shots are of them climbing. It best shows off how animalistic they are and how beautiful they are. It really drives home the "they aren't human" issue. They're creatures of instinct.

And, BTW, when Angela and Bronx are climbing up the tower, that's a great butt shot on Elisa. Gotta say. Elisa rocks. Strong woman that never gives up, protects her friends, has a sense of humor, and has a great butt.

If she's based off of anybody you know, mind introducing me? :)

Onto the rest of the ramble.

Max and Elisa parallel on that huge issue. They're the heroes beside the heroes. The difference is that Elisa started out that way. It's who she is. Considering who her parents are, it might even be an instinctive trait to her.

Max? Max isn't so lucky as to have Elisa's upbringing. He's probably had to learn that lesson that there are some things that are too powerful for him to overcome. So, he has to overcome that fear just to go into his destiny.

Elisa's learned quite the opposite lesson. Even within the series, she's learned that, even though there's always somebody bigger and stronger than she is, that doesn't really matter.

Renard gone mad. Oh come on, like you wouldn't destroy a few things if you got that kind of power. It's like a new toy. You play with it until you're through.

But, when Renard was through with the euphoria of the new toy, he was left with the cost. And, that was a great face shot of the Golem when Renard realized that he had become something. It also made sense that it was Goliath's words that finally got through.

He might, logically, have known that Elisa and Max were right, but he considered Goliath to be an equal. They both share that daily struggle of integrity. And, it's here where Goliath really repayed Renard for his lesson in Outfoxed, and reminded him of the daily struggle that is integrity.

The final fight sequence was something that struck me. 4 different heroes, 4 different styles. Max, the Golem, Goliath, and Elisa. Each very effective.

The first time I saw this, I saw the golem as a robot and Max as the mind behind it. Telling it what to do and, like a good little drone, it does it. Essentially making Max the mind. But, that scene with Brode over the big pit, last time I saw it, changed my mind. Instead of the golem's mind, the golem has it's own mind even if it is a primitive one, Max is the golem's heart.

If there were future episodes with the golem, I could see Max going through efforts to keep the golem from becoming like the monsters that he fights.

Can't wait for the ramble on "The Hound of Ulster"

Honey writes...

Crikey, wouldn't have found that 'posting' page if you hadn't taken me straight through. I can answer some of those questions!
ANonymous - WOuld you laugh or smile much when your whole family has been slaughtered and you know you could have prevented it? It's called Guilt, mate, it's the same thing that makes Demona so insane. Mind you, GOliath HAS got a lovely smile when it shows up, I'm sure you're not the only one wishing it showed up more often.

Demona was given her name in City of Stone, the four-parter 1/3 of the way through the three years.

Since Awakening was set in 994, a squiz at the history books will show that the Vikings were out on world conquest around this time, they were attacking every country they could get to. Basically, Greg & Co were kind of taking one viewpoint of a historical event, like HOgan's Heroes focusing on POW camps during WW2.

I'm guessing that all those extra characters in the age list are actually in your stories, hmm GReg? You know how to keep us thinking, that's for sure, mixing up two rather different topics.
Hey, have a great night everyone.

Siren writes...

I was reading some of your answers and was reminded about how Broadway was originally female. I am an overweight female, and the thought that a overweight female gargoyle wouldn't have bothered me in particular. I think it is all in the way the character is. Broadway knows he is big, and his self esteem is pretty good, considering the jabs his rookery brothers make. He is smarter then he looks too. Naive, but so were the rest of the clan, it's a learning process. New time, new people, new culture, new ideas. I love Broadway, think he is a great character, but I hope one day they can come out with an overweight, young, smart female. Most overweight females are all the Miss Potts type. Mother hens, grandmothers, etc. I like the way Broadway is and acts, and I wouldn't want that to change, but I still want to see a similar female character one day, human, gargoyles, whatever. I know a some people blow things out of proportion when a female actress puts on a fat suit, like Courtney Cox in Friends. If your going to make the character humourous, it should be tasteful, not hurtful. Someone for people to look up to, not a joke, most characters should be. Look what they do to mentally retard people, Adam Sandler still does it, and it's still funny to a large amount of the public. (Not me.) Maybe it's just me about the whole thing, I am overweight, but I am secure in my look. I think the ones who bash the overweight characters are the people are unsecure with themselves. But there's my ramble. What do you think?