Comment Room Archive : Gargoyles : Station Eight

<<She's been alive for a thousand years with untold contacts and resources we couldn't even dream of.>>

I really, really doubt that. For one thing, her paranoid nature. I don't see her having this network. She may have some, but I don't think it's all that extensive. Now that she's a human, that will probably change.

But "untold contacts and resources?" She has wealth, she is immortal. But let's not pretend she's Ra's al Ghul. That immortal has untold contacts and resources. Peredur and Duval have untold contacts and resources.

Demona is a loner. She'll ally herself with others when the situation arises, but she's never demonstrated an ability to maintain alliances.
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 10:48:43 pm EDT from 68.199.5.105

BARRACUDA> Simple, Demona is very prone to absolute statements that are not at all accurate. And, old as she may be, she clearly doesn't know everything. She obviously didn't know about the Avalon Clan, but she does now.

And then there is "City of Stone" ... she says "we are all that are left of our kind in this world" a split second before three strange gargoyles show up. Granted they turned out not to be gargoyles, but that certainly came off to me as the writers playing up Demona's tendency to speak in absolute statements without knowing what she's talking about.

I find it hard to believe she doesn't know about London. But, considering how isolated the Mayan Clan is, I'd be amazed if she knew about them. I don't think she knows about Ishimura as Kai made it clear he hadn't seen another gargoyle ever.

That, and like I said, characters in this series are prone to subjective statements and not objective statements. From the very beginning they've been making statements that are flat out wrong, or inaccurate. I get that in most cartoons, characters don't speak unless they are making objective statements... mostly to not confuse the kiddies. But this show was different from the get go.

Hell, we had Xanatos, a guy who is much smarter than Demona, with far greater resources say that the gargoyles were the last of their kind in his first appearance. He was obviously wrong, but I'd sooner trust him with an objective statement than Demona.

Even then, I chalked it up as Demona might think she knows every remaining gargoyle, but as with lots of other things, she can't be right about it. Then I got on the internet and I found out a lot of people took it as an objective statement.
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 10:28:52 pm EDT from 68.199.5.105

Greg> Though it does seem indeed like a subjective statement and I agree, how do we know for absolutely sure that Demona doesn't know of every gargoyle clan? She's been alive for a thousand years with untold contacts and resources we couldn't even dream of. Taking her obvious character flaws out of the equation, there's not a lot of canon evidence to the contrary. Not that I'm trying to start an argument, I'd just like to hear your side and invite discussion.

And I find it hard to believe she'd simply go from clan to clan with the choice of "follow me or die", just because it happened between her and the Manhattan clan. Demona is incredibly self-destructive but slaughtering each and every clan she might happen across just because they didn't choose her as an all-encompassing new leader seems to go against her staunch protection of the gargoyle species itself (of course, this in in itself makes her such a complex character with such dichotic extremes). Her vendetta against the Manhattan clan seemed more personal than anything else, especially with their pro-human stance. I doubt a clan that had the same hatred of humanity as Demona but just didn't happen to want her as their leader would warrant an immediate death sentence. Just my two cents. Discuss, discuss!
The Barracuda
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 9:29:51 pm EDT from 204.174.35.33

Something else to bring up about Demona's line in "The Reckoning".

Demona said it when she was crying out in apparent astonishment to Angela about who she was. But we learn later that Demona already knew about Angela being her biological daughter (apparently thanks to Sevarius and his encounter with her in "Monsters" - remember that Sevarius was working with Demona and Thailog in "The Reckoning"), which means that she was only feigning surprise about Angela. In that case, her statement "I know every remaining gargoyle" becomes all the more suspect.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 9:11:50 pm EDT from 4.244.208.214

SAMUEL> Demona may have believed it to be true, but it couldn't have been true.

I don't know, it just bothers me when some fans just think every statement a character makes is objective.
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 7:54:27 pm EDT from 68.199.5.105

Enjoy your vacation, Matt. :)

Demona's statement about knowing every remaining gargoyle was probably so convincing because she believed it to be the truth. For that to be true, though, she'd have to know of other clans. Matt's theory about how she could think of the London Clan as being cowardly makes sense if she lived among them and tried to convince them to change their ways. Which she might have, before Goliath encountered the clan of 1940, giving the clan the knowledge of what 'Scottish Stock' is. Hmm.......
Samuel
Now, now. Language...
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 7:29:17 pm EDT from 76.111.94.63

PATRICK> "I'm not sure why Mayan clan would call the people who raided their pyramid and smashed their clan "poachers." Sounds more like they were thieves and vandals."

I'm guessing they were actual poachers who had a run in with the Mayan Clan and were looking for payback. Remember the Mayan gargs are rather zealous when it comes to protecting "the Green", and that probably extends to it's animal life. Given all that, it's not surprising that there'd be bad blood between the Clan and any poachers operating in the area.
Algernon
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 7:27:17 pm EDT from 86.40.255.137

"Poachers" might be an echo of "Hunters", since it means people who engage in illegal hunting. Of course, the unfortunate implication of that term is that it evokes the notion held by most humans that gargoyles are simply wild animals.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 7:12:49 pm EDT from 4.244.215.36

Put your max bid in NOW and eBay will bid for you up to that max bid until the very end. No need for sitting at the computer 24/7, no need to install dubious third party software that's probably also going to put spyware on your computer.

I'm not sure why Mayan clan would call the people who raided their pyramid and smashed their clan "poachers." Sounds more like they were thieves and vandals.
Patrick
"A poached egg isn't a poached egg unless it's been stolen from the woods in the dead of night!" - Willy Wonka, "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory"
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 7:08:37 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

Off-topic, but has anyone ever used any Ebay "sniping" programs or websites? I've got an auction I need to win, but I won't be around at the time the auction is over, so I need a program that will submit my max bid at the last few seconds for me. Does anyone have any recommendations for good programs or websites to use? Ideally I would like to use something that is very cheap or has a free trial.
Rebel
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 3:08:42 pm EDT from 66.57.121.227

Glad the Room is back on track a bit.

I'll be gone for a week or two. My boyfriend and I are off to Costa Rica for vacation. Have a good week, everybody!
Matt - [ewoks11 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 9:34:42 am EDT from 76.217.239.172

As of "Hunter's Moon," Demona knew about the Avalon Clan. Angela told her about them in "The Reckoning."
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sun, Mar 14, 2010 7:32:29 am EDT from 74.205.192.14

Greg B> But what gets me is how many people took that as an objective statement. I actually blogged about this once, and how some people don't know the difference between subjective and objective statements from fictional characters.

Yeah, I read what you were refering to (Fandumb). On the note of the blog, I'm curious as to what your reaction was to the end if the Avatar TLA episode "The Western Air Temple".
Antiyonder
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 11:36:36 pm EST from 96.239.198.131

Landon Thomas> Thank you VERY much for posting that link! I am now officially excited!
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 10:35:26 pm EST from 75.159.239.62

"I know every remaining gargoyle!"
- Demona... full of crap. ;)

But what gets me is how many people took that as an objective statement. I actually blogged about this once, and how some people don't know the difference between subjective and objective statements from fictional characters.
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 9:31:34 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

I don't think Demona knows about the Loch Ness Clan since she claimed that the last gargoyle clan in Scotland was wiped out long ago, and besides, Greg has said here at Ask Greg that after 1057 she found no gargoyles in Scotland, at least. I don't think she knows about the New Olympus or Mayan Clans simply because of their remoteness, this could be the case with the Pukhan and Xanadu Clans as well. Before Angela clued her in, she didn't know about Avalon Clan, though I'm sure she was aware of Avalon itself. That just leaves Ishimura and London. I don't know if she is aware of either of them, but I feel they are probably aware of her. Esspecially with the London Clan.

And I'm not so sure that if a Clan failed to join her cause she would destroy them outright. I'm sure she'd have some serious denial issues with the Ishimura Clan if she knew about them and at some point in time, perhaps she tried to convince them to change their ways and failed. But I can't see her just killing them for that. This is even truer with the London Clan, who are not outright allies with humans, but are only attempting to hide in a human world, not unlike Demona herself at times. I think she is aware of the London Clan, and perhaps thinks of them as cowards or whatnot. Maybe her thoughts at the time of Operation Clean Slate were that destroying the humans would free the London Clan from their hidden lives and allow them to expand and breed and repopulate Britain.

I think she had to know that more gargoyles were alive than just the Manhattan/Labyrinth Clans at the time of Hunter's Moon. The question is who. And I think the London Clan is most likely.
Matt - [ewoks11 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 7:44:39 pm EST from 76.217.239.172

Regarding Demona knowing about other clans: I have a feeling that she has to know about at least one of the other clans (not saying all of them, but at least one). I say this because in Hunter's Moon she mentions wanting to rule the gargoyle race. I don't really think she meant the Manhattan clan (except Angela) since she knew they'd always follow Goliath. So what gargoyles would she be ruling if she didn't know about any other gargoyle clans?

And thanks to those who gave info on the Mayan Clan.
Charisma82 - [charisma82 at clearwire dot net]
"The alien mothership is in orbit here. If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." -Zap Brannigan
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 7:27:13 pm EST from 64.128.148.53

BISHANSKY - Yes, that's one reason why I don't think Demona was aware of the other gargoyle clans around the world (in London, Ishimura, etc.). If she knew about them, she'd have almost certainly tried recruiting them to her cause, and slaughtered them if they refused. And we know that those other clans are still alive and not working for Demona.

(Of course, some of her violence towards the Manhattan clan may have been fueled by it being her former clan - and especially her mixed emotions towards Goliath. Those wouldn't be present towards the other gargoyles - gargoyles who don't include an ex-mate of hers among their numbers.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 6:11:23 pm EST from 4.244.212.150

My mistake. I didn't check to see if it was posted.34a4b0
Antiyonder
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 5:11:47 pm EST from 96.239.198.131

Another Disney classic is making a comic comeback for a miniseries: http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=25219

To sum up who it is, "Let's Get Dangerous".
Antiyonder
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 5:09:46 pm EST from 96.239.198.131

<<I think one of the most important things about Demona's character is that she has been alone for nearly a thousand years, and I'm pretty sure that if she knew of any other gargoyles, she would be eager to join them, or even lead them.>>

Emphasis on the LEAD THEM.

If they didn't follow her agenda, I'm sure she'd kill them.
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 4:58:43 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

I think one of the most important things about Demona's character is that she has been alone for nearly a thousand years, and I'm pretty sure that if she knew of any other gargoyles, she would be eager to join them, or even lead them. But for centuries she has believed herself to be the last living gargoyle; I doubt she could have known anything about any other surviving gargoyles prior to "Awakening," at least.

Besides, Demona is not nearly as shy about harming humans as the Mayan Clan is, so I very much doubt that the Mayan Clan would have welcomed her. Actually, they'd probably consider her no better than the poachers.

So if Demona did try to ally with them, I doubt that alliance would last any longer than her alliance with the Manhattan Clan in "Awakening."
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 4:45:59 pm EST from 74.205.192.14

BOOM! Studios announces a 4-issue Darkwing Duck comic miniseries: http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=25219 Hopefully this will further establish the Disney Afternoon shows as comic-worthy. I'm kind of curious if Tad Stones was ever approached about it.
Landon Thomas - [<- Gargoyles News Twitter Feed]
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 4:34:55 pm EST from 216.250.163.157

Samuel> Thanks. Yeah, I've been thinking about the poachers in ChacIxChel for some time and I've come to the same conclusion that some of you have: The poachers must've known what the gargoyles were or else why destroy them? It appears that the Mayan Clan's policy of "Never harming the humans, just frightening them" has not worked out too well. Perhaps Goliath should've told them that what humans fear, they often seek to destroy. I wonder how well the Mayan Clan knew these poachers or if they were poachers at all. Did the massacre simply happen and the pendant wearers come home to the destruction with no answers and simply assume the perpetrators were poachers. Surely a poacher is one of the worst things someone can be to a Mayan gargoyle. And there are other questions. Why didn't the 'poachers' do anything with the eggs? Destroy them, steal them, whatever.

I've often had a creativity demon about Demona discovering the Mayan Clan and feeling that perhaps she had found some gargoyles that shared her mindset, if not her ultimate goals, and made an effort to ally with them. And her war towards humans somehow alerted the poachers to the Pyramids whereabouts, leading to the massacre. Just a cool idea, I don't really expect that Demona is aware of the Clan at all.
Matt - [ewoks11 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 8:56:32 am EST from 76.217.239.172

Kaveh> I'm not the person who worked on the show, but Greg Weisman was demoted to creative consultant (though he wrote The Journey). He would make suggestion to the new creative team, but they ignored him for the most part.

If you want to see how the third season would have been, check out the following comic book trades:

- Gargoyles Clan Building Volume 1 and 2
- Gargoyles Bad Guys: This is actually a spinoff featuring Dingo, Matrix, Yama, Robyn Canmore/The Hunter and Fang as they are blackmailed into a group called The Redemption Squad. Basically most of the characters seek redemption.

You can find all of the trades here: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=gargoyles+clan+building

Should these sell well, then Greg might get to write more new Gargoyles stories.
Antiyonder
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 5:49:34 am EST from 96.239.198.131

I've watched season 3 of Gargoyles and I thought it was pretty bad. The quality of the season went down with each episode. I was wondering what are your thoughts on season 3 and why didn't you continue working on the show?
Kaveh - [K77suns at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 5:10:26 am EST from 72.223.26.173

Matt, it's nice to see you posting. :) Since you're such a fan of the Mayan clan, do you have any theories about the identities of the Mayan Clan poachers?
Samuel
Now, now. Language...
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 2:23:59 am EST from 76.111.94.63

"Matt->The newcomers here who are here only to cause trouble are annoying, true, but you veterans here are worse since you've seen this all before and should know better. *sigh*"
..........

Hey matt, I am a newcomer and you may or may not be refering to me. If you check my posts you will find that with each post I tended to post two items. (1) concerning whatever we were arguing about!! (which lead to a whole discussion on other films/directors which spawned connections to specific Gargoyle episodes) , and (2) Gargoyle subject matter-->namely The Weird Sisters (their relation to The Fates/The Morrigan) and the involvement of TNG cast members in voice over work, which is how a friend of mine reeled me in in the first place!

Remember: Every "veteran" was at one time a "newcomer". For myself I am only half way through Season Two and trying desperately not to watch the last twenty some odd episodes over this weekend!! Afterall, one can only experience a thing once. So that first time, when it is somwething special like Gargoyles, should be cherished.

And besides, I think some very interesting things came out of all of those Post. Folk got to know one another alittle and I've learned there are some really, really good thinkers on this Forum as well as very loyal fans---->and those are all things I can really respect!!

;)

It's all good!!

=^^=
lady s

ps: For myself I haven't enjoyed a series this much since I first came across "Kikki's Delivery Service" and discovered Studio Gibli! Which I then sought to introduce to every person on this planet that I possibly could. I remember having to purchase Studio Gibli's Box Set from an overseas company from Japan because no one over here in the states carried it yet. Everyone was like, "huh?"! Thats what loyal fans do!!--->Next Stop: Gargoyles!! and lets get that Season 2, Volume Two happening!! Maybe Puck could help us out!! (or, errr maybe that would not be such a good idea!! **wink**)
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
The next time someone pulls out a gun, give them all your money, then shoot THEM as they run away...
posted @ Sat, Mar 13, 2010 1:07:32 am EST from 98.200.70.241

What a shame.

You guys. There are several very interesting Gargoyles-related conversations attempting to happen in this Room this week and all this stupidity is overtaking it. The newcomers here who are here only to cause trouble are annoying, true, but you veterans here are worse since you've seen this all before and should know better. *sigh*
Matt - [ewoks11 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 11:11:34 pm EST from 76.217.239.172

Sonic The Hedgehog (Saturday Morning) = <3
The One Known As Mochi - [shogi dot keima dot 08 at gmail dot com]
Current Mood: (>^^)> 3D Dot Game Heroes...
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 8:47:20 pm EST from 72.199.86.107

lady of shalott> Allright, that all makes more sense. So some of ya'll (or all) believe in many of the issues raised by the film, but just did not like the way the film and it's director tackled the subject. Is that correct? And felt there have been proudctions from other directors/films that tackled it better?

Exactly. Captain Planet for instance constantly depicts people polluting in a sinister manner when the main problem stems from laziness or the need to save money.

Now Sonic The Hedgehog (The Saturday Morning version) on the other hand was pro-environmental without contantly telling us to protect the environment.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
Algernon's comment about Norman Osborn: One of the neat things about Dark Reign is that it gives Osborn the chance to expand his horizons beyond tormenting a twenty nine year old who still lives with his mom.
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 6:16:35 pm EST from 71.115.241.194

Hey Algernon, those are some good points,

and to others: Okie doke, i thought it sounded as if no one on here cared!! Apathy from the general public just drives me bonkers!! gets my kitty fur all raised and brings my claws out!!

Allright, that all makes more sense. So some of ya'll (or all) believe in many of the issues raised by the film, but just did not like the way the film and it's director tackled the subject. Is that correct? And felt there have been proudctions from other directors/films that tackled it better? Is that right? Thats kool.

I think the most important thing is the message (not neccessarily the medium). I suppose, in the end analysis, this is still about artistic expression and judgeable on it's delivery. And on that merit, it comes down to personal taste, opinions and personal views.
.......................................

On another note I really enjoyed the episode "Gargoyles: Deadly Force", (i saw it about three weekends ago), I was surprised that they got away with showing blood and that in the very next epsidoe Lisa was using crutches! I wish more "cartoons/anime" would seek to teach children and not dumb down to them.

=^^=
lady s
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
The next time someone pulls out a gun, give them all your money, then shoot THEM as they run away...
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 5:58:33 pm EST from 98.200.70.241

lady of shalott> No one is against protecting the environment or the message of helping to protect it. The problem is delivering the message in an insulting (telling us over and over) and misleading way.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
Algernon's comment about Norman Osborn: One of the neat things about Dark Reign is that it gives Osborn the chance to expand his horizons beyond tormenting a twenty nine year old who still lives with his mom.
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 4:59:38 pm EST from 71.115.241.194

Ha. I took my own advice, checked the Mayan Clan archive and found it right away.

zakhur writes...

Hi, I was wondering, when the mayan clan was destroyed, Did the polchers know that those were gargoyles, or did the just destroy everything that wasn't what they considered a treasure? Thanks

Greg responds...

Not telling.
Samuel
Now, now. Language...
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 3:19:21 pm EST from 76.111.94.63

"In the show it says that poachers raided the Mayan pyramid, took the sun amulet, and destroyed all the sleeping gargoyles. What I'm wondering is why poachers would destroy a bunch of statues? It doesn't make sense to me as to why poachers would go raid a temple and think to destroy statues that could possibly be worth money if sold. It makes me wonder if the poachers knew about the gargoyles."

I noticed that too, in the show. I would assume that the bandits knew about the gargoyles because it doesn't make sense to smash potentially profitable statues. It makes me wonder if the clan has made themselves weak by exposing themselves to too many humans.

Also, I don't know if Greg has mentioned anything about it. When I looked for it before, I vaguely remember a slightly sarcastic comeback with implicit meaning, but I can't find it now. Check the Mayan Clan archive.
Samuel
Now, now. Language...
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 3:15:23 pm EST from 76.111.94.63

LADY OF SHALOTT> "On a different note: I think there may be two camps of thought (relating to Avatar's 'Message') when relating to how folk see the Earth. Some people see this planet as a resource to be used and made of in any manner the world wishes, another camp sees the Earth as a living spirit (gia) with our lives inextricably linked to it.

I tend to assume that folk who enjoy many of the shows I like (Trek, Babylon5, DS9, Miyazaki studio gibli films, Gargoyles etc) have a profound love and protective quality to ALL things living and a certain 'world ethic'. That is obviously not always the truth, and THAT is my fault in assuming that. I forget that that 'sense of connectedness' between "like likes" and "like minds" is not always a given."

See here is where I think you're misunderstanding people like me and Greg and our thoughts on Avatar, it's not so much the basic message of Avatar I have a problem with as it's how it's delivered. I'm all for protecting the environment and the rights of indigenous peoples (although sometimes those two principles conflict more then pop culture would have you believe.)

But I go to movies mainly to enjoy a well told story. Now a good story can and often does have an underlying moral but that moral must exist to serve the story, not the other way round. When a film's moral serves the story you have a thoughtful piece of cinema, when the story serves the moral you have a propaganda reel.

Let's look at one of my favourite episodes of Gargoyles,Deadly Force. This episode is often thought of as the "gun safety episode", but in truth the gun merely acts as a catalyst for the real core of the episode; the gripping character drama. We see Elisa's dedication to justice, Broadway's loss of innocence and the first flickerings of Goliath's growing feelings for Elisa. This to me is way more satisfying then a 22 minute lecture on gun safety.

Another important point about Deadly Force is that at no point does it get up and say "guns are bad/good and anyone who disagrees with my opinion is stupid or evil". Rather it presents you with an issue and asks "what do you think?"

Avatar on the other hand isn't interested in what you think, it's only interested in telling you what to think. The Na'vi are perfect, angelic Mary Sues born without sin and anyone who thinks otherwise is an irredeemable psychopath who deserves to die. Let's contrast this again with the Narn-Centauri conflict in Babylon 5. Yes the Centauri
conquered and enslaved the Narns, but the Narns were hardly innocent themselves. They were in many way just as ruthless and brutal as their oppressors and once they had the chance weren't above doing a little oppressing of their own. The Centauri despite their many crimes weren't just slavering monsters either. Even though he does many horrible things throughout the course of the show, Londo is still one of the most complex and sympathetic characters in the B5 universe, and that's saying a lot.

As Ambassador Kosh might say, "understanding is a three-edged sword".
Algernon
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 2:07:00 pm EST from 86.40.252.122

Yeah (greg) I am speaking about The Morrigan:

The Morrigan is a goddess of battle, strife, and fertility. Her name translates as either "Great Queen" or "Phantom Queen," and both epithets are entirely appropriate for her. The Morrigan appears as both a single goddess and a TRIO OF GODESSES. The other deities who form the trio are Badb ("Crow"), and either Macha (also connotes "Crow") or Nemain ("Frenzy"). The Morrigan frequently appears in the ornithological guise of a hooded crow.

It's interesting to note that many Greek gods (as well as Norse--Odin, ruler of Asgard) would shape shift according to the situation and folk they were dealing with.

Here is a thought, 'when The Weird Sisters appear as one form with one character then another form with a different character in the same scene, are they doing this purposefully or do different folk that are interacting with them see them differently?' And if yes to either, then why?? My guess would be each according to their task. In other words it may be more advantageous to appear as a beautiful handmaiden to one person then a watchful witch to another.
....................

On a different note: I think there may be two camps of thought (relating to Avatar's 'Message') when relating to how folk see the Earth. Some people see this planet as a resource to be used and made of in any manner the world wishes, another camp sees the Earth as a living spirit (gia) with our lives inextricably linked to it.

I tend to assume that folk who enjoy many of the shows I like (Trek, Babylon5, DS9, Miyazaki studio gibli films, Gargoyles etc) have a profound love and protective quality to ALL things living and a certain 'world ethic'. That is obviously not always the truth, and THAT is my fault in assuming that. I forget that that 'sense of connectedness' between "like likes" and "like minds" is not always a given.

Note 1: Okay, I take back the "I was attacked statement". In fact bring it on. I will back up my points to high waters and high heavens. I have no problems engaging in a healthy debate.

Note 2: Just because an abundance of opinion says 'one thing' does not give it any more creedance than another opinion held by less voices. Fifty million people saying a thing does not make it right or true. It just makes that opinion "louder".

Note 3: Beavers don't cut down 1,000 trees, shoot their neighbors and engage in corporate manipulations to sell those 1,000 trees on the world market to the highest bider, while eliminating the competition from other beavers.

addendum: Corporate Beavers tend to get shot my their younger beaver sons who return after being abandoned early in by their fathers, to beaver families on the other side of the river, they take over their father beavers business, marry their mothers then go to therapy for 20yrs.

=^^=
lady s
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
The next time someone pulls out a gun, give them all your money, then shoot THEM as they run away...
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 11:41:11 am EST from 98.200.70.241

It looks like Amazon is no longer stocking the Gargoyles trades: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=gargoyles+volume+weisman&x=0&y=0 All the new and used copies they mention are 3rd party sellers, not Amazon, which may or not be reputable.

So SLG is probably the best place to point people for buying the trades: http://www.slgcomic.com/search.asp?keyword=weisman+volume
Landon Thomas - [<- Gargoyles News Twitter Feed]
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 9:13:44 am EST from 216.250.163.157

Greg Bishansky> "Seriously, we're all adults here."

Are you sure about that? Internet anonymity hides true ages, after all.

Honestly, stuff like this is why forums are great. You can avoid topics and people that infuriate you and if things just get completely out of hand, someone in charge who can keep a clear head can just tell everyone to move on and lock the thread.
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 8:53:17 am EST from 192.44.136.113

Hey guys, if you get a chance, go see "She's Out of My League". I appear as an extra in the scene towards the end of the movie when the entire cast is on an airplane in yellow sweatshirts. You'll know me as "Random Business Man."
Anthony Tini
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 8:04:13 am EST from 70.15.81.119

Rebel: You're not looking at both sides of the picture. Read farther down. They started out civilly. It was only after Lady of Shallot started flailing her arms and shouting that we didn't get it that the tone changed. Read over the messages from Wednesday. The only thing Greg, Harlan, and Algernon did initially was make a few jokes about the movie, and that was just among themselves. They weren't personally attacking anyone, and then Shallot just starting going bonkers.

So I guess now we've hit the point where people aren't even allowed to share jokes in here without someone shouting "persecution!"
Harvester of Eyes
"I want you all to understand this! If you do this, there will be no forgiveness! No amnesty! This boy died honoring his uniform. You, you'll die with nothing!" -William Adama ("Battlestar Galactica")
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 6:33:54 am EST from 70.177.182.14

I was reading on Gargwiki about the Mayan Gargoyle Clan and read something that got me thinking. In the show it says that poachers raided the Mayan pyramid, took the sun amulet, and destroyed all the sleeping gargoyles. What I'm wondering is why poachers would destroy a bunch of statues? It doesn't make sense to me as to why poachers would go raid a temple and think to destroy statues that could possibly be worth money if sold. It makes me wonder if the poachers knew about the gargoyles. Does anyone know if Greg has mentioned anywhere that the poachers knew about the gargoyles being living creatures and not just a bunch of stone statues? Thanks in advance for any answers. I was going to ask Greg this question, but I don't want to ask him something that someone here might be able to answer.
Charisma82 - [charisma82 at clearwire dot net]
"The alien mothership is in orbit here. If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." -Zap Brannigan
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 1:20:58 am EST from 64.128.148.53

PATRICK> "A beaver cuts down dozens trees to build a lodge, that's nature. A man cuts down dozens of trees to make a house, that's inherently evil?"

A beaver takes ONLY the trees he needs. Man takes ALL the trees until nothing is left.
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Fri, Mar 12, 2010 12:11:42 am EST from 75.159.239.62

REBEL> I have to point this out. I'm sorry, but this is the second human being I have ever encountered who demanded this kind of faux politeness to be attached to every opinion as if you're apologizing for it. The first was my nursery school teacher.

Maybe this is a culture thing, but in New York, and Los Angeles, two places I call home, you don't have to apologize for your opinions. You state your opinion and you're not considered rude.

I state my opinions, and I trust that anyone reading my posts has passed basic literature comprehension to know I am stating my opinions. If you think I'm full of crap, you are always welcome to tell me.

My friends tell me I'm full of crap all the time, and they don't say to me "Greg, in my opinion, you're full of crap." They just say "Greg, shut up, you're full of crap!" .... and I respect and love 'em for it ;)
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:19:50 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

Sorry for the triple post.

That should say "take a page from their books."
Rebel
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:16:19 pm EST from 66.57.121.227

Hell, it's not even tagging on qualifying phrases like "in my opinion" that's important. It's the whole attitude with which you communicate with someone else. If you've got an air about you that says, "My opinion is supreme, your opinion is horse shit," then that's inappropriate. If you've got an air about you that says, "Though I respect your opinion, I disagree with it, and here's why," then that's perfectly fine, even if you never add any prefaces in there. When I have an unpopular opinion in this comment room, I am greeted with a great deal of the former attitude and not very much of the latter.

Want to know who communicates effectively and politely, with well constructed arguments? Demonskrye. Matt. For the most part, anytime I've ever disagreed with them, they responded with posts that were polite, respectful, but nevertheless dissenting (which is perfectly fine). I wish that many other users in this CR would take a page from their boobs.
Rebel
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:15:47 pm EST from 66.57.121.227

If you're participating in a debate team event, yeah, I can understand why you'd avoid phrases like that. But if you're having a civil discussion with another human being, and it's not a competition, then politeness is more important than avoiding phrases that "weaken your argument," in my opinion. The whole notion of avoiding those phrases because they "weaken your argument" presupposes that you're in some kind of contest, and most of the time, you're not. If we're all adults, let's act like adults, and treat each other civilly.

Oh, and no one was being attacked? Hmmm...

"DUR HUR HUR THE CRAZIES UR DUMB I'M THE SMARTEST GIRL IN FUCKNUTCITY",
"...explain why what you're saying isn't the bile coming out of a fat clown's asshole."

Those sound a helluva lot like attacks to me.
Rebel
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:02:18 pm EST from 66.57.121.227

Greg B: heh- My first "exposure" to George Carlin was on my brothers portable record player when I was 6...in 1972 with his "Class Clown" album. Closed up in a basement room with my other Brother & sisters listening when my parents weren't home. Liked his approach better then, but he still made alot of sence right to the end.
Wingless
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 10:28:43 pm EST from 99.245.254.123

I'm posting this link because I find it relevant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6wOt2iXdc4
Greg Bishansky
"Personally, when it comes to rights, I believe we have unlimited rights or no rights at all. Personally, I lean towards unlimited. I feel I have the right to do anything I please. But, if I do something you don't like, I think you have the right to kill me. Where will you find a fairer deal than that?
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 10:04:28 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

REBEL> <<(such as "in my opinion" or "well I think" instead of just stating their opinions as fact and treating my opinions like dirt)>>

See, I was taught that such phrases weaken your argument. Seriously, by stating an opinion, you are doing so by default. You don't need to constantly remind people that it's your opinion.

I'm reminded of something the late, great hero, and smartest man who ever lived who made too much sense on every topic said. But that will be my new signature.

No one was being attacked. Seriously, we're all adults here. We don't need to add this "this is just my opinion" schlock to everything we say. I've never been in any debate that included that.

Just state your opinions, and have enough confidence in them, and in the intelligence of the person you're debating to know they're just that.
Greg Bishansky
"The next time some asshole says to you 'I have the right to my opinion' you say 'oh yeah, well I have the right to my opinion and in my opinion you have no right to your opinion.' Then shoot the fuck and walk away." - George Carlin
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 9:50:56 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

Back when I was in high school, we had classes that covered aspects of speaking and debating (the high school had a speech and debate team, coincidentally). One of the big lessons we were taught is that phrases like, "I think..." or "It's my opinion that..." are to be avoided because they weaken your argument. If you don't believe your point to be true enough to state it without prefacing it with weasel words, you shouldn't be engaging in the debate in the first place. So that is why I have an exceedingly difficult time saying or writing those phrases when I am stating an opinion.
Patrick
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 9:49:00 pm EST from 173.88.135.205

"I've read back over the posts of this week. No one was attacking you."

I'm going to have to disagree with this. Having frequently been on the receiving end of what I would consider "attacks" in this room, I have to say that a lot of people here are highly unmannerly, and that makes their comments into attacks. Personally, I don't mind if people disagree with me--not one bit--but it's all about how they do their disagreeing. If someone disagrees with me politely and offers no insults or ridicule, and if they use qualifying phrases (such as "in my opinion" or "well I think" instead of just stating their opinions as fact and treating my opinions like dirt) then they could disagree with me on every single issue and I wouldn't mind one bit. But when people start treating me rudely because they strongly disagree with my opinion, then yeah, that's an attack, and it's wildly uncalled for. I don't think Lady of Shallot is without guilt in contributing to the unpleasantness of this discussion, but she has most certainly been attacked. There are few excuses for a lack of civility, as far as I'm concerned.

Now, how do I feel about Avatar? Well, I enjoyed the hell out of it. Was it one-dimensional? Yes. I didn't really care though. I can enjoy a one-dimensional current movie just as easily as I can enjoy a one-dimensional tale of good and evil from hundreds of years ago, such as Beowulf, for example (though granted, Beowulf didn't have some societal "message" as far as I know). Do I appreciate depth and subtlety? Yes. But I do not require it.

I noticed the pro-environment, anti-military message in Avatar, and realized that it was rather blatant, but I didn't really care. That wasn't what I was there for. I paid more attention to the changes in Jake's character over time, his evolving relationships with other characters, the film's visuals, and the David-and-Goliath struggle between good and evil. That was why I was there. For me, Avatar wasn't about the environment, the military, or anything like that. It was about Jake Sully--a likable character who decides to take up his dead brother's calling and lead a bunch of aliens to their doom, but slowly decides to give up his human life and fight for these people he was once willing to destroy. Have stories like this been done before? Yes, of course. But I can still enjoy Avatar, just as much as I can enjoy a cover of a song, or a new performance of a play I've seen before.

Re: "Unobtanium"--I immediately noticed the odd name for this rare mineral as I was watching the film, but I didn't dwell on it. My mind quickly generated a potential "in-universe" explanation for the mineral's name--that perhaps the scientists who discovered it had a sense of humor, and gave it that name because of how rare and "unobtainable" it was. Or, I thought maybe within the context of the film, the mineral in question hadn't been formally classified and named yet, and that "unobtainium" was merely a temporary nickname for it--which actually makes lots of sense, since the word "unobtainium" is often used in fiction as a name or any extremely rare material. Those explanations satisfied me and I no longer concerned myself with the mineral's name, nor did I consider it to be a blot on the film as a whole. I figured most people would come to a similar conclusion as they watched the movie.

Note: You can comment on my opinions on "Avatar" if you want, but I didn't share them for the purpose of "arguing" a particular position about the film. I just felt like sharing my views.
Rebel
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 9:25:16 pm EST from 66.57.121.227

Suddenly, I remember why I lurk more than I write these days. It's getting harder and harder to disagree with someone these days, without that person crying that they're being picked on. Of course, I don't think I'm much better. When I do emerge from the shadows, it's to make a bunch of biting, sarcastic remarks to the offending party. So let's take a more civil approach.

Lady of Shallot: I've read back over the posts of this week. No one was attacking you. If anything, you were the one who seemed to be pitching a fit just because a majority of the room did not agree with YOU. No one is begrudging you the right to your opinion. But if you just want people to agree with you, go find an Avatar forum.
Harvester of Eyes
"DO NOT INTERRUPT! There! Happy now? Look what you did! Now you don't get to go on the murder crusade!" -The Monarch
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 7:57:57 pm EST from 70.177.182.14

Greg Bishansky> "Avatar, all the three dimensional graphics in the world wasted on a one dimensional movie."

Nice quote there, Greg. Yours?

I must say, I'm looking forward to 3D applied to something with a bit more potential flair to it than Avatar. Anybody who's seen Alice in Wonderland knows what I'm talking about; they've seen the new Tron: Legacy trailer.
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 7:42:44 pm EST from 174.101.249.151

Avatar, all the three dimensional graphics in the world wasted on a one dimensional movie.
Greg Bishansky
"Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he's the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." -Roger Ebert
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 5:16:54 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

Please don't get me started on "Captain Planet."

Why is it that so many people these days believe that anything that humans do that affects the environment around them must be a bad thing? A beaver cuts down dozens trees to build a lodge, that's nature. A man cuts down dozens of trees to make a house, that's inherently evil?
Patrick
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 5:07:43 pm EST from 173.88.135.205

Honestly all Avatar shows me is that technology is bad and nature is good. That's only uplifting if you happen to be a naturenerd like they have in Captain Planet.
Vinnie - [tpeano29 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 3:44:15 pm EST from 69.54.209.22

lady of shalott> A movie like Avatar has the potential to teach young children about being conscious of the larger picture and thus affect a whole new generation. Something most mothers would be concerned about.

Yes, but a movie or tv show that beats you over the head with morals is basically telling you that "you are dumb".

Now look at The Spectacular Spider-Man on the other hand. The show gives us an example of how drug abuse can be harmful, and at no point do the episodes beat us over the head about how abusing drugs will cause trouble.

I mean, if someone called you dumb or called you stupid, would you listen to anything that person said? Probably not. And that's what Avatar and Captain Planet basically does (Heck according to Captain Planet, it's the "dumb Americans" who are solely to blame for environmental issues).
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
Algernon's comment about Norman Osborn: One of the neat things about Dark Reign is that it gives Osborn the chance to expand his horizons beyond tormenting a twenty nine year old who still lives with his mom.
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 2:29:55 pm EST from 71.115.241.194

Lady S> The Weird Sisters should remind you of many different triptych goddess throughout various mythologies (The Norns of Norse myth are one set you didn't mention). They are a deliberate invocation of those mythologies. Greg Weisman has even stated each of the Weird Sisters has an ascendant attribute: Luna represents Fate, Phoebe represents Grace, and Selene represents Vengeance or Fury. Each of these attributes references triple goddesses of Greco-Roman mythology (as do their moon-based names). Being Wiccan, you should be quite familiar with the concept of the Triple Goddess and note the Weird Sisters' usage of the concept in their various human forms throughout City of Stone.

By the way, can you clear up what you meant by "The Morgans"? I thought you might have meant Morrigan, but that's Irish myth rather than old English. The only morgans I know of in old English myths are the water spirits known for drowning men in Wales and Breton. These creatures are similar to the Greek sirens and the Scandinavian nixie and may have lead to the naming of Morgan le Fay (in certain versions of the Arthurian Mythos, even the Lady of the Lake is named "Morgen").
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 2:20:13 pm EST from 192.44.136.113

Guys, does anyone here play Dragon Cave? It's an online collectible game, where you catch, raise, and breed dragons. Common dragons are easy to acquire, but you must compete with other users for the rare eggs. Anyway, someone has recently started up a Gargoyle lineage. If anyone is looking for a fun game to play online, you might want to check out Dragon Cave. Once you've got yourself established, you could join the Gargoyles lineage.

Here's the site's main page:
http://dragcave.net/
Here's the thread for the Gargoyles lineage:
http://forums.dragcave.net/index.php?showtopic=79906
Rebel
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 2:18:44 pm EST from 66.57.121.227

Okay Gregy Poo, now what about all the OTHER stuff I said!!!

1. Lets talk about The Weird Sisters!!

2. If we are gonna mention Miyazakis then we need to talk about: NausicaÃ¤ of the Valley of the Wind (Kaze no Tani no Naushika, 1984), an adventure film that introduced many of the themes which recur in later films: a concern with ecology and the human impact on the environment; a fascination with aircraft and flight; pacifism, including an anti-military streak; feminism; and morally ambiguous characterizations, especially among villains.

:)

=^^=
lady s
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
"...Not all who wander are lost-" J.R.R. Tolkien
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:52:08 am EST from 98.200.70.241

<<On a side note: Me and mother cannot help wondering if all you guys are simply skeetish over the fact that Avatar had a love story at the center of it's message...>>

Um... probably not. My favorite film of all time is "Casablanca" after all.
Greg Bishansky
"Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he's the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." -Roger Ebert
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:44:11 am EST from 68.199.5.105

Ya know all I ever said was that I could make an argument for:

1. Avatar being the most important film of 2009 and,
2. Avatar winning best Sound/Editing/Design

Good lord, then I GOT ATTACKED!!

I never said it was THE BEST film, there is a difference between "important and best". And I do not see why folk have a problem with a film that raises larger issues about the way we treat our planet. YOU GUYS MAY ALRERADY GET IT BUUUT there is whole younger generation that DOES NOT GET IT. I happen to be Wiccan and my belief system is heavily tied to the Mother Earth. We are all connected-to one another and to this planet. And while yes it was very cool to watch Hitler get pelted (i laughed my ass off over that scene), that film is not going to change the world.

The point: A movie like Avatar has the potential to teach young children about being conscious of the larger picture and thus affect a whole new generation. Something most mothers would be concerned about. Shows like TNG, Babylon 5 and Gargoyles had an effect on the generation now coming into it's own, and now the younger generation needs a positive light. If not in a positive film like Avatar then where??? There is no Trek on TV, there is no Gargoyles on TV, there is no Babylon 5, Batman (animated series), Pinky and the Brain!!, or DS9 on TV. There are NO positive Fantasy or Sci-fy programs on at this time (Caprica?? ugh, give me BSG Seasons 1-3). Have you seen what kids are watching in the weekday mornings?? The current shows in the morning and Saturday are REALLY scary dumb!!

I am just glad there is something with a positive message.

On a side note: Me and mother cannot help wondering if all you guys are simply skeetish over the fact that Avatar had a love story at the center of it's message...

....................

Anyways, I wanna talk about Gargoyles now! I stated earlier that I am only up to City Stone parts 1-4. I am working hard to resist watching it all over one weekend. I am trying to watch only 2 episodes a week so I can stretch it out abit!!

Anyone wanna chat about The Weird Sisters? They remind me of The Morgans (old English mythos), and The Three Fates. They seem to be Chaotic but upon closer inspection they seem to be intent upon maintaining the "direction" events (time line) are to unfold. That is why they remind me of The Three Fates.

NO SPOILERS PLEASE!!!

=^^=
lady s
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
"...Not all who wander are lost-" J.R.R. Tolkien
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 11:23:39 am EST from 98.200.70.241

Greg Bishansky> I loved Inglourious Basterds for the same exact reasons you stated. hittler's body fuil of holes. The best scene in the film. Now why Quentin didn't win for his screenpaly... I'll never now. he was robbed.
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Thu, Mar 11, 2010 12:43:09 am EST from 75.159.239.62

Hello All!

I wanted to make this offer if any of those that were attending the Gatherings in California were interested. There is a convention in Irvine called Califur that deals with Anthropomorphic artwork. This includes gargoyle artwork. I am OggyWolf one of the staffers for this convention. I have loved gargoyles since it was originally on the air, and have been wanting to attend a gathering for years. Sadly as we all know this is not possible any longer.

Thus I offer you this idea:

We are hosting the con this June 4-6th in Irvine. Our theme this year is comics, and we are more that willing to open up to all gargoyle fans. If anyone is interested in hosting events, panels or anything related to gargoyles I more than welcome you to contact me.

One of our guests this year is Kythera of Anevern which i'm sure if of interest. This is another reason I am making this post, because we truely would love to give the gargoyle community of California a place to meet once more.

www.califur.com
OggyWolf - [califurconbook at gmail dot com]
OggyWolf
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 9:27:32 pm EST from 207.233.109.98

MATT - Good question. If Alex does age dramatically faster than most babies, Xanatos and Fox could be facing some difficult questions soon. (Not to mention the gargoyles saying to each other about Alex's rapid aging, "When did this become a soap opera?" - except they already used that line in "Angel".)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 7:08:02 pm EST from 4.244.208.94

As far as I know, Gargoyles was a success in absolute terms but not in relative terms. It was and is a darn good show, and I think it was profitable for Disney (since otherwise they wouldn't have bothered with a 52-episode second season), but not nearly as popular or as profitable as its competition. Sadly, I think that people tend to focus on the latter aspect and ignore the former.
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 7:06:39 pm EST from 74.205.192.14

lady of shalott> Actually, Gargoyles was indeed a success back in the day. Otherwise, why else was it renewed for 42 episodes and 13 more afterwards?
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
Algernon's comment about Norman Osborn: One of the neat things about Dark Reign is that it gives Osborn the chance to expand his horizons beyond tormenting a twenty nine year old who still lives with his mom.
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 6:47:29 pm EST from 71.115.241.194

Thanks Ed, but like an idiot I italicized the bottom of my post instead of hiding them (**smacks head**) . . . serious brain fart, as [I] looks NOTHING like [SPOILER] . . . >_<
Phoenician
"The suspense is terrible, I hope it lasts" -- Willy Wonka
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 5:50:24 pm EST from 157.242.217.219

Glad you mentioned these, Phoenician. For several years, one of the smaller marking-points of the new year for me has been checking the Ask Greg archives after the first post of the year to see what the new archive will be called.
Ed
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 5:48:18 pm EST from 213.187.39.228

On a TOTALLY random and tangental geek moment . . . I was just browsing through the Ask Greg archived libraries when I spotted the full library of 2007 answers titled "COMEBACKS" and looked around for the other yearly archive libraries. Now, I've seen (and read) these libraries for several years now, but totally haven't bothered to look up the new names for 2009 and 2010 (why look up the latest annual libraries when you read the latest responses EVERYDAY, hehe) and that's when I saw Gore's (or Todd's, not sure who actually does the archiving around here) latest entries: WEISMANSWERS & GREG-SPONSES.

Needless to say, this made me laugh quite a bit, and I must give kudos to whoever it is that makes the annual effort to find a suitable synonym for 2001's "RESPONSES." I imagine the regulars here have seen the other names given to the other annual archives before, but for those who haven't been around that long, take a look at the archive library page

Of course, I can't help post the current list myself, but if you want to hunt yourself, I've left it hidden d:
2001 - RESPONSES
2002 - ANSWERS
2003 - REPLIES
2004 - RETORTS
2005 - REJOINDERS
2006 - RIPOSTES
2007 - COMEBACKS
2008 - POSTINGS
2009 - WEISMANSWERS
2010 - GREG-SPONSES
Phoenician
"The suspense is terrible, I hope it lasts" -- Willy Wonka
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 5:39:51 pm EST from 157.242.217.219

"1. gads, the REASON Avatar's message is scaled down is cause most folk are not clever enough to get it without "it" being spelled out."

Thank you for confirming my suspicions and making me not want to see the movie even more now. If it's dumbed down so everyone can understand it, it has nothing profound to say because it has to compromise itself. You've proven my point.

"okay, let me get this straight, "your friends like it, so you going to not like it""

Chances are low. My friends and I have some different tastes. Us agreeing on movies was never the same since I fell asleep during Wanted, which they all insisted was great.

I'd take a bullet for my friends. But they sure as hell can have questionable movie taste that doesn't really sync in with what I like.

"2. uhhh, you haven't seen the film yet! but wait, thats right, you like to assume."

And you like to confirm. It goes both ways. Had you constructed your thoughts properly, you wouldn't confirm my horrible assumptions. But you do. You have defeated your own point. You could say "I like applesauce and my grandmother is a Swedish haberdasher with a feather in her cap and a pocket full of dreams" and you would have a stronger argument than "Avatar is dumbed down because people are dumb."

Or maybe the movie is dumb.

Just saying.

"3. Great-Green-Blooded Ceasars Vulcan Ghost! The "Crazies"....that about says it all I suppose."

Sometimes, I just want a quarter pounder with cheese and not an extravagant dinner. Let's put this in terms of things that can be inserted into your mouth, as I believe this comparison will find its way to your understanding.

Let's say The Crazies is a McDonald's double cheeseburger. Delicious, not particularly healthy, but gets the job done.

Let's say [insert intelligent movie you love here, I don't feel like picking] is...we'll go with an Iron Chef dinner. Depth, art, and delicious in an enriching way. Definitely a piece with a single author/auteur/director's vision, I think, is the general purpose of this statement.

Based on what you tell me about Avatar (and what Greg and Algernon confirm), this movie is basically a McDonald's attempt to make an Iron Chef dinner. It looks beautiful, seems elegant, but has that fast food grease and hollow ingredients that stops it from being worth something special.

Thus, as my argument was actually proposing until you decided to brush it aside with "DUR HUR HUR THE CRAZIES UR DUMB I'M THE SMARTEST GIRL IN FUCKNUTCITY", I prefer a work that is honest and fulfilling in expectations. If Avatar is the movie you all suggest (a dumbed down movie that doesn't truly speak in depth, which you all seem to agree on for one reason or another despite one of you [that would be you] saying it's still important because the film ASSERTS intelligence where there is none), it's going to be a significantly less enjoyable experience than a movie that doesn't try to be more than what it is.

I'm going to like an action movie with kickass explosions more than I'm going to like a movie that addresses philosophical issues as its main point but horribly botches them. That train of thought.

Now while you're distracted by the train, I'll address more of your comments.

"1. or they are simply wrong."

Which is very presumptuous of you to say, as you've still said nothing to convince me you're an intelligent human being. Or if you are, you've certainly not shown the proper intelligences that would contribute to making yourself not sound like a moronic, pretentious douchenozzle.

In fact, you actually assert a movie is important because it dumbs itself down for people who won't understand it. Then what merit does it have if it compromises itself?

"2. atleast my argument is constructed and has a point and reference, your argument goes something like this, "why are you saying tupid things?!""

And you still haven't answered that question.
Harlan Phoenix
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 4:45:32 pm EST from 76.2.91.55

You know, it seems like every week I understand less and less why I still come here.

In the name of keeping the comment room open to everyone and preserving the old timey atmosphere, it's growing more and more into a place where people with no intention of contributing to the conversation can come back again and again to repeat the same behavior and people hurl insults at one another because there's nothing and no one to stop them.

Not trying to create more drama or make a noisy exit. Just voicing my thoughts.
Demonskrye - [<---Big Changes at The Ink and Pixel Club]
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 4:40:48 pm EST from 146.115.115.75

<<1. And unfortunately it got canceled because of that. Gargoyles is brillant, i agree.>>

You are the first person to suggest that "Gargoyles" got canceled because it wouldn't dumb itself down.

What exactly are you basing this on? Certainly not facts.
Greg Bishansky
"Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he's the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." -Roger Ebert
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 4:01:26 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

Lady> Why do you keep assuming you're more intelligent than everyone else? All I see you do is say stupid things and then talk down to people as you explain why what you're saying isn't the bile coming out of a fat clown's asshole.

1. stupid things? hey, atleast i saw the film I am talking about! you are just reacting on second hand information from your friends!! wow , thats...uh...hmmm...

2. atleast my argument is constructed and has a point and reference, your argument goes something like this, "why are you saying tupid things?!"

wow, thats, uh, hmmmm...

....................

Here's a hint: If people are disagreeing with you, it's not because they're wrong. It's because they're constructing an opposing position because they understand what you say and disagree with it.

1. or they are simply wrong.
....................

I haven't seen Avatar, but my friends have. They confirmed when I asked if the story is basic, but assured me it was a good film. Not to diss my friends, but they're not as critical as I am. So I'm going under the assumption that I would not like it, thus I will not see it unless I'm in a social situation where everyone wants to see it.

1. okay, let me get this straight, "your friends like it, so you going to not like it"

is that it? cause if I missed something please clarify. in fact I am gonna re-read your statement above..

lets see, "I'm going under teh assumtion I would not like it"

You know what this sounds like? It sounds like this:

"No Sam I am, I do not like green egss and ham."

Read the book.
....................

I can enjoy a work of fiction that's subpar but doesn't aspire to be more than that...

2. uhhh, you haven't seen the film yet! but wait, thats right, you like to assume.

...it's probably why I enjoyed The Crazies despite a few brief moments of garbage. It was crap, but didn't try to be more than crap (from what I saw). Or maybe I was in a good mood that day.

3. Great-Green-Blooded Ceasars Vulcan Ghost! The "Crazies"....that about says it all I suppose.
....................

Avatar, however, seems to aspire to be this massive, grand epic without...actually saying anything profound (which Greg and Algernon seem to confirm, and I trust their opinions as they are not dumb). So I think, to a point, it's a crud film with nothing to say. Or nothing worth hearing.

1. gads, the REASON Avatar's message is scaled down is cause most folk are not clever enough to get it without "it" being spelled out.
....................

But then again, I still haven't seen it. I don't think I will, either. Give me a crappy zombie movie instead.
Harlan Phoenix

1. wow, you would prefer a crappy movie?? well, I can see what kind of taste you have.
....................

NEXT:

See: "Princess Mononoke" instead. A film that examines the story of nature vs progress in a three dimensional manner and makes no attempt to do the thinking for you. Unlike "Avatar," "Princess Mononoke" knows you're an intelligent person. That is a very, very thoughtful masterpiece. If Cameron had made "Princess Mononoke," Lady Eboshi would be a cackling Cruella DeVille type who eats babies and burns down forests FOR NO REASON!
Greg Bishansky

1. I agree 100%. I love Miyazaki films and PM is brillant, purely brillant! My guess is that he assumes the average Japanese film goer actually has an opinion...unlike most Americans.

2. I agree 100%. "Unubtantium" made my skin itch as well. I did not like the ter. My guess is that Cameron wanted kids to "see it" without haveing to think too deeply because their parents sure as heck would not explain it to them.
....................
NEXT

....I'm sorry but the greatest message in the world doesn't mean much if it's delivered in a heavy dumbed down way. As you said yourself, Gargoyles was able to cover much of this same material in a subtle intelligent way while still telling an original story with complec characters.

1. And unfortunately it got canceled because of that. Gargoyles is brillant, i agree.

2. Dumbed down because people are. You are not dumb, in fact most of the folk on this forum are brillant thinkers. I wish the mass public was the same.
...........

As for the advanced civilization exploiting a less advanced one, that's been a staple of sci-fi since Kirk's day and had been used to much better effect then in Avatar. One of my favourite examples would be the Narn-Centauri conflict from Babylon 5...

"Why does any advanced civilization seek to destroy a less-advanced one? Because the land is strategically valuable, because there are resources that can be cultivated and exploited, but most of allÃ¢â‚¬Â¦simply because they can. You have experienced much the same on your own world. There are humans for whom the words "never again" carry special meaning. As they do for us." -G'Kar

1. Yep. Trek and Babylon 5 got it right many a time. I have no conflict with this analysis.
....................

THE POINT BEING: It's a movie with a positive message and in a world with so many who do not care...I was thrilled to see a movie that cared, and a big screen epic that sent a message to the masses that do not get it.
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
"...Not all who wander are lost-" J.R.R. Tolkien
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 3:46:08 pm EST from 98.200.70.241

Lady> Why do you keep assuming you're more intelligent than everyone else? All I see you do is say stupid things and then talk down to people as you explain why what you're saying isn't the bile coming out of a fat clown's asshole.

Here's a hint: If people are disagreeing with you, it's not because they're wrong. It's because they're constructing an opposing position because they understand what you say and disagree with it.

I haven't seen Avatar, but my friends have. They confirmed when I asked if the story is basic, but assured me it was a good film. Not to diss my friends, but they're not as critical as I am. So I'm going under the assumption that I would not like it, thus I will not see it unless I'm in a social situation where everyone wants to see it.

I can enjoy a work of fiction that's subpar but doesn't aspire to be more than that. It's probably why I enjoyed The Crazies despite a few brief moments of garbage. It was crap, but didn't try to be more than crap (from what I saw). Or maybe I was in a good mood that day.

Avatar, however, seems to aspire to be this massive, grand epic without...actually saying anything profound (which Greg and Algernon seem to confirm, and I trust their opinions as they are not dumb). So I think, to a point, it's a crud film with nothing to say. Or nothing worth hearing.

But then again, I still haven't seen it. I don't think I will, either. Give me a crappy zombie movie instead.
Harlan Phoenix
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 3:16:01 pm EST from 76.2.91.55

And just remember... the natural resource the United States Army was after was called... unobtanium.

When I first heard about that, I thought it was a joke. There was no way a professional screenplay for a movie that was getting Oscar buzz and making billions of dollars would be that... unimaginative.

But, I saw it, and lo and behold, there it was.

Coincidentally, I just read a new interview with Matt Stone and Trey Parker of "South Park." Late last season, they did an episode making fun of Avatar (before the movie came out) called "Dances With Smurfs" and they had this to say...

***

Q. Have you seen "Avatar" since you did your "Dances With Smurfs" episode, and what did you think of it?

A. STONE: I thought "Dances With Smurfs" was better, actually. Obviously, we hadn't seen it when we did that. We just had to guess what the movie was about, based on the trailer. But I am surprised how close we got, actually. I thought the movie was going to be a better version of itself.
PARKER: We're like, "We know that they're trying to get something off this planet, some resource. We should find out what they call it." And then someone said, "Oh, they call it Unobtanium." And we were just like, "Yeah, whatever, shut up. O.K., let's find out what it's really called." We were like, "No way. No. It can't be that dumb."
STONE: But it was that dumb.
PARKER: I actually took forever to go see it, but I finally went and saw it like a month ago. After an hour, I was like, I am so done with this movie. Because I know exactly what's going to happen.
STONE: I have to admit, I had a fun time watching it. But I can't defend a single thing in it.

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/south-park-at-200-trey-parker-and-matt-stone-apologize-to-no-one/

***

I am just going to say what I have said about this movie elsewhere. See "Princess Mononoke" instead. A film that examines the story of nature vs progress in a three dimensional manner and makes no attempt to do the thinking for you. Unlike "Avatar," "Princess Mononoke" knows you're an intelligent person. That is a very, very thoughtful masterpiece. If Cameron had made "Princess Mononoke," Lady Eboshi would be a cackling Cruella DeVille type who eats babies and burns down forests FOR NO REASON!
Greg Bishansky
"Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he's the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." -Roger Ebert
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 3:04:24 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

LADY OF SHALOTT> So basically it's just like every episode of Captain Planet? I'm sorry but the greatest message in the world doesn't mean much if it's delivered in a heavy dumbed down way. As you said yourself, Gargoyles was able to cover much of this same material in a subtle intelligent way while still telling an original story with complec characters.

As for the advanced civilization exploiting a less advanced one, that's been a staple of sci-fi since Kirk's day and had been used to much better effect then in Avatar. One of my favourite examples would be the Narn-Centauri conflict from Babylon 5...

"Why does any advanced civilization seek to destroy a less-advanced one? Because the land is strategically valuable, because there are resources that can be cultivated and exploited, but most of allâ€¦simply because they can. You have experienced much the same on your own world. There are humans for whom the words "never again" carry special meaning. As they do for us." -G'Kar
Algernon
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 2:51:22 pm EST from 86.40.244.25

the message????

good grief charlie brown! okay let me spell it out:

1. abuse of natural resources,
2. might is right,
3. technology (with no ethical parameters) solves all problems,
4. spirituality holds no answers,
5. native peoples know nothing, only civilivations with tech do and gee, we sure are doing a great job of running this planet!!<--(thats called sarcasim),
6. stealing land and anothers country is fine,
7. if you have resources and 'we' want them, take them,
8. nothing exist in the universe unless you can see it,
9. i dont understand you therefore "i" am right,
0. my weapons are more powerful, therefore i am right,
1. ignorance of other cultures and lives is okay,
2. too much concentrated power in the hands of one group (even within the same society) is dangerous,
3. destroying ancient cultures and land marks is okay so long as there is gold beneath dim' dar temples,

hmmmm, remember the Spanish and Central America? the Mayans? aboriginals in Australia? native peoples of North America? the ancient library of Aexandria? the de-facing of female leaders in ancient Egyptian art?

and lastly, people are simply "culturally and ethnically centristic"...what does that mean?--> simple: folk have a tendency to feel that the only valid group in the world is their own group or culture. this "group centrism" causes most of the worlds issues

aaaaaaaaaaaaand

1. it's part of the reason most of the Gargoyles were destroyed by the very folk they were helping!!

2. if you don't "get" Avatar's message watch the first several Gargoyles Series 1 episodes again cuz you missed that class. Part of that "message" is in what happens to the Gargoyles.

=^^=
Meow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lady s
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
"...Not all who wander are lost-" J.R.R. Tolkien
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 2:19:45 pm EST from 98.200.70.241

ALGERNON> Hey, the colonel in "Avatar" was funny. Can you watch him without laughing? He's so over the top, he's hilarious.

Of course, I'm under the impression that he wasn't supposed to be funny.
Greg Bishansky
"Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he's the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." -Roger Ebert
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 1:52:39 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

Algernon> Says you. I HOPE we find Smurfs in space.
Harlan Phoenix
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 1:51:23 pm EST from 76.2.91.55

LADY OF SHALLOT> I fail to see how the message of Avatar is so forward looking, just a rather shallow Native American stereotype vs a rather shallow U.S. Military stereotype. I haven't actually seen Inglorious Basterds but from what I gather it's a great deal more original then Disney's Pocahontas IN SPACE! What exactly is the message of Avatar other then giant blue cat people good, military bad!

Let's hope that when aliens do arrive they're more interesting then the Na'vi, otherwise First Contact is going to be a big disappointment. Plus I'm slightly miffed that the REAL Avatar movie has to be called The Last Airbender thanks to Mr. Cameron.
Algernon
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 1:19:28 pm EST from 86.40.154.117

you boys and your guns and thrill at shooting things...

ugh, and while yes it was nice seeing Hitler blasted to bits, i prefer the message in Avatar.

it's a "forward - future" message,

not a "backwards - to the past" message

certainly we must remember the sins of the past (-or "doomed to repeat them" whole thing-), buuuut we must also look to the furture and begin to get this world on the right track, other wise when some space faring race finally does get around to our little corner of the Galaxy all they may find here are cockroaches scurring across dissemated cities...

=^^=
mia
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
"...Not all who wander are lost-" J.R.R. Tolkien
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 12:12:16 pm EST from 98.200.70.241

PATRICK> "but a story about Allied soldiers slaughtering Germans in ways that could make even Hannibal Lector cringe is a "feel good comedy." :P"

Slaughtering Nazis, not Germans. Although these Nazis just happened to be German.

I actually blogged a little on this topic a few days ago:

http://gregxb.blogspot.com/2010/03/inglourious-basterds.html

We live in a world of grays, yes. But Nazis are one of history's few darkest of blacks, that I find nothing wrong with a film like this.
Greg Bishansky
"Quentin Tarantino's 'Inglourious Basterds' is a big, bold, audacious war movie that will annoy some, startle others and demonstrate once again that he's the real thing, a director of quixotic delights." -Roger Ebert
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 12:04:39 pm EST from 68.199.5.105

Avatar teaches us the importance of paying good money to stroke James Cameron's ego.
Algernon
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 9:58:33 am EST from 86.41.110.18

Here's an interesting article from the Hollywood Reporter about future projects for Disney Channel and Disney XD: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3ib786618f922dfc1dfadfb7afe7539cb7
I don't think it looks good for a third season of Spectacular Spider-Man. They're announcing "The Avengers" animated series, but the interesting quote is this: "We've been poring through the library of 7,000 Marvel characters looking for the next 'Spider-Man.'" Which seems to imply that Spider-Man is done and they're moving on.
Phil - [p1anderson at go dot com]
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 9:34:40 am EST from 69.131.42.43

Landon Thomas> "This new Samsung ad has some striking (probably coincidental) imagery"

I was wondering how long it would be until someone brought that ad up. It got my attention as well.
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 9:31:30 am EST from 192.44.136.113

Todd> I wonder if Lexington is going into business with Xanatos (as in David) or Xanatos (as in Alex). Alex will still be quite young in 1999, but he also appears to be aging faster than most human infants.
Matt - [ewoks11 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 8:36:47 am EST from 76.217.239.172

WW2 was 65 years ago. Oddly, though, it's still "too soon" to dress up as Hitler for Halloween, but a story about Allied soldiers slaughtering Germans in ways that could make even Hannibal Lector cringe is a "feel good comedy." :P
Patrick
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 6:59:49 am EST from 173.88.135.205

"Inglourious Basterds" had a much more important message than "Avatar." Simply put... Jews killing Nazis and scalping them!

::sniffs::

I'm sorry to be slobbering all over myself, but seeing the Fuhrer's body full of holes and all those Nazis burn to death while masturbating their own egos was the most beautiful thing I've ever seen.
Greg Bishansky
posted @ Wed, Mar 10, 2010 12:06:12 am EST from 68.199.5.105

i also feel that Avatar wasn't necessarily the best film of the year (in some ways though, i could make a good argument for Avavtar being the most important--simply for it's message); however, i was shocked that Avatar did not win for Sound Design/Editing. i saw Hurt Locker and most of the films up for those awards--Avatar with out a doubt had the most complex sound editing. And since i used to work in the Recording Industry, i feel i can make that statement.

seems to me like that was a negative slight at Camerons crew. look at the history of the awards--they hate giving awards to sci-fi/fantasy films, as they feel these films do not have any real social weight or relevance.

just my .0825 cents

=^^=
lady s
lady of shalott - [paulizdreamy at yahoo dot com]
"...Not all who wander are lost-" J.R.R. Tolkien
posted @ Tue, Mar 9, 2010 11:23:07 pm EST from 98.200.70.241

This new Samsung ad has some striking (probably coincidental) imagery: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2KRtCtRINc
Landon Thomas - [<- Gargoyles News Twitter Feed]
posted @ Tue, Mar 9, 2010 10:55:25 pm EST from 216.250.163.157

Here's a great interview with Victor Cook on Mecha-Nation: http://comicsonline.com/node/893

"Mecha-Nation started out as an animated series pitch. Greg Guler, Greg Weisman and I put together a series pitch which included a bible, a season's worth of story ideas, full color character designs and action poses and a DVD pitch reel with music, voice over and mini-action sequence... During that process, APE publisher David Hedgecock suggested to us putting Mecha-Nation out as a limited comic book series first... Written by Greg Weisman, expect plenty of backstory, relationships, mystery and action. Each issue will have two covers to choose from, Sean Galloway and Greg Guler are doing the covers."
Landon Thomas - [<- Gargoyles News Twitter Feed]
posted @ Tue, Mar 9, 2010 9:24:42 am EST from 216.250.163.157

DEMONSKRYE - That's all right. I can wait a week - and I'm still looking forward to reading your review.

A further thought about how Goliath might regard Lexington going into business. I suspected that he'd be uneasy about it, particularly in light of his words to Thailog in "Double Jeopardy" - "Money is a necessary evil in Xanatos's world, but not in ours" - not to mention the possibility of Lexington being partners with Xanatos, as the "Lexington-Xanatos Corporation" suggests (though we don't know for certain when that happens; Lexington's 1999 deal might be something else entirely). But then I thought of a further reason why that action might trouble Goliath in particular: his memories of Lexington in "Future Tense". Might Goliath fear that Lexington's decision to go into the business world could take him one step closer to becoming like his alternate self in the nightmare Puck sent him? Goliath knows, of course, that the "Future Tense" world was really a twisted creativity demon conjured up by Puck, but it's still likely that he subconsciously fears it coming true ever since.

(Now I really want to see a story about Lexington going into business if we get more "Gargoyles" graphic novels; we've got great drama possibilities there.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Mon, Mar 8, 2010 6:55:33 pm EST from 4.244.208.29

Gargoyleslady> Assuming that they find out about it, as I'm not quite sure how isolated they are from the rest of Japan, I imagine they would feel the way a lot of people feel: shocked, horrified, angry. I haven't seen the movie, so it had initially occurred to me that the clan migh not see a difference between hunting dolphins and hunting any other kind of animal for food. But as I've read about it, it sounds like a cycle of just one horrible thing after another with no real survival justification behind it. Would the clan try to stop it? Maybe. I don't know how far Ishimura is from Taiji, so it may not even be possible for them to get there safely, much as they would like to help. If it is close enough, they would still have to balance the possible good they could do with the potential danger to themselves posed by leaving their home, especially with the world now aware of the existence of gargoyles.

LXMs> I think the best way to sum it up is "walking, talking, thinking search engine." Part of the reason that Lex is the model for these guys is that he's smaller than the other gargoyles and therefore "cuter," less threatening, and more space efficient.

Ink and Pixel Club> Just so you guys know, particularly Todd, I am going to delay my "Quest for Camelot" review for a week. I'm not all that happy with how it is currently, so I'll be doing some editing on it this week and hopefully have it ready for next Tuesday. Tomorrow's article will instead be about the animation related Oscars.

I'm also moving the site to WordPress, so there are going to be some big changes in the near future.
Demonskrye - [<---Big Changes at The Ink and Pixel Club]
posted @ Mon, Mar 8, 2010 1:15:04 pm EST from 146.115.115.75

I was happy with the Oscars, too. I was especially happy Avatard didn't win; it was a terrific movie and all, but just becuase it made a couple of dollars at the Box office doesn't mean it's the best of the year.

I was rooting for Inglourious Basterds because that's my favourite of all ten nominees - which I have seen and reviewed, see my website. I was happy for Christoph Waltz, but I really wanted Quentin Tarantino to win for his brilliant screenplay.

That said, everything was sooo predictable, as it usually is. They spred the Oscars around this year; yah, Avatar and Locker took home a combined nine of them, but the rest were spred around evenly.

Not the best Oscar show, but it was interesting. Sort of. Until next year.
Battle Beast - [Canada]
That is all I will say.
posted @ Mon, Mar 8, 2010 12:08:04 pm EST from 75.159.239.62

I wonder if the LXM robots will resemble Lex as closely as Coldfire resembles Desdemona for instance. I can't really see these robots having Lex's wings. But I guess we'll see.
In any case, Lexington is hardly what many humans think of in terms of appearance when they think of a gargoyle. Witness Castaway's gargoyle statue in "Night-Watch".

And Todd, Goliath will indeed still be alive when Lex goes into business. Greg has given us dates (all on the GargWiki) that indicate Lex will start his business in 1999, while Goliath is still around until at least 2004.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"For science, which, as my associate Fang indicated, must move ever forward. Plus there's the money... and I do love the drama!" -Sevarius, 'Louse'
posted @ Mon, Mar 8, 2010 8:20:19 am EST from 76.217.239.172

HARLAN PHOENIX - From the description of the LXM robots, they sounded to me more like computerized mini-encyclopedias, something to consult for information when you need it, that happened to be shaped like gargoyles for novelty purposes - (maybe not the best analogy, but I remember seeing mouse-covers some years ago shaped like mice) - than like pets. But it's still a good question. Of course, they're produced by a company that Lexington apparently (judging from the title) founded; we don't know if the LXMs began being produced during his lifetime, but their design could have been intended as a tribute to one of the company founders and his technological achievements.

(Of course, that raises the question from there of how a lot of gargoyles would view Lexington founding a company and being involved in the business world. If it happened during Goliath's lifetime, for example, what would his response be? It's not a first, obviously, since Demona and Thailog had already made similar ventures - but Lexington isn't a rogue gargoyle as they are.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Mon, Mar 8, 2010 7:45:50 am EST from 4.244.209.153

Comment Room Archive

Comments for the week ending March 15, 2010

Index : Hide Images