A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Ask Greg Archives
WEISMANSWERS 2009-05 (May)
Archive Index
: « First : « 25 : Displaying #36 - #60 of 87 records. : 25 » : Last » :
Posts Per Page: 1 : 10 : 25 : 50 : All :
Mike writes...
I'm sorry if this question has already been asked before but when do you expect to get any news on Season 3? Also how is your "cause" to get Season 3 on production?
Greg responds...
My "cause"? I don't know what you mean.
We'd expect news on Season Three sometime after Season Two begins airing on Disney XD, i.e. NO SOONER than late June. Probably more like July.
Galax writes...
I'm so sorry, I forgotten to tell which show I mean ^^
Of course Gargoyles ;)
So I ask again:
Can you tell me, which Animationstudio produced the episodes of the show?
Maybe a name of one or all?
thx a lot.
btw: keep on to bringing Gargoyles alive! :)
Greg responds...
Oh. Sorry, I guess I was in Spider-Man mode.
As for Gargoyles, the series was produced by Walt Disney Television Animation. Most of the first season episodes and many of the second season episodes were animated by Walt Disney Television Animation - Tokyo. Some others were animated in Korea by Han Ho. There were other studios too, but it's been too long, and I don't remember off the top of my head.
Galax writes...
Hi Greg.
Can you tell me, which Animationstudio produced the episodes of the show?
Maybe a name of one or all?
thx a lot.
Greg responds...
Sony TV Animation produced the series. But if you mean what studios animated them, we used Dong Wu, Han Ho & Moi.
RTS writes...
*SPIDEY SPOILERS*
Hi Greg.
Great work on Season 2, I might not know exactly how the system works, but I see no reason why it shouldn't be renewed. Hopefully by the time you answer this you will have good news to tell about that, but for now, a few questions regarding what's been done so far.
1) In season 2 episode 8, "Accomplices", we see Black Cat spray something onto a window before going through it, we then see the window wobble around or something after she goes into the vent. What did she do to the window, exactly?
2) Was the lead into Hobie Brown first speaking in the role of Puck something you planned well ahead of time, or did Hobie's silence become a running joke before you made that decision?
3) On the subject, any chance that you tried to get Brent Spiner to do the role?
4) In "Growing Pains", I couldn't help noticing that a certain "Greg Weisman" is named on the cast list shown at the end. I was just wondering whether you have ever performed any role in "A Midsummer Night's Dream", since it is mentioned in one of the FAQs that you've taken acting classes in the past.
5) You're the best. (This isn't a question)
Greg responds...
SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!!
1. First she melted the real glass with acid. Then she replaced it with a reflective "paper" that mimicked the look of the glass. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
2. The former.
3. The role of Hobie? No.
4. Yes, I've been in "Midsummer" as Theseus and in another production as Philostrate.
5. Right back at ya.
Kyle Tonarella writes...
I just want to apologize for asking for the black cat question and say i won't bug you anymore about your season 3 plans. I'll just stop asking season 3 questions and support the show buying the season box set for starters and watching the show disney XD which I've been doing.
Greg responds...
Thanks!
Thomas writes...
Alright, you've had Venom in season 1 and 2 or 'The Spectacular Spider-Man, and you gave Cletus Kassidy a cameo in season 2. Does this mean your going to introduce Carnage into the fray, or would that be a bit much for the show?
Greg responds...
No comment.
Michael Byrne writes...
Hey, Greg! Just wanted to say that I loved every new episode of Season 2, all the way up to Goblin and Spidey's climactic battle! But...there is something I want to understand about [[spoiler]] Norman. Why did he go to such measures to take over the Big Man's empire after his identity was guessed by Spidey? I mean, Normie has it all: a great tech company, a loyal son, and a home people only dream of renting. Was he trying to protect all that from others by taking command, or was he simply an ungrateful tyrant obsessed with power and money? I mean, I know he cares about his son in little amounts...but I just can't fathom the reasons for why he did what he did.
Either way, it's been a great two seasons so far, and I encourage you to keep the dream of a season 3 alive. This series, simply put, is lightning in a bottle.
Greg responds...
SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!
Well, my gut reaction is to say if it isn't clear what kind of guy he is from the episodes themselves (let alone 40+ years of continuity) then nothing I say here is going to matter much. But basically, he wanted MORE.
Denis writes...
Hello, Greg!
For a while, now, I've been wondering about something.
For how long has Jason Canmore been sentenced?
Sure he destroyed law enforcement building, but as far as we know, there's been no loss of (human)lives in their actions, his and his sibblings'.
Thanks in advance
Greg responds...
I don't know that he has been sentenced yet -- or tried. It's only been a few months, and he was in the hospital for quite a bit of that.
Litwolf writes...
Has there been a selection made in the guest who will write the introduction to Clan-Building volume 2? And is there going to be a guest intro for Bad Guys?
Greg responds...
There's no intro to Clan-Building Volume 2. I haven't seen the Bad Guys proofs yet.
Tom Daylight writes...
Hi Greg,
Congratulations on putting together the best screen adaptation of Spider-Man of all time. I was particularly impressed with your Green Goblin whodunnit. I wonder if you're going to take a similar approach to the Hobgoblin story?
As far as I can see, there are not only a ton of "red herring" candidates in the source material (in fact Roger Stern said it could have been absolutely anyone other than Peter Parker and Robbie - and indeed he invited his replacement Tom DeFalco to unmask Hobgoblin as anyone he liked, although ironically he'd left the book by the time that happened), there's at least four alternative candidates you could genuinely cast in the role (names and descriptions omitted for the sake of spoiler aversion; I hope you know which I'm referring to). The character who was unmasked and officially was the first Hobgoblin for nine years, the character who was revealed to actually be the original Hobgoblin after all that time (mainly due to some writer switches), the character who took on the Hobgoblin's mantle after believing he'd murdered the first one, and the character who became Hobgoblin in Ultimate Spider-Man.
So the way I see it, the casting of this character won't be as clear-cut as "the guy it technically was in the comics all along", because in reality it was a whole bunch of different characters depending on when you were reading it. And casting Montana as Shocker, Tombstone as the Big Man, etc, suggests to me that you're not afraid of playing against the diehards' expectations. So, presuming there is a season three... will this kind of thing play into your Hobgoblin story, or will you be introducing him more as a viewer-in-on-everything supervillain?
Hey, maybe you could even satisfy that Robbie fan by making him a suspect this time. :)
Greg responds...
No comment.
THE BIG CHEESE writes...
Hi Greg. I have always wondered why did you make the Big Man of Crime Tombstone? Because in the comics, Tombstone was a hitman. Thanks. Please write me back.
Greg responds...
As I've stated (many times) before, our original plan was to use Kingpin, but he turned out to be unavailable to us. Tombstone seemed like a character who would well-fit that roll, and I think that proved true. I'd still like to have a shot at Kingpin some day, but I can hardly regret how things turned out.
Todd Jensen writes...
A comment, inspired by my last question about the Standards & Practices deaths.
Many of the "deaths by falling" that you had in the series, such as Findleach's and Gillecomgain's, were there simply because of S&P, and I don't think that it would have made a sizable difference to the story and characterization if, say, Gillecomgain had run Findlaech with a sword instead.
But it made good dramatic sense, I think, to have the Captain and Hakon die that way. One of the crucial points of "Awakening"'s opening was Goliath being driven to despair by one blow after another, to the point where he finally commits suicide (in a sense). The Captain and Hakon falling off the cliff rather than being ripped to shreds by Goliath worked there; now, not only has Goliath's clan been massacred, but he can't even exact vengeance upon the two people most responsible for his loss. It brings him one step closer to devastation.
So I think that even without Standards & Practices, it was a good idea to have the Captain and Hakon die that way.
Greg responds...
Me too.
Todd Jensen writes...
In "City of Stone", you had Findlaech, Gillecomgain, and Duncan all die by either falling off something or getting burned up by the Weird Sisters' magic, to make the methods of their deaths acceptable for Standards & Practices.
But in Part Four, you had Canmore temporarily slay Macbeth by running him through with a sword. Did you have any difficulty with Standards & Practices over that?
Greg responds...
Nope. Because (a) the audience saw no details of the event and (b) a few seconds later he stood up.
Anonymous writes...
"I did read "One More Day" and I read the first year or so of "Brand New Day" before my workload overwhelmed me. It would be pretty hypocritical of me to rant against the resetting of timelines, since in essence that's what I've done on this show. "
How would it be hypocritical? You are starting a new universe from scratch with the benefit of hindsight. Marvel reset an existing universe to a status quo that hadn't existed in two decades.
What are your thoughts on the marriage between Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson? Do you think it was a good idea? Marvel, and a lot of anti-marriage fans seem to be stuck on this Spider-Archie character. It's like they don't want their characters to grow and evolve.
Spider-Man has always seemed to be a story about coming of age and growing up. That seems to be the theme of your show also.
Did Marvel drop the ball and lose sight of who this character is? Because it seems that way to me.
I would have loved to see him as a dad, raising Baby May with Mary Jane, but Marvel chose to have Norman Osborn kidnap or kill that child (they never said what happened) because they felt it would age him.
But what sucks the most is that Stan Lee was the one who married them. It's what he wanted for his characters. What Marvel did to them would be like some future writer of "Gargoyles" deciding that it's boring if Goliath and Elisa get together because the tension there was the core of the relationship and resets their entire relationship back to what it was in the first episode.
Greg responds...
SIMPSONS SPOILERS!!!!
Personally, I like characters who grow and change. My all time favorite episode of The Simpsons, is the one where Lisa is having her fortune told and we flash-forward to her in college, falling in love and NOT getting married.
But when you're working on a commercial property that fundamentally has to work commercially, it can be tough when your series has evolved beyond its original premise, especially when you have MULTIPLE authors who have pushed and pulled the thing in multiple (well-intentioned) directions over the course of 40+ years. (Stan wasn't REALLY the guy who married Pete & M.J., no matter how much he participated in the decision and execution of the wedding itself. His run on the book had long since ended.)
Ttake the argument to it's natural extreme. Let's say, to be generous, that Pete was 15 in 1962. So now in 2009, he's 62-years-old. By all rights, if we really wanted to see him change and grow over time, we wouldn't be reading about Pete and M.J. raising baby May. We'd be reading about Pete and M.J. attending May's wedding and the birth of HER kids. (Or whatever.) And we'd be seeing a 62-year-old Spidey swinging around the city... or seriously considering retirement (or whatever).
Now, me? Yeah, actually, that REALLY interests me. It totally does. But I get why it's a commercial nightmare -- and you must also.
You ask how would it be hypocritical of me to rant against resetting timelines, but the answer is pretty obvious. Sony and Marvel approach me about doing a new Spidey show, and I pitch them a sixteen-year-old Pete in high school in 2008. I'm resetting. (You call it "starting a new universe from scratch", but really, what's the difference?) I could have pitched them: I'd like to see Spider-Man as a grandpa. They wouldn't have bought it and frankly, as much as it interests me, I'm not sure I'd have wanted to do it as a Saturday morning cartoon even if they had said yes.
And bringing up an ensemble show like Gargoyles with (more or less) a single guiding hand is really apples and oranges. I can evolve the premise and the relationships and even age the characters, because I can constantly add younger characters at the other end to maintain commerciality. Best of both worlds.
But with a single character property like Spider-Man, what happens when you've aged him beyond his premise. Do you live with it? Do you try to make it work commercially anyway? Can the premise evolve? Or do you find a way to reset. There's no one right answer, but folks have to bite the bullet and decide. Once a decision is made, then it becomes about execution.
STAR TREK SPOILERS!!!
Look at the recent Star Trek movie. They took the continuity and reset it using time travel. The Spidey staff used Mephisto. The concept of the reset/clean slate was surprisingly similar. What remains is execution. Some folks may buy into the Trek reset because of the execution. Some may not. Same with Spidey. And then there are some folks who just don't like the idea of doing a reset AT ALL. That's legit too.
I had the advantage of doing an adaptation for another medium. So I could reset without any continuity excuse. And still, at the end of the day, whether people liked what I did had a lot more to do with execution than themere FACT that I did or didn't reset. Same, I'd guess, goes for One More Day/Brand New Day.
Patrick writes...
When will you post a ramble for Hunter's Moon, Part III? I really enjoy reading those, and Hunter's Moon Part III is, for my money, one of the best and most dramatic episodes of the series!
Greg responds...
I don't know. I'll try to get around to it eventually.
Clark Cradic writes...
Are there any particular Sagas you're hoping to intergrate with the Spectacular Universe? Like the Clone Saga, Six Arm Saga, Indentity Crisis Saga, or some combination?
Greg responds...
Yes.
Anonymous writes...
why is Peter not trying to be with Mary Jane? Why is it Gwen? He married Mary Jane in the comics. He was in love with Mary Jane in all the other cartoons. He was with Mary Jane in the movies. Why is she not important here?
And why this stuff with Liz? Gwen/Peter/MJ should be the triangle. Not Liz.
And Mary Jane should be who he loves, not Gwen.
Greg responds...
Well, if you read the original comics, Gwen was his first real love, and his (much later) relationship with Mary Jane was a DIRECT result of their shared grief over her death. Betty was his first girlfriend, and Liz was someone else he was into as well for a considerable period of time. M.J. was always hot, but early on, she was never interested in being a one-man woman. That's just who she was. We're trying to be true to all that, and more. So have a little patience.
Brad writes...
You answered my question about Morbius by saying that you could only confirm plans for Hobgoblin and Scorpion, but I guess what I really wanted to know was if you could actually use him at all? I've heard the 90's show had many problems clearing him for the network, not allowing him to use his fangs or say the word 'blood' (opting instead for suction cups in his hands and a desire for 'plasma'.)
Loved the first two seasons and particularly the framing devices used in the second (nice touch with the Opera), anxiously awaiting a season 3.
Greg responds...
No comment on Morbius. Thanks for the kind words.
Bazell writes...
Glad this site is back up and running. I hope you got everything done that you needed during the hiatus.
Spectacular Spider-Man has been, well, freakin' spactacular. As a life long Spider-Man fan and current comic book reader, it is with an air of nerdy sophistication that I lend my compliments to all involved in the process.
Now that my nose is sufficiently brown:
I know that translations from one established medium to another require changes and adaptation, not only in terms of style but content as well. I don't pretend to know much about the official process of adapting a story into a new format, but watching many of these television shows and movies that are based on comic book (or novel) storylines that I am intimatly framiliar with often can leave me... wanting. Even in this current show, clearly many alterations of the original storyline have been made. Certainly some of the changes are for the purposes of pacing, keeping episode count down, updating things for modern audiences, etc. But other changes seem unneceassary in terms of such thing to the casual, yet involved, viewer like me. Now understand, I am in no way asking you to justify changes that have been made to a story I already know. If it was the EXACT same story, then I would know what's going to happen at all times. I am confident that changes you and your team have made have been for the purposes of telling the best Spider-Man story you could, so my question is this: what can dictate the changes you make? Also, I assume you must seek some sort of approval from Marvel or Lee/Ditko or someone... is that oversight strict, or are you given certain measures of freedom? Are there any changes you made that you regret? What aspects of the Spider-Man mythos did you consider sacrosanct beyond the obvious necessities about his origin story?
Thank you, as always, for the time you give us fans.
Greg responds...
SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!
Marvel approves everything. But I have to say, they've been great partners -- which of course to me means they seem to love what we're doing! ;)
Changes are dictated by all the things you mentioned above, but in adapting the property, we tried to follow what we came to call "The Five Cs": Make it Contemporary, Cohesive, Coherent, Classic and iConic.
When you lay eyes on any character for the first time, especially the villains, you want the viewer to say, "Wow, yes! That IS Doctor Octopus [or whomever]!" He has to be that iconic, that classic. But at the same time we want to make his look contemporary.
The same notion applies to storytelling. Over forty plus years of continuity (with ideas coming from Lee/Ditko, Lee/Romita and everyone since including Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man and the Raimi movies, etc.), there's going to be a ton of interesting characters and story ideas, but there's also going to be considerable duplication, a false start here and there, conflicting interpretations, etc. Having the advantage of hindsight when looking at this wealth of material, we strived to make the show more coherent and cohesive than the original.
This in turn helps it feel more contemporary. Storytelling has changed over the last set of decades, and a modern audience is more sophisticated with more stringent expectations. For example, just having every villain (and your hero) created from random exposures to radiation is a bit tough to swallow... on many levels. So -- as arrogant as I know it sounds -- we try to improve on the origins, by weaving characters and plotlines together, by limiting the sources of where someone can get super-powers, etc. Likewise, we may combine two characters that overlap so much that they fulfill the same function. For example, Bennett Brant + Mark Raxton/Molten Man = Mark Allan/Molten Man, or it did for us, anyway. Doing this made things more coherent and more personal to Spider-Man/Peter.
Having said all that, it was EXTREMELY important to us that the characters remained Classic and Iconic in the writing as well as the visuals. I STUDIED these characters and all the source material intensely. I tried to get down to the core essence of each character, i.e. what made him or her who he or she was to the reader. Flash is a bully, who deep down is actually an honorable guy. He's a guy who starts out as Pete's nemesis (and ironically Spidey's biggest fan) and eventually becomes both a decorated war veteran and one of the few people that Pete can count on. We knew we were starting with High School Flash, but we wanted to plant seeds of the guy we knew he'd become.
On the other hand, I studied Shocker. Great powers. Fun battles. Iconic costume. Secret i.d. = a cypher. Yes, we know his name, but there's nothing about Herman that makes him special. So in an attempt to make our universe more cohesive and coherent, I combined Montana with Shocker. I don't make that decision likely, and I do get that this bothers some folks, but it really felt like it worked in the context of our series, and Marvel agreed.
Another example: The Green Goblin was introduced as a mystery. Stan and Steve kept us guessing as to who was the man behind the mask for years. That mystery seemed FUNDAMENTAL to the character. And yet we knew that the audience knew that Norman Osborn was the Goblin. So how do you create a fundamentally necessary mystery when the audience already knows the answer? The solution was misdirection. Many people still guessed or assumed that Norman was the Goblin, but some people were fooled (at least briefly) and because I was NOT above making Montana into Shocker, seeds of doubt were planted. There's been (thankfully) a lot of positive feedback on our second season finale. And many people said something along the lines of, "Even though I knew it was Norman Osborn, you still kept me guessing." That's exactly what we hoped would happen.
This, of course, is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many other examples. But it should give you something of a window into our very exacting process.
Vaevictis Asmadi writes...
Hello Greg,
While I was looking in the GargWiki for information about the Olympians, I saw that you wanted to know the Ancient Egyptian name for the Egyptian pantheon.
The word which can be translated as "god" is _netcher_ or _netjer_, feminine _netcheret_ or _netjeret_, plural _netcheru_ or _netjeru_. TCH and TJ are just ways to spell the CH sound at the beginning and end of English "church," without confusing it with the German or Greek CH. As with every Ancient Egyptian word, the vowels were never written down, so the vowels in netjer and netjeru are speculatively added to make N-TJ-R and N-TJ-R-W pronounceable.
Netjeru refers to all the deities, including large numbers of minor deities who are servants to the greater deities, and who are often referred to in English as "demons" or "spirits." Netjeru sometimes also include other beings: deified mortals, the _akhu_ or souls of the dead, and divine beings like Ammut and Apophis that were not worshipped. Netjeru can also include the _bau_, which are "manifestations or emanations" send forth from a deity.
I do not know if netjer was also used to refer to gods of other religions, but I'm guessing it was.
What I have told you comes from Richard Wilkinson's "The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt." In my non-expert opinion this is one of the best books on Egyptian Mythology that I have seen for the non-specialist.
Greg responds...
Wow, that's seriously helpful, both the info and the reference book. I'm definitely buying that book! Thanks.
Anonymous writes...
Hi...
Can we see th Chameleon in season three?
Can we see the Lizard in season three, too?
Will Sandman be back in season three?
Will Rhino return for a third season?
Do you have plans for Doc Ock be in more than one episode for season three?
Is Venom going to be back for season three?
Can Mysterio be back in season three?
~ Thanx
Greg responds...
And again, no comment. NO COMMENT on what's planned for Season Three, beyond the arrival of Hobgoblin and Scorpion. Those are two BIG spoilers. And I'm not giving out any others.
BackLash writes...
Hello sir,
1. In episode 9 "The Uncertainty Principle, who was that "cheerleader" in the ping wig and green jacket, hanging out with Flash and the "girls"?
2. How come Montana is the Shocker in the show?
3. If there is later seasons, will Bluebird or Prowler make appearances?
Greg responds...
1. Uh... honestly, it's been so long since I saw that episode, it's hard to remember which guy was wearing the pink wig. Was it Rand? Kenny? Hobie? Tiny?
2. I've addressed this. Check the archives.
3. No comment.
Branden Harvey writes...
The show is great. I LOVED both seasons (especally Final Curtain). I have a few questions:
1. SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If Norman framed Hary in The Uncertainty Principle, how come Harry was switching back and forth between himself and the Goblin persona?
2. SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In First Steps, how was Eddie able to make a web when he didn't have the symbiote on?
3. How long will it take after you get the ok for a third season to produce the season and make it available for television?
Thanks.
Greg responds...
SPIDEY SPOILERS!!!!!
1. Huh?
2. He created a web-shooter, since he had all of Peter's memories.
3. About ten months, give or take.
Anonymous writes...
Hello Mr.Greg Weisman i want to give some compliments about Spectacular Spider-Man.
1.DOCTOR OCTOPUS.
Doctor Octopus is one of my favorite Spider-Man Villains(others are Venom,Green Goblin,Lizard And Carnage).I like him very much in your show.In 90's animated series he was good,but later was just henchmen for Kingpin like much villain in 90's show.In your show he is very cool and evil character.In all of his episodes best were Reaction And Shear Strenght(that's my opinion)and there he was 100 percent EVIL(Like he should be).I also liked how in Group Therapy he showed interested in Symbiote,and in Gangland he said that criminal empire should be run like a science.You should make storyline where Dock Ock wants to test Symbionte or Become Monster-Ock(Like one of Spider-Man Games) in Season 3 or 4.Also for some reason i think that he employed Chameleon to steal Symbiote in Persona.
2.EPISODE ARCS
Idea to make episode arcs In Spectacular Spider-Man was brilliant,and Big Three(Venom,Doctor Octopus,Green Goblin)has 2 their own arcs.Venom has Symbiote and Venom arcs.Green Goblin Got First Green Goblin Arc and Return of Goblin Arcs.Doctor Octopus has Master Planner Arc And Gang War Arc.And they are like Main Villains in your show and they done worse things than any other villain.I don't like that some fans are saying that some episodes are fillers,but i don't think that way.Good luck developing storylines in future.
And i have one question.Do you plan to add another crime lord to Spectacular Spider-Man?
Greg responds...
To me, none of our episodes are filler. Certainly, none were INTENDED as filler All serve multiple purposes and hopefully tell a great story. But I'm biased, obviously.
Kyle Tonarella writes...
hey greg not really a queation just wanted to show you a video where the nostalgia critic added lyrics to the gargoyles theme.
enjoy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvnwv1L79AI
Greg responds...
Yeah, I'd seen that. But thanks.
: « First : « 25 : Displaying #36 - #60 of 87 records. : 25 » : Last » :