A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

Pendragon

Archive Index


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #46 - #70 of 348 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

Chapter XLVIII: "Pendragon"

Time to ramble...

Chapter XLVIII: "Pendragon"
Story Editor: Brynne Chandler Reaves
Writer: Lydia Marano
Director: Dennis Woodyard

SOMETHING'S COMING
There's a wonderful children's book called "Something's Coming" about three stuffed animals and [SPOILERS] a sneeze. I hadn't read that book when we did this episode, but it was all I could think of reviewing the opening minutes now.

In fact, what's coming, according to Macbeth, is the "Harmonic Convergence". When I heard that, I immediately jumped to the conclusion that this was a Cary Bates episode. (Cary, at least for a time, was very into incorporating all sorts of New Agey schtick into his work [cf. his comic book series SILVERBLADE published in the late 80s by DC Comics].)

Of course, as noted above, this was a Brynne/Lydia/Greg collaboration. No Cary at all.

A BRIEF STOPOVER IN LONDON
Arthur arrives in his "City of Wonders", i.e. modern day London. We throw in some beauty shots of the city from "M.I.A." here. It helped us trim a few bad seconds of animation later in the episode, and helped establish the mood a bit better.

With Arthur arriving at what must have been his final destination from Avalon's point of view (minus a quick Stone of Destiny hop to NYC's Guggenheim Museum), his skiff sinks down into the water. I always imagined that the skiff resurfaced back on Avalon. Having shown this here, I didn't feel bad about NOT showing the sinking skiff in "Gathering, One" when our quartet returned to Manhattan. Allowed us to keep some surprise at their arrival at the Clock Tower.

Arthur makes a point of using a mace, since his quest is to find EXCALIBUR and we didn't want to confuse the issue by having him simply exchange one decent sword for the subtlety of a better sword. Or at least not until the end of the ep.

We also made a point of him missing Merlin, which was a bit of foreshadowing to the proposed Pendragon spin-off, where Arthur and Griff's first order of business would be a Quest for Merlin.

Speaking of Griff, his silhouette is a bit too distinctive here for my tastes. I wish it hadn't quite given away his indentity so soon. His design is somewhat inconsistent in this episode. As I mentioned during my "M.I.A." episode, Frank, Greg Guler and I were never 100% satisfied with the design. In this episode, in particular, he has some real Foghorn Leghorn moments.

The first real stop on Arthur's tour is Westminster Abbey. The door is locked, which makes sense in the Twentieth Century but not to a guy from the Sixth Century. And it perhaps makes even less sense to us in the 21st-Century. Is that all the security that exists there: a locked door? And of course, GARGOYLES continues its traditions of wantonly damaging historical sites, when Arthur uses his mace to enter.

Inside we find the Stone of Destiny in it's 1990s home beneath the throne. Shortly thereafter, the Stone would be moved to Edinburgh Castle. As for the Stone, I perpetrated one of my favorite mythological devices, which is conflating various similar concepts... so the Stone of Destiny (i.e. Jacob's pillow) also becomes the Stone from the Sword in the Stone, i.e. the stone from which Arthur drew Excalibur. And the thing talks!! What's interesting to me now, is that Arthur doesn't seem surprised by the fact that it talks. Legends state that an inscription revealed that "Whosoever pulleth this sword from this stone [and anvil] will become King of Britain." But perhaps there was no inscription, and the stone talked from day one. One question: Is the Stone itself one of Oberon's Children (in stone form) or is it magically enchanted? (I lean toward the latter, but it's interesting to ponder the former.)

Arthur, without Excalibur, had hoped that the sword would have returned to the stone. He's frustrated when he finds it hasn't. But he doesn't doubt his "ownership" of it, until much later in the episode. The Powers That Be are much less sure of Arthur's claim on it. They are constantly reminding him that at best, all he has is a shot at it: "It belongs to the True King. Are you still he?"

I also love how Arthur says that he hates riddles. It just feels so right for my interpretation of Arthur as a man who LEARNED to be a thinker, but to whom it didn't necessarily come naturally. Said interpretation of course heavily influenced by the works of T.H. White. Anyway, that poem/riddle which Griff recites (an unknowing trust past down across generations of the London Clan) was written, as I recall, by Lydia. It was hearing this poem that reminded me that she had written this episode and not Cary.

Note that everytime he sees a gargoyle, Arthur asks if he's "of Goliath's Clan".

BACK AT THE RANCH
Once again, we abandon our travelers to focus on life on the homefront with the Trio & Hudson. We will, once they've met up with Griff & Arthur, get a bit of an update on how updated our left-behinders are. They've heard from Halcyon Renard that he spotted Goliath, Elisa & Bronx in Prague. They've heard from Diane Maza that she spotted them in Nigeria. [I have to assume that all communications were channelled, per Elisa's suggestion, through Matt.] Now they learn about the travelers stop-overs in London (from Griff) and Avalon (from Arthur). [All of this was a bit of a risk, as we couldn't guarantee the airing order of the World Tour episodes. But I guess we felt it was a risk worth taking in order to give us a bit of legitimate continuity. Fortunately, it all worked out.] I'm curious if Angela was mentioned by either Renard or Diane (or Griff or Arthur after the adventure was over), and if so how prominently. Also, Griff demonstrably proves that other Gargoyles still exist in the world. Though the ramifications of that and of Angela clearly don't sink in with Hudson and the others until "The Gathering, Part One".

You'll see flashes of Brooklyn taking charge in this episode. With no one (including him) questioning it or even making an issue of it. I guess the lessons of "Kingdom" stuck.

You'll also see Broadway destroying one of Macbeth's lightning guns. But in contrast, Griff -- a man of HIS era, i.e. the forties -- comandeers the other one and makes it a part of his arsenal. I liked that, even -- or especially -- with the spin-off series in mind.

WILL OF THE WHISP AND OTHER STRANGERS...
I've since revealed here at ASK GREG, that the Will of the Whisp (introduced here by Macbeth, who uses both science and sorcery to control and utilize it) is the primitive magical entity that Oberon's Children evolved from. Sort of the Homo Erectus of the magical set. (Or maybe something even more primitive like a lemur or lungfish.)

The Lady of the Lake surfaces (literally). I like Lexington's "And she was right in our own lake.." for its understated humor. Also, this gives Hudson an excuse to say "Jalapeña", thus fulfilling another of the verbal challenges that Voice Director Jamie Thomason set for me -- and thus further pissing off the contingent of artists who truly HATED that expression. I think this may be one of the last times, until "The Journey", that we used it.

Anyway, we constantly raise the question of why the sword and the Lady associated with it were now in New York and not in Britain. Of course, the short answer was that we wanted to involve Hudson & the Trio without sending them on their own World Tour. But in fact, we did have a larger purpose. We wanted Arthur to become a player on the World Stage. A larger stage, as the Lady says.

I wasn't wild about that Water Djinn sequence. We wanted Arthur to solve the problem through leadership. But having him order Griff to use the Lightning weapon seems a fairly feeble solution to me (even though I endorsed it at the time). Wouldn't Arthur simply be electrocuted?

PEN... DRAGON
It's a goofy joke, but I still chuckle at Lex saying "Brooklyn" and Brooklyn answering.

I also am amused by the fact that it's Banquo in his slow pondering way that gives Macbeth the idea -- if not the ambition -- to take Excalibur for his own: "Hey Boss, you're a king. And you've been alive a long time..." Mac, an established Arthurphile, may seem an unlikely person to try to supplant his own hero. But it perfectly suits my interpretation of the character. Our Macbeth may not have the ambition of Shakespeare's Macbeth. But he's always been a man to sieze an appropriate opportunity. And he's always been a man in search of his own purpose. Perhaps this business of being a "Timeless King" and everything else that Excalibur represents in the past and future provides the reason for why he's lived for a largely tormented nine hundred years. Of course, Mac is also a man of honor. He vies for the sword. But when it becomes clear at the VERY end that Arthur is indeed its true master, he swears fealty to the (Whitean) Once and Future King. The thought DID cross my mind to add Macbeth to the cast of regulars in my PENDRAGON development. To give Arthur, in essence, two knights: Griff & Macbeth. But the dilemma comes in the fact that any spin-off has to stand on its own two feet. Characters can have backstories, but you can't assume that the audience has seen x amount of episodes of Gargoyles. I felt that telling Arthur's GARGOYLES-related backstory was going to be difficult enough. Throw in Griff's complicated story and you've set yourself a real challenge. Throw in Macbeth and that boat is just going to sink under two much backstory-weight. Much better to use him as guest star. Then if it seemed to work, over time he might spend MORE time in Pendragon. You never know. [NOTE: I was considerably less worried about adding Blanchfleur, Merlin and Duval to the cast, as we would be introducing them IN Pendragon.] So in the end, Mac accepts a more separate but equal arrangement. This was still cool to me. It reminded me of Arthur's relationship with King Pellinore. King Pellinore was also a King, but he was a wandering King. He didn't always sit at the Round Table, but he always came to Arthur's side, when Arthur needed him. They maintained a certain equality between them, and yet unspoken was the acknowledgement that Arthur was the one true king.

Speaking of Banquo... note his "Popeye" expression throughout most of the episode. This is a result of his model sheet, which showed him squinting through one eye. That was just supposed to be a single expression, but many of the overseas artists naturally assumed that it was a permanent condition -- because of course, we didn't have another model sheet with a different expression. Also, what did you think of Banquo & Fleance's power armor. I'm not sure it really came across as power armor. It was supposed to make them tougher and stronger. But I think it just looked like a flight suit for their sky-cycles. [But I did love those sky-cycles, especially the way Lex used them as a staircase for the Gargoyles to get some air. That was really cool and clever, I think.]

Random fact: My ten-year-old daughter Erin was fascinated with the topiary monkey.

An episode called Pendragon needed... a Dragon. I think this one is positively glorious. I love those steam vents. And the stone flight. And the fire. GREAT FIRE. But before it wakes up, I like how in essence this stone statue becomes the NEW Stone of Destiny. Macbeth draws the (faux) Excalibur from the dragon's stone grip and declares: "Macbeth, son of Findlaech, is the one true king." Arthur for a minute seems a sore loser. But his better nature wins out, after Macbeth points out that he's being a jerk. [Macbeth is great about being right when he's wrong.] When, as a youngster, Arthur drew the sword, many opposed his rule. It's a lesson that he's learned from. Griff resists, but Arthur kneels. He will not be an obstructionist if Macbeth is the new true king. Erin also felt that Arthur was being a sore loser. But Benny, my seven-year-old, disagreed, calling Arthur "the World's best fighter" and therefore the guy who deserved the sword. What's interesting, is that was NEVER my intent. I don't think of Arthur as the world's best FIGHTER. Even in his own legends, there were many knights who could outfight him. Arthur was a decent fighter, but his greatest strength was as a LEADER of men. That's what we tried to get across, both here and in "Avalon, Part Three".

It's also a cool play on words, I think, that this time the phrase "Sword IN the Stone" needs to be taken literally. The dragon statue surrounds the true sword inside it. I love the steps Arthur goes through to figure this out, primarily that moment when he recovers the faux Excalibur and can instantly sense that it isn't the genuine article. That was us trying to DEMONSTRATE with clarity that Excalibur wasn't just any sword, but rather something special. But what exactly was it? That, to be honest, we still needed to figure out. But we were hoping we'd have an entire spin-off to explore that question.

SOME GOOD LINES
Fleance: "No free rides, Bat-boy."

Broadway: "Now you stay put." And Banquo: "No problem."

Lex: "Take the stairs."

Arthur: "Arise... SIR Griff."

Plus a bunch of great British Griffisms:
"In for a penny, in for a pound."
"Well, that just about tears it."
"You are the Once and Future King."
"Right with you, Your Majesty"
"That's the stuff!"

Anyway, that's my ramble. Where's yours?


Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

What did the Lady of the Lake mean when she said that the world needed a leader? Was that suppose to be mean that Arthur was to become leader of the world?

Greg responds...

A leader for the world, not necessarily THE leader OF the world.

Response recorded on September 30, 2004

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

How long was the Lady of the Lake living in that lake in Manhattan?

Greg responds...

I don't know that she was living there.

Response recorded on September 30, 2004

Bookmark Link

Rising Moon Starsword Warrior Daiginga writes...

1.Were you going to introduce more "International Heroes" in Pendragon?
2.What exactly is the purpose of all these heroes?

Greg responds...

1. Not per se, but it happens. I had an overall plan for the "International Heroes" however, and Pendragon had a role in that plan.

2. Not going to reveal that yet.

Response recorded on July 28, 2004

Bookmark Link

Dave writes...

Hey Gregg, I'm new to this site, and I was just wondering... is there something I missed about Gargoyles? I mean, I know of Gargoyles, and The Goliath Chronicles, but was there some other Gargoyle show that aired after?

What lies ahead for Gargoyles? Do you plan on bringing them back to the air at some point? I'd really like to see some new Gargoyles cartoons....

Thank you.

Greg responds...

There were proposed spin-offs, sequels and prequels, including

Gargoyles: The Dark Ages
TimeDancer
The New Olympians
Pendragon
Bad Guys
Gargoyles 2198

plus plenty ideas just to continue the "Gargoyles" series itself.

I haven't been able to convince Disney to do any of these things.

But who knows?

"Firefly" was dead. It sold a TON of DVDs and now they're making a movie, "Serenity". "Family Guy" was dead. It sold a TON of DVDs and now they're making new episodes.

Up until this year, the best single way you could help relaunch the show in some way, shape or form was by attending the Gathering, our annual convention. That's still true. So if you haven't heard, check out this year's con at their website:

http://www.gatheringofthegargoyles.com/

The good folks at Walt Disney Home Entertainment took notice of the fandom, largely thanks to these conventions. They'll be attending this year with a video crew to tape footage of the con to put on the Gargoyles DVD, to be released later THIS year (2004!).

The DVD will contain all 13 episodes of the series' first season, complete and uncut. It will also have a commentary track and other extras (in addition to the con footage) that are still being discussed.

If you want to see the 2nd Season on DVD, and if you want to see Disney make more Garg Universe materials, there's no better way to get them to take notice than by buying the DVD. If the fans demonstrate an audience with disposable income, Disney will respond. It's not far-fetched. It's happened before.

Response recorded on July 02, 2004

Bookmark Link

Balrog writes...

Pendragon

I am from Iceland and want ask a question about person that i have seen not asked about.

Would Prince Valiant appear in The Pendragon series, i meen he was quite unique knight (at least in the comics about him) and he had Excalbur's sister sword; Flamberg.

P.S be merciful to me(glup).

Greg responds...

Prince Valiant is not public domain, so the answer is no. Hope that was merciful enough.

Response recorded on June 16, 2004

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

You mentioned once that the rookery riddle about Excalibur Griff recites in "Pendragon" was taught his clan by "the three". A few people have claimed that "the three" are Morgan le Fay, Nimue, and the Lady of the Lake; my own response was that we don't know as yet who "the three" are; that title isn't specific enough. What are your thoughts on this issue?

Greg responds...

Well, I'm sure I was being intentionally vague. But in fact you just named the three I was talking about, and I guess I'm feeling generous, because I'm copping to it.

Response recorded on April 30, 2004

Bookmark Link

The Cat writes...

Hey Greg,
It's The Cat, again. Technically I've already asked this question, but it has more to do with when the gargoyles learned how to read than anything else.

It has been asked already, but your answer is not correct.

You aswered that Demona learned from the Archmage. Goliath learned from Demona. Lexington learned right before they were turned to stone for a thousand years. Brooklyn learned right after the spell was broken and of course Broadway and Hudson learned together from Elisa and the rest of the clan.

It is not correct in the fact that English was not a language back in 994A.D., much less a written language. So, here is your answer revised a bit for all those people that have to learn this in History class and then wonder how it could be possible for the gargoyles to have learned to read English if it wasn't a language.

Demona learned how to read English sometime while the others were in their stone sleep, after all life must really get boring having nothing to do and being a live for several centuries( do ya'll people really think that she'd kill humans all the time?) Goliath, Brooklyn and Lexington most likely learned how to read right after the spell was broken. After all the language Goliath and Lexington learned how to read was most likely Latin given the fact that that language was the only one besides Greek and Hebrew that were written down at the time.

Another question(actually the one above wasn't really a question, hmm, I've really got to work on that)

In the episode, A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time, The Scroles(I'm unsure if I spelt that right and I don't have a dictionary at hand right now) of Merlin were written in Ancient Celtic, but how could that be? Celtic wasn't a written language. Or it could have been and I just haven't covered that topic in my history lessons yet. But I don't think it was a written language at the time that the scrolls were written.

Well, I know this is a kind of multi-topic letter, but I was going on the topic of written languages more than anything. See ya.

Greg responds...

I don't think I was asked when they learned to "read English", I think I was asked when they learned to read.

Of course, we generally cheated on language issues. Michael Reaves had a magical solution to this, which I like and have commented on before.

As for the Scrolls, I'd have to do more research to answer you in the kind of detail your post displays.

Response recorded on April 26, 2004

Bookmark Link

Gerald writes...

what happened to king arthur after he retrieved Excalibur.

Greg responds...

He and Griff went looking for Merlin.

Response recorded on April 15, 2004

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

Here's my ramble on "Shadows of the Past".

First off, of course, this is where the Avalon World Tour begins (if you don't count the "Avalon" triptych), which makes it a biggie. I agree with you that the reruns in between the three instalments of it (which aired, as I recall, in November-December 1995, February 1996, and May 1996 - more or less) make the World Tour seem longer than it really was. (Incidentally, you're right that you were able to bring out more than 18 episodes of "Gargoyles" in the September-December period; I remembered that the "fall run" ended with "Grief", and so worked out that it was 30 new episodes during that period).

As I mentioned before, I enjoyed the Avalon World Tour, and agree with you that something like that was necessary for the series at some point (especially in bringing in enough other gargoyles to make it feasible for the species to survive and recover - as I've mentioned here before, something along the lines of the World Tour was probably the only realistic way for Goliath to discover that there were gargoyles left in other parts of the world, given that he couldn't simply hop on board the next flight from New York to London or Japan).

Angela's correct (from the original legends perspective) about it always being summer on Avalon; in fact, I remember that the old Welsh legends about Avalon (or, more accurately, its "literary predecessors") called it the Summer Country or the Region of the Summer Stars.

In hindsight from "Vendettas", I picked up on the significance of that axe that Goliath unearths - and agree with you now that Hakon's mace from the Wyvern Massacre would indeed have worked better. Too late for that now, though.

I also liked that line (which I considered very poetic) of Elisa's about "old wounds".

The Captain and Hakon's tormenting of Goliath was very effective - probably the creepiest part, in my opinion, was when Angela and Elisa appear in Goliath's eyes to be the Captain and Hakon - but then we hear Angela and Elisa's voices coming from the Captain and Hakon's mouths.

The Captain of the Guard's change of heart worked for me (again, I especially liked the bit that you mentioned where he's looking troubledly at his hands as he and Hakon solidify). In fact, it made sense in view of his role in "Awakening" - he'd never wanted the clan massacred, and was horrified as to how that had gone wrong. I might add that Hakon showed, again, just how creepy he is when he gets into the fight with Goliath and begins laughing as his fists pass through Goliath - the reason for that being now, not that Hakon's insubstantial and Goliath solid, but the other way around.

Incidentally, the Captain actually appears better-looking in the scene where he's giving Goliath his thanks, just before he ascends.

And I'll confess that I'm one of those who would have preferred Hakon to have remained trapped in the cave for all time - I felt, when "Vendettas" aired, that it destroyed some of the effectiveness, in retrospect, of Hakon's sentence: trapped alone for eternity, with nobody at hand for him to hate. (Also, "Vendettas" felt anticlimactic on the Hakon front; in "Shadows of the Past", he battles Goliath by skillfully undermining him with a lot of psychological subtlety; in "Vendettas", he's reduced to simply fighting him in a slugfest with a big dumb werewolf - though don't tell Wolf that I called him that. :) ). But I do think that you made a good point about how, ultimately, Hakon would have to be given more permanent resolution than just that.

Incidentally, your treatment of the megalith that the Captain and Hakon were using, and your comments on it, make me wonder now how you would have handled Stonehenge if you'd ever gotten to do an episode involving it (especially since you mentioned having had plans to send King Arthur and Griff there during their quest for Merlin) - a pity that we may never know the answer to that now.

Greg responds...

*I think it's appropriate that as the Captain is (in essence) redeemed and "ascends", that he is beatified a bit.

*I get what you're saying about Hakon, certainly. And yet, I really like "Vendettas" and hardly think that Hakon's post-Vendettas fate is likely to be any kinder than his post-Shadows fate. And although Hakon was the series' first big villain, he was hardly the most impressive of our villainous creations.

But, let's be honest, I just couldn't resist giving Clancy Brown the opportunity for a David Warner-esque tour de force performance. I'm sure I'll get into this topic more when (some day) I get around to rambling on Vendettas, but I think Clancy's double duty in Vendettas is perhaps even more impressive than what Warner did -- (a) because Clancy did what he did with a then amateur voice director (i.e. me) and (b) because the two characters he was playing (Wolf & Hakon) allowed for much less subtlty than Warner's two Archmages. (This of course, is not designed to take any credit away from the brilliant David Warner, simply to give Clancy his just desserts as well. And speaking of Clancy, he does a great Mr. Freeze in the new "The Batman" series.)

*The ideas used in Shadows for the Megaliths, were in fact cribbed from ideas I've had for Stonehenge for some time. (Pre-dating the creation of Gargoyles, in fact.) It would be interesting to see (even to me) how I handled Stonehenge now. On the one hand, I wouldn't want to repeat myself, but I'd also want to be consistent and I don't want to betray the notions I've had in my head forever. That's the problem when your brain begins to cannibalize its own ideas. A danger I find myself facing all the time.

Response recorded on April 12, 2004

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

Yay! A new episode ramble! Thanks, Greg!

Here are some of my own thoughts about "Double Jeopardy".

The opening one is a rather odd little memory. In the summer of 1995, I spotted an article on "Gargoyles" in a sci-fi magazine (whose name I can no longer remember) discussing what would be done in Season Two; among other things, it included a mention that Goliath's daughter would be introduced into the series. I was quite curious about that, and wondered what she'd be like and how it would be done. And then, when "Double Jeopardy" first aired, and Thailog was treated as Goliath's son in it, I wondered if the article had erred and gotten the gender of Goliath's offspring wrong. (Of course, I know now that it was Angela that the article meant, not Thailog, so that there was no mistake there except on my part.)

In light of the opening flashback, Xanatos must have already started building a whole new set of Steel Clan robots even while he was still in prison, before "The Edge" (especially given that I spotted a whole bunch of those robots in storage, alongside the one that was activated to attack Goliath).

I also liked Owen's "Is this a plan that you've neglected to mention?" line. He really sounded hurt there.

I was interested to notice Renard on Xanatos's suspects list for Thailog's kidnapping, alongside Demona and Macbeth. While I can easily imagine Demona or Macbeth being willing to engage in such a maneuver against Xanatos, I doubt, in light of his rigid code of integrity, that Renard would have done the same (although there is "Golem" to consider, coming up later in the season). Maybe Xanatos believed that the temptation of kidnapping his new gargoyle would have been too much for even his father-in-law to resist.

Sevarius's hamming it up with Xanatos ("Yes! You robbed me of my creation!") was one of the funniest moments in "Gargoyles" for me; certainly the funniest in the episode. (Don't quit your day job, Anton.) And I agree with you about the Dr. Antinori business, by the way. (Also on the subject of Sevarius's overacting, I couldn't help but think that some of his narration in the "clone files" that Lex and Broadway discovered felt almost like a parody of that in a nature documentary, such as the "time for it to leave the nest" line, though I don't know if it was intended that way.)

You no doubt recall how I'd earlier pointed out the similarities between Thailog and Edmund (which I first began to notice after you mentioned Edmund being your favorite Shakespeare character); it occurred to me recently that Thailog also does have a certain similarity to Mordred, especially in many modern-day versions of the Arthurian legend, such as T. H. White. He's Goliath's "illegitimate son", just as Mordred was Arthur's, and his training by his other two fathers, Xanatos and Sevarius, does have (if you're out looking for the parallels) a certain echo of how Mordred, in White's "The Once and Future King", similarly gets trained by his mother Morgause. And the dynamics between Goliath and Thailog, with Goliath initially rejecting his son but then learning that he was wrong to do so, and now reaching out to him - but too late - do remind me of how in White, Arthur similarly initially moves against his son (trying to drown him at birth), but then understands that he was wrong to do so, also makes the attempt to reach out to him, but is coldly rejected by Mordred when he does so. (Come to think of it, Thailog also clearly lusts after both of Goliath's loves, Demona and Elisa, even to the point of combining them in Delilah, just as Mordred lusts after his stepmother Guinevere and attempts to wed her after he usurps his father's throne.)

I've mentioned before the element that I believe makes Thailog an especially great antagonist (the incongruous pairing of Goliath's physical appearance and voice with a thoroughly Xanatosian amorality - though I think that Thailog comes across as more malevolent than Xanatos does, which is also a good touch), so I won't go into that again. It's a bit of a pity that he only turned up twice more in the original series after that ("Sanctuary" and "The Reckoning"), although I suppose that if you'd gotten to do more episodes past "The Journey" that we'd have gotten a lot more of the guy.

The ending definitely surprised me; I was expecting Xanatos to reveal that he'd seen to it that he didn't lose the ransom money after all, but instead we got the revelation that Thailog had escaped with it and is out there, happily scheming away, to Xanatos's own alarm. (As I mentioned before, it's particularly of interest to note that this is the last time in the series that Xanatos attempts to make his own gargoyles - and after the way that Thailog backfired on him, who can blame him?)

It's great to have the rambles going again, and I'm looking forward to the ones to come.

Greg responds...

I'm afraid we haven't made that much Ramble progress recently, though I know we got past Avalon and into (at least) the beginning of the World Tour.

I think, like your Edmund comparison, your comparison of Thailog to Mordred is very apt. Perhaps moreso. Another bastard, basically. I'm not sure how conscious I was of any of these individuals influences, but I'm fascinated with the archetype of "The Bastard" in literature. Both the quote/unquote good guys (like Theseus, Arthur, Dunois, etc.) and the quote/unquote bad guys (like Edmund and Mordred, etc.) Thailog with his three fathers was clearly designed to be our bastard. And what a great bastard he is.

I've certainly read White's ONCE AND FUTURE KING at least a couple times. And I've lost count how many times I've seen CAMELOT.

Response recorded on January 22, 2004

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

A couple of "King Arthur-in-the-comics" related questions:

1. You mentioned that you've read "Camelot 3000" (and were even working at DC Comics at the time that it came out). In your opinion, did it have any influence on your vision of Arthur's return in the Gargoyles Universe. (Well, there were obviously some strong differences, such as Arthur returning in the present day in "Gargoyles" rather than the year 3000, and finding Excalibur before he finds Merlin where in "Camelot 3000", it was the other way around).

2. Have you ever read "Prince Valiant" (the most famous Arthurian comic)? If so, what did you think of it?

Greg responds...

1. My ideas on Arthur were fairly well-formed by the time I read Camelot 3000, a limited series by Mike W. Barr and Brian Bolland. For example, in my mind Arthur was in Avalon, not on British soil. And frankly, the notion of Arthur coming back is part of the legend, not something that Mike came up with. I also have no plans to use reincarnation to bring back dead knights, etc. So I don't think it was a major influence.

Having said that, I thoroughly enjoyed Camelot 3000. Thoroughly.

2. Prince Valiant was never in the L.A. Times, at least not in my memory. When I was in High School, it appeared in the now-defunct L.A. Herald Examiner, a paper we didn't get at home, on Sundays only. So on Monday mornings, I would occasionally take a look at it. Basically, I'm passingly familiar with it, but I don't know much about it.

Response recorded on January 14, 2004

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

1.Is Morgana related to Oberon?
2.What does she think of Oberon?
3.Does she still hate Arthur or Merlin?

Greg responds...

1. Not saying.
2. Not saying.
3. At what point in history?

Response recorded on November 14, 2003

Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Illuminati

1/ What is the connection (if any) of the Illuminati that Percival (Duval) created in 642 and the Illuminati created by Adam Weishaupt in 1778?

2/ Was Percival present at the Battle of Camlann in 542? If not, was it because of his responsibilities as the Fisher King?

3/ Does the Illuminati have connections to the Knights Templar and the Freemasons in the gargoyles universe?

Greg responds...

1. I'm not answering that at this time.

2. Ditto.

3. Tritto.

Response recorded on October 15, 2003

Bookmark Link

Chapter XLIII: "M.I.A"

Time to ramble...

Haven't done this in a while (over a year, actually), and I definitely feel rusty. Anyway, I watched "M.I.A." last night with my wife Beth, my nine-year-old daughter Erin and my six-year-old son Benny.

This episode was directed by Kazuo Terada, story edited by Gary Sperling and written by Robert Cohen.

The (semi) one word title, as usual, was one of mine. (As was the springboard, but more on that later.) It's appropriate both because of Griff's disappearance and because of the wartime setting. Although I don't know if they actually used the M.I.A. acronym as far back as WWII. I associate it with Vietnam. Does anyone else know?

Benny read the title and thought it said Mia. He has a friend named Mia, whose birthday party he had gone to earlier in the day. So the title required a bit of explaining.

INTO THE MYSTIC

This was one of my ideas that I really fell in love with. The idea that a magic shop never goes out of style. The idea that these gargoyles have been running this shop right in the midst of London's teeming humanity for a millenium. I just love the idea that you could stop by there in 1940 or 1996 or 1809 or 1776 or 1595 or whenever. Different gargoyles manning the store, of course. But the store itself largely remains the same. It's a place where Lennox Macduff and Will Shakespeare might have ended up after a night of carousing together.

My notion, which I've stated here before, is that the London Clan has an estate in the burbs, and that the shop helps fund them.

Responding to the guys line about the shopkeepers having "incredible" masks, Benny takes a good look at Una and says: "That's a unicorn. A real one."

And Erin: "Those aren't masks."

Of course, these kids have both seen the episode before. But it was so long ago and they were so young it's like they're seeing it for the first time.

LONDON

We get some gorgeous shots of London. So gorgeous that when the animation on PENDRAGON came back weeks later looking not so good, we reused some of the "M.I.A." footage for that ep.

[Of course the animation here was done by Walt Disney Television Animation Japan, GARG's Best studio. It still kills me that Disney has shut down that unit. They did SUCH great stuff.]

Elisa talks to the Cabbie. In my mind, this Cabbie appears during the 1940 sequence as a little boy, running downstairs and into a bomb shelter with his sister. It's not important, but that's how I saw it.

And we explain (include) another legend. That of Gremlins. Not Gremlins from the Spielbergian movie. But gremlins that caused damage to airplanes during the war. This was/is a very famous legend among pilots. Roald Dahl (of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory fame) wrote a book about them, which Walt Disney himself optioned. Eisner once had us develop a tv series based on the idea. I handed it off to a couple of producers who COMPLETELY redeveloped the idea. They came up with a good show, but it was unrecognizable to Eisner. (It also had a toupee joke, which probably didn't go over well.) Anyway, he didn't buy it.

SOHO

Actual racists thugs. We didn't do much of that. We usually went with anti-gargoyle types, who were metaphors for racists. But here we actually go with the real thing.

Their attack is very reminiscent of Awakening 3.

I love Brigitte's work here. Angela sounds like a tough warrior one minute, like a naive innocent the next. All within her character.

And that shot of Bronx leaping down from the roof is just gorgeous.

Leo and Una come out and confront Goliath, whose confusion is a lot of fun.

They're all in conflict, but everyone can agree with Elisa to take the argument inside...

We go inside and see the portrait of Griff.

Benny makes a connection: "There's a statue of him on the airplane."

UNA

I love Una's line: "I know my merchandise."

Throughout this episode, I think she comes across a bit like a junior Demona. I don't know if I felt that way at the time. But we have a female garg with sorcerous powers in denial about her own feelings of guilt and rewriting history to blame Goliath for things that were really not his fault.

Una was in love with Griff. And still is. But in the interrum, in my mind, she mated with Leo. She LOVES Leo. But she never got over being IN LOVE WITH Griff.

AWKWARD MOMENTS

Two of them.

One is having Goliath black out and instead of using it as our act break, we just go to black, wait a beat and then come back. We had a much better act break coming up, so I guess I don't regret it, but I also don't like it much.

The other awkward moment is giving Goliath that voice over of his interior thoughts, where he states his plan to use the Gate to figure out what the hell happened in 1940. I'm sure I resisted doing that VO. But we just didn't have a better solution.

I do love Goliath's frustrated: "I don't know any Griff!" line.

G uses the gate and Benny asks "What did he just do?" Beth explains it to him, but it illustrates my point that it has been so long since the kids last saw an ep, that their memories of the show are very vague.

WWII

We meet Clive and Douglas Bader. I've stated this before, but Douglas Bader was a real person. A true war hero. Douglas Bader lost both his legs in a plane crash, and became a war hero and fighter ace AFTER he recovered and learned to walk on two artificial pins. He was a hero during the Battle of Britain. Later, he was shot down over enemy territory and put in a POW camp. He escaped twice but was recaptured both times. Years later, he was knighted.

I met him once. My father, Wally Weisman, is a real Spitfire afficionado, and Bader was one of his heroes. My dad eventually met Sir Douglas in London and at the RAF Museum outside London. When I was a kid, Sir Douglas and his wife came to Los Angeles and we all went to Disneyland together. He never used a wheelchair. Always just moved along with his hip-swinging walk. An amazing man.

So there was no way I wasn't going to pay tribute to him here (and indirectly to my father as well -- in my mind, this ep is dedicated to my dad). I gave Gary Sperling the Bader biography, "REACH FOR THE SKIES," knowing that it would be tough for him to incorporate much into the episode. But we tried to base the design of Bader on one of his photographs. And we made sure that his first and last name were both used in dialogue so that he could be indentified by those paying attention.

And most of all, we tried to show that these pilots were the true heroes. Sure, Goliath and Griff save them. But Bader saves the gargoyles too, and he's the one who takes out the most dangerous of the Nazi fighter pilots.

This was important to me. Influenced by both Dahl's Gremlins book and my father and Bader, I'd wanted to do a Battle of Britain story pretty much since the series' inception. It's even listed in the bible. This came out of the notion we once had that (while the other gargoyles may have been asleep for a thousand years) Goliath had been awake and alone for 1000 years.

Imagine, if you will, that scene in Awakening-2, when Goliath comes back and finds Hudson, Bronx and the Trio asleep. Instead of joining them, he watches over them for a millenium. (This was back when we had a more magical view of Garg biology.) I thought Goliath would have largely spent a thousand years brooding. But that during WWII he might have ventured forth to fight the Nazis, if for no other reason than to prevent the bombing of Wyvern.

We, obviously, didn't end up going that way, but the visual of Gargoyles fighting in the Battle of Britain stuck with me. (And man, is that visual brought to life here beautifully.)

But having decided to do that, I didn't want to give the gargs all the credit. Real men and women gave their lives during the Battle of Britain. I didn't want to undercut their contribution in order to make my fictional gargs look good. That just seemed like it would be both irresponsible and disrespectful. A betrayal of the very reasons why we were doing the ep in the first place.

GRIFF

Casting... we had used Neil Dickson to tremendous evil effect as Duncan and Canmore in City of Stone. Here he gets to play Errol Flynn. Neil is a Brit. As is Charles Shaugnessy who played Bader and Sara Douglas who played Una. (Leo/Gregg Berger, on the other hand, is a Yank.) And they all really brought life to their respective roles. I have to admit I was worried about whether Neil would be right for the role. I should no better, but Duncan especially was so memorable, I really had that fixed in my head. But Neil's voice just worked perfectly for Griff. I'm still sorry we didn't get to see more of Griff with King Arthur in the Pendragon spin-off.

Griff was conceived as a real swashbuckling hero. A Robin Hood of the 1940s. As opposed to our rough-hewn "Scottish stock", this was a good-old-fashioned patriotic English Hero to put up against the Nazis. His costume was influenced, I think by the Blackhawks. And his look was inspired by British Heraldry. He was the Griffin to Una's unicorn and Leo's lion, three of the most striking heraldic beasts. Again, going back to my earliest development of the series, I thought that adaptations of heraldic beasts might be the English version of gargoyles. So Griff has Eagle and Lion qualities. Feathered wings. A mohawk-like main. An eagle-like beak, but lionesque limbs.

I know that Greg Guler, Frank Paur and I went over and over Griff's model. We were never 100% satisfied with it. But it must work, as I've never any complaints from the fan. And I think Neil (and Jamie Thomason's voice direction) deserve much of the credit for that. Because even with the great Japanese animation, he still looks a bit too Foghorn Leghorn for my tastes.

TIMELOOPINESS

Goliath (after Griff saves his life): "It was supposed to work the other way."
Erin: "I think this is how it started in the first place."

So, hey, she got it!!

Benny even jumped ahead, figuring out: "So he can take Griff back forward in time."

So he got it too. Did you guys get it right from the beginning? That Goliath would take Griff "back forward" to the present to reunite him with Leo and Una?

I love the scene between Griff, Leo, Una and Goliath over tea in the shop. Everyone's motivations are so clear that I often use this scene when I do voice seminars.

Griff wants to sell everyone on going on the offensive.
Leo wants to sell everyone on sticking with defense.
Una is more subtle. She'll use any argument that will promote Griff's safety.
Goliath is trying to stay out of trouble.

But I love his line: "In my experience, human problems become Gargoyle problems." How true... (witness the cancellation of the show...)

And then later, Goliath AGAIN realizes a lesson that he and the audience would have to relearn again and again. Fate cannot be cheated. History cannot be changed.

And once again, we show our lack of imagination and/or our desire to stick with something once we find it works by using the line "Not where, when."

We can say "1940" but we were discouraged from referring to the present by an actual year -- so that reruns would still sound current. I'm surprised that Goliath got to use the phrase "the 1990s". How short-sighted of Disney to not think we'd still be airing these reruns in the 21st Century. Not that I'm complaining, mind you.

Griff almost gets hit by a car in the present and Goliath says "Let's not start that again." A mini-tribute to the English Vultures in "A Jungle Book".

At the very end, Elisa's confusion is fun: "Just explain it one more time." That probably came out of my fear that the audience might not get it. If Elisa didn't get it either, the audience wouldn't have to feel so bad about it.

DOGFIGHTS

Everything I could have asked for.

I have a VERY vague memory that we were discouraged from using Swastikas. I can't remember why or even if this is true.

But the skull-like pilot with the skull & crossbones on his plane certainly looks like a bad guy, doesn't he?

The planes themselves just look great. I found out later that Bader didn't fly Spitfires during the Battle of Britain. He flew Spitfires later, but flew Hurricanes during the Blitz. This fact drives me crazy.

But I love his line about the Gargoyles (which in my mind, he viewed as Gremlins): "They're real, and they're on our side!"

Benny noticed that they shot a hole through Goliath's wing. I had to reassure him that he'd be okay after getting some stone sleep.

Parachutes. No one dies in this episode. At least not in theory. Of course, we KNOW people died during the Blitz. But we couldn't show or even imply that.

THE WORLD TOUR

We end of course by creating new heroes out of old. Griff has returned. And Leo and Una have been reinvigorated. They take back their neighborhood.

Leo: "Or we'll make it our business." Leo's spent years worried only about business. Now he remembers what his business is supposed to be. The nation of shopkeepers is once again ready to defend the realm. So to speak.

Anyway, that's my ramble. Where's yours?


Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Pendragon

In Arthurian lore, Arthur Pendragon is generally born because his biological father, Uther Pendragon, took on the form of Gorlois, the Duke of Cornwall and the first husband of Igraine, Arthur's biological mother. Uther was transformed through the magic of Merlin to appear as Gorlois, and essentially sexually assaulted Igraine by tricking her into taking him into her bed.

Given the moral focus that often is found in animated series, how would you have handled the situation surrounding the birth of Arthur Pendragon and Merlin's part in the events.

Greg responds...

I'm not revealing this at this time, though if you attended Gathering 2002 or 2003 you may have noticed a VERY indirect clue.

(The above is in itself a HUGE clue).

Response recorded on October 10, 2003

Bookmark Link

Wolfram Bane (wolfram_bane@hotmail.com) writes...

Pendragon

Geoffery of Monmouth states that Mordred was the son of Lot and Anna (Arthur's sister), and Arthur Pendragon's nephew. Sir Thomas Malory later expanded upon the story, having Mordred be the son of Arthur and his sister Anna (now Anna Morgause, Arthur's half-sister) through an incestuous tryst. This created the idea that Mordred was both the son and nephew of Arthur, and both his eventual heir and ultimate nemesis.

I read that you had intended Mordred to be the son of Arthur and Morgause, but was he conceived through an incestuous relationship, or given the moral focus that often is found in animated series, is their another explanation?

If the answer for the above question is that Mordred is not the product of incest, than is he the biological son of Lot and Morgause, yet have some special paternal bond with Arthur (ie. godfather or such)?

Greg responds...

I don't see me changing one of the fundamental relationships of the legends, i.e. Mordred being Arthur's illegit son by his half-sister. Assuming it was televised, I don't see me dwelling on the incest angle, but I wouldn't have contradicted it either.

Response recorded on October 10, 2003

Bookmark Link

As requested...

Todd sent the following to me in response to my request for a quick info fix...

Dear Greg,

I hope that you don't mind me e-mailing you directly about Roger Lancelyn Green, but I thought that this was the quickest way
of getting the information to you (given the length of the queue and the fact that I know that you don't dare read much of the
comment room because many of the people there post "creativity demons" there).

At any rate, you're correct about the spelling: it is Roger Lancelyn Green. The title of the book is "King Arthur and his Knights
of the Round Table".

Todd Jensen


Bookmark Link

Lord Sloth writes...

1. Is Blanchefleur an original character on your part, or is she in any other older Arthurian Legends?

2. If she is in other stories, in what ways dose she vary, or stays the same as what you have planned for your version? Is she always Persival's wife?

3. If she is in other stories, do you know what books I might find reference to her in? What books I might find reference to her in?

Greg responds...

1. She's a character from Arthurian legend. The eventual wife of Sir Percival.

2. Uh... she becomes Percival's wife at the end of the grail quest. I just extrapolate from there.

3. The first one that comes to mind is Roger Lancelyn Green's book on King Arthur. Having said that, I'm not sure of the exact title or the exact spelling of Green's name. I don't have the book in front of me. (Todd, I know you and Lord Sloth are both comment room regulars. Maybe you could help me out with the spelling and title both here and in the comment room. Thanks.)

Response recorded on October 03, 2003

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

In "A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time", when Macbeth starts reading the Scrolls of Merlin out loud, the part that he's reading is about Merlin's first encounter with the young Arthur and his impressions of the future king. Something that I've occasionally wondered over is that this does seem a bit late in Merlin's life to begin his autobiography, considering how many things had already happened to him (according to traditional legend), prior to his becoming Arthur's tutor (such as his boyhood encounter with Vortigern and the ensuing battle between the dragons, becoming involved with Stonehenge, helping to bring about Uther and Igraine's meeting and Arthur's subsequent conception at Tintagel, etc.). Were the Scrolls really only a partial autobiography, beginning relatively late in Merlin's life and career? (Which, if so, is a bit of a pity, but even an incomplete autobiography's better than nothing).

Greg responds...

There are at least two obvious possibilities.

One: That it was not an autobiography (despite what Macbeth may have said at the spur of the moment) but a history of Merlin's time with Arthur.

Two: That it opened with a reference to what even at the time Merlin must have known was the most significant thing to happen in his life. And that after the intro, he would eventually start at the beginning.

I'm not going to make that call at this time. But I'm hoping it's the latter.

Response recorded on September 23, 2003

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Was arthur's alliance with gargoyles an extrapolation of Gargoyles being used on coat of arms?

Greg responds...

Not particularly.

Response recorded on August 15, 2003

Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

You've mentioned how, in the Gargoyles Universe, you see Excalibur and the Sword in the Stone as being one and the same. One thing that I found myself wondering lately was whether you'd ever worked out a plan to reconcile these two different accounts of how King Arthur got his sword.

After all, the "Lady of the Lake" account of how Arthur received Excalibur portrays him as receiving it from her some time after he became King via the Sword in the Stone, so that if Excalibur was the Sword in the Stone, he would already have it by the time that he met her. (Of course, as I recall, the movie "Excalibur" did manage to reconcile the two different versions by having Excalibur be broken under the strain when Arthur used it to defeat Lancelot and then being briefly returned to the Lady of the Lake, who restores it and gives it back to Arthur).

Of course, if you've managed to find a solution yet, you're probably choosing (and understandably so) to keep it secret for now to be saved for the possible future occasion that you get to do the "Pendragon" spin-off, but I was still wondering if you'd ever come up with a way to reconcile the two different origin-stories, seeing that you treat them as both true in the Gargoyles Universe.

Greg responds...

Well, I kinda believe (generally) in consolidation. So, for example, the Stone of Destiny is also the stone from the Sword in the Stone. The Weird Sisters are Fates, Graces and Furies, etc.

So, yes, I see Excalibur and the Sword in the Stone as being one and the same in the Gargoyles Universe. As to the exact how, well, I'd tend to follow the lead of the movie "Excalibur," probably. But I'll admit, I haven't given the specifics much thought.

Response recorded on August 14, 2003

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Does alex or merlin have enough fay blood in them to mate with non-compatible species?

Greg responds...

I'm really not sure I understand the question.

If they transform into another species than they can mate. They have enough "fay blood" to theoretically transform, but it also requires extensive training. And more training for them than for the average Child of Oberon.

Response recorded on July 29, 2003

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

Does Duval still remember Arthur?

Greg responds...

Yes.

Response recorded on July 22, 2003

Bookmark Link

Anonymous writes...

1.In which series did you plan to introduce Castle Carbonek?

Greg responds...

Well, really intro it in Pendragon, though it might appear in any of them.

Response recorded on June 18, 2003


: « First : « 25 : Displaying #46 - #70 of 348 records. : 25 » : 250 » : Last » :