Todd Jensen writes...

This is a comment on your answer to Jason Barnett's question about Rogue. I'd read your ramble on the "X-Files" movie where you explained why you weren't too keen on Rogue as portrayed in the comics, particularly because of what you viewed as a clumsy introduction (her story being mostly crammed-in backstory rather than happening on-stage).

WB's currently doing an X-Men cartoon in which Rogue's a major character, in which they handle her introduction differently. They introduce her in the "now" of the series at the point where her "draining" ability first manifests itself, whereupon Mystique finds out and recruits her for her followers; in the "now" of the series thereafter, Rogue is thus portrayed as a "villainess" of sorts in that she's one of a group of mutants whom Mystique's recruiting in opposition to Xavier and the X-Men - but also portrayed as not feeling quite at home with them (she even reluctantly helps out the X-Men in one episode, though she doesn't feel quite ready to join them even then and heads back to Mystique immediately afterwards).

Actually, I've found it a rather good series (I've been able to quite enjoy it and follow it, even though I've next to no knowledge of the X-Men; they went for a "start continuity over from scratch" approach of the sort that you praised in both the movie and "Batman:TAS"); incidentally, Frank Paur is one of the directors.

Todd Jensen writes...

This is a sort of early ramble for "City of Stone" in general; I know that you haven't started any rambles on it yet, but this was a thought that I'd had for some time on the four-parter in general that I thought I'd share with you now, since it is next in line on the Episode Ramblings list.

One thing that has surprised me for some time is that "City of Stone" is one of my favorite "Gargoyles" stories. Surprised me because, as you once said (although I honestly didn't realize that this was the case until after you pointed it out) that the episode focused more on the villains (Demona and Macbeth) than on Goliath and his clan. And when I thought over that, it surprised me. Because I've found that I generally don't like episodes in a series which focus on the antagonists and leave the protagonists off to one side. But I very much enjoyed "City of Stone".

Once I realized that, I began wondering over why "City of Stone" was an exception to the rule. And I did provide myself with two possible answers for why that was the case:

1. The focus of the Demona/Macbeth backstory was on something that genuinely interested me very much, long before "Gargoyles" came out. For one thing, it was set in the medieval period, which is my favorite part of history (and indeed, the "medieval Scotland" flashbacks were always one of my favorite parts of "Gargoyles"). But, even more significantly, the backstory in the flashbacks was all about Macbeth. "Macbeth" is one of my favorite Shakespeare plays, and I was genuinely delighted and thrilled to see Macbeth turn out to be *the* Macbeth in it, and to see his story unfold in the course of the flashbacks. And all the more so when I saw that you were basing it on the historical Macbeth (whom I was already fairly familiar with), even if with some elements from the play (such as the Weird Sisters). So the story there was very much my cup of tea.

And second, Demona was, to me at least, never just another villain in "Gargoyles". She was a very crucial figure in the series. After all, she's a survivor of the original gargoyle clan, and thus as legitimately one of the title characters as Goliath, Brooklyn, Hudson, etc. Not only that, but she's also Goliath's former mate, and thus very much part of his story. So the strong flashback element around her worked for me.

At least, that's the explanation that I've worked out for why my response was and is different to "City of Stone" than to other episodes in other series of that nature (i.e., episodes where the protagonists are given a relatively smaller role). I just thought that I'd share it with you.

AbVibiA writes...

Since you always ask for feedback, Greg, Here I am!!!!!
Thanks to you and many others for:

1. Your old notes from the earliest days and silly thoughts. Some of them make me laugh, and some of them make me wish you had used them. (Ala the Elisa- Goliath scene when she mimics Goliath's poses. CUTE!)
2. Gotta love those smart-ass responses!
3. The enduring mystery that you keep about the rest of your plot. I wish you, or some other heavenly creature, could find a way to get that show back on the air!
4. The priceless scenes that endure in the minds of children and obscessive adults alike that I know you had a hand in creating.

Okay, It's short, but what can I say? I just wish the Gatherings weren't so far away, especially for those of us who live in the NorthEast US! Maybe I'll actually get to meet you someday!
-AbVibiA, 13

Mel writes...

Hello, I'm doing an assignment at school for art on Gargoyles, & I thought I'd take a look here to see if I could find some info on them.

I'm LOVE watching the show on Thursdays. I favour Bronsen the best, he's so cute.

Please send a reply to this message to: missee83@yahoo.com.au
because I don't think I'll be able to find this site again.
Thankyou.

matt writes...

i was just looking through the archives and i noticed that everyone always uses the term "the humans" just as we would say "the gargoyles" or "the new olypians". that really struck me as odd because i assume everyone submiting questions is human, as well as you, Greg. we probably say "the humans" for clarification in a universe of diverse peoples, but i wonder if we sometimes say it to distance ourselves from "the humans" in the series who besides Elisa and other friends of the clans (who we are not) usually are the ones to cause trouble for the gargs (which we would not do). well, just another pointless ramble from matt, although i hope its food for thought...

Kathy Lowe writes...

I just want to tell you how much I have enjoyed reading both your rambles on the episodes as well as all the development memo's. I never realized how much effort went into a production or how long in advance people start working on an idea. Your memos certainly show that a lot of team work was involved with the advanced details.
Thank you for sharing this priceless information.
See you at the gathering.

matt writes...

i know you get this alot, but i'd like to say thank you from all the fans, not just for the series itself, but for answering all of our questions and pushing to get episodes (new and old) back on tv. i've loved gargoyles from the beginning and even if there are no new spinoffs or movies i know "gargoyles" will still live on in our imaginations due to your commitment to the series. i love reading an answer to a question and going back to watch the episode talked about and seeing or realizing something i didn't before. thanks again.

JESS writes...

This is a general comment not a question, sorry.
matt writes about bronx not being able to feel pride ...
if he's comparing bronx to a dog, i know for a fact some dogs have a sense of humour, and can get jelous - so why not pride ??
also bronx seems to show considerable intelligence in the series, and to understand, pretty much, what is being said.
( cue "why not pride" question again!)
OK here's one for you, greg - does he?

matt writes...

at the end of "hound of Ulster" Goliath says that Bronx has a right to be proud of himself. now, i like Bronx and i think he is smarter and at times more emotional than your average dog but he is still an animal and i don't quite see how he can feel pride. maybe love, and fear, and loyalty, but pride???

matt writes...

in your analysis of "the mirror" (or somewhere) you mentioned that you wondered what the humans of New York thought when they suddenly relized they were not wearing shoes. last night, as i watched the episode i noticed that only one human was shown without shoes at the end of the episode. i don't think he was wearing shoes to begin with, here's why: the animators would probably pay closest attention to Elisa's changes back and forth cuz she was the main human character. when she became a gargoyle she no longer had shoes (or a jacket for that matter) and when she changed back she did. i think therefore that when Puck changed everyone back they would be as they were before, as Elisa was. that one guy probably was at home or something without shoes on when he was changed to a gargoyle than left his house and happened to be in the street when changed back. i realize i just rambled on about something completely pointless, but it was an observation that i had to share with everyone at "ask Greg".