A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Animation

Archive Index


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #129 - #153 of 188 records. : 25 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

Sapphire writes...

Wouldn't it be cool if gargoyles was done in amine?

Greg responds...

Do you mean "anime" or maybe "mime"?

And what exactly do you mean by that? Do you want bigger eyes?

Response recorded on March 13, 2001

Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

Thanks for giving my comments about AWAKENING (the portrayel of the Trio and the cut prologue) a fair explanation. (I'm glad to hear that you would've preferred the prologue, too -- maybe I just wanted to know it wasn't cut for quality reasons.)

I understand the usage of the Next Time and Last Time segments better now, too. Though I have to ask: Is the quantity of bad animation you got back on GARGOYLES typical of an animated show?

Greg responds...

No. Actually, on the whole, I'd say Gargoyles got much BETTER animation than the average tv show. For starters, many of our episodes were done by Walt Disney TV Animation Japan. Those guys kicked ass.

And we also did very well by our Korean sub-contractors. Not every time. But often enough that I don't want to complain. Well, to be honest, there were always things to complain about. From every studio. That's the nature of tv production. But we got pretty lucky over all.

Response recorded on March 08, 2001

Bookmark Link

Jim R. writes...

I am curious. You were an "executive producer" for Gargoyles, right? What does an executive producer do for an animated series? Did you work on any of the artwork? Any of the storyline? The voice actors?

What is it that an executive producer does? In a nutshell, of course, I know you're busy...

Greg responds...

Haven't I answered this a hundred times?

No. In those days, Disney TV Animation did not give out "Executive Producer" credits. I started as a "Co-Producer". Then became a "Producer". Then "Supervising Producer". Through all these title changes, my duties never changed. [Which is to say, that a title doesn't necessarily give a consistent read on an individuals responsibilities or efforts. So I can't speak for all Executive or even Supervising Producers. I can just tell you what I did.]

I came up with all 66 story springboards and supervised the writing staff. Though I didn't have the title, since my producer credit rendered it redundant, I was the Supervising Story Editor for the series. I personally wrote and story edited "The Journey". Though I did not produce the Goliath Chronicles episodes, including Journey.

I also supervised all recording sessions with the actors. I voice directed one episode (VENDETTAS).

I don't draw, but I did give notes and approvals on all designs and storyboards. I also supervised post-production. Called retakes, supervised final edits, mixes, on-lines, etc.

I didn't do any of this stuff alone. But along with Frank Paur, I was the final word on everything.

Response recorded on March 02, 2001

Bookmark Link

Pyro X writes...

Hello;

Generally, what does an Executive producer do, as in preparing a show like Gargoyles?

Greg responds...

Well, I wasn't an Executive Producer. Gargoyles didn't have any executive producers.

I was a Supervising Producer. I came up with all the springboards, reviewed all premises, outlines, scripts. Supervised Voice Recordings, edit sessions, sound mixes and on-line sessions. Gave notes on all designs, storyboards and animation. I was a busy boy.

Response recorded on February 15, 2001

Bookmark Link

melcelestial@hotmail.com writes...

Seriously, how'd you get noticed by the world of your high-qualitied animations, A-Z starting from college? What inspired you to start the career as a cartoon animator? Do prefer 2D or 3D? What gave you the inspirations to start a cartoon????????

Greg responds...

O.K. First off, I'm NOT an animator. I'm a writer. And largely, at the time, I followed the work and the opportunities. I got a job in animation and followed that course until it eventually led me to create Gargoyles. But it was in that order, not the other way around.

As for 2D and 3D, I have no absolute preference. I like good animation, no matter the format. I like well-told stories. Some subject matter works better in 2D, some in 3D. And I like doing shows where the content and the format are working together as opposed to at odds.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

SEM writes...

Given what you learned from STARSHIP TROOPERS and MAX STEEL -- if you were told that you could do GARGOYLES again but only if it could be done in 3D Animation would you? Do you think GARGOYLES could even work in 3D?

(I know it's a hypothetical, but this was the main selling point that got VOLTRON back on the air after 10 years as VOLTRON: THE THIRD DIMENSION for 26 episodes.)

BTW for the person who asked what program MAX STEEL is rendered in -- I know Netter Digital (now defunct) used Lightwave, and that Foundation Imaging used Lightwave for season one (as well as for the work they did on STARSHIP TROOPERS). I presume its still being used for the current season but not sure. Lightwave's major competitor is a program called Maya.

Sorry if I wandered too far off topic, Greg, but since I knew this came up thought I'd answer it for the archives.

Greg responds...

Yes, I think Gargoyles could work in 3-D. And if that was my only option for bringing it back, I'd jump at the chance.

If I had multiple options, however, I'd use the animation style that best suited the subject matter of the series.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

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?

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Baal writes...

Had to ask this and I didn't see it in the archives, so here goes:

1.What companies did the the animations for the two episodes, Temptation and Future Tense? I was wondering because they did an awful good job considering some of the animation I've seen on some other nameless television shows.

2.(This may have been asked already but I don't think so.)If you had a chance to get the series going again, would you use CGI or the old animation style if you could. I guess it kinda depends on what is actually more expensive. I was always a little partial to the regular animation myself.

Greg responds...

1. This is from memory, but I'm fairly certain both of those were done by Walt Disney TV Animation Japan. It says on the episode credits, though.

2. Largely it would depend on what I could sell the higher-ups on. I'd do either if either were the only option. If given my choice (which rarely happens in this business), said choice would be based on issues of content.

Response recorded on February 01, 2001

Bookmark Link

Jim R. writes...

Did you ever work with computer animation when developing the Gargoyles series? I know you did some stuff for Toy Story, right? Toy Story was made by Pixar which is operated under Steve Jobs, who is also CEO of Apple. Being how I am a die-hard Macintosh person, (but do own some PCs too), do you use Macs if you've done any computer animation for anything? Mac is the best for that sort of thing.

Greg responds...

Uh, I never worked on Toy Story. I worked on Buzz Lightyear of Star Command, but that was animated traditionally with cels.

I use Macs myself. I have iMacs here and at home and some other kind of Apple something or other at my Disney office.

I have worked on some computer animated shows. Not Gargoyles, that was strictly cell. But Max Steel and Starship Troopers. But I don't personally animate anything. And I have no idea what kind of machines the animators of those series were using.

Response recorded on January 31, 2001

Bookmark Link

LSZ writes...

In general and on average, how long does it take to complete a whole season of say, 13 episodes of a half-hour animated show?

Greg responds...

A year.

We wrote the first season of Gargoyles (13 episodes) in ten months. Every other step in production had more or less that same ten months on a cascading schedule.

We wrote the second season of Gargoyles (52 episodes) in ten months. Every other step in production had more or less that same ten months on a cascading schedule. Obviously we had a MUCH bigger staff the second year. But we still had a harder time keeping up.

Response recorded on January 17, 2001

Bookmark Link

Wesley McGee (for whom Toon Disney doesn't air nightly) writes...

When you were talking about the studio that animated "Enter Macbeth", it wasn't Startoons was it? It did have that 'unique style' of theirs. Anyway I did not like Startoon's ANIMANIACS eps. (I liked the style of TMS when they did Animaniacs, who incidently are based in Japan.)

Anyway, which company -ies did the animation for Gargoyles.

Greg responds...

Most of our best animated episodes were animated by Walt Disney Television Japan. It's been so many years, that I don't remember the names of all the other companies. I have a vague recollection that Han Ho in Korea did the City of Stone four parter. But I'm not even 100% sure of that.

I don't remember who did Enter Macbeth specifically. I think it was a studio in Korea. But again, it's just been too long.

Response recorded on December 22, 2000

Bookmark Link

Demona Taina writes...

Heya, Greg!

I was wondering what happened to all the unseen footage of the show Gargoyles. Do you have it? If not, who does? Somebody has to have them! :P

To animate all those scenes just to have them cut and thrown in the trash? No, that can't be..

Thanks! :)

Greg responds...

What unseen footage?

Almost everything is used. We time shows to within a minute of their air lengths, before we send them to be animated. And that minute that we wind up cutting is like a frame here or three frames there.

It's not live action where entire scenes wind up on the cutting room floor.

Response recorded on December 22, 2000

Bookmark Link

Peter C. Roblejo, MD writes...

Hello greg. Just thought I'd respond for the third(and last) time. I'd like to thank you for your "advice." It was, of course, a lead, so I won't complain, especially given the legal position you claim to be in. It's just a terrible....truly terrible...shame that I wasn't able to impress you due to my 'prrofreading" errors. It could simply be that in my haste to respond to you, I clicked that little old button just a bit too fast. Or, it could be that I am even less impressed with your merits and capacity than you are with mine. I pore over proofreads when I deem it worth the effort. In this case, I obviously did not. In retrospect, I suppose my sub-optimal efforts were justified. Thanks again and good luck to you!
P.S. No need to write back. I can't check back. I've got other plans.

Greg responds...

Dr. Roblejo,

You seem to be upset with me. Which I don't really get. You said you won't be checking back, but just in case...

And at any rate, this info might be useful to someone else.

You write about the legal position that I "claim" to be in, as if perhaps I'm kidding about that. I'm not. I'm a creative writer, whose livelihood is based on me constantly coming up with new ideas, stories, etc. I've already been through two lawsuits with Disney, so believe me, I'm not exagerating the legal risk I take should I break policy and start reading other people's original work now. So I don't take that risk. I realize that the downside of this is that I can't mentor strangers creatively. But I teach and I try to bring new writers into the business, so hopefully I'm giving SOMETHING back.

You're clearly not happy that I picked on your proofreading skills, but I was trying to make a point that's valuable to everyone here. Like most of you, the internet makes me lazy about proofing. There are probably some proofreading errors in this message as well as all my other responses to you. I'm not going to try and justify that; I was simply pointing out that given what you were trying to accomplish, it's DEATH to have proofing errors. If you're asking for career help and advice from someone (no matter what you think of that persons "merits and capacity") then you need to "deem it worth the effort", or else why should they?

The fact that you aren't impressed with my merits and capacity (capacity?) is fine. I can't win 'em all. Though I'm not sure why you asked me for help in the first place. I mean why would you want help from someone you don't respect? Should I infer that you were just being opportunistic?

At any rate, as I tried to indicate, I'm not sure how much help I could have been anyway. I won't read your work "over the transom". And I don't live in New York and have no connections there. I therefore gave you the best advice I could under the circumstances. Proofread carefully. Try to find an agent. And pitch to networks that air stuff that is similar too, but not the same as, what you've got.

Given the forum, I'm not sure what else you expected to get out of our exchange.

However, if I was rude in any way, I do apologize. That was certainly not my intent. Good luck with your work.

Greg Weisman

Response recorded on November 15, 2000

Bookmark Link

Fontaine writes...

I'm writing a paper on computer animation and special fx and I was wondering if you could describe the process by which you create the animation...like what programs do you use, how much time it takes, etc.

Greg responds...

I know nothing technically about how computer animation is made -- regarding things like programs. Sorry. You might try asking Roy Sato in the comment room. (Sorry, Roy.)

Response recorded on November 13, 2000

Bookmark Link

Peter C. Roblejo, MD writes...

Dear Greg-
To respond to your response: you're not being snide, just honest. I live in the New York City Metro area..within 40 minutes in fact. As for prrofreading, as a writer, editing and proofreading is essential in every way. I assure you my material has been edited several times and is imminently to be published by 3 separate online web companies. Of course, the chances are small, yet I would defer to your wisdom and experience in this field for a way to crack it! I believe this has serious possibilities because the material is different from what's out there, and yet very much within the genre. Can you help? Thanks for your first response. (I'm being presumptuous but here's my e-mail just in case: kevlarpcr@aol.com)

Greg responds...

I can't help. Or rather, as I state in the rules for this site, I won't. Because if I help you, I'd have to offer the same help to everyone -- and I'd just be overwhelmed.

In addition, I can't read your stuff, because it's original, and that would put me at legal risk. And I can't recommend what I haven't read. So you see the bind.

[And of course, the reason I made the proofreading comment was because there were proofreading errors in your last post, which didn't exactly impress me. You also misspelled "prrofreading" in this post, but I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that was a joke.]

I am willing however to make general recommendations. Unfortunately, though I know there is some animation production in NYC, I don't live there and I don't know much about it. I guess my first recommendation is to get an agent to represent your work. Then depending on what the material is -- and, no, I don't want to know -- you should pitch that material to the network that airs stuff that's (a) similar to but (b) not duplicated by your stuff.

Good luck.

Response recorded on November 13, 2000

Bookmark Link

Peter C. Roblejo, MD writes...

Dear Mr. Weisman,
I am home sick today and for the first time was exposed to the Max Steel show. To see an entertainment medium of this kind on regular TV was amazing. It also occurred to me that this may afford me the opportunity I've been looking for to further my own ideas: I am an author, published through the internet. My chronicles deal with characters similar to those on Max Steel, and although this is not a request for employment, advice on how to penetrate the industry would be most appreciated. I feel my ideas could inject some fresh variety to this action genre. In fact, I think it was made for it. Please help.

Greg responds...

Well, Peter, not to be snide, but my first bit of advice is to proofread. (And just cuz I don't, doesn't mean you shouldn't.)

After that, there's no quick or surefire way to get into the biz. Where do you live? (I mean what city. I'm not interested in your address.) If you're not living in L.A. (or maybe New York) than you're clearly not serious about being part of the animation business. People with established careers, like Cary Bates for example, can afford to move to the city or town of their choice and communicate via e-mail, etc. But newbies need to be where the action is. I'm sure there are exceptions. But not many.

Response recorded on November 09, 2000

Bookmark Link

Michael W. writes...

Hi! I was wondering if it is possible to ever see layouts/sketches/blueprints? of Xanatos' building with the gargoyle's castle in it. I am really interested in not only the Gargoyles show but also the incredible settings. I really enjoyed the creativity in the design of the earlier episode's airship. I really enjoy the show and feel that is one of the most original series ever to be produced. I appreciate that you have taken the time to read my question and please answer it.

Greg responds...

Layouts must exist in the Disney Archives.

I doubt actual blueprints were ever made. I don't think we had time for that.

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Frank writes...

Why doesn't Elisa change her clothes?

Greg responds...

She has 102 black t-shirts. She changes three times a day.

Or were you looking for a real world answer? We couldn't afford to redesign her every episode. And the more different looks we gave her, the more we were inviting animation errors.

(No one mentions why Owen seems to wear the same suit every day?)

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

aXvXia writes...

*hope you enjoyed the gathering cause i couldnt go! poop!*

I know what you're thinking, mr. weisman: "NOo! Not another August 7th post! I'm just one man, dammit!" i totally sympathize with you, but i just have to ask:

**How much money (on average) would you say it took to produce an average episode of gargoyles with the normal character cast having speaking parts??
I just wanted to know, cause i know alot of people who would, if they knew where to send it, give money to see GARGOYLES back on the air.

Thanks for your time and efforts Mr.Weisman, and if there is anything you need for me to do for you (posts,etc) just say so in your answering post.

Greg responds...

You mean just the voice recording or the entire episode?

If the latter, it cost just under half a million dollars per episode.

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Demona Taina writes...

Well, I was reading through the "Questions Answered Archive." Somebody noticed the anklet drawn on one of the gargoyles in "City of Stone 4." I can't remember who posted it, but whoever did, he/she was right.

One of the gargoyles had an anklet on his right ankle when the sky was in flames. And guess who it was? [drum roll] It was Goliath! He was watching the show in the sky, and there it is, an anklet like Demona's on his ankle. Well, this isn't the only mistake.

They once drew Goliath in Angela's clothes, how about that? "Ill Met by Moonlight." When Angela, Gabriel and Goliath collapse, you can see it.

Once, they made Elisa's hair slide back in "Monsters."

They forgot to draw Goliath's tail in "Walkabout."

They drew a shirt like Demona's on Angela in "Mark of the Panther."

They've forgotten to draw Goliath's underwear countless of times. They've forgotten to color Hudson's shirt. They've colored Goliath's wings wrong.. and I think they DID draw a mustache on Macbeth in "Enter Macbeth."

Just the little details of life. [chuckles] My question is.. how can those animators mess up so much? I mean, I've drawn the characters plenty of times, and I don't make mistakes like those. Even when I color them.

I understand that they have to color thousands of drawings but.. well, it's a little unbelievable. What do you think of all this?

Thank you for your time. :)

Greg responds...

I think you have very little sympathy or understanding for the pace and speed that all these things are done at. Most of what you cited above are actually painting errors, not drawing errors. Think about having to fill in all those little lines on hundreds of cels, day after day after day. Frankly, I'd go insane. Mistakes happen. We caught as many as we could. Fixed as many as we had time to fix. But mistakes happen.

Response recorded on August 23, 2000

Bookmark Link

Karen writes...

One of my favourite parts of each Garg episode are the gliding scenes. I just finished watching the Hunter's Moon episodes over the last two nights and was particularly impressed with:
1. When Goliath rounds the building and sees the Hunters' airship, he backwings and lands on the building. Very nice.
2. My all time favourite: the battle at the dam, when Goliath dives down and soars back up, he does the most wonderful wingover over the top of the dam. It's so powerfully graceful. I loved it.
Unfortunately, there are cases in some eps where the aerodynamics didn't always quite ring true, but hey I'm no pilot to criticize, and what looked to me like gaffs generally were pretty minor. So, to my actual question: Do you know if the animators studied any sort of flying in order to protray this sort of thing? IE, did they look at acrobatics with airplanes, bats, etc?
Thank you for your time!

Greg responds...

I don't know. There were times when it felt wrong to us too. The animators would, for example, on occasion allow the Gargs to hover like Superman. We'd have to call a retake to get them to (at least) keep the background panning behind them.

Some of the stuff did look great though.

Response recorded on August 18, 2000

Bookmark Link

BloodBane writes...

Hello Greg.

Ok, I have noticed the animation in some of the episodes was relly great!For an example in Hunters Moon there was a part where the oldest brother picked up Maza, and put her to sleep with the tranquilizer and in that few seconds the animation was really good.Do you no why they didn't draw the whole series like that?

Greg responds...

It's not like they didn't try. But animation involves a huge quantity of people and not everyone is as good as everyone else. Not all the episodes, for example, could be animated at Disney's Tokyo Studio, which was collectively superior to the other studios that worked on the show.

We got the best that we could get in the time and with the budget that we had at our disposal. It's not ALL as good as Hunter's Moon 3, but I'm pretty proud of most of it.

Response recorded on August 02, 2000

Bookmark Link

dracolich5 writes...

Hello again, Greg! I've decided to start posting questions more frequently, and I've got an interesting assortment of production questions.
During the creation of characters, how were their eventual designs chosen? Did the artists in question work on one design only, or were several designs tried? If so, is there any way we can ever see these unused designs? My interest in unused character designs started when I purchased some Japanese Godzilla books that showed alternate designs for machines and creatures. Just curious to see if similar interesting designs are around.

On a side note, IF any alternate character designs were made, were any of these re-used for later characters? Just checking!

Greg responds...

We had development artists at Disney come up with inspirational designs for all the main characters, which were used in the pitch to sell the show.

Bob Kline: Xanatos, the Eyrie Building
Dave Schwartz: Brooklyn, Lexington, Broadway
Greg Guler: Goliath, Demona, Elisa, the Pack
Paul Felix: the Clock Tower (and Hudson, I think)

These designs were then sent to Disney TV Animation Japan, where they sort of had a little competition to see who would be the primary designer on the show. They submitted multiple interpretations of the characters (Goliath in particular), and we chose Mr. Takeuchi, who seemed to capture the feeling of the show the best. Eventually Frank Paur went to Japan to work with Takeuchi and fine tune his designs. Paul Felix did a very early Bronx, but Frank changed it so entirely, it's basically a new design.

I have some of this old stuff, though I wish I had more. For example, I have almost nothing from the early comedy development. If you attend the Gathering, you can see the pitch and some of those early designs.

Response recorded on August 02, 2000

Bookmark Link

The Gatekeeper (repost by Aris) writes...

I have some questions on how the voice recording was done.

I've looked through the archives, and it appears that you get all the actors together at one time but I'm not getting an entirely clear picture. You have mentioned doing some editing on the voices for rhythms and the like. Is this possible to do when the recording is done in a group session? I know the partial answer, each voice is on it's own track, but wouldn't the natural bounce (if you would) of all the actors playing off each other make for a natural sounding dialogue?

Were the recording sessions filmed as well, so that some of the facial expressions of the actors could be incorporated into the animation? I can just picture Marina Sirtis sneering at Keith David.

What is the sequence that things are done? I think the script and story board comes first, but are the voices recorded before or after the animation, or it is a kind of hand in hand process?

The reason I ask, is because I remember listening to an interview with a voice actor (back in the mid '70's) and he said that all his lines were sent to the studio on a tape that he did at his home.

Greg responds...

Anything's possible but that last scenario sounds awful strange to me.

Here's the basic order:

1. Write the scripts.
2. Design new characters. This begins even before the script is finished sometimes.
3. Record the voices.
4. Storyboards are drawn. (This sometimes also begins before all the voices are recorded, depending on deadline pressure. But ideally it waits for the board artist to get the voice tape.)
5. Direct the board. (For timing, etc.)
6. Send materials overseas for animation.
7. Animation.
8. Post-Production. Retakes, editing, sound, etc.

As for step 3 itself, we tried as often as possible to get all the actors together in one room. This was almost never completely possible. There'd always be someone who wasn't available or was out of town or something. (For example, Keith David spent most of the second season performing in SEVEN GUITARS on Broadway. We would pick him up by "phone patch" from a studio in New York. One time, I seem to recall, we had to get Jim "Fang" Belushi by phone patch from Australia, where he was shooting a movie.

So we had to edit in anyone who wasn't in the session. Plus sometimes the best takes weren't consecutive. Say, Thom "Lex" Adcox did a great reading of a question. And Jeff "Brooklyn" Bennett stuttered when answering. Jeff probably did two or three great takes of his line. But we'd still want to use Lex's great take. So we'd edit it too.

And sometimes we'd tighten things up for pace. Since, as you noted, we had to allow each line to be on a separate track, that meant we couldn't overlap dialogue in the recording booth. But in real life, people often interrupt each other or talk over each other, etc. So sometimes we'd edit to create that overlapping effect.

Still the reason we TRIED to get everyone together is because we'd generally get a better, higher energy performance from most of the actors by allowing them to play off each other.

Response recorded on August 01, 2000

Bookmark Link

Blaise (repost by Aris) writes...

TEMPTATION

While this isn't the ep that cemented Brooklyn in my head as "Favorite Character," I have to admit he is GREAT in it.
I still love Lexington's remark about building a horse from spare parts.
Demona's tour of the city--Yeah, the DEAD BODY surprised me too. Very powerful, very good, as were Demona's other two "examples" of humanity. Bennett and Sirtis did WONDERFUL jobs with their voice acting here.
As for the bikers not noticing Brooklyn, yeah everybody notices that. I just try to ignore it and that seems to work. If nothing else, most of the bikers in that scene WERE wearing sunglasses at night (as someone else already pointed out). Come to think of it, some of them weren't even wearing helmets....;-)
Elisa's finger--great, now that you've mentioned it, *I'LL* probably look for it and not be able to see anything else in the scene.
I was surprised to hear that Brooklyn's description of the Cloisters was taken by some folks as "proof" that gargoyles were not native to this planet. Anyone who saw the first two episodes should have understood what Brooklyn meant. Come to think of it, why WOULD people want the gargoyles to be from another planet?
One of my favorite lines in this episode--Brooklyn: "You hold the book, Demona. But *I* hold the *spell*!" I just LOVE that.
The resolution of the spell may have been a bit of a cheat, but it WAS a creative and original solution to the problem. So, you guys still get some points in that area.
Lex and Brooklyn talking about the motorcycle at the end and Lex's reaction are always enjoyable.
Pointless note: Hudson doesn't speak a single line in this episode. Odd, when I think about it. Still, you do at least SEE him a few times.

Good ep.

Greg responds...

The Hudson thing was budgetary. Often if we had a character who needed to appear for logic's sake but didn't have too much to contribute to the story, we'd avoid just giving him one or two lines to prove he's there. That way we could save money on the actor's salary for that episode. That money saved could be used later on for some of our big cast expensive episodes.

Trust however that I never scrimped. If I thought Hudson needed to speak in that episode, even if it was only ONE line, I would not have hesitated to pay for Ed Asner to be in the session.

Response recorded on August 01, 2000


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #129 - #153 of 188 records. : 25 » : Last » :