Greg responds...

1. They input their destination. Of course, they can only input destinations that ALSO have a zeta tube. You need a transmitter and a receiver.

I haven't seen any shift at CN, but it's also not CN's decision alone. Don't forget WB and DC too.

Greg responds...

Garth's specialty is summoning the Tempest, i.e storm magic.

Tula's abilities are more or less the same as Kaldur's except she's more advanced so doesn't require the Water-Bearers that he uses.

Mera is a master sorceress, who doesn't need to specialize as much. But she can create solid forms out of water like the others, but has more flexibility, imbuing her creations with something akin to a life of their own.

Zatanna's abilities are even less specific. She can accomplish many, many things with enough preparation and energy.

Greg responds...

Well, you may have watched it multiple times, but so have I. In fact, I lived with it for months and months before and after the episode was completed. And I think from the moment he tripped and she made a little joke about it, he reacted badly. For example, asking over and over WHO ARE YOU?

There are other little clues too. I think the Roy thing was just an excuse, frankly, which is why he's so easily OVER that, as you point out. It was never about that. But it doesn't change how he feels a bit off his game with Artemis, which had more to do with her making fun of him (out of her own insecurities) and with his very real attraction to her exacerbating that embarrassment. I'm not saying it's not subtle. It was supposed to be subtle. But it's absolutely there - because those of us who made it put it there - whether you chose to believe or acknowledge or see or whatever it or not.

But I am done arguing over this. CAN WE PLEASE AGREE TO DISAGREE?! Neither of us is convincing the other. You will NEVER convince me that the things I intentionally put in the show aren't there nor will you convince me that things we didn't intend to put in motivated our choices. NEVER.

And it seems equally clear that I'm not going to convince you either. That makes this discussion a somewhat frustrating endeavor, at least for me.

Greg responds...

Well, other than the dark hair, I don't see that Zatanna and Donna have much in common. But I wouldn't want to second guess the amazing Phil Bourassa. Brandon Vietti, Phil and I would always talk about a character before he sat down to design him or her. And Phil would always do everything we asked for. But then Phil would always surprise us, as well.

Greg responds...

Check out issues #7-8 of our companion in continuity comic book series for the answer.

Greg responds...

1. It's really about heat, not fire. But both are a legit threat to them physically.

2. I suppose.

2b. There's no significant biological difference between the various races of Martians in ANY respect.

3. Well, we're all vulnerable to fire, aren't we? I mean, I Superboy isn't. But it's not like Robin, Artemis, Aqualad and Kid Flash are somehow immune from the threat of fire. Beast Boy's no different. But he's not as vulnerable to heat as Miss Martian is.

Greg responds...

The short answer is no.

First off, five years? It's been twenty on Gargoyles and I haven't given up on that.

Second off, ideas minus their execution are subject to horrendous second guessing. I don't know why I'd open myself up to that.

Besides, at that point - if it's not an authorized revival of SOME kind - I'm just writing (well-informed) fan fiction. You guys can do that yourselves and each come up with the "ending" you like the best. You don't need me for that.

Greg responds...

I honestly don't recall. Might be a question for Brandon Vietti and/or Phil Bourassa.

Greg responds...

No.

Greg responds...

Wow, I'm getting tired of this.

I've said this before, ad nauseum at this point, but I'll say it again. Wally West is my all-time favorite speedster. The fact that he was one of the original sidekicks didn't hurt. But he certainly was NOT just a placeholder for Bart. And I don't particularly care who is popular or not. Brandon and I chose him for a variety of reasons, that included powers, power-level, personality, background, history, dynamics with other characters - and, yes, nostalgia.

There definitely seems to be a vocal minority who seems to think we didn't do the character justice. (At least they're pretty darn vocal here at ASK GREG.) But they are the minority. The vast majority of our audience seems to have loved Wally, which suggests they loved how we handled him - except maybe his ceasing to exist at the end, which BROKE THEIR HEARTS. And you can't break a fan's heart if they don't care about the character in the first place. (I suppose you'll attribute that to the love of the character they brought with them TO the show. But I don't believe that's true for most of our audience, who loved Wally - and in particular, Jason Spisak's performance as Wally.)

And I've never said that Wally was any less of a priority in Season One than the others. All six of the original teammates had equal priority and near-equal screen time. (What I said was that his story was more straight-forward and required less explanation - something that was equally true about Dick and Kaldur.) And what I said about Wally relative to Season Two is that ALL the characters (in terms of screen time) were subservient to the arc of the story. So, yes, some got more priority because of the story. But that wasn't a knock on Wally. Anymore than Superboy's near total absence in the second half of the season was a knock against him.

I will say that if you didn't get some of the nuances of the character until you came here to ASK GREG, then I'm sorry. In that sense, we failed you. Some of it was revealed with more clarity in our companion comic, but I'll grant that you shouldn't have had to pick that up in order to appreciate what was going on in the show. But we took no different approach to Wally than to Dick or Kaldur or Artemis or anyone. If we failed, we failed. But please STOP trying to ascribe some odd motivation to it. You don't like it, fine. But stop trying to tell us how WE feel. It's reductive, presumptuous and insulting.

(And by the way, I don't agree that we failed. The truth of all those things you "discovered" here is IN THE EPISODES themselves. It may not be stated verbally, but I think all of it is there, spelled out in behavior, action and words between words. If we weren't on the head with it enough for you, fine. But it worked for us. We were happy with it. And again, I think most of our audience got it, even if some of our audience did not. And I'm okay with that.)

We were VERY invested in Wally, from his first appearance to his last. Sorry if it didn't work for you, but that's all it is. Us doing something that didn't work for you. Not us crapping it out. We worked very hard, and I believe overall we did justice to the character, as seems obvious by fan response to his death.

Now, can we please put this topic to rest? Those of you who feel this way have had your say, over and over. And I've responded, over and over. Neither side is going to convince each other. It's enough.