A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Ask Greg Archives
Behind the Scenes
Archive Index
: « First : « 50 : Displaying #70 - #119 of 536 records. : 50 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
NY writes...
Hi Greg! I looked through the archives and found that you previously mentioned that the first couple seasons of Gargoyles cost $400k-500k per episode to produce.
Assuming the cost of haven't changed dramatically, it seems as though animation is cheaper than the standard scripted network show. Given that, I'm surprised there aren't more animated shows on the major networks, especially with anime so popular in the US now, particularly among older audiences.
I think the only weakness to Young Justice is that it feels like the stories are big enough to fit in a whole hour, but are being condensed to thirty minutes. Again, assuming the cost of animation is in the ballpark of what it was for Gargoyles, an hour-long show doesn't strike me as financially prohibitive.
1. Can you say how much Young Justice costs to produce? A ballpark would be fine if you can't/don't want to give exact numbers.
2. What are your thoughts on the lack of non-Fox/non-comedy prime-time animation? Do you think this is something that can change in the future?
3. Do you think we might one day see hour-long dramatic animation? Did you ever consider making YJ an hour long?
Thank you very much for many excellent shows and opening yourself up for questions from the community!
Greg responds...
Your assumptions are faulty. Animation and anime have not - in this country - hit the kind of critical mass among adults that you seem to think they have. A few comedies, like Simpsons and Family Guy have worked in primetime, but others have failed. Even the great BATMAN THE ANIMATED SERIES - which was a huge success in the afternoons - didn't fare well in primetime.
In addition, costs HAVE changed dramatically. Budgets have not, but that means we have to learn to do more with less, generally.
More important is the issue of shelf space. An hour - per conventional wisdom - is a LONG time for kids to sit and watch an animated show. We're told, with some evidence to back it up, that they get bored. And kids still define the economics of most animated product. So if you are going to use up the VERY limited shelf space that any network has with an hour show, it darn well better kick some major butt in the ratings. Because otherwise, for nearly the same money, they could put on two shows (if not four) and have twice (or four times) the opportunity to grab the audience.
In fact, the trend isn't to longer shows, but to SHORTER shows. 11 minute episodes.
So with all that in mind:
1. No. That's proprietary information I'm not authorized to reveal.
2. Yes, I think it can change. But I won't pretend it would be easy to change the corporate culture that doesn't believe in this notion at all. What it takes, of course, is one network taking a chance on one show that's SO GOOD, that it's a hit in defiance of that culture and all conventional wisdom. That would break the floodgates. The inevitable result would be a lot of crap would go on the air, fail, and the conventional wisdom would come back into play with a vengeance. The one hit would be the "exception that proves the rule" and that would be it for awhile. That's what happened after Simpsons. (Who remembers Fish Police?) But the door would be open at least a little. Over the very long haul change is possible.
3. One day? Sure. In fact, I hope so.
3a. I'm not saying it's never crossed my mind. I'd love it, of course. But (a) it's not up to me, and (b) it's never been a realistic possibility.
Melissa writes...
First of all, let me say that how much I have always enjoyed Gargoyles. It was a high point of the afternoon for my younger brothers and me during the original run (while our mother enjoyed having a half hour relatively free of sibling squabbles), and now I'm having a lot of fun introducing the show to my 4-year-old son. So, you see, your show has multi-generational appeal! Thank you for all your hard work and vision.
Secondly, I guess my question is about your writing process. I recently discovered via this site your ideas for the prospective Gargoyles spin-offs. This suggests to me that you write with a, for lack of a better term, "master plan" in mind. Unlike, say, David Milch, who famously writes and re-writes furiously as new ideas occur to him, and actually plans out very little.
1)Would you say this is accurate?
2)If so, do you ever deviate from this plan, if a new and different idea strikes you?
3)Again if so, would you mind providing an example? (A Gargoyles show example would be just fine, I'm not asking for spin-off spoilers here!)
Thank you in advance for your time.
Greg responds...
First of all, that really warms my heart. Thank you for telling me that.
Secondly...
1. I can't speak for David Milch, but yes, I do better when I've planned ahead. That doesn't mean I don't allow for new ideas and/or rewriting. I do. I just would rather have the structure in place to allow new ideas to grow, rather than - generally - winging it.
2. Yes. (Gotta start reading all the questions before answering any.)
3. Uh... one that comes to mind is one we didn't do. In "Grief", we belatedly came up with the idea to let Coyote kill the travelers, who wouldn't die because Anubis was off-line, so to speak. And if we had come up with that idea a bit sooner, I definitely would have incorporated it, because it's a GREAT idea. But unfortunately, the idea didn't strike us until AFTER the episode was completed.
Todd Jensen writes...
The first season of "Young Justice" takes place over the course of half a year, starting on the Fourth of July and continuing to New Year's Eve in the Season One finale (with episodes set on Halloween and Thanksgiving along the way). I remember that the first season of "The Spectacular Spider-Man" similarly stretched from the start of the school year in September to Thanksgiving (with a Halloween episode along the way), and that the second season got up at least to Valentine's Day. The time progression in "Gargoyles" was more vague, but we had two Halloween stories ("Eye of the Beholder" and the Double Date story) and three wintry episodes in New York ("Her Brother's Keeper", which ends with a snowfall, "Re-Awakening", and "The Price"), as well as a clear timeline for the Stone of Destiny story.
I like this sense of the year's progress through the seasons and landmark days (like the Fourth of July and Halloween), but it doesn't seem that common in animated series outside your own work. I've seen two speculations on why that element is so rare in animated series. One is that a lot of the people who engage in such creative work aren't big on continuity and change, far less than you are. Another is that most people involved in creating animated television series live in or near Los Angeles and other parts of California, where the climate is pretty much the same year around and there's less a sense of four seasons than in other parts of the United States. I was wondering what your thoughts were on these theories.
Greg responds...
Both these theories seem valid to me, but they probably pale from the economic explanation: if you progress through the seasons then you have to redress backgrounds and characters, and that's expensive. Me, I believe it's WORTH the expense. But that's only true if you're really going to DO something with it. If you're not, then there's not much point. (We also did it on W.I.T.C.H. by the way.)
Dr. Spanky writes...
Greg! You are my hero (professionally at least. I mean, face it, I don't know you. You could be an axe-murderer). I want to spend my life doing what you do. Any pieces of advice for an aspiring writer? What are good ways to train myself / further my writing skills / develop confidence in my voice (or my character's voices)? How did you get your start professionally, and what are some good avenues towards putting your work out in the world?
I thoroughly look forward to seeing the rest of your work, because all of it has been great. Thank you and adieu.
Greg responds...
At the risk of losing my heroic status, I'm going to demur here, since all this information is already available in the ASK GREG archives. (I've been asked this MANY times before.) For example, check out "Animation", "Behind the Scenes", "Biz, The" and "Weisman, Greg" for starters.
TheTenthDoctor writes...
Hey greg I have noticed that you dislike hypoteticals of "who would win in a fight with x" and of comparisions in general That's something I admire of your style.
But my questions is, what If you were left in charge of a show that does rely on such coparisions=
Supposing you were in charge of a show like Dragon ballz would you be bothered the hypoteticals and charcter's power leveles on your writting given that those are a big deal on those kind of shows?.
Greg responds...
I'm not familiar with DragonBallZ, but if who can beat who is part of a STORY then it's not hypothetical.
Brazilian Guy writes...
Could you give us a few details on what the process to create an episode is like? I have no idea what doing online and locked picture mean...thanks!
Greg responds...
Sure.
1. We start/started by breaking down the entire season on index cards on a VERY large bulletin board.
2. Once the basic arc was approved, I wrote up premises for every episode in the season. Each premise is about a page long.
3. We brought in our freelance writers and broke down a handful of episodes at a time, with each writer in the meeting (myself included) taking one episode as their own, but with every writer in the meeting contributing ideas and notions to everyone's story.
4. The writer goes off with my written premise and the notes from the meeting and writes up an outline. This is a prose document, broken down by scene/sequence of about 8 to 10 pages in length. For me, as a story editor this is a VERY important step, as it nails down the story, making script writing much easier.
5. I do a rewrite on the writer's outline and submit it to WB, CN, DC, Brandon Vietti and the episode's director for notes.
6. The writer goes off with my revised outline and all the notes and writes a script.
7. I do a rewrite on the writer's script and submit it for notes to WB, CN, DC, BV, S&P, legal and the episode's director. Usually showed it to Kevin Hopps as well, who was great at catching my mistakes. The first season, Kevin was on staff, and it was part of his job. The second season, he just did it as a favor. Good guy.
8. I do another rewrite or polish based on all the notes.
9. We record the script, casting any new rolls, etc.
10. Simultaneously, the storyboards are begun...
11. While at the same time, design work for the episode begins: characters, backgrounds, props, effects. This is ALL black and white line-art at first.
12. The boards are roughed out and get notes from the director.
13. The boards are cleaned up and submitted to Brandon and myself.
14. Brandon and I give notes, and the boards are revised.
15. Meanwhile, designs are approved and then we go through the same process with color and background painting.
16. Boards are slugged for time to make sure the show isn't too long or too short.
17. X-Sheets (timing sheets) are created to give detailed information to the animators about how long each individual action will take and to give mouth movements to the characters.
18. All these materials are shipped to Korea to either Moi or Lotto to be animated.
19. We occasionally call for "Wedge Tests" that allow us to preview important or tricky bits of animation in advance to make sure we're getting what we want.
20. The animation comes back rough from overseas. Our editor Jhoanne Reyes compiles it into what we call an A-Frame. It's a very ROUGH cut.
21. Brandon, Jho, David Wilcox and myself call retakes, i.e. we ask the overseas studio for animation corrections. We also call out visual effects for Matt Girardi.
22. Brandon, Jho and I edit the episode, LOCKING it to the exact time that the network requires.
23. We spot the locked episode with our composers, Dynamic Music Partners, pointing out where and what we are looking for in the music.
24. We do the same thing with Audio Circus, our sound effects experts.
25. We preview the music in advance of the sound mix to make sure it's on target.
26. Generally, by now most of the retakes have come back from Korea and Matt's done most of his effects work too.
27. We mix the show for sound. That is we sit in a room and painstakingly balance the sound effects with the foley with the music with the dialogue.
28. We "On-Line" the episode. This is our last final view of the finished product to make sure everything is as good as time, budget and our abilities will allow it to be.
There's obviously more to it than all of the above, but that should give you the basics.
Matt writes...
So, you've been working in writing and producing animated shows for a long time. Since the shows you work on are generally targeted to younger viewers, I was curious about the impact, if any, that your kids and being a parent to them has had on your work. How much an influence has your being a parent been to these shows? And have your kids in particular had any general or specific influences on anything you've worked on?
Just curious. Thanks.
Greg responds...
Well, I often throw in little things to amuse my kids. Like making them genomorphs in YJ. Or using their birthdays on timestamps. And I'm sure they influence me in a hundred small ways I'm not even conscious of.
But mostly, I still write for myself.
Blizzard Sprite writes...
Hello, Mr. Weisman.
My questions today are more closely related to television programming. So here goes.
1. Have you viewed the new ThunderCats on Cartoon Network that debuted last year? Assuming so, what did you think of it?
2. Have you viewed any of the original episodes of the ThunderCats cartoon? Assuming so, what is your opinion of the old show, and how do you think it compares to the latest incarnation?
3.The original ThunderCats cartoon met the 65 mark episode needed to go into syndication, and produced episodes beyond it. While many of the new episodes were entertaining, I could not help but notice, in my opinion, a decline in certain qualities of the show. One of the areas hit hardest, in my opinion, was the writing in the episodes. This seemed to manifest itself in terms of more predictable scenarios occurring, less creative solutions to the problems that arose and eventually lackluster storylines. ThunderCats wasn’t the only show to suffer from this though. Cartoons like Captain Planets, which also surpassed the 65-episode mark, began to experience a bit of a lag, and lost many of the original voice actors/actresses who made their characters so exceptional.
4. So my question is what exactly happens to a show behind the scenes after moving beyond syndication? Is a show’s storyline only plotted out for 65 episodes and not expected to pass it? Or does the writing team have to brainstorm an entirely new set of ideas for episodes beyond? Are new writers assigned to the program or the old ones retained? Are the initial voice actors/actresses replaced with new people, choose not to renew their contract or different causes altogether?
Thanks for the time.
Greg responds...
1. I haven't had time to see it, but I really like the people involved with it.
2. I did a long time ago, when I was working on a single script for a different reboot that didn't see the light of day. But you need to understand that I never saw it when it first came on, so I have no nostalgia for it.
3. I just have no opinion on this. I only saw a handful of episodes.
4. Every case is different. And obviously, I have no idea what went on with ThunderCats.
Anonymous writes...
I was just reading the Toonzone interview with the late Dwayne McDuffie (http://www.toonzone.net/news/articles/36545/toonzone-presents-an-interviewtribute-to-dwayne-mcduffie) and he describes the difference between Story By credits and Teleplay By credits on Justice League, and how there may be a lot more writing done by uncredited main writers on the show. Is this similar to how you work on your shows?
Greg responds...
Yeah, more or less.
Fluttershy writes...
Hey greg what's up I would love to ask you a questions regarding your story telling techniques
You have said in the past that you could go be telling stories forever if you wanted and in fact sometimes not even the tv show is enough for them hence the comics.
But have you ever considered in giving your characters and stories a Grand finale?.
I think something that has made me a bit sad is that in your past shows you have been cut short due to executive decitions out of your control and we have been unable to get anything resembling an ending that actually gives closure (w.i.t.c.h,Spectacular spiderman, gargoyles etc)
However it is always nice when a tv show character directly says goodbye to te audience(like batman the brave and the bold) or when every major plot point is solved at the end.
A big trait of western media in it's majority like tv shows and specially comics is that the characters "are frozen in time".
Spiderman for instance will always be a young man that fights crime and the story won't go beyond that,same for superman and batman. When the story gets after a certain point we as fans tend to get reboots reapeaing the smae story.
I would like to ask you if given the chance will you give us a finale to your works like gargoyles.
Will we ever see the closure of them?
Do you believe in "grand finales"?
Or do you want simply to never give them a real ending o your shows and simply give the idea that the story will be around forever?
Greg responds...
Yeah, I'm not so much into Grand Finales. Probably why I'm more of a television or comic book guy than a movie or graphic novel guy. I believe (whole-heartedly) in the on-going story. That's what LIFE feels like to me.
Gargoyles is a perfect example. Characters come; characters go and some even die, but the world goes on. I even know (but don't ask) how Goliath dies, but I don't see it as the end of that world. It's only A FINALE, because there is no THE FINALE.
I suppose if one was writing a story with a single lead, a la Spider-Man, and either (a) one killed him off or (b) one really ran out of stories to tell, then I could see staging that big Grand F before you waved goodbye forever. But that assumes there isn't a new Spider-Man waiting in the wings and/or that a guy like me would actually run out of stories. And that hasn't happened to me, at least not yet.
Mike H writes...
Hi Greg,
I was wondering how much can be shared between your show and the WB DC direct to videos. For instance, as the movies "Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths" and "Justice League: Doom" share an executive producer and lead character designer with Young Justice, could you theoretically utilize character designs from those two movies? I imagine that even if you could, you would prefer to tailor unique versions for the show; but I'm curious what can be reused.
Greg responds...
We can - and occasionally do - reuse elements from past WB productions (usually things like cars or paper clips or other props, but also the occasional background design or pedestrian), as long as they fit the style of the series. This is done to save money and time, so that our designers can focus on elements that are more unique to our series.
Lavariel writes...
Dear Mr. Weisman,
Thank you for all the wonderful work you've done from Gargoyles, to Spiderman, to Young Justice. Been a fan for years.
1) From your experience, what was more enjoyable to work with? Working on a show that was completely yours to control - Gargoyles - from character development, plot, and storyline? Or Spiderman and Young Justice where the basics has already laid out?
2) Was there more pressure to succeed working on Gargoyles because it was original and the creativity was your to control? Or was there more pressure to work on an adaption on Spiderman and Young Justice because the bar has already been set?
Greg responds...
1. They're different. Gargoyles is my baby. But in terms of the actual work, I don't think I had any more or less fun working on SpecSpidey, W.I.T.C.H. or YJ.
2. I think the pressure rises with each series, but I blame the internet more than anything inherent in the series. (I blame the internet for a lot, which is not to say I could go back to living without it.)
Anonymous writes...
Hi Greg! First of all, congratulations on the Young Justice video game! Can't wait for its release! I've just got one question, which I've been wondering about for a while:
1. When you use cultural references in the show (like Wally's Planet of the Apes reference in Alpha Male, or his 'Dumbledore' line in Denial) do you have to ask permission to include them in the script, or do you guys have pretty much free access to all Warner Brothers material?
Great job on the show! Its easily my favourite TV show right now- there's clearly a lot of talent and effort that goes into it, and it really pays off! Keeping my fingers crossed for a season 3!
Greg responds...
1. It depends on HOW we use it. A mention like that is what's known as "de minimus". That's a legal term which basically means it's of little significance. And that's okay. Parody is also okay, though the definition of parody can be tricky. Obviously, a bigger use like our Marvin the Martian visual would have taken permission if not for the fact, that, yes, Young Justice and the Looney Toons characters are all part of the larger WB family.
Greg Bishansky writes...
This is one I've wondered for a while now. That banshee like shriek of battle cry that Demona screams... usually when making her escape, here it is on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DHt1Uocz-G8#t=386s
Is that Marina? Or a sound effect. I've wondered for a long time now. Either way, I always thought it sounded really cool.
Greg responds...
I'm pretty sure it's a sound effect, but it's been a long time, you know?
hallofjustice writes...
How old are Kevin Hopps and Jamie Thomason? I can't find any darn websites that will ever confirm their date of births!
PS: If they do make more DC Showcases, I personally believe they should hire Jamie Thomason as the casting and voice director for all them.
Greg responds...
I don't believe it's my business to tell you.
Lyla writes...
Whose idea was it for Demona to start turning into a human during the day and why did you add it to the series? Did you plan for that to happen from the beginning?
Greg responds...
I think it was mine. But so many years later, I can't be sure. So much of the series was a collaboration.
And, no, we didn't know we were going to do that at the beginning. But it became clear that was the way to go.
Curious writes...
I am so tempted to ask if Bette Kane (aka flamebird) Barbara Gordon ( aka Batgirl) and all those other high School students with alternate hero personas (Bumble bee, Herald) in the comic books are ever going to put on said costumes/personas on the show but I know better than that. So I'm just going to ask about another topic.
(1) Is it hard coming up with ideas and episodes for a show?
(2) When you get writers block is that when you raise the flag for a hiatus?
(3) Do writer's for t.v shows (any t.v show in general) use hiatuses in order to work on other projects?
Greg responds...
1. Nope. It's hard to leave things out. Thank goodness for the comic.
2. No. I don't have writer's block on this series at all. And we had no control, one way or another, over any hiatus. That's the network.
3. I suppose some do. I was busy on Young Justice.
Richard Jackson writes...
In the series, Demona gave several phony explanations of how she managed to live so long. Such as, stone sleep (Awakening) and stealing minutes of life from humans (City of Stone). Of course, also in City of Stone we found out that her link to Macbeth is the secret of her immortality.
But that was revealed in season 2 before the introduction of Oberon's Children. Demona let it slip in "Temptation" that she had survived through the centuries, but didn't elaborate.
When in production on the first season, did you know what the secret to her immortality would be? And were there other explanations you thought of but ultimately didn't use?
Greg responds...
Pretty much by the time we wrote "Enter Macbeth" we knew the basics. Didn't work out the details until "City of Stone".
Tom writes...
I've always appreciated that the show you create feature so many diverse characters with agency. It's great to see Elisa and her family, to finally seeing Spider-man in New York that features so many people of color in his cast, to having Aqualad and Artemis as such important, interesting characters in Young Justice. I love that your shows aren't engaging in the tokenism the way a lot of other shows (for kids or otherwise) do. And having strong women is a huge part of that--I remember friends in 4th grade fighting over who got to be Elisa or Demona at recess. So thank you for that!
I think with shows that are adapted from comics, there's this predicament of wanting to pay homage to decades of comic book history while not carrying forward the inherent racism and sexism of the eras when they were written. I think The Batman botched that when Detective Yin was replaced by Commissioner Gordon--closer to the comics, but axes a female, minority lead for a white male.
Not to mention the pressures from other areas. I remember hearing Dwayne McDuffie say that even in the height of its popularity, companies had no interest in making Static Shock toys, for example.
So, how do you handle this? Whether it's selecting minority/women characters from comics, creating new ones, or changing characters races like in Spectacular Spider-man, what's that process like when you make your shows?
Greg responds...
Um... mostly... I just try to reflect the world I see. I'm a sheltered white boy, but even a sheltered white boy would have to be blind not to see that the world is populated with more than just sheltered white boys. So putting in strong female characters and strong characters of color seems natural and easy, frankly.
If you're asking for process, though, it's very much case by case. We don't sit there and go, "We need 2.5 minorities on the Team with 23% females." Instead, we build a diverse cast of characters, character by character. When adapting a property (as opposed to creating one from scratch, like GARGOYLES), we DO pay attention to tradition. But some characters are certainly more iconic than others. So Robin, Kid Flash and Superman's clone remain Caucasian, and there was never any thought of changing them. But by using Garth's Tempest identity, it freed us up to create a new Aqualad, as the son of Black Manta - in part, to demonstrate the alternate Earth idea, i.e. this is Earth-16, and one decision changed the course of it's history (continuity) from what we're familiar with in the comics. As for Artemis, we felt she was obscure enough to make her half-Vietnamese, without fundamentally changing what mattered most about her. Likewise, her mother Paula Brooks-Crock seemed obscure enough to go ahead and make her the Vietnamese Paula Nguyen-Crock, as that also helped us make her Cheshire's mother, since Cheshire has always been the daughter of a Vietnamese mother and a Caucasian father. Maybe "obscure" isn't the right word, but I think you get the idea. As for Miss Martian, well, obviously she's a Martian, but I suppose we could have made her Megan Morse identity a minority too. (We portrayed her uncle John Jones as African, after all.) But again, we're not trying to meet quotas, and as you'll eventually see, we had reasons for the choices we made with Megan.
Anonymous writes...
Hi Greg! First of just wanted to say that I'm absolutely loving the Young Justice series, it's fantastic (particularly Home Front!) I just have a few questions about the process of voice recording for Young Justice.
1) Do the voice actors record in the same studio and interact with each other during the recording? Or do you often have to record separately due to conflicting schedules?
2) How long does it typically take to record each episode?
3) Who generally directs the voice actors during recordings?
4) Do the actors input their own suggestions for how the characters may react in a certain situation?
5) Does the script go through 'last minute' revisions during the recording?
Thank you so much for taking the time for looking at all the fan's questions and I look forward to seeing the rest of season 1 and 2!
Greg responds...
1. Both.
2. Three to four hours or so.
3. Jamie Thomason.
4. Occasionally. But unfortunately, we don't have a ton of flexibility.
5. Occasionally. Nothing major.
Jo writes...
Hi, again! First, thank you for answering my previous questions! I know you must be stressed, but, like others have said, it's awesome that you take time to answer questions like this. :)
And, now questions.
1. As a writer, how much say do you have in how the story is told? I mean, I know you write the script (duh), but it's the director who ultimately decides how it's told. So, do you both consult heavily on the matter?
2. Do you sit in on recording sessions? If so, why?
3. Um, I think this ties in with both the previous questions, but, do you have much say in how an actor performs their lines? Because, you must have written it with a certain tone, inflection, and emotion in mind, but the actor might interpret it differently.
4. How long does it normally take you to write an episode?
5. Do you find it easier or harder to write characters that have been created before you came along, as opposed to your own characters.
6. As far as character development goes, how deep do you go? Like, do you consider things that probably won't be presented in the project, or do you stick to things directly relative to the story?
I think that's it...not that I can't come back and ask some more. Thanks so much!!
Greg responds...
1. Well, it depends if I'm a freelancer or a show-runner. If we're talking Young Justice, than Brandon and I have final say on everything. The directors work for us. Though of course, they are immensely talented people, and we value what they do. The writers likewise work for us, but we've worked really closely on the stories and scripts with them. And as we proceed forward into design and direction, it's all in service of those stories.
2. Yes, of course. All of them.
2a. Voice recording is (a) one of the most important parts of the process and (b) the most fun part of the process. I wouldn't miss them for both reasons. We need to make sure that what we record is what we intended and needed. And I enjoy it. This year, for various reasons, I've also recorded a lot of scratch track, i.e. I've been the temporary voice for various characters when the actors we needed were temporarily unavailable. Just to give the board artists something to work with, until we can get the correct actor in there.
3. Yes. Ultimately, Brandon and I have final say. But again, we trust and appreciate the great work done by our stellar cast and by voice director Jamie Thomason.
4. To write a script: eight days. To write an outline: four days. To write a beat sheet: one day. To break the story: two days. Add it all up. Throw in time for notes and editing at every step. And you're talking about six weeks, give or take.
5. A well-thought out character is easier to write, whether I created it or someone else did.
6. We have detailed backstories for all our leads and supporting characters. Sometimes even a one-liner character has backstory in our minds.
PPL Ltd. writes...
Hey Greg,
Looking at the TV series producing industry as a whole, something I've always noticed is that, when it comes to live-action, comedies like "How I Met Your Mother" are always produced to fill one half-hour time slot, while dramas like "Dexter" always fill an whole hour time slot. Every show ever made is bound to contain elements of both drama and comedy, of course, but it seems like it is the overall tone of the series that decides the length of each episode.
For example, comparing two recent shows with a vaguely similar premise, the two medical shows "Scrubs" and "House". Anyone will say that "Scrubs" is a comedy show with dramatic elements at times, while "House" is a drama that often incorporates humour. Scrubs was a half hour show, House is an hour long show.
So the general line of questioning I'm leading up to with all this is the following, why is it that that there has never been an animated series which consists of hour long episodes spread over a whole season, even though animated shows can also be seen as dramatic?
The closest thing I can think of as an exception is the early 2000s Justice League series, which always had at least two part episodes throughout its run (until it became Justice League Unlimited), but those were always divided into smaller chunks, even if many channels just aired them back-to-back anyway.
HBO's Spawn can easily be said to be more drama than comedy, yet the episodes still were not as long as any other dramas on the channel, even though there were only six episodes a season.
I'm not trying to say that quantity is the same thing as quality, I'm just wondering if you have any insight as to why the episodes of a regular animated series are always of about the same length, regardless of their tone, while live action ones are not.
Greg responds...
The "conventional wisdom" is that kids won't sit through an hour.
I'm not saying I agree. But that's what the wisdom of the conventional states.
A.B. Washington writes...
Hi, Mr. Weisman!!
In the episode "Eye of the Beholder", I've seen "Fox"(a.k.a. Jeanine Xanatos" turns back into her human self and she was naked in this episode, how did you guys come up with that story which aired many years ago??
Greg responds...
Um... I'm not actually sure what you're asking.
The Eye of Odin was created by the video game folks, but we gladly brought it into the series. The discovery that Fox and Xanatos loved each other was a revelation that came with the "Her Brother's Keeper" episode. The idea of the gargoyles being free to walk around on Halloween seemed natural. Otherwise, the characters just sort of brought it all together, giving us what they would do.
Sean writes...
Dear Mr. Weisman,
I've been a huge fan of yours for years and just wanted to thank you for supplying or helping to make 1/3 of the cartoons of my childhood. I'm currently following Young Justice and I love it! I do have one question that I couldn't find in the archives though.
I noticed in episode 10 what seemed to be some height inconsistencies with Red Arrow. Cheshire was said to be 5ft 6in tall. But when the two of them were having their stare down in prison, Roy only looked a bit taller than her. Meanwhile, he seemed to be a bit shorter than Lex Luthor as well. In my animation classes, my professor mentioned a tendency for teenage characters to be drawn slightly shorter than adults, to make them easier to distinguish. Is that what happened here, or was it just animation error/camera trick?
I know in a previous post you said that he was the tallest of the teens, with Aqualad in second, but I was hoping that you could tell me their actual heights (and the rest of The Team's), or at least your best guess.
Thank you for your time and good luck with the rest of the season.
Greg responds...
We have height charts for all our characters and those charts are sent overseas to our animators for reference. I won't deny that animation errors take place sometimes, but none that I noticed in 'Targets'.
I can't tell you their actual heights. We don't put that information on the charts. I can only tell you how tall they are relative to each other.
spence writes...
A few questions about voice-over.
1) Is it recorded before the episode is animated?
2) How long does it take from recording the voice work until the episode is completely finished?
3) Do all actors get together in the room when recording one episode?
4) Are you present?
Greg responds...
1. Yep.
2. Months.
3. Ideally. Sometimes people aren't available on the day of the record, and we pick them up later. Sometimes if someone only has a line or two in the episode, we take pity on them and get them in and out fast. Sometimes, a single episode has two completely separate plots intertwining. We'd ideally record every actor in the first plot together, and then record every actor in the second together. But since the two groups don't interact, there's no need to record the entire group together and force a lot of actors to sit through scenes they're not in at all.
4. Yep.
Matthew writes...
This is about pretty much all the series you've worked on. I've noticed that most of your series has a large cast of recurring characters (and that despite this characters tend to be very well delineated.) Now for Young Justice, WITCH, and Spectacular Spiderman that may be just because they were pre-existing properties and already have large casts. However, Gargoyles also had a large cast.
Was this a because of conscious choice?
Do you perfer working with a large cast of characters?
Greg responds...
I do. I like creating worlds that feel real and populated.
Anonymous writes...
Was the notion of stone gargoyles coming to life at night an original concept of the television show, or does it have a basis in historical legend?
Greg responds...
Gargoyles as protectors is legend.
Specifically having Gargoyles only come alive at night, is -- as far as I know -- an invention, if a completely logical no-brainer one, of the series.
Anonymous writes...
How different of an experience is it to work on a show were the seasons are 13 episodes(Spectacular Spiderman) from one where the seasons are 26(I think it's 26 might have read 28 somewhere)?
I mean do you have to pace yourself differently?
Which do you prefer?
Are you more comfortable including sub-plots that you might not get to adress in 13 episode seasons?
You know stuff like that.
Greg responds...
The more episodes the better as far as I'm concerned. More EMPLOYMENT, first of all. Plus more room to maneuver, to add more subplots, more characters, etc.
Henry writes...
Are the "bibles" something that just you do, or is it standard for animated series?
Do live action television series do it to?
Also do all animated series have time-lines like you've made?
Or do they just kinda make it up as they go?
Greg responds...
1. It's pretty standard, though mine tend to be longer than standard.
2. As far as I know, though I've never worked in live-action.
3. That I doubt.
4. I'm sure each series is different.
Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...
I asked an unclear question a little back:
Laura 'ad astra' Sack writes...
You've always (wisely) refused name one series you've worked with a favorite over another. It'd be like choosing which child you love best. But is there any instance of one work being a favorite instance of X and another of Y?
Greg responds...
Uh... I'm not too clear on what you're asking....? Is it a chromosome thing?
Me again...
Sorry. I meant that do you look at the various shows you worked on and when you think of one or the other does one particular aspect stand out as for you favorite example of getting that particular thing right, or conveying another thing the best as you've ever done it? Either in general terms like saying your favorite John Wayn western versus military flick. Or in a very specific terms like saying you think you really aced a concept- like a relationship or a philisophical concept or bravery or human foible etc.
Greg responds...
Hey, there are a lot of great moments that I love (he says without modesty) in all the series I've produced. Even in the stuff where I was just a hired gun.
But the thing is... I mostly work in the same genre (i.e. super-heroes) nearly all the time. It's a bastard genre (he says with affection) that includes fantasy, science fiction, detective and mystery, thrillers, etc., plus -- at least the way we do it -- romance and comedy on top of the action and adventure. So it stays fun for me, fresh for me. But it doesn't lend itself to the western vs. military comparison you make above. All of them are all of it. So it's just about the execution. In general, there aren't any episodes of a show I've produced that I hate. Some work better than others. But for me it's mostly about the moments.
Anonymous writes...
Should a storyteller be telling us stories we want/expect to hear, or are they allowed to tell us whatever story they want, regardless on if we like it or not?
Greg responds...
Uh... I don't know that there are or even should be rules.
But as for me personally, I try to tell the stories I want to tell, the ones that I'd want to see - that way I maintain passion for the material. Then, of course, I desperately cross my fingers and hope that others also like the stories I'm telling.
Whether these are stories they wanted or expected, who knows? The audience isn't monolithic, so I'm not sure it's possible to give EVERYONE what they want or expect. But if a majority LIKE the stories, I figure I'm good.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Lost writes...
are you friends with Diane Duane?
Greg responds...
Nope. Never met her.
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.
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 Tenseâ€, which also had a VR sequence in the Xanatos Pyramid, albeit in a dream. They didn’t write “Walkaboutâ€, 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 “Legionâ€, 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
: « First : « 50 : Displaying #70 - #119 of 536 records. : 50 » : Last » :