A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Behind the Scenes

Archive Index


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #101 - #125 of 536 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :


Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :


Bookmark Link

Ada writes...

Being an Nigerian, it was exciting in Gargoyles to see the Black Panther story line done in Nigeria! I am curious to know why you chose Nigeria to create the story?

Greg responds...

English is one of the national languages there.

Response recorded on January 21, 2011

Bookmark Link

Harlan Phoenix writes...

So what's the specific appeal of animation to you? Or rather, the appeal of writing it (and by extension, comic books) primarily over other mediums?

I could make guesses, but I'd be curious to know what exactly thrills you.

Greg responds...

Well, the MAIN appeal is that they'll hire me.

(Only semi-kidding there.)

Anyway, I love the semi-contradictory notions of the control I have over the final product and the collaboration I get while making my way there.

Response recorded on January 21, 2011

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Apart from the work that he's done with you, what's your favorite thing that Kevin Hopps has ever written?

Greg responds...

I don't know off the top of my head.

Response recorded on January 21, 2011

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

I have some questions concerning episodic details

1. I noticed the original documents thread only has your memos on the pilot outline up to when Michael Reeves became the new writer, are we ever going to see rest of those memos(assuming there were more).

2. Concerning your tiers and tentpoles plan that started in season 2 you said awakening retroactively became tentpole 1, rewakening tent pole two, city of stone tent pole three and avolon tent pole four. Im curiouse what episodes made up the next sets of tentpoles after those ones. I figured Future tense or the Gathering was probably one of them with hunters moon obviously being the final ones, but what was the tentpole in the middle of the world tour episodes? I assume there had to be one more otherwise that would have been more episodes than usual in that tier.

3. You mentioned after Hunters Moon changed from direct to video to a three episode finally you had to cut 3 planned episodes. You said one was simply the vinnie episode being merged into vendettas, but what were the other two? Was the Coldston world tour story that made it into clan building one? Was Bronx's side story youve said happened during vendattas/turf one? If not do you remember what they were?

4. Youve said somewhere that the wierd MacBeth story was nixed because your superiours wanted it to be one episode instead of a two parter and you didn't think you could do it justice in two if Im not mistaken. Where would that two parter have taken place if you had been allowed to do it? Ive tried to figure out a spot in season 2 where it could have gone but none really seem to make sense and Id be curiouse to know. Also if you ever get the chnace to write more issues of the comics would you try to do this story now?

Thanks for your answers.

Greg responds...

1. "Ever" is a long time. But the issue is that I don't have those memos electronically archived. So I have to transcribe them. And I've just been (a) too busy and (b) at my Warner Bros office (and before that at my Sony office) most days, and not in my Beverly Hills office, where I have that stuff.

2. "The Gathering" two-parter was the next tentpole. Then "Hunter's Moon". There was no tentpole in the middle of the world tour. There were more episodes than usual, but Season Two was WAY longer than Season One, so we needed that flexibility.

3. I honestly forget now. (Isn't that sad?) I do have that info written down, but again -- it's in Beverly Hills, and I'm in Burbank.

4. It would have gone in the final tier of Season Two around the time of Vendettas.

4a. Yes.

Response recorded on January 21, 2011

Bookmark Link

Lost writes...

are you friends with Diane Duane?

Greg responds...

Nope. Never met her.

Response recorded on January 19, 2011

Bookmark Link

Blizzard Sprite writes...

Hello, Mr. Weisman.

My next questions are for Brooklyn, who was one of my favorite characters in the franchise. Not only did he come off as cool, but he was a relatable character who came off as a sort of rebellious youth. So, here are the questions.

1. I read in a 2008 interview that Brooklyn was quite popular with the fans of the show. How and when were you able to determine that? Nowadays, I figure it would be pretty easy given the pervasive nature of the internet and how fast information can be circulated. But back in the 1990's, during the show's original run when internet use was not as prevalent, how were you able to obtain feedback about certain aspects of the show, such as character popularity?

2. Brooklyn’s encounters and love interests in the twentieth century always seemed to have an unhappy ending to them (his initial encounter with Demona and his initial interests in Maggie the Cat and Angela come to mind). Because of this, he seemed to come off as the most unfortunate character in the original Manhattan clan, at least to me.

a. Do you think that all of these unfortunate letdowns were necessary in developing his character, and preparing him for what was to come in Timedancer?

b. Do you think that Brooklyn having fewer ties to (new) people in the twentieth century made it easier for him, mentally and emotionally, to jump around different points in time?

3. Were you concerned about the audience perception of Brooklyn when you had him return from the Timedancing adventures not only with a family, but an eye patch? I think one of the qualities that made Brooklyn such a likable character, in addition to his personality and his cool voice, was that he was a physically attractive and handsome gargoyle. One external change might not be all that drastic though.

Thank you for your time.

Greg responds...

1. From the internet. It may not have been AS prevalent back then, but it was prevalent enough. There was like an e-mailing list. Uh... for the Disney Afternoon in general, I think. Then my sister helped me find Station 8.

2a. It just felt organic to us.

2b. No.

3. I don't think he's any more or less handsome now. If you liked him before, I can't imagine the eyepatch would cause you to think he's unattractive now.

Response recorded on January 18, 2011

Bookmark Link

Richard Jackson writes...

Todd Jensen and others have commented on the similarities between “Grief” and the Batman episode “Avatar.” Todd’s question being here:

http://www.s8.org/gargoyles/askgreg/search.php?qid=2870

I noticed another pair of episodes of Batman and Gargoyles that really reminded me of the other, because of the same writers. “Legion” and the Batman episode “What is Reality?” Both were written by Robert Skir and Marty Isenberg. Both episodes deal with virtual reality, but the third acts are very similar to me.

Batman/Goliath has to go into a virtual reality world to help his friend, Commissioner Gordon/Coldstone. His VR savvy compatriot Robin/Lexington tells him how it works. Once inside Batman/Goliath battles his enemy, The Riddler/Xanatos. Robin/Lexington tries to help Batman/get Goliath out of the VR world, but is painfully rebuffed. A shrill noise blasted into his ear piece in Robin’s case. An electronic shock emanating from Goliath’s body in Lex’s case. Side note: That was the biggest problem I had with “Legion.” I can buy a cybernetic gargoyle and that Xanatos can design a computer program based on his personality, but I never understood how Goliath’s body became akin to a live wire when hooked up to Coldstone. It must be one of those side effects when science and sorcery are combined.

Of course, “What is Reality?” and “Legion” are two different episodes and the execution of third acts are very different. Dialogue, characters and virtual reality as represented in the respective episodes were all different. Even the resolutions are different. I guess writing the virtual reality Batman episode gave Skir and Isenberg the experience to write the Gargoyles VR episode. Interestingly enough, they did write “Future Tense”, which also had a VR sequence in the Xanatos Pyramid, albeit in a dream. They didn’t write “Walkabout”, which had a metaphysical reality (MR?) scene.

I do think the examples of “Avatar/Grief” and “What is Reality?/Legion” are interesting examples of how writers will take previous ideas they’ve had and use another chance to expand or improve on them. “Avatar” didn’t work for me, but “Grief” is one of my favorite episodes of Gargoyles. And it’s close between “What is Reality?” and “Legion”, but I slightly prefer the former.

Greg responds...

Science and sorcery indeed.

Anyway, as always, the springboards for every Gargoyle episode pre-date writer involvement (unless the writer was also a story editor). But it may be very possible that once they got the assignment, they created or emphasized parallels with other work they had done.

Response recorded on January 12, 2011

Bookmark Link

Marc G. writes...

Is there a list online somewhere of all the overseas animation studios used for Gargoyles, by episode? It's frustrating because the credits always just listed "Walt Disney Television Animation".
Also, a related question: did you have control over which scripts were sent to which studios? Or was it purely dictated by scheduling and budgetary concerns?
Thanks!

Greg responds...

I don't have a list. Most of the first season was animated at Walt Disney Television Animation Japan, though I seem to recall that a couple were subcontracted out to Korea.

Season Two featured some eps by WDTVAJ, plus more from Korea (such as Hanho). But I can't remember who did what.

Scheduling tended to dictate what studio got what episode, but we did make an effort to make sure that "Bushido" went to Japan.

Response recorded on January 12, 2011

Bookmark Link

John Derrick writes...

I hate to say it, but I was extremely disappointed in the Young Justice premiere. Don't get me wrong--the animation was gorgeous, the dialogue entertaining, the story intriguing. But the gender imbalance was a huge turn-off for me.

Why was it that the women of the Justice League were only shown in the last five minutes of a two-part pilot? Why did the male sidekicks get to go on a rebellious adventure and force the League to accept them as a team of their own, while the first girl is only added to "Young Justice" at the very end, introduced by her uncle and guardian like some sort of token?

I expect that the women will have a lot more to do in the episodes to come, but I still find it profoundly problematic to introduce the characters in such an unequal manner. I believe there are too many men in the world as it is who see women as mere supporting players in their stories. Why reinforce this stereotype for a whole new generation of superhero cartoon fans?

Greg responds...

It's a legitimate gripe. And I doubt my answer will satisfy you, but it came down to a couple factors that we at least found important: (1) practicality and to a lesser extent - but intertwined with - (2) tradition.

Let's start with practicality.

You asked why there were no female Leaguers until the end. But where would they have fit? There are no female Leaguers with traditional first generation sidekicks. So Batman, Green Arrow, Aquaman and Flash could not be replaced by Wonder Woman, Black Canary or Hawkwoman. That leaves the four Leaguers introduced at the Hall of Justice. I needed Martian Manhunter to be there to set up Miss Martian. I needed Red Tornado there to set up his interest in the teens. I needed Superman there to set up Superboy. That leaves only Zatara. He was certainly replaceable. But then I would have had to hire another voice actress to read ONE LINE. I couldn't afford to do that. We have budgets. (And you'll notice that Red Tornado never speaks in the episode. Couldn't afford giving him a line either. None of which had anything to do with gender.)

There was NEVER any intent to introduce Artemis this early in the season for story reasons. Wouldn't make sense for her character. And I think the reasons why will become clear as the season progresses.

As for Miss Martian, yes, in theory, we could have introduced her sooner. Manhunter COULD have brought her along at the beginning. But then I'd have had FOUR characters running around the first half hour and FIVE in the second. That steals screen time and characterization from everyone. I think the entire production would have been weaker for adding another character -- ANY other character (gender notwithstanding).

Of course, that begs the obvious question - why not ditch one of the boys in favor of her to create a little balance.

But it seemed to us that would create balance at a cost.

There are FOUR TRADITIONAL sidekicks: Robin, Speedy, Aqualad and Kid Flash. To leave one out seemed wrong to us. Which brings in the Tradition argument, which I'll admit is somewhat feeble, but as an old comic book geek, I'll also admit it matters to me and to everyone else here.

The very first Teen Titans story ever in Brave and the Bold featured only THREE heroes: Robin, Aqualad and Kid Flash. Wonder Girl did not join until their second adventure. So we felt there was a precedent for beginning with Robin, Aqualad and Kid Flash and saving the real introduction of Miss Martian (beyond hellos) for OUR second adventure.

For what it's worth, if you give the series another chance, starting with episode three (i.e. the one immediately following the pilot "movie"), I think you'll see that female characters including Miss Martian, Black Canary, Artemis, Wonder Woman and MANY others will be playing ESSENTIAL roles in the show as we progress. I think the balance - and then some - is absolutely present in the first season when viewed in its entirety.

Yes, the pilot was very boy-centric, but that's not the rubric for the series. Personally, I love writing female characters, and if you're at all familiar with my past work, you'll know I have a history of doing them justice. (At least, I think so.) Gargoyles, for example, is FULL of strong female characters, including Elisa, Demona, Angela, Fox, etc. WITCH was nearly ALL female leads. Even Spider-Man had a strong female supporting cast, in my opinion at least.

If we did "reinforce a stereotype" (which I think is overstating it) then perhaps we've lured in kids that we will reeducate over the course of the season - organically without forcing it.

So I'd beg a little patience, a little indulgence... maybe even a little trust that we'll do right by this issue.

But judge for yourself.

Response recorded on December 21, 2010

Bookmark Link

Steven D. writes...

Hello again, Mr. Weisman.

I've had a question in the back of my mind for some time, and now seems like a good time to ask it.
Recently, you released the writer's rotation for the first 24 episodes of YJ.
I've always been fascinated with television writing,as there seems to be no one way to do it, so I wanted to ask a few questions on how you approach it.

1. Back when i first wanted to ask this, I checked the SpecSpiderman archives to see what you mentioned about writing for that show. When going over writing duties, you mentioned that some of the episodes that you "reserved" some of the episodes you wrote. Since Young Justice finds you in a similar position of being both a producer and staff writer, I'm curious to know, what factors do you use when picking episodes to reserve for yourself (and confirming that reserve wasn't just a metaphor you were using)?

2. While I'm here, I was hoping you could also shed some light on how much freedom your freelance writers are given. Do they ever get the chance to write an episode completely from scratch, or because the shows you work on are so arc based, are they always given a firm foundation to start with, and if so, how rigid is this foundation (generally)?

Thanks!

Greg responds...

1. Sometimes I end up writing an episode for pragmatic reasons... or a combination of the creative and the pragmatic. For example, I wrote the two-part pilot of Young Justice (i.e. episodes 1 and 2). Of course, I had a creative desire to write these episodes, but it also would not have been pragmatic for anyone else to write them. I needed to set the tone of the series for the other writers to be able to get it.

Another example: staff writer Kevin Hopps and I were set to write the last two episodes (25 and 26) of the first season. Though we know the basics of what takes place in them, based on meetings that Kevin, producer Brandon Vietti and I had over a year ago, we hadn't broken those episodes yet, and creatively I hadn't decided which of the two I wanted to write. But scheduling realities last week made it apparent that Kevin would HAVE to write 25, meaning I was writing 26. All of which is just as well. I started the season; I might as well finish it. But the decision wasn't creative; it was purely pragmatic. The creative decision might have been no different. But the creative decision became moot for pragmatic reasons.

On the other hand, I've also written three other episodes. In those cases, the pragmatic need was for me to write one episode each between 6-11, between 12-17 and between 18-24. Within those parameters, I chose 11, 15 and 19 for purely creative reasons. Those were the ones I felt a special affinity for (based on reasons I can't reveal now without spoilers). So going into the three writers' meetings for each of those three "sets" of episodes, there was SOME flexibility as to which writer took which episode (keeping scheduling pragmatism in mind), but I had "reserved" for myself the one I wanted to write in each case.

2. My freelancers have, for better or worse, very little freedom when it comes to WHAT stories we are telling. The premises were all approved long before the freelancers came aboard. If a specific writer feels no affinity for a specific story, then he or she doesn't have to take that episode. I always try to give each writer an episode that jazzes him or her. But the basics of the stories are set. Now, the writers are very involved in the execution of those stories. That's where their freedom comes in. But they still have quite a gauntlet to wade through... beat outlines, outlines, scripts (and notes from many sources). Ultimately, I take responsibility for every episode, and I'm the guy doing the final pass on every beat outline, outline and script. But I couldn't do this job without stellar writers providing me with great stuff. And on this series, I couldn't do it without Brandon and Kevin actively participating in the inception and breaking of every single story.

Response recorded on October 22, 2010

Bookmark Link

Clark Cradic writes...

Any characters you were surprised to see becoming popular? The ensemble darkhorse in other words.

Greg responds...

What series are we talking about here?

I guess I'll assume we're talking Gargoyles. And, no, not really. Perhaps I underestimated the Trio's popularity a bit, but I never thought they'd be UNpopular. But we can pretty much see who's popping as we're making the series.

Response recorded on August 20, 2010

Bookmark Link

Jurgan writes...

Not a question so much as a comment. You've said several times you think you missed a bet in "Grief-" namely, that Coyote should have killed the travelers, to show that death was impossible with Anubis locked up. I may be in the minority on this, but I prefer the story we got to this alternate version.

First of all, it would reopen the Highlander-esque questions that you get regarding Demona and Macbeth. So, Angela's shot through the heart but doesn't die- when Anubis is freed, is the wound still there? If so, would the wound then kill her? If Goliath were decapitated, would the head still talk, or would it sprout spider legs and walk back to him (sorry, I just watched The Thing the other night- incidentally, Keith making a surprise appearance in a movie is something that always makes me smile)? I imagine that, if only for S&P reasons, the death would simply be through bloodless laser beams (sorry, "particle beams") and the issue wouldn't have come up, but it's still confusing.

The bigger point, though, is that it cheapens the characters' abilities. I've read most of the Lee/Ditko and Lee/Romita Spider-Man comics, and while they're great stories, one thing that always bothered me was how supervillains always let Spidey live. Typically, a new villain would dominate the wallcrawler and then arrogantly announce "I don't need to kill Spider-Man- I can beat him any time I want!" I don't have a count, but I really think this happened dozens of times in the Silver Age. I could understand if the villain had a reason to run, like Doc Ock's power running low in your show, but most of the time they just seemed stupid, since of course Spidey trounced them next time. The point is that it seemed like he was surviving more through luck than any particular skill. Likewise, our gargoyles have survived countless battles because of their own abilities. To say that they finally lose- but it doesn't count because, for this one day, they can't die, seems to cheapen their earlier successes. It feels like the only reason they're winning is because the writers want them to win, and if they get in big trouble, a deus ex machina twist will save them. The show starts to feel artificial, and I wonder if these characters are really that special, or if they're just the designated heroes.

Now, of course, this is hypothetical. It's possible that, if I'd seen the episode the way you envision, I would have loved it. As it is, it's kind of hard for me to imagine it working. Just something to chew on.

Greg responds...

I guess I wouldn't agree about one lucky break cheapening earlier victories... I guess I wouldn't agree with that at all.

I'm also not big on deus ex machina saves myself, but when an ENTIRE episode is ABOUT arresting death, having them live because death has been arrested doesn't feel like deus ex machina at all to me, even with a deus (Anubis) present.

And, as you noted, the beheading (et al) issue just wouldn't have come up.

I know you're arguing for the success of what we made, and I'm in the odd (very odd) position of arguing that we could have done better, but I still think a bet was missed...

Response recorded on August 17, 2010

Bookmark Link

Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...

I’ve heard you mention several times that you have had very good luck with S&P over several series, praising people who really understood the series and were more interested in showing consequence than keeping any violence off screen. When they put their foot down it was generally to avoid what a child can copy, even willing to have a different violent action in place they couldn’t. Did you ever have bad experiences? (Either on a series you were running, or one you freelanced on.)

Greg responds...

Yes, I've had many. Some completely inexplicable. Others explicable, but still wrong-headed.

Taranee on W.I.T.C.H. was a constant problem, as her power was fire and the S&P executive was very uncomfortable with... I'm not quite sure... the notion that we were encouraging child pyromania? The possibility that kids would use magic to generate flames?

I can't think of a really funny example just this second, though God knows I have more than a handful.

Response recorded on August 03, 2010

Bookmark Link

Trevor Duke writes...

Why does Lexington have different wings from the four other gargoyles of the manhattan clan? The behind the scenes answer please!

Greg responds...

Behind the scenes? We thought they looked cool on him, and we wanted diversity.

Response recorded on June 29, 2010

Bookmark Link

TZ writes...

Tana writes...
You Asked:
"Does anyone know if "Maza" means "iron" in any Native American language or dialect?"

According to my book of names (it's got like 20,000 names and their meanings, which is totally cool, especially the Athurian names) Maza blaska, which is a Dakota name means "flat iron." So if it's one of those languages where the adjective comes after the subject, then Maza does infact mean Iron in Dakota. Which interestingly enough adds more irony since Dakota was an early choice for Demona's name. ^_^

And you know that J.R.R. Tolkien claimed that all of his novels were fact...you seen to have the same symptom with the Gargoyles.

Greg responds...
I'm not claiming they're fact so much as acknowledging that sometimes storytelling on this show just seems to click with history, existing legend and with dramatic necessity. It's a rare feeling, and I'm humbled by it. All I'm saying is it sometimes feels like the stories are true somehow somewhere, and all I'm doing is (imperfectly) tapping into them.

But I'm not actually delusional.

Ok, this is TZ now......

I was looking over the archives and was simply amazed by this response of yours, Greg. I have always felt that art (in all forms, from literature to sculptures to music) is discovered, not created. I subscribe to that theory because there are such famous examples of great work that endure for years, sometimes even centuries. Why would something like Michelangelo's David or Beethoven's 9th remain so popular through the ages? I think it's because those pieces already existed and were "discovered" by those artists, because certain works like theirs touch us so deeply. When one of us "finds" that piece of art, and shares it, it seems to strike something in all of us. I think creativity is God's alone, but I think He gives some of us a gift to find or tap into (as you've put it) something He's already created that reveals a great truth or lesson or feeling. Anyway, just a ramble of mine to share based on something I was amazed to see here. I'm not sure if I got my point across to others (I found it really hard to put this into words) but I think you get it. Thanks for "discovering" more great art for us all!

Greg responds...

You're welcome. Glad you get what I'm getting at, more or less.

Response recorded on May 13, 2010

Bookmark Link

RandomStan writes...

What animal noises and sound effects were used to make the gargoyle sounds, like when they roar, growl, sigh? Also for Bronx and gargoyle beasts as well? What sound was used for when the gargoyles would dig their claws into stone? That one sounds a bit familar, almost like popping bublbe wrap.

Greg responds...

I don't recall. Sorry. Been too long. And I was never at foley sessions anyway. Just the mixes, when the effects had already been created.

Response recorded on February 23, 2010

Bookmark Link

Landon Thomas writes...

Hi, I'm posting on Disney/Marvel Merger Day and I'm looking for some historical perspective. Someone in the comment room says "I recall Greg once saying that back in the 90s Disney was interested in buying Marvel, but instead decided to create their own universe with Gargoyles." I've found this on the New Olympians episode ramble:

"ORIGINS
Well, the Greek Myths of course. But that's not really what I'm talking about. As many of you know, The New Olympians was a concept -- originally created by Bob Kline -- that we began developing at Disney TV Animation even BEFORE Gargoyles. It was definitely a concept that evolved, but it was also a concept that we felt fit nicely into the Gargoyles Universe. So this episode was created as a backdoor pilot. At the time we had big plans for the Gargoyles Universe. Hopes that it would eventually evolve into Disney's equivalent of the Marvel or DC Universe. The World Tour expanded our Universe in many ways -- mostly for the sake of the Gargoyles series itself. But also to demonstrate that our universe had the "chops" to go the distance."

Could you elaborate?

1) Is it true that Disney considered buying Marvel in the 90s?

2) Did the Disney higher-ups want a Gargoyles Universe to rival Marvel/DCU, if briefly, or was that your idea?

3) How heady were the days of season 2? Was Gargoyles being positioned as a significant face of Disney? I remember the Anaheim Gargoyles baseball team memo is from around that time too.

Greg responds...

1. Yes.

2. It was my suggestion, but it was a suggestion that my bosses, including Michael Eisner liked. At least for one meeting.

3. They weren't all that heady. There was a lot of potential in the property, but the schedule was also both long and brutal, and we were still producing episodes into May of 1996, even though the season had premiered in September or October of 1995. By January it was pretty clear that reruns, preemptions, the O.J. Simpson trial and Power Rangers had combined to severely damage our momentum. In addition, the death of Frank Wells and the departures of Jeffrey Katzenberg, Rich Frank, Gary Krisel and Bruce Cranston, i.e. some of the people who had been such great backers of the property, hurt too. As did Eisner's decision to step back from the hands-on decision making he had done vis-a-vis Disney T.V. Animation. It left us quite at sea. New people came in who had no affinity for the property, long before we were even done producing Season Two.

Response recorded on January 22, 2010

Bookmark Link

Tonya writes...

Hi Greg! I was reading an earlier post of yours where you mentioned that it's harder to pitch original ideas (I'm guessing to networks, but maybe it's the same with comics, books, etc...?) now than it was when you originally pitched Gargoyles:

1. Why is it more difficult to pitch original ideas now than it was then? (I would think they'd be anxious for new concepts???)

2. What's probably the #1 thing that the people being pitched to are looking for?

3. Is a successful pitch sometimes tied to the person you are pitching to? (I mean, if you're pitching to one guy on Tuesday, but had you gone on say, Thursday and had a different guy, could the outcome of the pitch be different? I guess I mean do you depend on getting lucky with whomever you're scheduled to pitch to? And if not, can you ask to pitch to someone else?)

Thanks! I hope my questions were clear enough to get across what I'm trying to ask. I'm thinking of writing professionally (IF I'm any good) and wondered how hard it would be to "pitch". Thanks again! (Love your work by the way.)

Greg responds...

1. They're not. They're afraid of new concepts and would rather have something that's "proven" in some other medium or era. This, in my opinion, is a direct result of the vertical integration of these companies that makes the decision making process a long uphill struggle.

2. It differs all the time, but marquis value doesn't hurt.

3. Luck-of-the-draw and incidental timing are huge factors.

Response recorded on November 02, 2009

Bookmark Link

Geoff writes...

What was with the animation goofs that happened throughout Gargoyles? Did they seriously get by everyone until the episodes were aired? (I'm talking about the character design ones, to be specific.)

Greg responds...

What exactly do you expect me to say here?

Sometimes things were off-model. Sometimes we had the time and money to fix it, other times we didn't.

Response recorded on October 28, 2009

Bookmark Link

MARVEL-FAN writes...

Greg, how come in the Spectacular Spider-Man it doesent use realistic gunshot sounds? But, Batman: The Brave and The Bold it uses realistic gunshot sounds, other Batman cartoon shows.

Greg responds...

Different networks have different rules, I guess.

Response recorded on October 27, 2009

Bookmark Link

Purplegoldfish writes...

Hi Greg,

erm, I don't know if you noticed, but I created a bit of a stir in the comment room recently about the design of Constance, and I would appreciate if I could have some of your input in the matter. It might put this annoying demon in my mind to rest.

I'm just wondering, if at any time in the design process for Coco you made the connection between her being a heavy set female that resembles an animal that is unfortunately used as a negative metaphor for large women.

I actually like Coco's design, and her personality especially. What I don't like is that she's the only full figured female we've seen and she just happens to resemble a pig.

I admit I'm a bit jaded and cynical when it comes to this stuff. Chalk that up to having to endure a lot of verbal abuse growing up. I'm just really curious if you personally made that connection while designing the character. I'm really interested to see what you have to say about it.

Greg responds...

One of the main reasons that the original Coco became Broadway (i.e. why we took a female heavy-set gargoyle and made her male) was because we were afraid of the politically correct blow-back that we thought would come by depicting her that way. It's a double standard, but it's true. You can do a heavy set guy who likes to eat. But you can't do it with a gal without risking repercussions.. Ultimately though, that's cowardice. And not that I think the series is poorer for it, because I love Broadway, but ANY series is poorer for that kind of cowardice. When you fold to that, you wind up with the same types (not bad types, but the same ones) over and over.

Having gotten over that specific brand of cowardice (though I'm sure I'm still subject to other examples of the same kind of thing), I decided to create this new Constance/Coco. Being part of the London Clan meant she should be based on a heraldic animal. And the boar was one I hadn't used yet. So let's hit it HEAD ON. She's a heavy-set female gargoyle -- and she even has a pig-snout.

So go for it. Tell me she's nothing but a bad and inappropriate joke. I dare you. (I don't mean "you", Purplegoldfish, but a more generic "you" that's out there.) If I do my job well, then there's no concern. She's strong and multi-faceted, and her size is just an aspect of who she is, not the whole story. If all anyone can see is the girth and the snout then either I've failed... or that "anyone" has failed to look beyond the surface, which is one of the MAJOR themes of the entire series.

Generally, the response to Coco has been fairly positive, so I'm feeling pretty good about the job I did. Even you seem to like her, and your reservations are based on surface qualities and old prejudices and memories that I was openly defying on purpose. I can live with that. (Since ultimately I have no choice.)

Plus, I just really like Coco's design. I think David Hedgecock did a GREAT job on her. Instantly, I forgot about any agenda and just thought she was a great looking character. Which is how it should be.

Response recorded on September 25, 2009

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

who paid for gargoyles

Greg responds...

Originally? Disney.

Response recorded on September 17, 2009

Bookmark Link

Bazell writes...

How do you come up with your character names? (though the Manhatten's names' origins can be easily deduced)

Greg responds...

Different ways. And I didn't come up with all of them. Some came from other writers and story editors, such as Cary Bates and Michael Reaves. Others come from mythology or legend, etc. We try to make the names believable but have resonance.

Response recorded on August 03, 2009

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Generally speaking, about how many pages is the script for an average 30-minute television episode?

Greg responds...

Well, for starters, it's really 22-minutes (once you subtract commercials, credits, etc.) Our scripts for Season One of Spectacular Spider-Man were 36 pages. But we were often long and were often forced to cut material that was scripted and recorded. So for Season Two, we cut back to 34 pages. And still we were often long and forced to cut material that was scripted and recorded.

Response recorded on October 07, 2008

Bookmark Link

slayer38 writes...

Iam very interested for the 3rd season as comics. But i want to know, comes this comics also translated into german language in the german book stores? My English is not the best, << you can see that in my text. and another question? in 1996 at the moment disney do not produce season 3 with you as author, why you dont changed to another company at this moment. (btw. The goliath chronicles sucks, the liason between goliath and eliza are also ignored.)

And btw. My favorite Episodes is Hunters moon part 1 - 3. Great story, very dramatical, and the lovely end, << at this moment between goliath and eliza, the fans waited since episode "the mirror" / german titel "Der Spiegel"

And is that true. Episode "the mirror" is cutted in usa (in tv) because the "world trade center"?

Greg responds...

I'm afraid I have no information on German translations.

And I don't own the property. Disney does. It wasn't and ISN'T mine to take anywhere else.

As far as I know, "The Mirror" still airs with all the others.

Response recorded on September 24, 2008


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #101 - #125 of 536 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :