A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Ask Greg Archives
Behind the Scenes
Archive Index
: « First : « 100 : « 10 : Displaying #307 - #316 of 536 records. : 10 » : 100 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : 100 : All :
Entity writes...
Hi Greg,
In your latest beat sheet for the series opener, I see that the idea of the Trio being young and inexperienced was still prominant. I understand where you came from in eventually changing that, but when I first watched AWAKENING I was distraught by the Trio. Every gargoyle we saw was a full-fledged warrior. Where _were_ the inexperienced kids? The elderly? It seemed slightly out-of-sync that the Trio were such able-bodied fighters. Was the Viking attack a real threat or wasn't it?
That is just my original impression of the events of the initial Viking attack. Later on, when the gang counterattacks the camp, I can understand their participation.
I guess the battle just came off too light-heartedly when we glimped the Trio, starkly contrasting with characters like Goliath's and Demona's scenes. A real sense of danger is added by Hakon drawing Goliath's blood, boulders crashing into stone, refugees huddling about, the Captain barking orders, etc. But then we have the Trio gallavanting through the battle like it's, as Brooklyn puts it, just "fun."
I think their innocense could have been portrayed in a way that didn't detract from the realism that was so effectively installed earlier on.
This isn't intended to come off as pure criticism. AWAKENINGS was brilliant, especially Part 1. But I thought I'd mention my first impressions.
Another little thing I noticed from the beat sheet is that the flashback originally began showing the refugees entering the castle, with the Marauders/Vikings on their tail, and then both parties camp for the day till dusk. This struck me in two ways: First, it gave me a better grip of realism. Enemy attackers camping right outside the castle, both sides waiting for the battle to begin... that could've added a cool flavor to things, and immerse us more into the medieval setting. Secondly, showing the refugees herded into the castle beforehand would've better clarified the events surrounding the battle. In the final product, we jump straight into the fight and, as a result, a reason is not even necessarily needed. The Captain's off-hand comment about refugees comes off as superfluous. I remember shrugging. 'That's nice' I thought. We were in the battle. Who needed backstory? Of course, the refugees were an important component, for the sake of Tom and his mother, and to better portray the environment of 10th century Scotland. If we'd seen the prologue to the battle, that's included in the beat sheet, I think it would've been much more effective.
I guess what this comes down to in the end is my earlier message I sent to you, in which I asked about trimming episodes with Last Time and Next Time segments. You defended, saying they were useful for tightening the episodes, but I put forth, as shown here, that some valuable stuff can be lost. Of course, it's doubtful you would've wanted or could've gotten a 6th Part to AWAKENINGS, but don't you think you could use ANY extra time you have to better flesh things out?
Greg responds...
The trio are new to this warrior thing at the time of the Viking attack. Brooklyn takes it more seriously, and unfortunately we don't see much with Lex (not enough time in the episode). Broadway enjoys the battle and doesn't take it as seriously as he should. We did this on purpose in order to contrast his response in the second battle at the Viking encampment.
I don't think the realism was damaged (though, of course, you're entitled to your opinion). I just think we were showing a variety of responses to the stimuli at hand.
And we did show the elderly -- in the person of Hudson. We couldn't show everyone, so he stood in for all of his generation that still survived. The only group we didn't show at all were kids (Bronx's age). It was felt that it would just be too brutal to establish and show these kids -- only to have them smashed later.
As for the prologue, well, I liked it too. But talk about superfluous...
I mean, what would you have been willing to cut from the episode in exchange for adding that prologue. It's not like I can say, "Hey, we want this prologue. Let's animate an additional three minutes here." Ultimately we have an absolute time limit to every episode. A footage limit (based on budget concerns) that we are allowed to send overseas to be animated. Something had to go. And I think the Captain's line covers the necessary info. It might not be elegant. But it's servicable.
But don't start on the Previously and Next Time segments. They don't count. What I'm talking about is how much we were allowed to ANIMATE at our budget. That was limited to about twenty-two minutes and thirty seconds. Putting entire new sequences in would require us to speed up the pacing of everything else. Using thirty seconds for a PREVIOUSLY segment allows us to tighten pacing and cut out bad frames of animation once something is animated. Because, the truth is, nothing ever came back to us PERFECT. NOTHING.
So AGAIN, had I cut all those previously and next time segments you would not have gotten any extra scenes. You just would have had the scenes you saw with some bad animation and pacing left in. And if there's still bad animation and pacing in there -- well, trust me, we used those thirty seconds to cut out the worst of it.
We clear now?
Tim writes...
City of Stone 1 ramble:
The Revelation about the Weird Sisters double agent motiviations was a thrill to read. It worked on me exactly like you said it did...did you have a camera inside our heads? Those are still the most wonderfully mysterious fey ever...I loooove Kathie Soucie's voicework.
In the top 5 of the most heart and gut wrenching scenes ever, Demona turinng to stone with a tear in her eye, the massacre finding scene (I thought "COLDSTONE!!!" when she picked up the piece of face) and her tearful goodbye to Goliath and any hope of a non-vengeful life.
1. Eggs: I never gave any thought to the eggs, but once they were shown driven away, it just opened up a whole new subplot to wonder about.
2. MacBeth, I was wondering about, he was neither a hero, nor a villian, something grey in between, which is always the best character. Young Macbeth and Young Gruoch certainly had to grow up fast. Loved the battle scene between Young MacBeth the Hunter and his "Nooooo!" Bodhe seemed to be a shrewed negotiator...probalby would make a good ambasador.
3. I really thought that was how Demona got her immortality, from the Grimorum. Why the heck not? Xanatos seemed to be desperate enough to trust her. Either he would have used the spell on Fox if it worked on him, or he didn't love her enough to ask her about it...wouldn't he have tested it on somebody first?
4. Yeah, Owen being caught by the spell was a bit cheating...but that's okay. :) Never even thought about the "tricky one" comment until I saw the Gathering. Once again, love the latin spells, gives the show authenticity, plus latin sounds just really darn cool and mystical.
Overall, the fact that this show provides wonderful backstories for the "villians" in a FOUR PARTER episode just goes to show why this is on nearly everybody's top 5 best episodes list.
Questions: 1. What did Standards and Practices think about the implications of Goliath and Elisa's relationship by the end of the series?
2. Who came up with the brilliant idea of the access code being "ALONE"? That just fits so well. Thanks so much for these episode rambles!
Greg responds...
1. They weren't thinking ahead, just responding to what was before them. Our S&P executive on the first 65, Adrienne Bello, was very good at seeing the forest for the trees. She was rational and a pleasure to work with. The kiss was fine and earned after 65 episodes.
2. I don't remember. Me or Michael or Brynne or Lydia, I imagine.
Greg James writes...
Hi there
You have a lot of questions to answer already so I'll try to be brief but I doubt I'll succeed.
How did the Gargoyles series come to Disney? Did you aproach them?
Also, Disney has cancelled some fantastic shows in the past, what was the reason for them cancelling Gargoyles, and will it ever come back in series or movie form?
On www.imdb.com there is a Gargoyles movie with the date 1999 on it but no other info? Which one is this?
Lastly, I think we should storm the Disney execs and get them to release the Gargoyles series and movies on Special edition DVD'S! Sometimes I just can't understand their thinking!
Thanks
Greg responds...
I was already working for Disney as a development executive when my team and I created and developed the show.
As to why it was cancelled and whether it will come back...
I've answered that so many times. Did you even glance at the archives?
Briefly, it was cancelled because the syndication package was complete and the third season (on ABC) performed poorly in the ratings. And I do hope it will come back and am working conscientiously to bring it back.
I don't know what imdb.com is. So I have no response to that question.
"Storming" isn't such a good idea. But petitions wouldn't hurt. But I'll tell you, the best thing you can do is to attend the Gargoyles convention this June in Los Angeles. If we get a high enough attendance, we'll invite the Disney Execs and let them see first hand what a huge following the series has.
White writes...
Hello,
I koow a lot of people asked you wich were your fav episodes. You always answered you loved them all. I wonder, are there any episodes that dissapointed you, or that you didn't like as much. Perhaps just not feel like watching as oftenly as others. Maybe because of the drawings, maybe because of the music... I dunno.
I love your work and am a big fan too. I love to write stories and there's oftenly some parts that we like less, no matter how many times we re-write it. I guess it's the same with Gargoyles, it was verry general * magic / technologie / ufo * we're bound to have at least one that we don't like just as much.
Greg responds...
There isn't a single episode, not one, that I don't wish I could fix a few things here and there. And there are a few with really mediocre animation that I wish we could really overhaul. "Monsters" comes to mind, for example.
And there are a couple of story beats I wish we could have fixed in "Hound of Ulster" and "Grief" at least.
And I didn't produce "The Journey". I just wrote it. And there's a TON in that that I wish I could fix.
Plus I'd like to fix the other 12 Goliath Chronicles right off the map.
But generally, we made the show I wanted to make. Few complaints.
Todd Jensen writes...
Oh, and I'm glad that the "G" on Goliath's belt buckle was never used in the series. It certainly would have felt out of place in it. The mere thought of it gives me a bit of a shudder.
Greg responds...
Me too.
SEM writes...
Greg, Toon Disney has just started showing GOLIATH CHRONICLES, of which I recognize you only see "The Journey" as fully canon. In the end credits of "The Journey" I saw that NELVANA LIMITED was the animation studio for it and that surprsied me. I didn't think Nelvana was doing contract work at that point just their own stuff. Do you know any background as to how the two studios hooked up?
Greg responds...
Not really. I know that Lenora Hume who was at the time our head of international production had once worked for Nelvana. But I'm not even sure if she made the deal.
NZGargFan writes...
Q2:
I read somewhere that Elisa Maza was the cartoon drawing of actress Salli Richardson. Is this true? Were any of the other character's based on the actors/actresses voicing them? Thank you once again for your time.
Merry Xmas, and All the Best in 2001!
Greg responds...
It's kinda true.
We had a very similar drawing of the character "Elisa Chavez". Not different enough for anyone to notice in passing. But when Salli was cast, we changed her ethnic heritage from Hispanic to African/Native American to match Salli's ethnic heritage. Elisa Chavez became Elisa Maza. And we gave Salli's photos to our designers so that they could split the difference between our original Elisa and Salli. And in fact, back when Salli had long hair, there was a striking resemblance between her and her character.
People said the same thing about Xanatos and Jonathan Frakes. But that was coincidence. Xanatos was designed before Frakes was cast. Later, Jonathan would occasionally trim his beard to match Xanatos, for example when he was playing Riker's clone. Or when he did some publicity for us.
The only other time when designs were based on performers was in the episode "The Mirror". Although constrained by the basic look of our gargs, we tried to get a flavor of Keith David, Edward Asner, Jeff Bennett, Bill Fagerbakke and especially Thom Adcox Hernandez into the human versions of Goliath, Hudson, Brooklyn and especially Lex.
demona writes...
at the end of the show the credits come on and i see your name what was your job?
Greg responds...
I was one of the Supervising Producers. My specific responsibilities were largely over story. I was the Supervising Story Editor. I came up with most all of the springboards, and assigned them to our various story editors and writers. I then made sure all the premises, outlines and scripts were in good shape. I also wrote and story edited a little myself.
In addition to that primary responsibility, I supervised voice recordings. I gave notes on designs and storyboards. I co-supervised post-production, including film edits, sound mixes and video on-lines.
All this after, I led the development of the show in the first place. I was hardly a one-man band, but from inception to the end of the second season, I was the only guy who was there from beginning to end.
Kinda proud of that.
JENN writes...
Dear Greg, 12/27/2000
Why was the Gargoyles series canceled and why aren't their any reruns to be seen? Is there going to be a movie on the Disney's Gargoyles?
Jenn
Greg responds...
1. Long story. But the short answer is that it didn't perform well in the ratings in its third season.
2. Reruns do air on Toon Disney.
3. There is a live action Gargoyles movie in development at Touchstone Pictures. I hear they have a script that they like. But I haven't seen it.
Kalafarski writes...
Hunter's Moon has got to be my favorite episode, just because of it's scope, continuity, and character development. I just watched it again recently, but, and I might be crazy, I thought I noticed something weird. The beginning of Hunter's Moon Part I seems to go kind of out of its way to reintroduce the series. There's the specific dialogue of the gargs as defenders of the night, Broadway's eating habits, Elisa's comments to Matt (concerned citizens with wings), and it all seemed to briefly reintroduce the plot and the idea of gargoyles as protectors.
Again, I might be crazy and it doesn't mean anything. But was this reiteration/reintroduction of the plot intentional? Was Hunter's Moon meant to be the ep that would draw new viewers into a third season, or something to that effect? Or was it just meant to emphasize that the gargoyles have reached a very brief but happy, consistent time in their existence, just before they're revealed to the world?
Greg responds...
Mostly, the latter. That they thought they had reached a status quo with the world. NOW BANG!! We're gonna throw their lives into MAJOR CHAOS and change the situation forever.
But at one early point, we also thought that Hunter's Moon might be released as a direct to video movie. So we wanted to set up the basic situation for any new audience which the video brought in.
These two ideas worked in tandem seamlessly, so even after we knew we were just dividing the story into episodes, we still left a bit of an introductory feeling to part one.
: « First : « 100 : « 10 : Displaying #307 - #316 of 536 records. : 10 » : 100 » : Last » :