A Station Eight Fan Web Site

Gargoyles

The Phoenix Gate

Search Ask Greg

Search:
Search type:

Displaying 1 record.


Bookmark Link

Todd Jensen writes...

My thoughts on "Avalon Part One".

First off, a little about the eggs. I honestly hadn't expected to see anything further with the eggs at this point. The reason was that I'd always assumed that the eggs were indeed all gone, as Xanatos had claimed in "Awakening Part Two", even after we found out what he was really like, for this simple reason: the thousand years between the Wyvern Massacre and the Awakening. Since I didn't think it likely that gargoyles live naturally for a thousand years, my assumption always was that the eggs had hatched long ago and that the gargoyles that had hatched from them had grown up, lived out their lives, and died long before as well. I hadn't taken into account the possibility of a place where time moved slower.

(Of course, thinking over it some more, I should have expected the eggs to return, simply because, if they weren't going to, their inclusion to date would have been almost pointless. After all, they'd had no real impact on the storyline in "Awakening" - the mere fact that the video version was able to edit them out is proof enough of that - so that would have to mean that something further with them would have to be done, or else why include them in "Awakening" at all?)

Regarding your multi-parter comments: I also prefer it when the first episode of a multi-parter clearly labels itself as "Part One". That way, I'm already prepared for the "To Be Continued" part. So I'm glad that you always labeled the multi-parters as such.

I was a bit amused to notice the Brigadoon alternative to Avalon, in light of the fact that you did manage to use Brigadoon as the Avalon-substitute in your "Gargoyles meet Captain Atom" story. And, yep, I was definitely looking out for King Arthur to show up at some point in this story, given that the thing that Avalon is most famous for is being his resting-place. (More about that in my ramble on Part Two when it comes).

Needless to say, I enjoyed the flashback. More 10th century Scotland! And more real Scottish history! In some ways, it was even more fun than the Macbeth backstory in "City of Stone"; after all, I already knew about the historical Macbeth before "Gargoyles" ever came out, but I'd never heard of Kenneth II and Constantine III before. After seeing this episode, I eagerly looked up everything on them that I could at the local library (although I wasn't able to find much, thanks to the scanty records for this part of Scottish history).

Constantine definitely struck me as shrewd when he provided a very convincing "innocent reason" for the secret meeting in the drying-house (the argument that it would be better for Kenneth's dignity to have Finella turn down his suit in private, rather than before his entire court). I thought he made a good antagonist here, even if for only one episode.

(I haven't seen the McKellen "Richard III" movie, by the way, but I do have a book that McKellen wrote about the making of it, including the screenplay, which I found fascinating reading.)

I also liked the mention of Michaelmas, which added to the medieval flavor of the story. (It's things like this that make me regret the fact that you never got to make the "Dark Ages" spin-off. Of course, I suppose that an animated series set entirely in 10th century Scotland wouldn't be all that commercially viable, more's the pity.)

I'm looking forward to your rambles on Part Two and Part Three, as well.

Greg responds...

I have that same McKellen book. I've seen the movie of course, but I found the screenplay and his commentary on how and why he made the decisions he made, very informative.

I don't know that Dark Ages wouldn't be commercially viable. I do know it's tough to convince Network Executives that it's commercially viable.

Response recorded on March 12, 2004