A Station Eight Fan Web Site
Is the god that christians, jews, and muslims worship exist in the gargoyles universe?
Regarding the points raised by Sapphire and Todd regarding a 'Buffy' crossover: although I'm not massively well-versed in 'Buffy' stuff the biggest problem (and quite a big one at that) strikes me as the difference in views of good and evil. 'Buffy', as I see it, takes the footing that there's good and there'd bad, so you kill the bad guys and have a nice day. 'Gargoyles' always picked up on shades of grey though - 'there is good and evil in everybody' being, I suppose, the obvious quote. I don't know if this is misrepresenting 'Buffy' - or even 'Gargoyles'. Greg?
The only characters who strike me as really being evil for the sake of it are Jackal, Hyena, Wolf and maybe Iago. Demona is bad, but we saw her capable of goodness in 'THE RECKONING' and to an extent in 'CITY OF STONE'. Or at least we saw her reasoning. But even the above four characters seem evil by circumstance - Jackal and Hyena seem to be motivated by money and thrills, Wolf by action and the 'thrill of the hunt', and Iago by lust (love?) for Desdemona. But these aren't presented as evil simply because they're demons and that's what they do.
Greg, do you think there is a race that is innately evil?
I don't, no.
The Buffy Universe has it both ways. They show plenty of well-meaning Demons and vamps, like Angel. Plenty of grey in the Buffyverse. But also plenty of pure evil. Pure good? Well, that's harder to find. Duller too.
Note to Sapphire about the "Gargoyles/Buffy" crossover possibility:
While my thoughts on this one probably count less than Greg's (he's the creator of the series; I'm just one of the fans), I do think that such a crossover, while in some ways more feasible than, say, "Gargoyles/Batman" or "Gargoyles/Superman", does have a few snags to be overcome. One is legal ownership (Disney owns "Gargoyles", WB "Buffy"). Another is geography (Buffy and Co. live on the West Coast, the gargoyles on the East Coast).
(Of course, there's no danger as yet of "Gargoyles Universe" vampires being incompatible with the Buffyverse, since all that we know about "Gargoyles Universe" vampires is that they're vulnerable to silver - Princess Katharine mentions this in "Ill Met By Moonlight" - which doesn't contradict any statements about vampires in "Buffy").
But as I said, I don't view such a crossover as something all that likely for the near future, myself.
Not at all likely. But it might be fun to think about in a non-canon vein.
If you were to do any crossovers between Gargoyles and another show what will they be?
If Gargoyles were to come back I would like to see a Gargoyles/Buffy the Vampire Slayer crossover
I answered this recently. Mostly, I think there are a lot of shows that would be fun in a parallel universe non-cannon way.
I love Buffy, but I'm not sure how the two universes would interact.
A rather silly question, admittedly, but:
What has been the impact of Goliath and his clan in Manhattan (particularly Bronx) on the pigeon population in the city?
Little. They don't hunt them. After a while even a pigeon will learn that there are certain places (like the Clock Tower and the Castle) that you just don't want to hang at.
Semi-personal question for you Greg... Have you ever seen the series Robotech or Starblazers? If you have, what did you think?
Is "Starblazers" the big battleship Yamamoto thing? cuz if so, I think decades ago I saw a tv movie version.
I've never seen Robotech.
1.Does Wolf have any problems with fleas?
2.What about the Mutates at the Labyrinth?
Hi, this is something that just recently started bugging me. Did you and the others make up the term "By the Dragon"
just for a figure of expression or does it have historical reference? (Just one of those things that get stuck in your head and your not happy till you figure out why, you know?)
I'm not saying.
What would the gargoyles think of the likes of Britney Spears and all that other pop music?
Are there any non-magical 'traditional' ESP/psychic powers in the Gargoyles universe?
In another sense of voting...
1.) In the gargoyles universe, could they fight for citizenship?
2.) Could they vote for a govenor or even a president?
3.) Could they run for office?
1. Citizenship of what?
2. At what point in time?
In "Vendettas", after Vinnie creams Goliath with his pie, he walks off humming the theme music to "Gargoyles". How does he know the tune? After all, I think that we can safely assume that the television program doesn't exist in the universe that it creates.
I think he made it up. But mostly it's an in-joke. The homeless guy in 3x3 Eyes also hums the Gargoyles Theme. (Said guy voiced by yours truly). Also an in-joke.
do you know of the poem Tam Lin?
Of it, yes.
Just read your last ramble (the one posted a few minutes ago about deciding to make Goliath one of a species rather than a human turned into a gargoyle) and thought that I'd ask this: What is "Zot!"? I can't recall hearing of it before.
I could tell you, but you'd be better off hearing it from the source, i.e. Scott McCloud. Check out:
In brief, ZOT! is one of my all-time favorite comic books. Now it's on-line.
In the opening sequence to "Gargoyles", Goliath talks about how his clan was "betrayed by the humans we had sworn to protect". One thing that puzzles me a bit about that line, however, is that only one human in the community of Castle Wyvern took part in the betrayal of the castle to the Vikings - the Captain of the Guard. Which makes the use of "humans", plural, a bit puzzling. How does it fit in? Is Goliath in the opening speech refering to the unfriendliness and ingratitude of Princess Katharine and her subjects as well as the Captain's deal with the Vikings? (The former is a bit of a stretch as "betrayal", admittedly).
I think there's a general bitterness there. Princess Katharine created the environment that fostered the betrayal. Also, it's narration. Goliath is speaking (on some level at least) of the generic treatment that gargoyles received at the hands of humans.
Mostly, it just sounds better.
What would Lexington think about this whole Napster deal?
(it's late...insomnia makes me think of strange things)
I don't know what Napster is.
Who, in your opinion, is the most dangerous villain in the Gargoyles universe in the epic sense?
I don't like quantifying things.
Regarding Mr. Freeze:
Well, I don't read much batman comics, but I do recall one that I did read where Batman mentions he originally fought mr Freeze as Mr Zero. So, i think that Freeze and Zero are in fact the same person.
Maybe. Or maybe that's retcon at work.
I'm pretty confident, even though my old WHO'S WHO IN THE DC UNIVERSE are packed for the move. God knows I may be wrong, but I was a DC employee for about eight years.
And by the way, it's refreshing to have a post that is NOT related to the contest.
i never read it but a friend has a book on all the ins and outs of the trek universe. he said that the original series klingons were a sub race created by the ridge headed klingons to infiltrate the humans. or something to that extent.
Clearing some things up:
"One question: I saw a scene in the preview that I don't think was in the movie. The villain is cut in half and then mends himself immediately."
Here's a quote from the movies.ign.com review of Endgame:
"(Oh, and if you were going to Endgame to see the cool effects from the trailer -- Kell splitting himself in two, or stopping a sword in mid-air -- then you might want to know that those bits aren't in the movie. I've heard that the effects stuff was cut because they didn't want the big villain to be "super-powerful" -- if Kell could beat Duncan and Connor early on with his superpowers, why not at the big climax? By making Kell simply an immortal that had killed more immortals than anyone else, it levels the playing field and doesn't give him the cop-out of superpowers, but means that Duncan and Connor have to simply be more skilled (their combined effort) to defeat him, not suddenly come into some superpowers. I liked that they changed it, actually, as it makes him a much more believable villain.)"
"And Mr. Freeze, was , by the way a creation -- i'm pretty sure -- of the Adam West Batman series."
I don't remember where I saw it, but on some sort of Batman documentary (webpage? book? TV show?) they showed the cover of the comic with Mr. Freeze's first appearance. He wasn't even Mr. Freeze, he was called Mr. Zero (Captain Zero? Something like that). So I think he does predate the Adam West series. But even then it looks like the cold thing was originally just a gimmick like you said.
Thanks for the Endgame info. I agree that the super-powers wouldn't have helped. Just better motivation.
But I think that Mr. Freeze thing is a stretch. There have been a TON of "cold" villains, going back at least to the forties. None of them were Mr. Freeze. I'm pretty sure, still, that Freeze was a creation of the Adam West Batman Series.
I was wondering if there are different implications in your answers--"maybe" and "not saying". The former, at least to me, seems to imply that you may not have worked out the answer yet. Then again, rather than "not saying"--which clearly states that you don't want to reveal the answer because it's information that you want to keep secret--saying "maybe" could be your way of hiding the significance of an answer. You don't want to say "not saying", because then the fan will become suspicious that the answer might reveal more than originally thought.
So are there different meanings behind the two answers? I was just wondering because they seem to follow most of my questions of late. =P
O.K. Maybe serves a lot of functions for me. You can't pinhole it that much, because I don't.
Not saying, is pretty self-explanatory.
In reference to the Lloyd Alexander question that you got and your own answer to it:
Yep, the Disney movie "The Black Cauldron" was based on Lloyd Alexander's books - the first two books in his "Chronicles of Prydain" series.
Some more Highlander discussion. (I must be on the wrong board or something)
"But I kinda liked endgame. I just thought the villain's motivation was beyond feeble. O.K. for a tv episode. But not nearly potent enough to cause the end of Connor."
Agreed. Clancy's Kurgan reigns supreme as the series best villain.
"One question: I saw a scene in the preview that I don't think was in the movie. The villain is cut in half and then mends himself immediately. Did you see that or am I imagining things?"
As far as I know that was from Highlander 3.
"And also I saw something in the preview that wasn't"
??? This appears to be an unfinished statement… Or a rather disjointed thought. Either way some clarification would help. (HA! When was the last time one of us got to say that to you?)
Okay, how about a question? (Or two, counting this one) Why do my questions appear so eloquent when I write them, yet seem to exasperate you when you read them? On second thought, this is probably best left to introspection. Or sarcasm. ;)
The last guy got what I was talking about and confirmed I wasn't crazy. Disjointed maybe, but not crazy.
Sometimes, it's just my mood. Don't take me too seriously.
This has to do with highlander: ENDGAME
you asked a question about previews with the bad guy being split in two.
I did see that preview, but it wasnt in the movie. Also i saw a preview with him having a bubble with connor's face in it, and he blew it away, and connor screamed.
Yeah, so what's the deal?
"Splinter of the Mind's Eye," right? Had to be; it was the only Star Wars novel produced between '77 and '93. It's probably the worst Star Wars book in existence. Definitely not representative of the stuff that has been produced since 1993. The relationship between the quality of what you read and the quality of the current books is similar to the relationship between The Goliath Chronicles and Gargoyles. If you ever do decide to read another Star Wars book, I can guarantee you that you won't be as disappointed as when you read this one.
It sounds familiar, but I'm not sure. I think I'd recognize the Author's name, though I can't summon it up at the moment.
Do any gargoyles believe in communism?
Have any read Marx?
I'll have to agree with 'puck40': Timothy Zahn's Starwars trilogy was great. All the rest of the Starwars books I've read have truly, *truly* sucked but Zahn's trilogy is different... And it has an absolutely *amazing* villain, someone whose brilliance you can truly respect. No 'Return of the Jedi'-Emperor this one.
Anyway, assuming you *ever* choose to give a Starwars book a chance, Zahn's 'Heir to the Empire' is the thing.
O.K. I'll keep it in mind.
Another one of these "fan questions":In an Episode(I lost the name again...should look more videos) the trio returns from an concert. my question is, what band was it(I first thought the Smaching Pumpkins are doing a gig aroud that day)? Please help me with that. For now no more questions...FOR NOW!
Sorry, John. You'll have to give me a bit more clues as to the episode.
Just out of my own insane curiosity...If you could do one crossover, just one, with Gargs and something else, what would it be? Could be anything from a tv show to a movie to a comic. Disney, Warner Brothers, Universal, etc.
On a personal standpoint, I like the idea of X-Men/Gargoyles. They have pretty much the same goals and are treated the same. They want to protect the people who hate them because they are different and the characters are so very colorful in both sets.
X-Men/Gargoyles leaves me a bit cold.
Nothing immediately grabs me. It all feels kinda forced.
Batman in a vacuum maybe?
There aren't any easy fits that come to mind. Did you see the Gargoyles/Justice League Europe cross-over? It was palatable because it was played for laughs.
Recent posts have brought up Sean Connery and First Knight, which as you all know, was a horrible translation of the Arthurian Legend. So much of the epic was mutilated that I'm surprised they didn't just start from scratch. But Connery almost saves it. Almost. He's so perfect for the role that whenever he's onscreen all the crappiness of the rest of film seems to blur into the background. He uplifted Dragonheart the same way. The two films were released around the same time and I had high hopes for both. Unfortunately neither lived up to my expectations. But Connery did. He's was perfect as Arthur and perfect as the dragon Draco. I only wish those films lived up his skill and their original premise. He's an actor that can single-handedly turn an atrocious movie into a tolerable one (Highlander II). Truly one of best out there. I just wish he'd done a voice on Gargoyles. Hey, a guy can dream can't he?
Wasn't Dragonheart YEARS after First Knight?
Have you ever read the children's book "God Bless the Gargoyles" (I forget the author's name)? It's a book written for young children dealing with gargoyles, in a way that struck me as thematically close to the series (the gargoyles are portrayed as having been raised up on churches to protect them from evil, but then humans come to fear and dislike them, grieving the gargoyles - until a flight of angels come to comfort them).
No, never have.
Some of your posts indicate that you're a Highlander fan, or at least are familiar with the original movie and some of the T.V. series. I was wondering if you'd seen Highlander: Endgame yet. While not as good as the original, it was easily the best of the sequels, taking the best from the show and first movie and combining them into a poignant package. I went into this movie with a sense of despair (understandable, due to the last two big screen fiascos) and came out pleasantly surprised. The battle choreographing was topnotch too, on par with The Matrix and The Phantom Menace. Overall I consider seeing Highlander: Endgame a good use of an afternoon.
I did see Endgame. I kinda enjoyed it. I agree it's the best of the sequels.
The property as a whole is wildly inconsistent.
It's full of terrific ideas that never quite jell together, never totally make sense.
Some of the tv episodes were truly great. Others were just o.k. Some were godawful.
But I kinda liked endgame. I just thought the villain's motivation was beyond feeble. O.K. for a tv episode. But not nearly potent enough to cause the end of Connor.
One question: I saw a scene in the preview that I don't think was in the movie. The villain is cut in half and then mends himself immediately. Did you see that or am I imagining things?
And also I saw something in the preview that wasn't
Hey there, Greg. Since my last questions seemed to have been devoured by the Internet Goblin, I'll repost them, rather than trying to ask you directly using 'The Force'. ;)
1. When asked about Mab not long ago you wrote: 'She's MAD, I tell you, MAD, MAD! BWAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAAAAA'. Putting all jesting aside, is she insane?
2. If the answer to #1 is yes, was she this way prior to her incarceration/banishment or as a result of it?
3. Do the Fae in general feel that Oberon was justified in overthrowing her? Or are there holdout followers of the former ruler? Old school Mabites. =)
4. How can Oberon be so petulant and conceited? Despite all the centuries he's been around he still hasn't learned how to act like an adult. It's highly ironic that he banished the Fae from Avalon to teach them humility when he has so little himself (not exactly a model of introspection is he?). Not to mention that his son Merlin is renowned for his wisdom and for mentoring the noble Arthur. Yet Oberon himself seems devoid of all leadership qualities. He forbids his people from directly interfering with mortal affairs then blatantly breaks his own edict when he tries to kidnap Alexander. How can he be the ruler of an entire species and be blissfully ignorant to the fact that no one is above the law, especially the ruler? Sorry, that was more of an opinionated comment rather than a question.
5. Merlin is Half-Fae. So does he use human magic, Fae magic, or a combination of both? I am assuming that he was the one who enchanted the iron suits of armor guarding the sleeping Arthur. Such a feet of conjuration seems very difficult for someone who uses just Fae or human magic, but if Merlin used both then I can see how it's feasible. However, wouldn't that be mixing magics? And isn't that inherently dangerous?
(Listen to me! Talking about magic being feasible! This reminds me of all the discussions I've had with other Trekkers about why/how modern Klingons possess ridged heads and Original Series Klingons don't. Obsession on minutia: the hallmark of the fan. You can quote me on that).
1 & 2. I never said she WENT insane, which I think is what your question implies. She is what she is. Mad, I tellyou, Mad, Mad!!
3. In general, a sigh of relief was breathed. But nothing's ever unanimous.
4. I know a lot of adults who behave MUCH worse than Oberon with a hell of a lot less justification for their arrogance. Don't you?
Everything's relative. Oberon is hardly devoid of leadership qualities. You don't like him so you're not paying close attention. He's the one that banished his arrogant race and caused many if not all of them to learn something about mortals. The old Titania in particular made Oberon seem like Mr. Maturity. Admittedly, she changed and he didn't. But she wouldn't have changed if HE hadn't forced her to learn certain lessons. He's also the guy who created the non-interference law. He didn't have to do that. He wanted to.
You accuse him of blatantly breaking it, but how human of you. He didn't feel he was breaking the law at all. As the ultimate Supreme Court Judge in this matter, he "ruled" that Fox was human, but that Alex was not. Taking Alex would therefore not be breaking his law.
Look at Elian Gonzales. Literally millions of well-meaning people disagreed on how to handle that. Some thought he should go back to his father in Cuba. Others believed he should stay with relatives in the U.S. Oberon acted as a judge in (what he honestly believed would be) the best long-term interests of the child. You and I may disagree, but we're clearly as biased as he is. And when another viable option was presented to him, he relented. A truly immature un-leaderlike guy would NEVER have relented. It's not like he was defeated. It's not like Fox's one surprising powerblast represented any real threat to him.
Try to stand in his shoes for a minute. You see a child, who runs the risk of being crippled if he stays with his real parents. On the other hand, there's a grandmother (who happens to be your wife) who can raise the boy to be happy and healthy on the paradise of Avalon. Who's to say Oberon was really wrong? [O.K. I think he was wrong. On the other hand, I think Elian's relatives were wrong to keep him from his father. And I'm sure to this day, they sincerely believe they were right.] My point is that people of good intentions sometimes disagree. So when you judge Oberon so harshly, who exactly is being immature?
5. Both, but never at the same time or on the same thing.
As for Klingons, I always had this theory that Q altered the entire Klingon race without telling anyone as an experiment. That the Klingons weren't this race of honor until Q messed with them, changing even their memories, history and religion. I think someday, he might offer them the chance to change back.
Thanks for answering my question about "Roswell Conspiracy". Here's another one, while I'm at it.
In the completed pilot that I saw, the Banshees were ruled by Queen Mab and were described as vulnerable to cold iron (among other things). Were these two details from the original script that you wrote for it that got extensively revised by your successor? (Knowing you, I suspect that they were, but I just wanted to make certain).
(Incidentally, I thought that the Banshees in that one looked very much like Luna (the silver-haired Weird Sister).)
I had some specific kind of space iron that they were vulnerable to. (I had a name for it. I can't remember it now.) I had a whole LONG family tree leading to Siobhan (my female lead) worked out. And a time-line which they were, NOT supposed to use, but which I gather they adapted. There was a Mab equivalent in the family tree. Probably at the head of it. And there was a Shee Mother figure that was Siobhan's mother.
Suddenly, I have a bad taste in my mouth.
A rather different question from the odd ones I usually deluge you with..
You said you had watched the Anthony Hopkins movie MAGIC, which, if it's the movie I'm thinking of, I enjoyed greatly. Still, I haven't watched it in years, and I can't remember the ending(I was sick while watching it), except that it was one of those surprise interesting endings..
1) Is this movie about Hopkins playing a ventriloquist and the dummy talking to him?
2) If so, then it's the movie I'm thinking of..what is the ending?
2. It's grim. He kills himself to keep himself from killing Ann-Margaret.
Great film. Great performance. Hannibal Lecter's got nothing on this guy.
This isn't a question about TGC so much as an aspect of the show:
I know the Quarrymen was one idea you had a hand in that was put into TGC. I was wondering about the PIT Crew. They kind of struck me as a cross between a regular political activist group and those idealistic, over zealous animal lovers that I keep hearing about(y'know, the ones that believe all animals are noble and pure compared to humans, which could be but I digress). Clearly, they were the foil to the Quarrymen.
1) Did you have anything to do with adding the PIT Crew? if so, answer number 2.
2a) What were some plans you had for the group over the length of the show?
2b) Was it possible that a couple new major characters were going to come out of the group?
I had nothing to do with the PIT Crew.
ok, heres one i didnt see in the archives. i looked! im sure it must have been asked at one time, and if so, just tell me to go find it, but JUST IN CASE it hasnt been asked:
the fact that gargs carve in to the stone when they climb it should technically dictate that there are lots of little holes on the outside of the castle. we dont generally see these per se, but that doesnt mean theyre not there. did prince malcom or does xanatos have masons going around filling the holes? ^_^ (dumb question, sorry. ;P)
Kelly, I need you to audio-tape your questions. I miss hearing that voice.
Not Malcolm. And Xanatos would only initiate repairs if the aesthetic of the castle (or it's pragmatic functions) was damaged. Most of those little holes wouldn't qualify.
[Todd Jensen (repost by Aris) writes...
In the recent "Meet the Pros" chat, Cary Bates said that there might have eventually been introduced into the series a gargoyle named "Staten". Is that the case, or was he just joking?
Joking. Trust me. Joking.]
My question is: What was the joke?
If all the planets aligned just right would you ever consider doing s cross-over? Like Gargs/Batman. Gargs/X-Men. Gargs/Spider-Man Etc. There shall be a 20 year blizzard in the Sahara when if it happened, but just hypothetically...
Maybe. But not with any of the shows you named. They're all parts of LARGER Universes that I don't think would fit, unless the idea of the cross-over was like that old DC Earth-1/Earth-2 thing. Where the various characters are traveling between dimensions. Otherwise a story with these characters would have to be non-canon.
But if you want to see a Garg/Justice League cross-over, check out that parody story I wrote for DC Comics.
Does the survival of the Loch Ness Monster have anything to do with the fae or the Zeroth/Lost Race?
Again with the Zeroth? What is that? Did I use that term? If so, I don't remember.
Do any other dinosaurs besides the Loch Ness Monster survive in the Gargoyles universe?
Congrats on catching up to the queue somewhat.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Gargoyles, I promise.
Have you read any of the Harry Potter books?
I've just started reading the first one and it's so great.
I'm way jealous.
Hello! I couldn't find this in the archieves so I was wondering if you had ever seen the Gargoyles paroday Lawn Gnomes and if so if you had any thoughts on it. It aired as part of one of the Freakazoid episodes (currently being rerun on Cartoon Network). Thanks for your time and for Gargoyles!
I saw it at a Gathering. I think in '98. I thought it was mildly amusing.