A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives


: « First : « 250 : « 25 : Displaying #263 - #287 of 322 records. : 25 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

Vashkoda writes...

Hello again. These questions are about King Arthur. 1) Would he still be alive by 2158? 2) Would Arthur ever be recognized by world leaders as being the actual "King Arthur"? 3) Would Arthur ever rule Britain again? (he's supposed to be the once and future king, right?) 4) Would he ever rule anything? 4) Will he have an heir? 5) You previously mentioned that McBeth wouldn't "inherit" Excalibur from Arthur. Would McBeth ever even own Excalibur? 6) What's the largest number (rough estimate) of knights that you picture Arthur having, from the time he was awakened until he dies? 7) About how many of those knights do you think might be gargoyles? 8) Do you picture Griff staying at Arthur's side until death claims one of them?

(please forgive the obvious "monstly" typo in my previous post. I would really appreciate an answer to those questions)

Greg responds...

1. Maybe.

2. By some. Not all.

3. Once and Future King of something, all right.

4. That would be telling.

5. He might hold it once or twice.

6. I'm not good with numbers. (It's amazing I can count to fourteen over and over again.)

7. See 6.

8. Yep.

Response recorded on July 07, 2000

Bookmark Link

LSZ writes...

Wealth:

1) Who has more money, Macbeth or Xanatos?
2) How much money do the Canmores have?
3) Just how much did the Pack profit financially from their tv show?

Greg responds...

1. From a liquid standpoint, Xanatos. Macbeth may have some extremely valuable items, that would be worth a fortune if he was willing to part with them, but he's largely not...

2. An extremely large trust.

3. Quite a bit. But not as much as Xanatos did.

Response recorded on July 03, 2000

Bookmark Link

LSZ writes...

Did Macbeth ever encounter any Gargoyles besides Demona in the centuries between his first 'death' and his first encounter with Goliath's clan in the 20th century?

Greg responds...

maybe... maybe not....

Response recorded on June 30, 2000

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

A sort of "ramble-reply" to "Long Way Till Morning".

I'll have to confess that the only part of my "first time I saw it" response to this episode that I now remember (other than my delight at another medieval sequence - the 984 scenes in this case) was that I initially believed that Prince Malcolm would actually succumb to the Archmage's poisoned dart, and that this was how he'd died. (It was obvious that he must have died at some point before the 994 events in "Awakening", naturally, since Katharine's ruling Wyvern by then). So the fact that, in the succeeding flashbacks in this episode after the initial one, he does live in the end, surprised me.

I certainly agree with you on the Katharine-and-Malcolm scenes; I'd also felt on my own before reading that ramble that Malcolm was unwittingly planting the seeds of bigotry in his daughter when he used the gargoyles as a means of frightening her to be good. (Kind of reminds me of something I'd read once in either "Dear Abby" or "Ann Landers" about a policeman protesting the way that a few parents use police as "bogeymen" to scare their children into being good similarly). Indeed, Prince Malcolm's judgement really does come across in this episode as a bit on the poor side beyond Katharine; he's overly confident about the Archmage no longer being a threat, while Hudson correctly recognizes that the sorcerer could return for revenge - and indeed, the Archmage does.

Demona's ambitious streak in the 984 scene reminds me a bit of Lady Macbeth similarly urging Macbeth to dispose of Duncan in Shakespeare's play - which, when you stop to think over her future, is rather appropriate. (Indeed, in "Sanctuary", Demona actually becomes "Lady Macbeth" in a literal sense - and if you ask me, she fits the Shakespearean character far better than Gruoch ever did).

I must admit that I've always had a certain fondness for Hudson, and he certainly comes across as a sympathetic figure here. One can't help but admire his dogged persistence in keeping Goliath safe from Demona in the present day. He may think of himself as all washed up, but he still does his duty in protecting Goliath against a very determined adversary.

Two scenes I particularly like in this episode, both near the end: the sight of Demona slowly approaching through the graveyard in the distance, and the bit where she emerges from behind the stone angel - both positively creepy.

Greg responds...

This was a great story, I thought.

And I agree with your Demona/Lady Macbeth assessment. A lot of that was intentional.

Response recorded on June 29, 2000

Bookmark Link

Kevy Kakes writes...

In the episode 'Future Tense,' Demona is killed by Cyber-Xanatos, didn't Goliath know something was up then? Because clearly Xanatos is not MacBeth, and therefore cannot kill Demona...Puck knew Demona was immortal because of 'The Mirror,' did Puck just kinda forget, or was he not worried about the details of his little scheme. Just a little somethin' somethin' to ponder and answer for us, or just me

Greg responds...

I think that Goliath's head was fairly well turned upside down by all that had happened up to that point.

As for Puck, what in "The Mirror" gives you the impression that Puck/Owen knows about the Demona/Macbeth connection?

Response recorded on June 29, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bengali writes...

1.What happened to Grouchs mother?

Greg responds...

She died.

Response recorded on June 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bengali writes...

1.What happened to Macbeths mother?

Greg responds...

She died.

Response recorded on June 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bengali writes...

1.What is Demonas opinion of Bodhe?

Greg responds...

I'm sure she hates the sniveling coward.

Response recorded on June 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bengali writes...

1.What is Demonas opinion of Gruoch?

Greg responds...

1. I think they kept their distance from each other, generally. No animosity. But I don't see them as friendly. Of course, after it went bad, they hated each other.

Response recorded on June 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bengali writes...

1.What is Demonas opinion of Luoch?, after all, he was a major supporter of her clan and was outraged when Bodhe suggested that Macbeth betray Demonas clan.

Greg responds...

I think she liked him during those 17 golden years. Or at any rate, liked him well enough. Probably wouldn't admit it, but liked him.

After it all went bad, I think he became just another human to her. But by then she was fleeing Scotland. And he didn't have long for the world.

Response recorded on June 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Faieq Ali writes...

In Huter's moon part three, Demona was going to cast a spell which would wipe out all life except gargoyles. But wouldn't she kill herself because, she would have killed Macbeth and she would have perished as well or would Macbeth be the only human alive? Would Demona's disease or plague have reached the shores of Avalon and killed tom and the Princess?

Greg responds...

Both these points are debatable. I've answered the first one before. (Check the archives for a fuller answer.) It would depend on her mindset. It's possible her survival would have kept Macbeth alive.

I think it's unlikely that it would have hit Avalon.

Response recorded on June 21, 2000

Bookmark Link

Mike J. writes...

ENTER MACBETH

A series like "Gargoyles" is build (in my opinion) on the strength of its villians, and Gargoyles had some of the BEST villians going, especially Macbeth. Even Xanatos, in armor, didn't try to take on all the gargs at once (The Edge) much less succeed the way Macbeth does. Throw in the character's phenomanal personality and history, and you have one very engaging and dangerous guy.

As to the episode itself... I'm forced to agree it was the worst animation in season one. Did you notice in the final shot of Macbeth (in the tape Owen shows Xanatos) that he's got a mustache! Personally that bugged me more than the other probelems. At least keep the character's LOOK right! :)

My favorite part of the episode, amongst many cool moments: While Goliath battles Macbeth, Bronx frees Brooklyn and Lex by CRASHING BODILY STRAIGHT THROUGH THE ELECTRIFIED BARS! This time without the benefit of diveted current. This feat is so impressive it even shocks Brooklyn and Lex. Just look at their faces! I think their actually scared of him at this moment. In my mind, this established Bronx as being, pound for pound stronger than all the gargs, including Goliath.

My two cents... thanks for listening, er.. reading.

Greg responds...

Bronx is tough. And probably a bit underused in the series. One of the reasons I was determined to take him on the World Tour.

Macbeth is also tough. Resourceful, etc. Definitely wanted to establish that in his first appearance. He's a major kick-ass guy.

Both fun characters to write.

Response recorded on June 13, 2000

Bookmark Link

Robin Wynn writes...

Hey Greg,
I thought I'd just add my two cents on something I saw a couple of ppl ask.
The question was concerning the scene in Highnoon (i think that's the right ep.) when Demona and Elisa are fighting, and Macbeth is just sitting there not feeling anything. Your reply was that you lost track of the whole pain thing, (i think there was another explanation that you gave, but I cant' remember it right now) Well, I had always been under the impression, that in that scene, when Coldstone says "Well, this is diverting" (or something like that) And Macbeth replies, "You don't know the half of it" I always figured that that was what he was refering to. That he could feel the pain, and so it was even more 'diverting' that it seemed. But maybe he didn't react to it because he had seen teh pain coming, and so braced himself for the impact. And, maybe he was getting a tad bit of pleasure at watching Demona get her but whipped by Elisa. ;)

Anyway, that's my two cents worth..

Greg responds...

I do think I more or less said that as my "in-Universe" explanation, but at any rate , I like your interpretation.

Response recorded on April 04, 2000

Bookmark Link

Ambrosia writes...

Greg, as always, you are so delightful. I enjoyed reading your rambling about Awakening part 3 and all the little behind-the-scenes stuff you told us about. Ambrosia chuckles. Poor Brooklyn. I did wonder why he was always the one falling in and out of love. Curse you, Maggie.
No, I liked that we saw Demona ahead of time. I remember freaking out when I saw her alive, and yet it took nothing away from the scene where she is reunited with Goliath. And I think everyone knew that Xanatos was a "bad guy" although Demona was something of a shocker for me. I think it was a great dramatic moment.
I loved Goliath's line, "and please, don't fall off the building this time!" Unfortunately- and understand that it's hard for me to give criticism even though I know you invite it- but I liked Goliath much better in these 5 eps than anywhere else. He was thoughtful, calm and level-headed and I liked that in him. Later, though, he seemed to roar much more often and break things down before he thought about it carefully. I hafta say, Greg, this upset me a little. Consider Enter MacBeth. Goliath rampages throughout the whole ep tearing down MacBeth's home. Yeah, MacBeth kept hiding from him and he was frustrated, but the Goliath from Awakening might have found a better way to handle it. Which brings me to something else. Why was MacBeth running and not facing him in an honorable fight? MacBeth is reversed from my opinion of Goliath. I didn't like him at first (he seemed to be too much the stereotype of a villain) but as his depth grew, I liked him more.
Something that always bugged me about the scene when Hudson is named: He asks if the sky needs a name... the sky's name is sky! I'm going to have to be a human too and agree with Elisa: things do need names. I did love the scene with Brooklyn, Lexington and Tom. It warmed my heart to hear Lexington casually answer "We look different" to Tom's question, "How do you tell each other apart?" So cute! And even better to the question, "But what do you call each other?" was Brooklyn's, "friend."
I never gave a thought to part three not having any action. I loved it and, you're right: the characters themselves held my attention. Correction: my rapt attention.

Greg responds...

Erin (age 5 & 1/2) responds:

My favorite character is Tom. I liked the part when he said how do you tell each other apart. And I liked how he looked when he was little. And when he was a little boy.

Greg (age 36 & 1/2) responds:

Good point about Goliath. I always felt we had plenty of justification when Goliath was behaving badly. It came out of his lack of understanding of the twentieth century, his warrior up-bringing and occasional flares of temper and extreme frustration. The same thing happened in Act One of Awakening, Part Two. In "Enter Macbeth", Macbeth was intentionally goading him, which helped explain his increasing frustration and the resulting destruction. I don't think there was a better answer for Goliath on Macbeth's home turf. And once, Macbeth revealed his flawed plan to catch Demona, Goliath laughs, and the tables turn. And again, we have a Goliath who is responding with more thought -- and more success.

Macbeth's change takes place over time intentionally. He starts out bitter and borderline suicidal. And over the course of his multiple appearances, finds new reasons to carry on. Plus, of course, it never hurts to learn a characters background (as in "City of Stone") in order to generate more sympathy for him.

As for the name thing, I think YOU are the one splitting hairs. The sky is called the sky, the way Hudson is called a gargoyle. But to Hudson, you don't need to give the sky an additional name like, say, Fred. Hudson is used to being referred by his relationship to whomever he's talking to. Brother, Father, mentor, Leader, Friend, Old Friend, etc. The need to pinpoint him with an identity that isn't relative is human, not gargoyle. But even with all that, I'm human too, and I also feel the need to name -- it's addictive. I just like to point out the conceptual difference between traditional gargoyle customs and human changes.

Response recorded on April 01, 2000

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

A Macbeth question that I've been wondering for some time. In the Shakespeare play, he can only be killed by one who is not "of woman born". It occurred to me some time ago that this also holds true for the Gargoyles Macbeth, for the only one who can kill him is Demona, and she was hatched from a gargoyle egg, which counts just as well as a loophole as being from one's "mother's womb untimely ripped". Have you ever noticed this before?

Greg responds...

Yep. We talked about making a point about it in City of Stone, just as we discussed doing a Birnham Wood scene. But unfortunately all that "Shakespeare" stuff got cut for time (before we even went to script).

Response recorded on March 31, 2000

Bookmark Link

Bengali writes...

1.How did you plan for Macbeth and Demona to finally die?.

Greg responds...

Who says they do?

Response recorded on March 25, 2000

Bookmark Link

Puck40 writes...

Okay! Second question! Macbeth!!! He's got to be one of my favorite antagonists, because he's not truly evil at heart and such.

1) Would King Arthur and Macbeth ever crossed paths again? I'm like positive this answers yes so onto the next question.
2) I'm pretty much guessing that King Arthur isn't immortal. He's always captured my fancy because he was a regular man, who accomplished so much. With help from others and such but hey.... now to my question so its not off topic. Would Macbeth of ever inherited Excalibur?
(10 to 1 you don't give the answer to that. heheh)

Greg responds...

1. Sure.

2. Inherited? No. Not the word I'd use.

Response recorded on March 21, 2000

Bookmark Link

Pyro X writes...

Hey Greg!

Some Questions About MacBeth:

1) In "A light house in the sea of time," MacBeth says "The Scrolls of Merlin, Seeld by my own hand." Did he mean the He (MacBeth) seeled the scrolls?

2) If that is the case, then did MacBeth know Arthur and
Merlin, or were they before his time? In pendragon, he did seem kinda shocked that that was King Arthur, so it make for a conflict.

the Next two also relate to MacBeth...

3. Did Macbeth Know that a play was being written about him by Shakespear and did he ever "see" the play?

4. Did Demona ever see MacBeth, because she knew it was about Macbeth?

5. Did MacBeth MEET Shakespear?

Thanks man!

Greg responds...

1. No. (Admit it, no one ever reads the archives.) Macbeth was reading that. Meaning, he read that Merlin sealed it with HIS own hand.

2. So, no, they were before his time.

3. Yes. And yes.

4. I'm sure she's seen it.

5. Yes. (Yeah, no one ever reads the archives.)

Response recorded on March 21, 2000

Bookmark Link

Aris katsaris writes...

How much does Macbeth know about the Weird Sisters involvement in his life, and how does he feel about it? (for example he thinks that their overall involvement was beneficial or destructive to him, how would he react if he were to meet them, etc?)

How does Demona feel?

Greg responds...

Both Macbeth and Demona are remarkably ignorant of the Weird Sisters OVERALL involvement. Of course they know the Sisters were involved with them way back then. And I'd lay odds that they've seen the sisters once or twice since then. But my guess is that Mac's view is more neutral. Think of your own responses to the sisters after CITY, before their later appearances. I'm not sure he'd necessarily be happy to see them. But I don't think he'd regard them as enemies, or as huge manipulators of his life.

Demona hates their guts. But not for rational reasons. They're just someone else to blame for her problems.

Response recorded on March 17, 2000

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

Just read your reply to my comments on your "Hercules" episode and your rambling in general about Theseus and the Bastard role. I very much enjoyed reading it.

I found your comments on Mary Stewart and Mary Renault interesting, since I recently read "The King Must Die" after you spoke highly of it in the Station 8 Comment Room a while back, very much enjoyed it, and found that it reminded me in its general tone of Stewart's Merlin trilogy, in that it similarly successfully produced a version of the legend that was rationalized and yet retained a strong sense of wonder and awe. I could actually believe with Renault's Theseus, as with Stewart's Arthur and Merlin, that these events really could have inspired a legend that would last for thousands of years.

BTW, I found your comments on Luach's parentage interesting, since I was aware of how, in actual history, he was supposed to be Gillecomgain's son. I personally couldn't help but think that, if Gillecomgain actually was Luach's father, then it was ironic that Luach was the one supporting Demona in Macbeth's council in 1057.

Greg responds...

Me too. I loved that irony. It was impossible to play all of it in City of Stone. The thing was so crowded as it was. And the whole implication of adultery between Macbeth and Gruoch had to be so sub-surface as to be non-existence. So for the general audience, I allowed the simple interpretation that Macbeth was Luach's father and that he was conceived and born AFTER Mac and Gru were wed.

But I very consciously didn't contradict the actual history or the GOSSIP. So anyone who did more research would get a little added bonus.

Working stories on multiple levels gives me pleasure. And, I believe, makes for better television.

Response recorded on March 11, 2000

Bookmark Link

Aris Katsaris writes...

In real history, Luach was the son not of Macbeth, but of Gillecomgain. Is this also true in the gargoyles universe? And if so, was Macbeth aware of it? (And if yes, very cool of him, don't you think? :-)

Greg responds...

As I'm sure I've said before, in the stories I've read, Luach (or Lulach) was during Gilcomgain's lifetime rumored to be the son of Macbeth. Once Macbeth adopted the boy, the gossip wind shifted, and everyone became convinced that Lulach was really Gilcomgain's.

Sometimes you just can't win.

In the Gargoyles Universe I left it intentionally ambiguous for that reason.

Response recorded on March 11, 2000

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

In "City of Stone", Bodhe advised Macbeth to abandon his alliance with Demona so as to short-circuit Canmore's propaganda campaign, i.e., the English had, according to Bodhe, only invaded Scotland to wipe out Demona's clan and were only fighting Macbeth because of his alliance with them, so that if Macbeth cut off his alliance with the gargs, Canmore would be left without an army. In your opinion, how accurate was his assessment of the situation? I noticed that even after Demona and the other gargoyles left, the English still went ahead and attacked Castle Moray - and they evidently continued to fight for Canmore against Luach even after Demona's clan was wiped out. So, was Bodhe mistaken about the English motives?

Greg responds...

I think almost without exception, Bodhe was a cowardly idiot.

I just like to think he died a good death defending his grandson.

Response recorded on March 09, 2000

Bookmark Link

Chapter IX: "Enter Macbeth"

Another episode by episode ramble. Feedback encouraged.

So here's where all that great continuity got us in major trouble.

The episodes were all designed to play in a certain order. But I didn't tell my bosses that in advance. I know it sounds sneaky, but it wasn't really. We wrote the darn things and sent them off in order. It never occured to me they wouldn't be able to come back and air in order. I mean, how could a newer episode get the jump on an older one? How could an older episode not be ready before a newer one? Then the footage came back on "Enter Macbeth".

This was the first episode not animated in Japan. And immediately we knew we were in trouble. I'm not talking about the version you all have seen. The one that aired. I'm talking about stuff you never saw. Much of the original footage we got was unusable. This wasn't about just calling retakes. This wasn't about us bitching how "Thrill" wasn't as well animated as "Awakening". This was a major disaster. So my bosses said: "Air the next one." And I responded, "We can't."

And not just because they were all designed to air in order. It was a horrible coincidence, but this episode, this episode that was unairable, was a tentpole. Yeah, if Thrill or Temptation had been reordered it would have been sad. Same with "The Edge" and "Long Way To Morning". But big deal, right? Better to get a new episode out and not make the audience deal with repeats this early in the season. (Remember, we had aired our first five episodes in one week. This was only week five. In those days, week five was considered way too early in the year for reruns.)

But this was the follow-up to Elisa's injury. It was important to us that we continue our policy of "repercussions". We put her on crutches to show that a gunshot wasn't something that was solved in twenty-two minutes. This was an ongoing recovery. If you pulled the crutches out by airing Edge next, you blew out the sense of repercussions.

But that wasn't the clincher. Of course, the clincher was the Clock Tower. This was the episode where the Gargs were "banished" from the castle and moved to the Clock Tower. That was a major shift. If we cut straight to Edge, the audience would be lost. Fortunately, Gary was convinced. In a way, I was lucky that our first crisis of order came on such a pivotal "tentpole" episode. We couldn't reorder these. So we went with reruns. But it was a lesson learned. And it would effect the way we approached the second season.

But meanwhile, we had the problem at hand. We couldn't reanimate the entire show. So we picked shots to redo judiciously. There are still some awful looking scenes. When Goliath says, "How Dare You?!" to Elisa, he looks like an Animaniacs parody of Goliath. And that sarcophogus/iron maiden thing that Goliath follows Macbeth through looks like a prop out of CHIP N DALE'S RESCUE RANGERS. (Another perfectly good series, but with a slightly different art style, if you know what I mean.) Or how about the GIANT remote that Macbeth pulls from his duster in order to summon his ship? "Enter Macbeth" is still, as aired, the worst looking episode of the first season. And that really killed Frank and I, because we both really loved this story. We were sure that the bad animation would kill any interest in Macbeth. The fact that generally, the character did catch hold of fandom's collective imagination is a true testament to the work of Steve Perry, Michael Reaves, John Rhys-Davies and Jamie Thomason. And, oh, yes... William Shakespeare.

The weak picture forced us to use a lot of little tricks to get a final cut. One thing we did, which I regret, is reuse dialogue. Elisa says "You aren't safe here" like three times. And it isn't three different takes. It's just the exact same take reprinted and reused. Lex & Brooklyn also reuse lines to get Bronx to find Goliath. That sort of thing drives me nuts.

There is one really nice moment in the animation. When Macbeth chooses his sword off the wall, the reflection effect is quite sweet. And I also like the down shot of Bronx running right down the middle of Broadway (the street not the gargoyle). I also love how Goliath makes no attempt to hide. That really spoke to the Gargoyles attitude about living among humans. They wouldn't hold press conferences, but they would not cower.

Anyway, we ran reruns. Awakenings. And obviously all five episodes on five consecutive weeks. That might have been a good thing for people who had heard about the show by word of mouth in week two or later and needed to catch up. But for anyone who had been following the show from its premiere, it was a long time to wait for new episodes. By the time we came back, so much time had passed since "Deadly Force" that we felt the need to put a "Previously on Gargoyles" at the head of the episode. Another trick I cribbed from HILL STREET BLUES. Cartoons rarely did that sort of thing. Sure multi-parters had to. But single episodes... For some reason, it made me feel very grown up. (Which only proves how immature I really am.) The "Previously" also allowed us to cut 30 more seconds of bad looking footage out of the episode. That little bonus was something I'd remember for season two as well.

HOME

As we pushed guns in the previous episode, this one is laced with the imagery and language of home. What is it? What makes it? What price is one willing to pay to keep or secure it? There are four homes depicted. Well, really five. The Gargoyles' castle. Xanatos' prison. Macbeth's mansion. The Clock Tower. And the Castle again, once it is reclaimed by Xanatos and thus becomes a very, very different place.

I tried to make sure, as much as possible, that every episode had that kind of underlying theme. (I recently tried with very limited success to do the same thing in MAX STEEL. Someone asked me once, why the one-word S-Titles for all the Max Steel episodes. They were my attempt to make me and the writers focus on the theme of each story.)

And how do all these homes turn out? Macbeth is so obsessed that he loses his home to a fire. Xanatos finally gets out of prison. (Not on Halloween by the way, or that would make the dates depicted in Double Jeopardy innacurate. Obviously, Halloween was circled on his calendar because the guy just loves Halloween. And after all, Owen specifically says in a LATER scene that Xanatos has one week left before he gets out. The wall calendar had shown only a few days.) The Gargoyles lose the castle, gain the clock tower, but realize that home is literally where the heart is. And Xanatos... well all other concerns of Grimorum and gargoyle of destruction and competition pale next to the simple pleasure of being back home.

And how many of you were suprised that the Gargoyles lost the castle? That was supposed to be another pretty shocking development. I mean, sure, Batman might lose the Batcave for an episode, but for 56 episodes? When Goliath said "We'll be back to claim that which is ours" at the end, did most of you think he'd be back next week? Next month? By the time, the gang finally did return in chapter 65, did anyone still remember Goliath's vow?

MACBETH

I've discussed this before, but Macbeth's origins (at least in terms of our series) were (ironically) an early attempt to play the notion of THE HUNTER. I was looking for someone human who could physically take on the Gargoyles as prey. Someone smart, with an agenda. We actually started with the notion of trying to create our own KRAVEN THE HUNTER type character. But it quickly moved in its own direction. Frankly, away from Kraven and more toward BATMAN. In those days, we were constantly being told that we would be accused of ripping off Batman. So Frank, Michael and I decided to create a villain who, at least in M.O. would be our Batman.

I had a semi-separate idea to add a human to the cast who was from Goliath's time. Thus creating a good thematic nemesis or opposite for him. (The key to creating a good villain, in my opinion.) But this villain would have lived through the centuries. So that he was familiar with the very latest in technology. This dove-tailed with our anti-Batman, and was also exactly how we viewed Demona. So it soon became clear to Michael and I that the two characters must be connected in some way. That suggested that he shouldn't merely be 1000 years old. He should be Scottish as well. All that was left was a name. And given my love of Shakespeare, I'm surprised it took me so long to figure it out. Our nemesis was Macbeth himself. An immortal Scottish King. What Scottish King was more immortal than Macbeth? More mortal too for that matter.

This was the beginning of countless Shakespearian references that I would either slide (or force) into the show, or that the writers would stick in knowing I was a sucker for them. And I love the little exchange between Lex & Brooklyn...

[dialogue approximate]
LEX: "Wasn't "Macbeth" the name of that play by that new writer Shakespeare that Goliath was talking about?"

BROOKLYN: "Have you read it?"

LEX: "No. Have you?"

BROOKLYN: "No. But maybe we should."

This was my little way of trying to encourage our viewers to read or at least learn about the play. If they wanted to know who Macbeth was, it wouldn't hurt to go to the primary source.

And at the time, Shakespeare was my primary source for Macbeth. This was long before Tuppence Macintyre and Monique Beatty did all their research for me for "City of Stone". Back then, the only Macbeth I knew about was Shakespeare's.

We gave him a sense of honor, but a twisted one. And we gave him a very interesting motivation. I didn't yet know the particulars, but this guy was after Demona in a major way. He had stained glass windows in his home depicting the two of them. He was the man who named her. It was all pretty intriguing stuff to me. I love the exchange between him and Goliath. Goliath is a pawn. Mac wants the queen and believes that endangering Goliath is the surest way to ensnare Demona. And how does Goliath respond? By gum, if he doesn't laugh -- MANIACALLY!! And watch how the tables turn. Macbeth is not infallible and suddenly Goliath has him on the defensive. Goliath even uses a MACE!! Great stuff.

Incidentally, we had in the script described Macbeth as wearing a thin layer of exo-armor. And Goliath was supposed to dig his claws into it. Macbeth would escape by detaching from the armor. Instead, the artists did the bit with the duster coat. But I remembered the claws in armor thing and eventually found a place for it... in HUNTER'S MOON, PART THREE.

Finally, watching the episode tonight, my five year old daughter said she spotted the Mona Lisa on Macbeth's wall. I didn't see it. But I believe her. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if that was the original. Too bad about that fire.


Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

Thanks for answering my "religion" question. Actually, there are two human characters in the series that you left out whom I'm curious about:

a) Macbeth
b) King Arthur

What (in your opinion) are their current religions? In particular, do you see the King Arthur of the Gargoyles Universe as a Christian (as per the traditional legends) or something else?

Greg responds...

I think Macbeth has been many things over the years. Obviously, he started as a Catholic. Now, I figure he's fairly omnireligious.

As for Arthur, I think he's a Christian. Officially, something of a Catholic... He probably hasn't had cause or opportunity to change.

Response recorded on March 03, 2000

Bookmark Link

LSZ writes...

What was Macbeth's exact relationship to Shakespeare?

Greg responds...

They were drinking buddies.

Response recorded on February 20, 2000


: « First : « 250 : « 25 : Displaying #263 - #287 of 322 records. : 25 » : Last » :