A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Ask Greg Archives

RESPONSES 2001 - 2 (Feb)

Archive Index


: « First : « 10 : Displaying #94 - #103 of 163 records. : 10 » : Last » :


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


Bookmark Link

matt writes...

what other spells besides the sleep counter spell were on the page of the Grimorum that Hakon burned? if you have this planned out, i'll be surprised so i really don't expect a big answer!

Greg responds...

I didn't have anything too specific in mind.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Yttrium writes...

You'd mentioned in the archive that gargoyles may be capable of having twins, yet it would be extremely, extremely rare. My question is, if a gargoyle did have twins, would they be born from the same egg, or would two eggs be laid?

---Ytt

Greg responds...

It's so rare, I hate to answer this. But I'd say one egg.

But let me emphasize that I don't see this happening naturally more than once every few hundred years.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Oberon writes...

Are the wyrd sisters the mythological
fates ?
norns ?
furies ?
horae ?
sirens?
are they classical moon goddesses selene, luna and pheobe or just named after them?
if they are these figures, do they have different forms? (personality traits?) for different names?

Greg responds...

Fates, norns, furies, moon goddesses - yes.
Sirens - No.

Horae? What are those again?

And they have many different forms. We've seen at least four on the show (plus multiple costume changes).

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Jim R. writes...

Do you think our technology will progress further than the magic of Oberon's children? When will Oberon's children reach the limitations of their magic? Would any of them possibly decide to live amongst us mortals and begin thinking scientifically, like an outcast fae, that would prefer sceince over sorcery?

Greg responds...

1. Apples and oranges.
2. Who says they will?
3. To some extent, Titania has done this already.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Corrine Blaquen writes...

Why did you decide to change Tom's name from Robby to it's present form?

Greg responds...

I didn't. One of our writers, probably Michael Reaves changed the name. I never knew why, but it seemed petty to insist on changing it back.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Entity writes...

Hi Greg,

In your latest beat sheet for the series opener, I see that the idea of the Trio being young and inexperienced was still prominant. I understand where you came from in eventually changing that, but when I first watched AWAKENING I was distraught by the Trio. Every gargoyle we saw was a full-fledged warrior. Where _were_ the inexperienced kids? The elderly? It seemed slightly out-of-sync that the Trio were such able-bodied fighters. Was the Viking attack a real threat or wasn't it?

That is just my original impression of the events of the initial Viking attack. Later on, when the gang counterattacks the camp, I can understand their participation.

I guess the battle just came off too light-heartedly when we glimped the Trio, starkly contrasting with characters like Goliath's and Demona's scenes. A real sense of danger is added by Hakon drawing Goliath's blood, boulders crashing into stone, refugees huddling about, the Captain barking orders, etc. But then we have the Trio gallavanting through the battle like it's, as Brooklyn puts it, just "fun."

I think their innocense could have been portrayed in a way that didn't detract from the realism that was so effectively installed earlier on.

This isn't intended to come off as pure criticism. AWAKENINGS was brilliant, especially Part 1. But I thought I'd mention my first impressions.

Another little thing I noticed from the beat sheet is that the flashback originally began showing the refugees entering the castle, with the Marauders/Vikings on their tail, and then both parties camp for the day till dusk. This struck me in two ways: First, it gave me a better grip of realism. Enemy attackers camping right outside the castle, both sides waiting for the battle to begin... that could've added a cool flavor to things, and immerse us more into the medieval setting. Secondly, showing the refugees herded into the castle beforehand would've better clarified the events surrounding the battle. In the final product, we jump straight into the fight and, as a result, a reason is not even necessarily needed. The Captain's off-hand comment about refugees comes off as superfluous. I remember shrugging. 'That's nice' I thought. We were in the battle. Who needed backstory? Of course, the refugees were an important component, for the sake of Tom and his mother, and to better portray the environment of 10th century Scotland. If we'd seen the prologue to the battle, that's included in the beat sheet, I think it would've been much more effective.

I guess what this comes down to in the end is my earlier message I sent to you, in which I asked about trimming episodes with Last Time and Next Time segments. You defended, saying they were useful for tightening the episodes, but I put forth, as shown here, that some valuable stuff can be lost. Of course, it's doubtful you would've wanted or could've gotten a 6th Part to AWAKENINGS, but don't you think you could use ANY extra time you have to better flesh things out?

Greg responds...

The trio are new to this warrior thing at the time of the Viking attack. Brooklyn takes it more seriously, and unfortunately we don't see much with Lex (not enough time in the episode). Broadway enjoys the battle and doesn't take it as seriously as he should. We did this on purpose in order to contrast his response in the second battle at the Viking encampment.

I don't think the realism was damaged (though, of course, you're entitled to your opinion). I just think we were showing a variety of responses to the stimuli at hand.

And we did show the elderly -- in the person of Hudson. We couldn't show everyone, so he stood in for all of his generation that still survived. The only group we didn't show at all were kids (Bronx's age). It was felt that it would just be too brutal to establish and show these kids -- only to have them smashed later.

As for the prologue, well, I liked it too. But talk about superfluous...

I mean, what would you have been willing to cut from the episode in exchange for adding that prologue. It's not like I can say, "Hey, we want this prologue. Let's animate an additional three minutes here." Ultimately we have an absolute time limit to every episode. A footage limit (based on budget concerns) that we are allowed to send overseas to be animated. Something had to go. And I think the Captain's line covers the necessary info. It might not be elegant. But it's servicable.

But don't start on the Previously and Next Time segments. They don't count. What I'm talking about is how much we were allowed to ANIMATE at our budget. That was limited to about twenty-two minutes and thirty seconds. Putting entire new sequences in would require us to speed up the pacing of everything else. Using thirty seconds for a PREVIOUSLY segment allows us to tighten pacing and cut out bad frames of animation once something is animated. Because, the truth is, nothing ever came back to us PERFECT. NOTHING.

So AGAIN, had I cut all those previously and next time segments you would not have gotten any extra scenes. You just would have had the scenes you saw with some bad animation and pacing left in. And if there's still bad animation and pacing in there -- well, trust me, we used those thirty seconds to cut out the worst of it.

We clear now?

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

LSZ writes...

Would the Loch Ness Monsters ever be featured in Dark Ages or Timedancer?

Greg responds...

Maybe.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

Aris Katsaris writes...

A question about rookery generations...

1. If the Wyvern massacre had not happened, would the Trio normally have been considered rookery parents to the eggs that would have hatched in 998? Or was the generation of the first rookery parents the one immediately older than them? (Goliath, Demona, ColdTrio, etc)

In short are rookery parents 40 or 60 years older than their first rookery children?

2. What if one of the gargoyles had mated really young (teen pregnancy) and contributed an egg by the time she was biologically 15? Ten years later would she *not* be considered a rookery mother even though she had biologically contributed an egg? Or would she be treated as an exception among her generation?

3. For that matter would Iago be considered a rookery father to the eggs simply because of his generation, even though he was mateless and hadn't contributed an egg himself? Or not?

Greg responds...

1. 60.

2. Gargoyle females aren't generally fertile by age 30 (biological age 15). This decision, frankly, was probably S&P driven originally, but I'll stick with it now. Garg females generally lay three eggs in a lifetime at age 50, 70 and 90 (biological age 25, 35 and 45). This further separates them from human biology, which I kinda like. And keep in mind, sex drive isn't limited to fertile cycles.

3. First off, did I ever say Iago was mateless? But to answer your question, Iago would likely have been viewed as a Rookery Father (or at least Rookery Uncle -- though there would be no such terminology) UNLESS he made a personal point of not accepting that responsibility.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

i'd just like to make a comment about gargoyles kissing. i think that stroking the brow ridges or hair is an extremely intelligent and important things in the garg series. first of all, it gives them some culture very different from humans and second, given that many gargs have beaks kissing becomes kinda hard to do. i'm surprised that Broadway and Angela kiss but i understand Greg's explanation that this is because of human influences on these two. good job, Greg, these subtle differences between humans and gargs really gives depth to the show!

Greg responds...

Thanks.

Response recorded on February 07, 2001

Bookmark Link

matt writes...

i have a question about gargoyle customs. you've said that Opheila is Gabriel's second in command and for a time, Demona was Goliath's second, is it common among gargs to choose their mate as second? if so, isn't that unfair to the other gargs hoping to become second, or am i thinking too much like a human?

Greg responds...

You're generally thinking too much like a human.

The bigger issue over time is age. A second should be in a position to be groomed to take over for his leader, either in case of an emergency (as when Brooklyn took over for Goliath during the World Tour) or in the case of succession, as when the older Hudson stepped down in favor of the younger Goliath.

Had things gone differently at Wyvern, eventually either Demona would have stepped down to allow a new second to be chosen from the younger generation (most likely Brooklyn) OR Goliath would have stepped aside to allow Demona to lead and chose a new younger Second (again, most likely Brooklyn).

It's largely a meritocracy otherwise. Hudson chose Goliath as his second based on a myriad of positive qualities but primarily integrity, intelligence, natural leadership abilities and a genuine ferocity in battle.

Goliath in turn selected Demona for the same qualities. *He was just mistaken about the integrity.*

As for Avalon, the situation is a bit different, as all the gargs there are of the same generation. Originally Gabriel was chosen as leader and one of his many rookery-siblings Angela was chosen as his second. When Angela left, Gabriel did select his mate as his second, at least for the time being. But you can bet Ophelia was qualified -- look how she performed even when wounded in Avalon Part Three -- or he would not have chosen her. Does nepotism play a part. Possibly. But I'd think that the qualities necessary would have to be even more obvious to avoid charges of nepotism.

In London, Una is the leader of the clan. Her second, whom we have not yet met, is of a younger generation and generally runs things at their more rural (or at least suburban) estate.

In Japan, Kai was the leader. Yama, of a younger generation, was his second. After Yama's banishment, Yama's mate Sora was probably chosen as Second (though don't hold me to that). Again Sora's chosen for her attributes and (relative) youth. Someday -- short of a catastrophe taking place -- she will lead the clan in Kai's place.

In Guatemala, Zafiro is the leader. His second is not his mate Obsidiana, but Turquesa, Jade's mate. They are all of the same generation, but they are also the only gargs alive down there at the moment. (Not counting the eggs.)

Response recorded on February 07, 2001


: « First : « 10 : Displaying #94 - #103 of 163 records. : 10 » : Last » :