A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Medieval Characters

Archive Index


: « First : « 10 : Displaying #46 - #55 of 98 records. : 10 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

person writes...

Hi Greg. Here's my question.
In Awakening part one, a man covered in white made a bargain with Hakon. Was that The Magus? And what did it have to do with the whole spell thing? Because I know it was Demona and Captain of the Guard's idea to let the Vikings have the castle. I just don't know what the Magus(or whoever it was)had to do with it.
Thanks!

Greg responds...

It was the Captain. We simply tried to fool you into thinking it was the Magus.

Response recorded on January 13, 2004

Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Macbeth

In the Gargoyles universe, you mention that Luach was the son of Macbeth and Gruoch, and born in 1033. In actual history, Luach was the son of Gillcomgain and Gruoch, and born in 1030. After Gillcomgain's death in 1032, Macbeth married Gruoch and adopted Luach as his own son and heir, and Luach even succeeded Macbeth as King briefly in 1054. I was curious as to the reasons you modified these aspects of history?

Greg responds...

I didn't. Not to my knowledge. My research indicates that Lulach (Luach) was born in early 1033, after Gillecomgain's death, but too soon to be Macbeth's son (at least legally). We glanced over it in the episode, but, yes, Macbeth adopts Gillecomgain after marrying Gruoch in 1032.

Further, my research indicated that rumors were rampant in court that Mac was actually Lulach's biological father, as well.

It's possible the research I received was faulty. (For example, a typo caused us to spell and pronounce Lulach's name incorrectly.) But we made every effort to weave our fiction among the facts -- without changing those facts.

The date of Lulach's birth is approximate anyway. So any time between 1030 and 1033 is probably "legitimate".

Response recorded on October 15, 2003

Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Hunters

Through which of Malcolm Canmore's children do the Canmore family of Hunters (Charles, Jon, Jason, Robyn, et al) descend from? Is it from one of the children from his first mariage to Ingibiorg Finnsdottir (King Duncan II, Malcolm or Donald), his second marriage to St. Margaret Atheling (King Edmund I, King Edgar, King Alexander I the Fierce, King David I the Saint, Edward, Ethelred, Matilda or Mary), or as yet another child?

Greg responds...

I debated with myself as to whether or not I wanted to reveal this at this time, but what the heck...

The answer is Donald Canmore.

Response recorded on October 09, 2003

Bookmark Link

Gipdac writes...

I could be wrong, but in Vendettas I think Hudson called Hakon "Hakon the destroyer of clans". So, did Hakon have a reputation for smashing gargoyle clan or so it just the one?

Greg responds...

I don't know if that's an exact quotation. I think he called him, "Hakon, Clan-Slaughterer". But I might be mistaken.

In any case, Hudson was referring to the Wyvern Clan.

Response recorded on October 03, 2003

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

When, in "City of Stone Part Two", Duncan manipulated Macbeth into seeking out Gillecomgain to avenge his father, what was he hoping the result would be:

a. That Macbeth would slay Gillecomgain, thus ridding Duncan of an increasingly unreliable and likely rebellious former ally? (The result, of course, that actually happened).

b. That Gillecomgain would slay Macbeth, Duncan's leading rival to the throne?

c. That the two of them would kill each other, thus ridding Duncan of both of them?

Greg responds...

Well, I'm sure his ultimate preference would have been c, of course. But either a or b were good news, so he'd settle happily for the a he got.

Response recorded on August 28, 2003

Bookmark Link

Stephaneus writes...

Hi Greg Happy New Year all

Vanity(don't you mean Gruouch??)

Know this is about Awakenings (which I think is the best episode in the whole series). Goliath caught Hakon's sword. What is the deal. Hudson's little dagger in Long way to morning cut a statue in half. But Hakons double edged long sword could only scratch Goliath. He's tough and rugged but come on now. And I really loved Hakon's reaction "Fight men they're not invincible" If that isn't invincible what the hell is? Why should Goliath even dodge weapons they just bounce off anyway?

Why did you let that happen? Catching a sword without it even hurting him seriously at all!!

Super Stephaneus

Greg responds...

I don't know what you're referring to vis-a-vis Vanity/Gruoch...?

As to your Awakening question, Hakon's sword did hurt Goliath. Cut down to the bone. He just toughed it out. Cuz he's Goliath. That's who he is. You expected him to cry?

And Hakon's sword could certainly cut THROUGH bone. But he would have needed to put more power behind the swing to do that. Given his position on that tower, Hakon did the best he could, but it wasn't good enough, and Goliath's been in enough fights to know what he can and cannot take. He stopped the blow with his hand before it could gain enough momentum to do serious damage.

What Hakon saw, before he spoke his line, was the Goliath's blood. We made a point of that, and even convinced our S&P exec to let us show the blood. Which is very rare for cartoons. If Goliath had been invincible, there would have been no blood. And the sword would have bounced off his hide. Which it didn't. Weapons don't bounce off our gargs.

Hudson doesn't have a dagger, by the way, but a sword. And a lot of Gargoyle muscle behind his swing.

And you, Super, have a lot of attitude, bordering on disrespect. Just so you know, it's really off-putting.

Response recorded on June 17, 2003

Bookmark Link

Fiona Seckari writes...

Dear Mr. Weisman,
I have a questoin for you, and I am fully aware that you will probably exercise you're right to not answer it because it is a question that could possibly involve a lot of writting, that you haven't given any thought to, don't feel like answering, or just be stupid. So, I thank you so much for you're time :) and for such a kick'n show :) and for the super hot character of Puck :D so here's my question:

In "The City of Stone" flashback after Mac Beth successfully wins the battle against Duncan, he exilles Prince Canmore. What happens to him right after the guards take him away? Do they put him on a boat straight to England? Does he get an escort? Does he get to pack? Do they feed him? Does he try to escape again?

2. Is the Prince Canmore in "The City of Stone" full name Malcom Canmore III ?

I realize I am probably just being curious about silly stuff in a really awesome show, but I'm so curious about it I just have to ask! Plus, even if curiousity killed the cat, satisfaction brought her back! LOVE YA!

Greg responds...

1. Well, I doubt he took a boat from Scotland to England. He was probably escorted there, with messengers sent ahead so that the English would expect his arrival. Did they feed him en route? Yes. Did he get to pack? I don't know. Probably not. Does he try to escape? No. I think at this point he goes to England and tries to win the English over to his side.

2. Canmore = Malcolm III = Malcolm Canmore = Maol Chalvim III = Ceann Mor = Big Head

Response recorded on June 09, 2003

Bookmark Link

Alex Katsaros writes...

what is the significance of the bird on top of Hakon's helmet?

Greg responds...

Fresh eggs?

Response recorded on May 15, 2003

Bookmark Link

Artemis writes...

(sorry, no questions this time, but)
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU (and all those other people) for all the Scottish history in the show. Because of it, I am totally facinated with the topic. It's even better that I know cuz I am from scottish decent (as well as a little english and irish), and my other side came from france (sounds like someone in the show, ne?)
Also, it has inspired me to read Macbeth, and I used to hate Shakespeare!
So thanx again to you and all the little peoples!
And while I'm on the topic of scottish history, can you PLEASE finish "Once Upon a Time there were Three Brothers"? I'd make me very happy!

Greg responds...

You're very welcome.

As I've mentioned before, "Once Upon a Time There Were Three Brothers" is kind of finished. For starters, there are only two brothers left. And although it wasn't necessarily my original intent, the piece wound up being more of a prologue to DARK AGES. So I took Three Brothers right up to the point where Dark Ages begins. And I stopped. To keep going would in fact be to begin Dark Ages, which is a HUGE project, that I'm not prepared to take on right now.

But I'm glad you liked it. It was, I think, my first and only attempt at Fan Fiction.

Response recorded on February 19, 2003

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

if all had gone on as planned after the sacking of Wyvern, what was the Captain planning on doing? retireing with ransom money? joining the Vikings?

Greg responds...

Definitely not joining the Vikings. I'm not sure what "retired" means in this context. He'd definitely have to get out of town. But, yes, with the money.

Response recorded on February 07, 2003


: « First : « 10 : Displaying #46 - #55 of 98 records. : 10 » : Last » :