A Station Eight Fan Web Site
I picked up the comic today at my local shop. I couldn't find it for the life of me, but luckily my boyfriend was able to spot it. First comic book I've bought in the last 14 years! (I'm usually a manga woman)
The story was largely a word-for-word repeat of "The Journey". While it would have been nice to have some new material, I understand perfectly why it started there and didn't really mind the re-cap.
The cover art was really nice; it was odd but cute how Angela's outfit looked like Demona's. Nice thick cover too.
The inside art I had a lot of problems with. There were some decent panels, but it was really inconsistent and a lot of it looked just plain bad. In some spots it seemed as if the artist really hadn't taken the time to finish the art properly. I don't have a problem with the characters being restyled, this is a different meaning, but there's good restyling and bad restyling. I can't really say any character was restyled well.
Major issues with the art:
1. Many of the characters were stripped of what made them look dynamic. I would point out Castaway and Vinnie in particular. Xanatos looked like he had one too many in every frame he was in.
2. Goliath looked odd in many frames and the black outline of the shadows on his face and body looked terrible.
3. Elisa was very inconsistent and a few bad panels in particular are the one when Goliath first turns to stone. (It looks like the artist didn't even try in that one, I probably could have drawn it better and I'm not particularly high on the drawing talent scale) and the first panel of her in her dress (In which she disturbingly sports Pamela Anderson breasts and Lara Flynn Boyle arms *shudder*)
4. Matt, especially when he's with Capt. Chavez. What the heck happened to his face?! Matt is a favourite character for me too...
5. Lots of scruffy unneeded lines and hand and leg problems.
6. Brooklyn with wings in his armpits?! C'mon!
So, will I buy the next issue? Sure I will! (cross fingers art will improve) The problem is I'm not going to be able to convince anyone I know, previous knowledge of Gargoyles or not, to purchase something with such bad art. In fact, I was at the comic shop with friends, later at one friend's house we reviewed what we had purchased. Those who flipped through my Gargoyles comic (Most were at least moderate fans of the show) were interested in the story, but were pretty turned off by the artwork. No one in the group declared they wanted a copy of their own.
I really hope the comics continue, but unless the artwork improves, I think it will be hard to entice anyone beyond the diehards to buy.
Good luck to you, and thanks for the comic. I may gripe a lot about the art but I really would like to see you able to write more Gargoyles stories.
I'll just comment on 6, pointing out that we did that in the series too on occasion . Future Tense comes to mind.
Hello Greg, This is my first question here. I have been combing the archives and have been unable to find an answer.
My question refers to David Xanatos's Parents.
WE know Petros Xanatos is a "poor fisherman" from Maine. WE know that he has not approved of David in the past, and even at the end of "The Gathering Part 2" he does not appear to approve of him, but he does see promise in him for the way he defends Alexander.
I was wondering:
1) Was there a particular event which caused a rift between David Xanatos and his father Petros?
2) if there was, would you please give a brief overview of the event?
3) Is David Xanatos's Mother Officially Dead?
4) If she is, what was her name and how old was David Xanatos when she passed?
5) If she isnt dead, what is her name? And why havent we seen or heard of her?
6) In your opinion, what would Mrs. Petros Xanatos think of David Xanatos? His Corporation? His "empire"? His wife?
7) What are David Xanatos's feelings towards his Father, Petros?
Thank you Greg, SOme of these will probably be answered when you get to this (in 2008?). I appologize for writing in a shopping list format, but I thought it might be easier for you. Maybe I am the only one interested in this, but I would love to know More about Xanatos's backstory, hence the above questions. Thanks for Gargoyles, thanks for reading, and thanks for keeping in fun!
PS - The DVDs are great, Im getting the first issue of the comic (Nightwatch) tommorrow!
Let me begin by saying that I don't completely agree with your initial assessment of their relationship in the Gathering.
1. I think that David was always just outside of Petros' understanding.
2. I don't see it that way.
4. I'm not revealing those details now.
5. She's dead.
6. I'm not revealing that now.
7. David loves and respects his father for who he is. He hopes his father can love and respect him for who HE is.
Wow, last time I posted I think it was the Season II: Volume I DVD!! Anyways, I'm afraid I couldn't make it to the Gathering in 2006 . . . but hopefully, by the time you read this, I will have made to to Gatherings 2007 & 2008!!
Anyways, I got Issue 1 of Gargoyles the Comic yesterday (which was also my brother's B-Day, actually!), and boy does it feel good to personally own some new Gargoyles merchandise!! I ran into my local comic book store and immediately saw it on the NEW RELEASES shelf. Boy, that made me feel good!! Spent my 3.50 within five minutes, and I was reading the thing on my way home . . .
Even though "Nightwatch" was merely Part I of "The Journey," I still enjoyed reading every part of it. It was definitely written for newcomers as well as old fans, particularly those two pages of Goliath's monologue to Elisa. Well written indeed!
I loved reading Vinnie's last name (Grigori) and I'm surprised I couldn't remember Castaway calling him that in "The Journey." Anywho, I can't wait till August and October (next release dates, right?) where I hope to see more of Castaway's transformation from Jon Canmore -- that always intrigued me (In the sense how the "Hunter" line continues to exist no matter what).
I've heard some people were disgruntled by the artwork, but I particularly enjoyed it. It wasn't just like Gargoyles of 94-97, but hey it wasn't animated either! It was great, I enjoyed it, and I hope to see more in the future!!
PS - If I had known you visited the AniZona 3 this year, I SO would have visited!!
G2007 & G2008 haven't happened yet. Look how nearly caught up I am!!!!!
Well, we got issue #2 out in December. Look for #3 in February, and #4 in April.
You've said a few times that gargoyles probably don't have hollow bones, on the basis of their strength.. I just wanted to point out that all bones are hollow. Ours are full of marrow, birds' have marrow and also a big chamber for air. Depending where the bone is, it might have blood vessels in it too. I don't think you'd have to sacrifice strength to say gargoyles had hollow bones if you wanted to (or even bones full of lighter-than-air gas. Hey that's a good idea!) I think they're even starting to say some of the strongest dinosaurs had hollow bones too, but don't quote me on that.
Can't wait til the comic's out! I'm buying each one as they come out on Amazon :)
Well, I was I believe specifically responding to someone comparing Garg bones with bird bones (which, as I understand it, are fairly fragile). I know about marrow, etc.
Reading the archives it's apparent you believe Sevarius' theory that gargoyles absorb sunlight during the day while in stone form, reducing their need to eat like the huge beasts they are. I've wanted to point something out for years, but now you have to be really quick about asking questions before Ask Greg closes again.
The thing is.. unless I'm mistaken, Sevarius came into that theory because:
A. he had mutates to make, and gave them bat wings they needed to flap
B. he realized he couldn't keep 6-foot furries in the air on bat wings without them eating him out of house and home, and
C. he figured the answer was in how the real gargoyles did it.
When I heard him explain how he thought gargoyles got the energy to fly, I didn't believe it for a second. obviously he didn't do his homework, because gargoyles DON'T FLY, they don't -flap- at all, they glide effortlessly (more or less) on air currents, and that doesn't require flapping of wing muscles. So.. the sun-absorbing-stone thing isn't necessary (at least for the reason Sevarius presented. Of course now I've read that the reason you had gargoyles glide was so they'd require flying vehicles for kenner to build).
I realize that episode was kind of frought with bad science (electric eels produce electricity, so their genes mean you don't need as much food energy? ... and then whatever extra energy that presents they discharge as lightning bolts anyway?), and that it doesn't matter because it's just an animated drama and you wanted to give the mutates a cool weapon, but.. I dunno, I've been hearing you base your (mostly wonderful) theories on the assumption that sevarius was right, when he got such a major detail wrong in developing it.. it kind of bothers me.. I mean, if gargoyle babies need to absorb sunlight too, their parents should probably stop putting them in caves and buildings... maybe I'm just naturally distrustful of scientists. I mean, when sevarius said "unfortunately nothing like this exists in the animal kingdom so I can't go to the gene store and get some" my first thought was "that's because you pulled that answer out of your ass, gargoyles are more well-thought-out than that". I generally wonder when scientists put out an unprovable theory like that, how plausible they think it is that a person could come up with the correct answer to a mystery like that with limited evidence. No matter what they come up with, it's surely not very likely to be correct!
Wow, when did this comment turn into a ramble? Sorry, heh. Anyway, I trust what you say more than what Anton Sevarius says, and in my opinion you don't have to agree with him just because he's a scientist and you're not. the theories you come up with to explain gargoyle science don't seem to mesh very well with Sevarius, so... perhaps we ought to keep in mind that the gargoyles aren't aware of any of them anyway. Keep up the good work!
Look, Sevarius was intentionally leaving out one major source of information because Derek was his audience. He'd been studying Gargoyle DNA to create Thailog. I'm not endorsing Sevarius' theory because he said it out loud in a room with a "civilian". I'm endorsing aspects of it because the absorbtion of THERMAL energy (not solar energy specifically) through their organic stone makes sense to me. Elegant sense -- at least in my mind.
Another thought about Bonkers...
At one point here, you said
By the way, the Miranda/ Bonkers relationship was a clear precedent for Elisa/Goliath. (Doesn't that seem strange?)
Yes, that seems extremely strange, given some of the more salient aspects of the Elisa/Goliath relationship. Could you elaborate on what you meant? Are you just talking about pairing up a human female lead with a non-human male lead in crime-fighting stories?
Perhaps one day I'll have a bona-fide Gargoyles question to ask here.
Until then, JJ signing off.
P.S. Here's hoping the Gargoyles comics are thriving by the time you read this.
I'm hoping they're thriving too. It's hard for me to tell.
Anyway, yes, that's all I meant. A human female cop fighting crime with an inhuman (but very human) male "partner".
Nothing romantic going on between Bonkers and Miranda. Bonkers only has eyes for Fawn.
When you rambled about "The Gathering, Part I", you mentioned a scene that reminded you of the famous "Tears" scene from Blade Runner.
This reminded me of Bonkers, of all things. In particular, I thought of an episode entitled "Do Toons Dream of Animated Sheep?" or something to that effect, obviously a play on Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, the novel Blade Runner was loosely based upon,
My question is: Was someone thinking of Blade Runner during the creation and/or production of Bonkers? I realize that any link between Bonkers and Blade Runner would be tenuous at best.
However, if I recall correctly, many humans in Bonkers felt uncomfortable actually being around 'toons. Maybe the tenuous link I mentioned is the notion that humans would be afraid of powerful non-humans; in Bonkers' case, toons that can survive terrible explosions and the like. Also, from some of the Piquel episodes, it seems that humans created toons (remembr Piquel's daughter and the magic pencil?). Then, could there also be a "Frankenstein" angle in here, which could add meat to the aforementioned tenuous link?
Still, no-one was "retiring" toons, unless you count Who Framed Roger Rabbit? as part of the Bonkers universe, and think about Judge Doom....
I'm quite sure that no one would have named a Bonker's episode "Do Toons Dream of Animated Sheep?" and NOT be aware of both the movie Blade Runner and the Dick story it was based on.
I thought the DVD was coming out next year! What a pleasure to have found it in the DVD aisle. I loved the extras, get more in the next volume if you can.
Now the question came from something I noticed on the DVD. During the episode Vows, around when Goliath and the two Demonas are using, Demona kicks Goliath and blood comes out of his mouth as he reels back from the hit. I was quite shocked when I saw this, having read about the three moments in the series where you used blood.
Was this blood in there on purpose? Was it put in by the animation staff and S&P just missed it?
I honestly cannot remember. Sorry. It's just been so long...
I've never asked a question here before, probably because I didn't have the patience to wait, but I just wrote this analysis of Demona and Macbeth's link for the GFW website, and I wanted to see what you thought of it. Am I on the right track?
Curses and Prophecies, Fate and Freewill
(Warning: This essay contains minor spoilers for Harry Potter books five and six. It's mostly about Gargoyles, so if you don't read HP you'll still understand this, but if you plan to read them soon, you may wish to stop reading now.)
Like most people reading this, Gargoyles had a major impact on my life. For me, the best it ever got was City of Stone. In fact, I would say that CoS was one of the highlights of my childhood. I still distinctly remember, when I was twelve years old, reaching the end of Part Three, seeing Demona advancing on stone Elisa with a mace, and then the words "To be Concluded." "You're telling me I have to wait a whole day to see what happens? I'm supposed to go to school? Screw that, I want to know how Elisa survives!" I've thought long and hard about CoS, and the key to it is the relationship between Demona and Macbeth. In fact, I think the Weird Sisters' spellcasting is, from a classical sense, the climax of the entire story. On the surface, the spell seems simple enough: Demona and Macbeth are linked so they feel each others' pain, and they will live forever. If someone were to kill one of them, (s)he would die and then quickly come back to life. If one of them were to kill the other, though, then they would both die. As I say, it seems simple. After reading Greg Weisman's numerous responses on the subject, I began to think about whether there was more to it than meets the eye, and it slowly dawned on me that it was much more subtle, deep, and brilliant than I'd ever considered.
For years, Greg has received questions like "What would happen if Macbeth got his head cut off? Would it reattach itself? Would it grow back immediately?" He has always answered something like, "Well, that hasn't happened, has it?" At first glance, that seems like just a weak cop out, with Greg trying to avoid a question he has no good answer to. In fact, he seemed to get pretty flustered at the way people kept projecting Highlander concepts onto Macbeth, which was probably inevitable given that they're both immortal Scottish nobles. Unlike Highlander, though, there are no explicitly stated rules as to how immortality works; all we have to go on are the Weird Sisters' words, and they clearly are not the most trustworthy or forthcoming of people. Remember that Luna is supposedly a representative of fate, and then think about the fact that the spell doesn't really talk about "what if this or that happened," but rather "what will happen." The final words of Luna to Macbeth in the past were that "you both shall live, eternally linked, sharing each other's pain and anguish, with no release until one destroys the other. Only then shall both finally perish together." From that, it's clear that the Sisters are not interested in playing hypotheticals about all the different ways things could happen: they simply pronounced what will happen. Rather than the spell being simply a safeguard against their dying, it could instead be thought of as a prophecy declaring quite simply what will happen to them in the future.
It turns out that at no point in the entire series do we see anything happen to either Demona or Macbeth that would be sure to kill them. In fact, there are only two times it really seems likely that one of them could die. The first is when Macbeth was stabbed in the back by Canmore- painful, to be sure, but not necessarily lethal. Certainly there are those who have survived a poorly aimed stab. The second is when Elisa shot Demona with Macbeth's electric gun. That one seems even less likely, as about three gargoyles get shot with one of those things in any given Macbeth episode. One might make a case that the roller coaster collapse in The Reckoning was potentially lethal, but that falls under the old comicbook rule of "if you don't see the body, the guy's not dead," and the fact that we know Thailog survived as well makes it clear that magic was not necessary to live through that incident. So, we have established that we have never seen anything unquestionably fatal befall Demona or Macbeth. Furthermore, Greg has told us that no such thing has ever happened. Knowing that, it follows that it is meaningless to ask what if such a thing were to happen- it hasn't! Such speculation is what is known logically as a vacuous proof: If A occurs, then B occurs, given that A is an impossible event. Consider the statement "All pink elephants can fly," or, more precisely, "If A is a pink elephant, then A can fly." This statement is absolutely true, since every pink elephant in the world can fly- there are none, so anything you can say about them is true. A simpler way of thinking about it, though less rigorous, is that the statement "all pink elephants can fly" could never be disproved, since to do so one would have to find a pink elephant that could not fly, which can never be done. It is equally true that every pink elephant cannot fly. What this means, then, is there's no point asking "what if Demona or Macbeth were beheaded" if it cannot happen- it's true that if Macbeth were beheaded, he'd die, and it's true that if he were beheaded, he would be revived, and it's true that if he were beheaded, they'd both die, etc. All of those statements are true, because they are all based on an impossible hypothetical.
So let us then accept that neither of them has ever been beheaded. That still doesn't prove that neither of them could ever be beheaded, in which case it would still be relevant to ask what would happen. To answer that, it's worth thinking of the Weird Sisters' pronouncement as a prophecy rather than a spell. Suppose we think of the Macbeth/Demona connection in these terms: The spell allows them long life and they share each others' pain. Since they share pain, if one of them were killed, then the other would die too. Then we see that what Luna meant by saying that they would live on until one destroys the other is not that they are somehow magically protected from injury, but simply that she was predicting what would happen, as an avatar of fate. Such a prophecy brings Harry Potter to mind. When Harry was an infant, a prophecy was made which roughly stated that either he would kill Voldemort or Voldemort would kill him. That prophecy was overheard and found its way back to Voldemort, who immediately acted on it by attempting to kill Harry and fulfill it in a way favorable to him. In so doing, he nearly destroyed himself and gave Harry powers that would enable him to finish Voldemort once and for all. Moreover, he gave Harry a desire to end Voldemort. Harry lost his parents and knew first hand the sort of pain Voldemort inflicted on others, and so he would not rest until Voldemort was finished. On the other hand, Voldemort believed in the prophecy, and thus saw Harry as the greatest danger to him, so he would not rest until Harry was dead. So the result was that the two enemies were both determined to kill each other. As such, it was inevitable that one of them would eventually succeed, and the prophecy would be proven true. However, it was not true because of some incomprehensible hand of fate hovering over them, but rather it was based on simple extrapolations from the subjects' characters, and the fact that they knew about the prophecy (fittingly enough, Rowling has acknowledged Shakespeare's Macbeth as an inspiration for the prophecy).
The same can apply to Demona and Macbeth. At the time of the spell's casting, they were already great warriors, and with unlimited time to practice, they would become even greater. So it is highly unlikely that anyone else would kill them. Yet based on the events of their falling out, an intense hatred blossomed between them, one that would keep them hunting each other and make it inevitable that one would eventually kill the other. And since Macbeth heard the Weird Sisters' pronouncement, he believed that he could not die without killing Demona. It never would have even occurred to him to jump off a tall building and see what happened, because he believed that it would fail. Thus, the prophecy has the added bonus of controlling any possible suicidal tendencies Demona or Macbeth might develop by telling them it's impossible to kill themselves, since while Luna's side of their personality may simply be prophesying, Selene's needs them to survive for their future plans. Plus, even if Macbeth thought it would work, he probably would still feel the need to settle the score with Demona first. With all of that in mind, it is not hard for the avatar of fate to predict that one of them will end up killing the other, and the fact that she makes the prediction helps it to occur.
The question then is this: Is there a difference between saying something cannot happen and saying it will not happen? Suppose a man plans to stay home one day. Can we then say that it is impossible that he will get in his car and drive to another state that day? Let's say it's early in the morning, so he's got plenty of time. He's got a full tank of gas. He's not in Alaska or Hawaii, so there are connecting states he could go to. However, he has no desire at all to do so. Without that desire, it simply will not happen. We can then say that it is impossible. Now the obvious objection is that one never knows for sure what might happen, and if an emergency came up, he might have to leave the state that very day. For that reason, we distinguish between what can happen and what will happen- something can happen if it would happen provided the will to do it existed. If we knew for sure that the man would choose not to leave that day, it would then be fair to say that it was impossible for him to leave. Likewise, if we know with certainty that Demona and Macbeth will not die until one destroys the other, then we can say that it is impossible for anything else to happen.
This theory may seems very complicated at first, but if you take the time to think about it, it makes more sense than most other explanations out there. Rather than rely on vague magic powers and convoluted rules of "what if Demona were smashed in the day?" this theory eliminates all of the guesswork and gives an answer without the ambiguity; one that ultimately is simple and inevitable, yet firmly in the hands of the players. By thinking of Weird Sisters' spell as a prophecy, we can help resolve the fate vs. free will argument. Luna is an embodiment of fate, and so she is able to make predictions in the future, yet they are based simply on reading the characters of the subjects. While the prophecy that Demona and Macbeth will eventually die when one kills the other is a pronouncement of fate, it is only made true because of Demona's lack of trust and irresponsibility and Macbeth's lust for vengeance. The same could be said of the prophecy that Macbeth, Lulach, and Canmore would all become king- it wasn't hard to see that Duncan's paranoia would lead to him moving against Macbeth, a confrontation which would ultimately lead to Macbeth's ascension.
But what if you paint an elephant pink? (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Otherwise I DO think you're on the right track.
We all know that Golaith isn't stupid. But he is a bit naive (Sp?). So, after he awoke in 1994, we know he frequented the library to read. Now, I know he read stories, but did he study? We saw him reading up on wearwolves (Eye of the beholder), but did he read up on the middle ages? Did he study American (and even world) history?
When Goliath an Co. navigated the globe, Goliath seemed to not know much about each place they visitied, and Elisa knew more (or so it seemed to me, at least).
My question is really this: How much did Goliath study up on the world? Did he read history books, and the like?
Was he like Brooklyn and the trio who wanted to learn as much as they could, or did he take the new world in slowly?
P.S. Love your episode mini rambles on the DVD.
I'd say he read a lot -- when he had time. But there wasn't always a lot of time and there is SO MUCH TO KNOW!