A Station Eight Fan Web Site


The Phoenix Gate

Comment Room Archive

Comments for the week ending July 30, 2023

Index : Hide Images

Yes both mine and Masterdramon's quotes are from the Futurama episode "Roswell that Ends Well" both from the same character as well.

Heck, my own signature is from Futurama as well. Suffice to say, it and classic Simpsons were very formative for my sense of humor.

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

I think the philosophy of time travel needs to fit the story it's in.

Generally speaking, if time travel is an element of the story but the centre is character drama, I think a fixed timeline is almost always best.

'The Time Traveller's Wife' is full of time travel but fundamentally it's a romance frustrated by time rather than a story about someone playing with time travel - originally, the time travel was conceived as a metaphor for failed relationships. The stakes only work because, even if Henry and Clare experience events in a different order, they still experience the same events and actually they're not able to change or mould their fates except in the sense that everyone does.

'Gargoyles' reflects Greg's sensibilities of everything being extremely researched and logically coherent to even the smallest details and is part of a single, auteured, cohesive universe. In this context, an immutable timeline is the only one that could be satisfying.

Put it this way: Demona isn't the author of her own demise if, in a different universe, she made the right choice - she's just the victim of being born in the wrong universe and the stakes of the story evaporate. One of the key reasons I hate multiverses.

But if the story is about time itself, I think that's a little different. I haven't watched 'Back to the Future' for decades but those films are literally about the changes you could make through time and the joy is in the jeopardy of those small changes.

'Doctor Who' similarly is about a character who exists in a time machine and it's literally designed by committee. Yet while other similar projects get lost in the apparent infinities of possibilities -- e.g. the Marvel and DC multiverses -- I think what the best writers have done of the years is make a real glory of this strength, allowing time and its rules to be unknowable to everyone except the Doctor. This means there are always stakes but also the capacity for renewal. In one of the most beautiful scenes (bizarrely, relegated as a DVD extra), the Doctor says:

"The thing is, Amy, everyone's memory is a mess. Life is a mess. Everyone's got memories of a holiday they've never been on, or a party they never went to, or met someone for the first time and felt like they've known them all their lives. Time is being rewritten all around us every day. People think their memories are bad, but their memories are fine. The past is really like that."

And I think that more poetic take on time travel, oddly, captures the wonder and mystery and unknowability of time travel much more than a set of coherent rules would or could -- and it kind of reflects how small and petty is the human need for definition and fixity and comprehension in a cosmos hardwired for chaos and with more mysteries than the species will probably ever manage to solve. Plus, it makes the concept self-renewing as if continuity issues occur (e.g. Earth being the most thoroughly-invaded planet in the skies yet nobody knowing about aliens) the past has simply changed around the characters.

I also think a third reason for different time travel rules is for closed-ended pieces where the time travel logic serves a moral purpose. I have issues with 'Terminator 2' undoing the elegance of T1... but I can't doubt that "No future but what we make" is infinitely stronger as a theme and connecting idea than the more logically-sound and thrilling but spiritually grim conclusion of 'The Terminator'.

Similarly, you don't want to see the version of 'A Christmas Carol' where Scrooge goes to the future and sees how happy he is by reforming. Admittedly, there's a hand-waive from the fact it can be interpreted a dream but if you assume Scrooge is time-travelling and history re-forms around his choices, that's vastly more compelling proposition.

Phoenician: Thanks for the recommendation. I've picked it up!


Masterdramon’s was also Futurama (I believe from the same episode, “Roswell That Ends Well”).

Matthew's quote is from Dr. Farnsworth on "Futurama".

MATTHEW - What was that last quote from? Oh, and what waws that quote from, Masterdramon?
Todd Jensen

Continuing the thread on caution in time travel.

"Oooh, a lesson in not changing history from "Mr. I'm-my-own-grandpa". Let's get the hell out of here already! Screw history!"

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

There is Doc Brown's take on caution. "I figured, what the hell?".

I prefer:

"Don't do anything that affects anything, unless it turns out you were supposed to do it, in which case for the love of God, don't not do it!"

Masterdramon - [kmc12009 at mymail dot pomona dot edu]
"It can be a hobby, or really, anything else, but I love when people have fun doing what they love. It’s like they’re sparkling." - Marin Kitagawa

I'm reminded of what Jasper Fforde once wrote when it came to writing time travel.

Rule #1: Don't do it.

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

My personal preference for time travel stories is less any specific model, and more the story picking one model/set of rules and sticking with it. This is actually something that bothers me quite a bit with the first BttF, even if overall it's a terrific movie. Sometimes it works around or at least heavily implies Stable Time Loops (Marty inspiring the future mayor, the existence of "Johnny B. Goode"), while other times it works around mutable history (the entire central conflict of the film).

Some of my favorite time travel stories in existence, including Puella Magi Madoka Magica, Steins;Gate, Erased, and Re:Zero all involve a character being able to go back in time and alter history to some degree, but mine this for maximum drama and existential horror as it sets a single, ordinary person in opposition to the overwhelming powers of fate and causality. To me that's just as valid an avenue for storytelling as the Stable Time Loops in Gargoyles or The Owl House or Haruhi Suzumiya.

As with most things in fiction, it's less about the rules the storyteller picks and more about how well they execute it.

Masterdramon - [kmc12009 at mymail dot pomona dot edu]
"It can be a hobby, or really, anything else, but I love when people have fun doing what they love. It’s like they’re sparkling." - Marin Kitagawa

Phoenician> Same. Also gotten various BTTF guides during the 2010s, and not too long ago one of those fan produced replicas of the Grays Sports Almanac.

The one I have actually is fill with sports stats in the specified years, but yeah. Hardly recreational reading material indeed.


Antiyonder: I have; I played the game and read the IDW comic adaptation (collectively known as "Citizen Brown") by Bob Gale. As with most of BTTF, the characters and scenarios are engaging and entertaining enough that it remains a fun ride.

Further, I remember the commentaries and interviews from the first DVDs for Back to the Future Part II that I also find endearing. That for all the antics in the future and alternate 1985, the real gem of that film is the scenes in 1955 that quite literally take us back to the events of the first film. Because, as the filmmakers realized, isn't that always the desire and ultimate flaw to most sequels? Studios know fans want to relive the joy of the original film, but ultimately frustrate the fanbase when too much is retreaded story-wise. But thanks to time travel, audiences arguably for the first time had their cake and ate it too.

A slight tangent, but I thoroughly recommend James Gleick's Time Travel: A History. It is a pretty thorough summary of humanity's grasp on the concept, notably in how its covered in literature, film, and television. Most insightfully, Gleick actually goes into how as a species, our divisional concept of time (past, present, and future) is quite a recent phenomenon. It's been a few years since I've read it, so I can't throw out exact numbers, but think only the last few hundred years or so.

Gus: "I always forget you're there." Hooty: "I forget I'm here toooooo."

I'm definitely another person who likes the "Gargoyles" style of time travel. (It matches the way I'm handling time travel in a children's fantasy I've been working on for a while; I first got the idea before "Gargoyles" came out, by the way - which probably helped me understand the events in "Vows", "Avalon Part Two", and M.I.A." all the more.)
Todd Jensen

Incidentally, anyone ever play or even just watch the game play of Back to the Future The Game from Telltale?

Ed > All good points. I have definitely moved largely to reading books on Kindle, mostly due to the storage space issue you reference. I love physical books, and someday I'd love to have a 'Beauty & the Beast'-style gigantic library with multiple levels and one of those rolling ladders. But for the time being, I just don't have any more walls where I can put a shelf. And the "search" feature on Kindle is a huge boon. Even just reading a novel and trying to remember who a character is, or when a particular element was last mentioned and in what context, it is so convenient to be able to just look for a word, as opposed to having to flip around.

As for time travel, I was 10 when Gargoyles debuted, and Greg & co. definitely spoiled time travel for me forever. The Gargoyles approach just makes so much more sense than any other. Even though I enjoy time travel stories a lot, I almost always end up frustrated by the logical flaws. Two movies that I really like are '12 Monkeys' (which follows the Gargoyles-style rules) and 'Primer.'


Yep, all comics are reading as they should now.

When it comes to time travel, I like that Greg went with the "you can't change the past, you were always meant to do this" bit but still leaves it vague enough that audiences aren't stuck in the whole lack of agency because of pre-determination.

In "M.I.A." a lot is placed on Griff not surviving the Blitz when in truth he never came back to the London Clan after that night, which Goliath enacts by taking him to the present. Thus, the story created a bit of wiggle room when it comes to destiny. And as a plus, it manages to get rid of the whole multiverse theory that pervades time travel stories (and stories in general these days).

I still think Back to the Future did the multiverse theory the best without it taking up the whole of the narrative.

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

Yes, top work Greg B.

Matt: Hooray!

Craig: All great reasons.

Personally, I moved pretty much to all-digital books and comics in 2012 and I've never looked back.

As well as the ones you state, I find many other benefits:

1. Readability - I just plain find books and comics more comfortable to read where you can adjust the font or use Guided View as required and the text is backlit. It's not that my eyesight is terrible by any stretch of the imagination but once you're used to being able to read at different sizes, at arm's length or close up at your whim, it's hard to go back. Also, I like the old Kindles that can read to you with a digital voice so I can keep books going while I'm cooking or doing other things. Regrettably, the modern Kindles bury that feature behind accessibility options which make them, ironically, very hard to access unless you navigate everything as someone partially sighted. (I think if you have one of the Echo things it works too but I find those quite creepy).

2. Space. My Kindle (which now includes my whole ComiXology library dumped into it) has 1,805 items in it. I can't even imagine the storage that would entail but my house is already glutted with books.

3. Accessibility. As you say, being able to check something in an issue is really handy but there are so many instances where I've used the convenience of digital. In the past I've highlighted on a Kindle books on the beach in July and then pulled up the highlight with two clicks in the middle of a staff meeting in January. I take highlights, can flick through at a glance or search at random moments - if I think of something I want to check while on the train or away from home. With physical books and comics it can be a pain to get them out of storage even if you're in proximity to them. They're also brilliant while teaching as you can show the book or comic on screen as you read aloud (although there's evidence that people remember better reading from physical books so I'm not for digital books for individual students).

4. Discoverability. Because I don't have space restraints and because I don't have to make a point of going into a shop, plus because I can search, I end up buying more books and comics than I usually would, especially as older collections often have some really good deals.

It's not perfect. I'm not wild about the fact that the only major provider is Amazon, a company about whom I have... mixed views. The ownership situation is murky - it's not the same as having a physical book. And occasionally there are things I want as a physical object and will still buy - the big hardcovers of the original TMNT run for example. But honestly, it's really rare.

Even my 'Gargoyles' physicals I only really glance at... thinking about it, I was so snowed under when #6 was released, I'm not sure I've ever cracked it open...

Phoenician: Yes, I think Greg's tight rules make for a much more satisfying take on time travel stories. Even in shows like 'Doctor Who' where the rules are more flexible, the best time travel focused stories tend to impose a level of rigidity either by making particular parts of time immutable, or introducing other consequences. Sometimes these are very effective - there's an episode where a woman is trapped on a planet for twenty years. The husband can go back in time and save her but the wife in front of him will, effectively, die - and she doesn't want to die. Still, the fixed timeline seems to offer the most dramatic stories.

(I'm also not a fan of the whole multiverse idea which seems to have taken pop culture by storm from Marvel to Super Smash Bros to Fortnite and obviously DC were mining this decades back. Fine in a video game where the narrative is just a bit of flimflam but otherwise I just feel it cheapens everything.)

Good points about the motives to teach Gnash history. I think what's fascinating about Brooklyn's character now is that he's basically a stranger to us. Everything he says and does now bears the weight of an extra layer of scrutiny. It's such a great device with an established character.


#7 is also working for me. Woo :)

I've been buying comics digitally since Young Justice: Targets (and, I guess, since the early days of DCUniverse with the "Torch Songs" comics for Young Justice: Outsiders. That's when I first came across guided view.

When everything is working fine, I've found that giant splashes which can look quite small on guided view can be zoomed in with 'pinching' the trackpad on my laptop (I suspect it must work similarly for those using smartphones and tablets on the glass screen).

Ed: Time travel physics (as part of the show's efforts to be consistent with its established rules) are always worth my while. I remember Greg Weisman's analogy of someone jumping off a cliff and gravity inevitably taking over despite that person's desire to no longer be falling makes me excited to see how some of those scenarios you mentioned would play out in the TimeDance for Brooklyn and company.

There can certainly be multiple motivations behind Brooklyn teaching Gnash as much history as possible. "Committing as much to memory" is certainly practical given the circumstances, but I wonder if, after forty years of TimeDancing, Brooklyn has grokked that even the experience of witnessing a particular effect before understanding whatever cause led to it are still tantamount to the choices he make (or not make).

From his TimeDance ruminating in "Underwater" (can someone reminisce about future events? Vonnegut is certainly of the opinion), its clear Brooklyn's attitude was more decidedly 'go with the flow', admitting that much of his fate was in the 'hands' of the Phoenix. Of course, these various revelations and understandings are not mutually exclusive. Definitely plenty to theorize and speculate to merit its own series. d:

Gus: "I always forget you're there." Hooty: "I forget I'm here toooooo."

Craig> I concur. I love getting the digital copy the moment it releases and that tides me over until my physical copies arrive. At that point, I prefer to read the physical copies, but the digital copy remains an easy resource to have for reference or whatnot. As you've said, there are perks to both and by going for both I can better support the property.

4 days, 10 hours until #8 drops!


Guided View is working for me on Gargoyles #7 again! Nice job taking action, Bishansky.

Ed > That's a really interesting point. The main other comic I'm following right now is Miracleman, and I haven't been buying it digitally. I imagine it would run into some similar issues as Fables, since Buckingham as usual is using some very unconventional page layouts that are best suited to the printed page.

I was never interested in the idea of digital comics prior to Gargoyles, but I've found that it has two advantages...well, actually, three. The first is that I can read the issue the second it's released at midnight, or first thing the following morning, whatever I feel like, which is almost like being a kid at Christmas every month (now twice a month). The second is that I can peruse the issue again and again without mussing up my physical copies. I still love physical comics most (the feel, the smell, the whole sensory experience...there's nothing that compares to seeing art on a page), but I get paranoid about wear and tear. So it's nice that if I want to look back to check a line of dialogue or revisit a cool drawing by Kambadais, I can just pull up my Amazon tab and scroll down without opening a polybag. The third reason is that buying the digital issue in addition to the physical copies is another way to support the property. So it's a win-win all around (until I get my credit statement). As you'll recall, when I first tried reading Gargoyles #1 with the "zoom" feature, it drove me crazy and I found it a miserable experience. But when you directed me to Guided View, I was shocked at how user-friendly it is. As much as I prefer printed issues still, as you say, smaller panels in particular benefit enormously from GV. The way they fill the screen and you can really appreciate the detail is superior to looking at the printed page, and definitely has potential for artists to tailor their work to that medium.


Guided View was one of the main reasons why ComiXology was so vastly superior to Amazon in the digital comics space. So Amazon bought them and closed it down to force people to use their app -- without such niceties as migrating subscriptions or fully implementing Guided View. The apps mostly don't have any effective sorting or filtering systems either to separate out comics (the web app has a very basic one or you can do it manually) which means that in a snap my Kindle library was glutted with comics to sort through. Infuriating.

One really interesting thing about Guided View is that it completely inverts the efficacy of traditional panel structures.

The big splashes, especially the double-page splashes, now appear as broadly the same size as the very small panels but the very small panels are super zoomed in so you can see detail that the splashes don't allow.

Basically, the small panels look more impressive than the splashes.

I don't imagine most writers or artists would (or maybe even should) take this into consideration.

After all, digital comics are only 10% of the market (and, apparently, a good portion of that 10% don't even know the functionality exists).

One negative is that GV may lead to less imaginative panel structures - I remember "Fables" read quite poorly at times on GV because of Mark Buckingham's use of unusual panel types (e.g. very tall).

Still, if it ever became commercially viable, I feel like there's a really interesting digital-only variant of the comic medium to be explored here with uniformly-shaped panels animated via Guided View so the artist can have more control over the resolution creating something slightly close to traditional animation.


Count me as another person who'd never even heard of Guided View before this discussion. Whatever the case is, let's hope it gets fixed soon.
Todd Jensen

I contacted Amazon, spoke with a rep, and I let them know what's going on with Gargoyles #7, they put in a ticket to get Guided View fixed on it. So fingers crossed.
Greg Bishansky - [<----- Voices from the Eyrie - Gargoyles Podcast]

Oddly, Guided View was working for me in #7 originally, but now it isn't.
"I have one absolute rule: No gargoyle left behind. Period." - Brooklyn, "Render Unto Caesar"

Bishansky > It was Ed on here who made me aware of the Guided View option when Gargoyles #1 came out. I can't fathom how anyone reads digital comics without it. It was a revelation for me.

(And since I'm posting anyway, I'll not that GV is still not working for #7 for me, but is working on all other issues.)

Matthew > Well, then I'll go back to slamming Katzenberg, because I hate those things (joking, sort of). Not that celebrity casting and cultural references weren't a thing in animated movies pre-1990s (see The Jungle Book), and not that the Katzenberg era didn't have some great successes in that regard (Robin Williams, Gilbert Gottfried), but I long for the days when professional voice actors and Broadway/stage actors got more work in animated films, as opposed to Seth Rogen being in everything.


Craig> I don't think anyone is going to be offended if you slam Katzenberg, everything I've heard suggests he was (and might still be) deeply unpleasant even during the highly competitive era back in the 90's. I was merely suggesting that a lot of decisions he made when it comes to making animated films like the celebrity stunt casting and modern day pop culture references and humor ended up being pretty impactful for animated films for years to come.
Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

I don't have a tablet, but I do have Kindle and Comixology on my Android... I had never even heard of Guided View until this discussion.

So I turned it on, and it worked for Gargoyles #1 and I liked Guided View a lot. But it didn't work for any other issue, and then when I checked #1 again, despite being turned on, it still wouldn't work.

I have Kindle on my laptop and I don't see a Guided View option there.

Greg Bishansky - [<----- Voices from the Eyrie - Gargoyles Podcast]

I don't have an iPad to test but tried a few options:

Cloud View: #7 inaccessible, DA #1 works as does GV. (Both used to work).

Kindle for Mac: Both download fine although the app doesn't support GV anyway.

8th Gen Kindle: Both download and both have GV.


Greg > I second what Masterdramon says. For me, guided view works fine for Dark Ages #1. But it is not working for Gargoyles #7 (even though it previously was, even after they updated the missing first page, so I have no idea why it suddenly changed). For reference, I'm viewing on Amazon Kindle Comixology, but on my laptop browser (Chrome)...my Kindle device itself is too old to support comic books.

Matthew > Yeah, I didn't mean to slam Katzenberg. Obviously, his contributions to 1990s Disney are enormous, not least of which is his support of Gargoyles (as Greg has emphasized many times, we likely wouldn't have the show without him). It's just an amusing anecdote I read from the directors that emphasized how chaotic the production of 'Black Cauldron' was during a time of great transition.


Read 1-6 on my Amazon library without any problem, but #7 wouldn't load on my laptop. From the looks of things this might be a bit of a problem but hopefully one that's fixed soon.
Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

GREG: I primarily read on the Kindle app on my (Windows) laptop. Weirdly, Guided View works fine for me on Dark Ages #1 but not for Gargoyles #7.
Masterdramon - [kmc12009 at mymail dot pomona dot edu]
"It can be a hobby, or really, anything else, but I love when people have fun doing what they love. It’s like they’re sparkling." - Marin Kitagawa

Gargoyles 7 isn't working on Kindle on my computer but does work on my IPad. All other issues are working fine.
Vicky82UK - [vickysunseeker at aol dot com]

Sigh. Sorry. *Dark Ages #1 Guided view is working. Gargoyles #7 isn't available at all. Guided view is working for Gargoyles #6.
Alex (Aldrius)

On my PC (Kindle app in my Chrome browser) guided view is working. Right now Gargoyles #7 isn't working at all.
Alex (Aldrius)

Hey Gang,

I've got a question. I just purchased the e-versions of Gargoyles #7 and Dark Ages #1 for my iPad. Guided View doesn't seem to be working for either issue, though it does work on Gargoyles #1-6. Has anyone else noted this problem?

Greg Weisman

I remember buying the VHS version of "The Black Cauldron" when it came out and watching it again. (I no longer have it, though; I gave it away during a move some years ago, since I was no longer using my VCR by then, having switched to DVD.) Thanks for the story about its making, Craig.

Today I discovered at the library a copy of the new "Disney Adventures" book from Fantagraphics that Craig had reviewed last week, checked it out, and read it. I found it rather fun. The Count Roquefort story seemed to be a take-off on "treasure of the Knights Templar" tales (Don Rosa did a couple of such stories for Scrooge McDuck, by the way, including a particularly epic one set at Castle McDuck, which I highly recommend). Now I'll have to find out if the library has the first two books in that series.

Todd Jensen

Katzenber, for better or for worse, changed the game in animated film. Not so much in the field of creation or writing, but in the behind-the-scenes executive process.
There's plenty of people and essays who have gone into greater detail about this, better than I could explain.

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

Craig: Fascinating. Nothing to add but thanks for another excellent post.

Ed > For many years after its disappointing release, The Black Cauldron was basically ignored by Disney. There was no way to see even clips of it until the 1998 VHS release. It was almost never discussed by the company in officially sanctioned books, articles, theme parks, TV shows (Wonderful World of Disney which often featured clips from the features), etc. Although you are correct that the film was included in Disney's features numbering system, which was begun sometime in the 1980s. The 1998 VHS did seem like a bit of a turning point, indicating that enough time had gone by for Disney to not take the film's failure so personally. Ever since then, they have been more willing to give the film a bit more acknowledgement (and as you note, it is on Disney+).

One of my favorite Black Cauldron stories is that Katzenberg (who at that point only had experience with live action) demanded that the animators provide more "coverage" of scenes (meaning different angles of the same shot) so he would have more choices in the editing room. The directors had to patiently explain to him that in animation, the "editing" is essentially done during the storyboard phase, and that animating every scene from multiple angles would in essence be animating 3+ features as opposed to one. It just goes to show how chaotic the production of that film was, with a lot of people pulling in too many different directions (the old guard of animators, the young new animators, the old Ron Miller regime, the new Eisner/Katzenberg regime).


'The Black Cauldron' seems to be on Disney+? I'd be surprised if they hid anything in their mainline animated film sequence. They were numbering them at one point iirc.

Todd: I wouldn't be embarrassed as I think it was designed to be incredibly subtle. I can't even remember if I spotted it right off or someone mentioned it to me at the time.

Craig: Ah, yes, I love "The Rock". I suppose what makes a time travel equivalent of that tricky is the need for the Phoenix between each. But definitely a series of short trips would be great. (Or, theoretically, you could tell a story of short trips from Brooklyn from across his dance and cut between).

Anonymous: I agree with other posters that it's tremendously unlikely they'd ever sell 'Gargoyles' -- even if it's 1000% more likely today than last week, the odds are still infinitesimal. Just practically - they'd want a good deal of money to make it worth the sale. The list of who could stump that up is tiny and, of that list - all the media giants - who would find value in it? And if they did, it wouldn't necessarily make things better for the franchise as it would likely be pulled from Disney+.


I've always felt a bit sorry for the fate of "The Black Cauldron", largely because I'd really enjoyed Lloyd Alexander's "Chronicles of Prydain" that it was based on.

ED - Some great ideas for time travel stories. (I still recall that scene in "Doctor Who" you mentioned - though the first time I saw that scene, I somehow missed the "reappearing jacket". Embarrassing, I know.)

And I never thought of "Sleeping Beauty" when I first read the poisonous stickpin line; I'll admit that I never thought of regular fairy tales getting directly into "Gargoyles" the same way myths and legends did, though in light of Greg's "Everything will get in with enough stories", I probably should have.

Todd Jensen

Disney tend to be pretty protective with IPs that originated in-house, things that they acquire I'd say are open game, though mostly unlikely. I can't imagine a case when Marvel or Star Wars becomes a financial burden to the point where they can't justify keeping it, but I'm not saying that it will never happen.

The properties they created but feel no strong attachment to, aren't profitable, created but don't fit whatever the Disney "image" is at the moment, or ones that just aged badly. Well they don't sell them off, they just bury them. They did that with Song of the South, The Black Cauldron, and the numerous live-action films that failed to leave an impact.

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

To be fair, Disney has sold off some properties over the years (selling Power Rangers back to Saban a decade after they obtained it through a larger acquisition; selling off the Miramax film library). But Gargoyles is arguably distinguishable from those because it’s a property Disney originated, not one they acquired. Anyway, I agree that it’s very unlikely they’d ever sell Gargoyles. It’s not even like they’d likely make much money on it, honestly.



Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]

If anyone's been paying attention to Disney's current financial woes, one can only wonder if any assets they're willing to sell off would include Gargoyles, and to whom. DreamWorks? Illumination, even?

Just something to think about.


Ed > I love the idea of a Demona spinoff. Nate Cosby and Dynamite have created a whole side line of Disney Villains comics (in addition to Negaduck, they've done Maleficent, Hades, Scar). And with a thousand years' worth of stories, as well as being one of the most iconic and popular characters from Gargoyles, Demona seems like a no-brainer candidate for a limited series.

As far as unique time travel ideas, I love all the works you cited and their novel approaches. Greg has already proven he can use time in creative ways in "The Rock" storyline on the SLG run (as well as the aforementioned "Vows," of course). It would be interesting to a storyline similar to "The Rock" but involving actual time travel, where Brooklyn is bouncing between multiple eras in rapid-fire fashion, trying to make sense of what's going on around him from quick snippets.


Matt: Yes, there's so much potential with Demona's millennium that I can't see there being multiple stories to tell there and really the only avenues to tell those currently are flashbacks in the main series or 'Timedancer' (possibly Fleur flashbacks in 'Pendragon' or Hunter flashbacks in 'Bad Guys' at a stretch).

I keep wondering whether the chances of a Demona spin-off are much higher now though. Obviously Greg has his legacy spin-offs but in the 90s there's no way Disney would green light a spin-off for a genocidal villain. Dynamite is in a very different situation. They've already spun off Nega Duck and Demona is in every sense a more compelling candidate to lead a comic book. And while I really want Greg to tell all those stories he's been sitting on for decades, I can't imagine it would take him long to find a great Demona story worth telling.

I like your idea of a "Trouble With Tribbles" Brooklyn story although my hesitation is that there isn't an obvious place for him to feature and I'd like it feel connected rather than like an afterthought. If it could be done as part of a plan, it could be masterful (there's a brilliant scene in the fifth season of "Doctor Who" where what appears to be a continuity error - the Doctor having lost his jacket in one shot but having it back in the next - turns out to be a hint that this is a Doctor from later in the season coming back through time to give his companion important information. It would be great if issue #8 had Brooklyn with a patch over the wrong eye and ten years later we found out it was a different time period Brooklyn).

I have to say, one of the things that appeals to me most about 'Timedancer' is seeing Greg playing with time travel. I absolutely love time travel stories and it's really rare to see stories that play around with them, let alone in interesting ways. I think "Vows" is an absolute masterpiece for this. Other examples I'd find cool:

- A "Time Traveller's Wife" storyline where Brooklyn encounters a character in the wrong order - probably not Katana as best we can tell but somebody important.
- A story with multiple Brooks at different stages interacting and playing with the different levels of knowledge.
- A "Tenet" style story - I've never seen time travel treated in that way before with time reversal. I'm not sure it's something you could even represent in comics very easily.

And yes, seeing the future of both Gnash and Tachi will be fascinating. It's theoretically possible, though unlikely unless they spend time on Avalon, that Tachi at least could be alive in 2198. I also wonder whether Brooklyn will adhere to the view of seeing the clan's eggs as family when it comes to any offspring either Gnash or Tachi may have -- or, knowing what he now knows about genetics, whether it will be difficult to meet someone in a later rookery and not jump to conclusions based on appearances.

I'm also intrigued that there's apparently no plans for Brooklyn beyond about 2203. Is this because of some limit in the Phoenix's journey or just that Greg hasn't needed to and therefore hasn't cared to flesh out later eras too much. I'm not as interested in the future as I am in the past but nevertheless, it's not very far away in the scheme of things - less than a decade on Avalon.

As for learning about his own future, I doubt Brooklyn had much choice but to learn some things. I guess the problem is that if time is immutable then foreknowledge is at least as much a curse as a blessing because you're not empowered to act at all and in some ways your decisions may be dictated by what you know will happen which then of course would cause what will happen to happen...


That first mention of 1997 was meant to be 2198.

Ed> I agree that Demona is too important of a character to be left out of Timedancer, particularly given the relationship between Brook and Demona. We've seen her encountered in 997, and we know she'll appear in 1997, but I also suspect we'd see her at least once between 997 and 1994. And since Katana has been around for a good chunk of the dance, I think Demona would be at least passingly aware of her.

One of the most interesting things about 2198 would be Demona and Brooklyn interacting. She would know that he returns home and may even remember a good deal about his life post-1997. He has already said he wants to avoid telling people in the past about their future, but would he object to people in the future discussing his future?

Makes me think of a couple other things that would be neat to see: Brooklyn appearing in 1994-1996 and playing a small, but key role in one of the adventures from Season 1 or 2. Perhaps he even was present in some form during "Temptation". That'd be fun to know that he was in the background somehow. Also, I'd really love Brooklyn to encounter an old Gnash. Like Gnash is far older than Brooklyn when he arrives. Maybe get to chat with him. And possibly some follow up to Brook teaching Gnash history in 1997. Brook knows that Gnash knowing history will be important because he already saw it play out. Lots of fun stuff.


Jurgan: The way you clipped that makes it sound like a statement! Let's not manifest that one.

Matt: Yeah, after a period in the cold, one-worders seem to be back. 40% of Dynamite titles now one-worders (excluding articles).

One exciting thing that did catch my eye about the blurb for Dark Ages #4 is that [SPOILER] we may finally get answers about the cave illustrations from "Long Way To Morning", surely the oldest unresolved mystery in the series. [/SPOILER]

Taking some of these discussion threads out of spoiler text because they the responses aren't spoilers:

Whether Katana has met Demona: Assuming that Katana was with Brooklyn his entire journey after they met - and given the vagaries of time travel that's perhaps not the safest of bets - they must have been travelling at least 30 years. Logically, with all of time to bop around in, the chances of meeting pre-97 Demona are remote. But if a 'Timedancer' spin-off ever happened, can you really imagine going for that length of time without a Demona story? Therefore my hunch is Demona will at least recognise Katana. (And even if she didn't, her pride at knowing every living gargoyle could mean she'd fake knowing her anyway).

On Hallowe'en costumes: It's many years ago now but Lex did inquire about "poisonous stickpins" in "Invitation Only". Given Greg's "eventually, everything" approach and the way he likes to seed in foreshadowing as throwaway lines, I do wonder whether we'll get a story one of these days about Sleeping Beauty's spinning wheel.


Todd> I noticed that too. And had the same thoughts on both your points. [SPOILER] Aside from imitating and perhaps even outdoing his father, it could be noted that since coming back to live with the Xanatos family, all the costumes have become more elaborate. I'm also interested to see if anyone else dresses up and if so as what. Elisa's costume in particular [/SPOILER]

On the upcoming Halloween Special.

[SPOILER] I noticed that Gnash was wearing a pirate costume on the cover. Since Brooklyn was wearing a pirate costume for the clan's first Halloween in "Eye of the Beholder", it seems to be a case of "Like father, like son."

But I also noticed that Gnash's costume was much fancier than Brooklyn's; Brooklyn was dressed like a regular "rank-and-file" pirate, but Gnash more like a pirate captain. Is Gnash trying to outdo his dad? [/SPOILER]

Todd Jensen

When it comes to the possibility of a live-action Gargoyles film I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, any new material or things that bring attention to the brand is nice. The show has been pretty niche for the longest time and anything that would bring it to a larger stage is a positive.

On the other hand, Disney's live-action remakes have ranged from "meh" to "unnecessary" to "just straight up bad" in my opinion. I really don't trust anyone but Greg with the material and even directors with a background in Shakespeare like Kenneth Branagh have had their stinkers before. The Artemis Fowl movie being one of the recent examples.

Ain't nothing crazy 'bout me but my brain!

If there were a Gargoyles movie, I'd want it to be a canonical sidestory with Greg Weisman as Producer to make sure it's consistent with the main series. Kind of like the original plan for Hunter's Moon. A 75 minute animated feature released on Disney+ would be interesting. DC does it all the time on Max.

Ed: "Chris Pratt is voicing Goliath"


Jurgan - [jurgan6 at yahoo dot com]

Phil> I'm guessing not since I imagine we'd have heard it by now! Too bad, but not complaining after the Halloween Special news we got!

I had a dream last night that something was announced: It was "Gargoyles: Bad Guys: Outback" (the next miniseries that picks up after Redemption). Took a few internet searches this morning to convince myself I had dreamed it all up. Seemed legit. Even the kind of title I can see Weisman going for.


BISHANSKY - [SPOILER] On your speculation last week that Demona might have crossed paths with a Timedancing Katana; in #7, Demona comments about the Phoenix's release from the Gate as explaining "*many* a mystery I've encountered across my long life" (emphasis mine). Her meeting Brooklyn in 997 was obviously one; the "many" part suggests that this wasn't the only time she got involved in a Timedancing adventure between 994 and the 1990's. Which does make such a meeting possible. [/SPOILER]
Todd Jensen


Any news from the Dynamite Panel at SDCC?

Phil - [P1anderson at yahoo dot com]