An addendum to what Rebel said: This is Greg Weisman we're talking about. Have we known him to skimp on anything? I haven't. This is his pride and joy (or, at the very least, he puts enough thought into it to make me believe it is); he's going to take care of 'us' as best as he can, while doing his dangdest to attract new readers.

Hey, when someone you only met for a brief few minutes three years ago still remembers you, you tend to back the guy up. :-P

This is one of the reasons why I will actively not purchase any DC or Marvel titles unless I find them incredibly awesome. There's so much to learn, and so much to unlearn with their routine retcons, and so much to learn again, and so forth and so on. Now that makes accessibility difficult. You won't be seeing anything like that with Gargoyles.
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 9:37:00 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

I'm pretty sure that Brook isn't claiming that the reviewer's opinion that the comics are inaccessible to new readers is stupid. I believe what he's claiming is "stupid" is the reviewer's assertion that Greg W deliberately made the comics inaccessible to new readers.

On that note, I'd agree with him. I'm still undecided on whether Greg W succeeded in making the comics accessible to new readers, but I have NO delusions that he didn't try damn hard to do so. To suggest that a professional teller of stories would purposefully try to make his stories hard to understand for new people is stupid, in my opinion, for the simple reason that it doesn't make financial sense. If I were creating stories professionally, I obviously want as many people to purchase my comics or watch my shows as possible, so it makes no sense to make my stories inaccessible.
Rebel
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 8:47:55 pm EDT from 69.134.195.157

Brook> If you read my whole post, you'll note that the first thing I said was that I agree with Greg that it is unfair of the reviewer to assume that Greg is purposefully alienating new readers. What I was disagreeing with you on was your contention that the large backstory of "Gargoyles" was not any kind of a problem and that you chose to call the reviewer's opinion "stupid." "Not objective" may have been more correct, but what are you expecting? It's a review, a person's opinions. Of course it's not going to be objective. Your opinion isn't objective either. It's not any less valid, but it's still an opinion.

Todd> It's a difficult thing. I think we all tend to forget that there are real people behind every creative work and that rarely did they set out to make something inscrutable, or cliched or outright bad. Heck, we bash the Goliath Chronicles plenty in here. And I can't honestly say that I don't occasionally enjoy seeing a really bad piece getting torn apart, like some of the Nostalgia Critic's reviews. So I dont know where that leaves us. When is a lack of courtesy inappropriate and when is it what the work and creators deserve?
Demonskrye (on vacation) - [<--Brief Delays At The Ink And Pixel Club]
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 8:26:27 pm EDT from 24.20.144.176

Demonskrye: "The reviewer is of the opinion that the comic would be hard for new readers to understand because of the degree to which it references characters and events from the TV series. That's it. "

Umh...

"What ticked me off, I guess, is the assumption that I was in essence flipping off new readers ("shoving it in their faces") and TRYING to make it inaccessible to them."

THAT IS stupid!! Not that he had doubt, that he said what Greg pointed out above.
Brook
I agree with Rebel on EVERYTHING she says!!
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 6:50:18 pm EDT from 84.191.203.101

DEMONSKRYE - Your post reminded me of a disconcerting feature that I've seen in many reviews and comments on the Internet; they often display a sarcastic streak in them. It's difficult to give an unfavorable review of something without sounding that way, unfortunately, but it doesn't make for pleasant reading. I'd like to see more courtesy, even when you have to point out the flaws in a story. (And I think that calling unfavorable opinions "stupid" is impolite, as well.)

I had a few other thoughts today, but I'd rather save them for tomorrow, after the room clears.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 6:35:20 pm EDT from 4.244.215.53

Elder> I think that's assuming a bit much. I personally didn't see any episodes of TGC until they were being rerun much later than their initial airings. The move to Saturday mornings did not agree with my sleep schedule at the time and from what I was hearing on the internet, it wasn't worth getting up for. So I'm guessing that the percentage of the initial readership who both recognized the first two issues as a reteling of "The Journey" and felt personally insulted at being asked to pay for two issues of a comic which had already been made into an episode of a TV show was not huge. I think most of the people around here at least realized that it provided an introduction to the world and characters as they were at that point in time and made more sense than trying to explain that one episode of TGC was canon while the rest were not. Of course I would have rather seen two issues of completely new material, but I can understand why that didn't happen.

Brook> I'll agree with Greg W that the idea from the review that Greg was purposefully ignoring or outright alienating new readers was silly, but I think calling the reviewer's opinions "stupid" is uncalled for. The reviewer is of the opinion that the comic would be hard for new readers to understand because of the degree to which it references characters and events from the TV series. That's it. Obviously there is a lot of disagreement about whether the series gives new readers enough information to follow the stories in the comics or not. Personally, I do not think that saying that there is a lot of backstory or that people who are confused can just track down the TV series is sufficient. You should not have to watch the TV series to understand the comic. Whether or not new readers can understand the comic if they've never seen the show is debatable and seems to vary from person to person. But calling someone else's opinion stupi and not objective is not helping any.
Demonskrye (on vacation) - [<----An Upcoming Delay at the Ink And Pixel CLub]
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 4:22:35 pm EDT from 24.20.144.176

Greg W: Thanks for clarifying. I agree the slurs are bang out of order.
Ed
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 4:02:51 pm EDT from 213.187.38.226

That issue with THE JOURNEY is something I'll definitely look into in my soon-to-come-review (just as with THE REUNION).

@ Greg W.: I must say, I find it quite unsettling you actually read this review. Don't get me wrong, I'm not 100% happy with the comic, but his critique of that point is simply insulting and stupid. Some things in there may be hard to understand for readers, but that just comes with the fact that the backstory is VERY VERY LONG, which is neither your fault nor a fault at all.

So yeah, this point he just made... absolutely stupid and in no way objective.
Brook
I agree with Rebel on EVERYTHING she says!!
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 12:28:51 pm EDT from 84.191.203.101

Adam> <<According to wiki, it aired on September 17th, 1994. That is about one month before the first time Goliath says it in Awakening, part 2 (which aired on October, 25th 1994). I don't know if one influenced the other or it is just an odd coincidence.>>

Yes, because it takes less than one month to script an episode; story-edit it; turn in a final draft; voice record it; storyboard it; send it to Japan to be animated; do post production; call for re-takes; finalize the episode; and deliver it.

;)
Greg Bishansky
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 1:26:58 am EDT from 74.88.215.133

So, I bought the two new DVDs that came out for the old X-men animated TV show. I was watching one episode today, the one names "Savage Land, Strange Heart (Part 2)", and in it, Sauron gets attacked from behind and cries out "what sorcery is this". I imediately thought of Goliath. So I looked up the date for the X-men episode. According to wiki, it aired on September 17th, 1994. That is about one month before the first time Goliath says it in Awakening, part 2 (which aired on October, 25th 1994). I don't know if one influenced the other or it is just an odd coincidence. Does anyone else know about this?
Adam - [carl006_1999 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 12:47:52 am EDT from 76.113.176.63

Besides, even if The Goliath Chronicles got a DVD release, many fans may not care for getting it. By having it in comic format, fans don't have to purchase the DVD to get that story. Plus we get to see the story completely as it was intended (no monologue from Goliath, and the error where Goliath glides on an injured wing is replaced with him leaping).
Antiyonder
posted @ Sun, Sep 27, 2009 12:26:32 am EDT from 96.25.38.137

I disagree as well. As it is, there's no telling if the rest of Gargoyles will come out on DVD, so having a comic rendition of The Journey is the next best thing. I, personally, got a kick out of it.

Slap in the face? I didn't feel anything.
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 11:32:29 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

Eldar> Disagreement on The Journey remake. To the newcomers it would make no difference, and makes for an introduction of the characters.

Besides, I'd say that while we all wanted the new material sooner, this was something that we needed as readers for several reasons.

1. It sets up several elements like Brooklyn's feeling of loneliness, and Xanatos Illuminati mission.

2. It simplifies the whole Goliath Chronicles matter. In the past we would be telling new fans that Weisman considers the first Goliath Chronicles episode canon, while dismissing the last 12 episodes. Not complicating, but because of the adaptation, we can dismiss the entire third animated season.
Antiyonder
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 10:34:35 pm EDT from 96.25.38.137

Retelling the Journey probably hurt the overall sales and momentum of the comic than any supposed impenerability of the newer stories. The initial readership of the comic were probably aware to some degree or another of the Journey and making them pay for a retelling really is a slap in the face.
Eldar
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 10:22:12 pm EDT from 75.53.192.199

Ed - Just to clarify my stance on this, I think it is COMPLETELY justifiable to say I FAILED at making the comic accessible to new readers. What ticked me off, I guess, is the assumption that I was in essence flipping off new readers ("shoving it in their faces") and TRYING to make it inaccessible to them. That's completely untrue. I tried very hard -- not to make each INDIVIDUAL issue accessible, but -- to make the comic as a whole accessible if you started reading it from issue one or trade one. (Same with Bad Guys.) At least from the standpoint of continuity. Granted, the Stone arc makes the reader work harder than some might like, but that to my mind is because of the structure not because of the continuity. Everything you NEED to know about the continuity is present in those three issues. Of course, people may read it and FEEL like they need to know more but still be unwilling or not interested enough to find out more on their own -- which is certainly legit and/or their prerogative -- but I'd argue there's nothing they really DO need to know that isn't present on the page.

So I'm not really trying to defend my work, so much as my intent. It just grinds on me when people make (incorrect) assumptions about my intent.
Greg Weisman
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 8:18:14 pm EDT from 68.183.95.134

And Demona finding that out from Sevarius was one of those moments where I hadn't thought about it before Greg revealed that tidbit at "Ask Greg", and yet it made so much sense that I was amazed that I hadn't suspected it earlier. Sevarius was the one who first made the discovery, and he was working with Demona in "The Reckoning"; it fits perfectly.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:54:09 pm EDT from 4.244.213.198

And as for why she said "I have no daughter."

Um....

"My dear, you knew she was your daughter before we staged your capture..." -Thailog

She was also trying to play Angela and manipulate her. Sevarius informed her that Angela was her biological daughter months ago.
Greg Bishansky
"I'm sorry... I don't remember any of it. For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me... it was Tuesday." - M. Bison
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:47:05 pm EDT from 74.88.215.133

Let's not forget that Demona was lying about having no daughter (she already knew about Angela's links to her before she was captured - in fact, that was one reason *why* she let herself be captured).

Of course, Demona probably assumed that the eggs were long gone - even if she hadn't expected the worst from Princess Katharine and the Magus, a thousand years had gone by, and she didn't know that the eggs had been taken to Avalon. She wouldn't have expected them to survive that long. (That was why, even after discovering Xanatos's true nature, I assumed he was telling the truth about the eggs being gone before "Avalon" aired.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:45:28 pm EDT from 4.244.213.198

PAUL> I'm sorry, but I can't let this go...

<<I guess I had assumed based on Demona's reaction to learning that Angela was her daughter ("I have no daughter!") that she had forgotten even laying the egg. I also have difficulty believing that she would just let Katharine go if she remembered that one of those eggs was her own.>>

Um, have you forgotten the gargoyle way? From her POV, they'd all be her eggs. Not just the one that happened to come out of her cooch.

Besides, at the time she was so broken, there are thousands of reasons subconsciously why she didn't dive down there. Think about it for a bit.
Greg Bishansky
"I'm sorry... I don't remember any of it. For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me... it was Tuesday." - M. Bison
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:42:22 pm EDT from 74.88.215.133

I guess I had assumed based on Demona's reaction to learning that Angela was her daughter ("I have no daughter!") that she had forgotten even laying the egg. I also have difficulty believing that she would just let Katharine go if she remembered that one of those eggs was her own.

And if she remembered seeing Katharine take the eggs away (in "City of Stone") when Angela told her about it again (in "The Reckoning"), she didn't give any sign of that either.

But even disregarding all of that, Demona has a history of making and breaking alliances: first betraying the Scots to the Vikings (resulting in the destruction of the Wyvern Clan), then betraying Macbeth to Canmore (resulting in the destruction of her new clan), then betraying Xanatos by turning the people of Manhattan to stone. Demona has made those mistakes often enough that she should realize that they always have similar, tragic results for herself as well as for others, yet she doesn't realize it.

On second thought, that might be due to denial more than forgetfulness.
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:35:39 pm EDT from 74.205.192.14

Sorry for the double post, but:

MATT - If the Tazmanian Tiger's to be the new member of the Ultra-Pack, then I *definitely* want to see the Redemption Squad battle it - just so that I can see Dingo's response to the Tiger having joined forces with his former teammates, the Tiger's response to Dingo facing him again (and with new allies), and Jackal, Hyena, and Wolf's response to the Tiger and Dingo having clashed before. Double-takes all around.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:18:06 pm EDT from 4.244.213.198

I'd speculated aloud before whether it might have been wiser for Greg to have begun the comic a while after the events of "Hunter's Moon", at a point when the gargoyles' situation in New York had been peaceful for a while and a new menace begins. (Maybe even simply skipping ahead to 2198 and the Space-Spawn invasion.)

But much of the point of the fans wanting the comic back was to see the third season that he'd planned, but which was replaced by "The Goliath Chronicles". So I suppose it was an unsolvable problem.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 6:51:49 pm EDT from 4.244.213.198

Patrick: Depends on the Superman or Batman comic. I'd say... SLG v DC. Constantly evolving ensemble drama with complexly-motivated characters v single lead with banner status quo. And 65 episodes not retailing in your country v "like The Dark Knight, right?"

Greg: I agree about the reviewers, I just think this specific crit (from multiple sources) rings true as one (of many) contributing factors to the comic's shrinking audience. At the end of the day though it's a pointless argument. I'd be delighted if Greg W just played the auteur card because I'm very happy to follow his work wherever. I disagree with his interpretation of his own work here but then I am a contrary bar steward. ;)

Anyway, I don't really have more to add at this point and it's put me a week behind getting my thoughts into order for the actual trades so that's all from me on this.
Ed
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 6:40:19 pm EDT from 213.187.38.226

Yeah I'm aware Street Fighter (from 1994) is a lame movie, but I think this line from Bison fits how important Gillcomgain's scar is to her:

Chun Li: My father saved his village at the cost of his own life. You had him shot as you ran away. A hero at a thousand paces!
Bison: I'm sorry... I don't remember any of it.
Chun Li: You don't remember?
Bison: For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me... it was Tuesday.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
Algernon's comment about Norman Osborn: One of the neat things about Dark Reign is that it gives Osborn the chance to expand his horizons beyond tormenting a twenty nine year old who still lives with his mom.
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 6:06:29 pm EDT from 71.115.241.194

PAUL> <<On second thought, it occurs to me that Demona is strangely forgetful of some things (e.g. laying Angela's egg, seeing Katharine and the Magus take the eggs away, scratching Gillecomgain's face...) Maybe she didn't remember her encounter with her future-self after all.>>

Who says Demona is forgetful?

1. When did she forget she laid an egg?

2. She didn't forget them taking the eggs, for all she knew they were going to make them into omelettes.

3. As for Gillecomgain's face. That moment was so insignificant to her anyway... she's probably killed and mutilated hundreds of people between that and the events of "City of Stone Part Two."

Check out my sig for a quote from a bad movie that sums it up quite nicely.

And to answer your question, yes Demona remembered her encounter with her older self. But, if you look again she even says "I know from experience that my arrival through the flames will attract one other." She was still hoping to pull it off anyway. She didn't.
Greg Bishansky
"I'm sorry... I don't remember any of it. For you, the day Bison graced your village was the most important day of your life. But for me... it was Tuesday." - M. Bison
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 6:00:05 pm EDT from 74.88.215.133

I can't imagine Demona forgot she'd laid an egg. Have you seen the size of those things? OUCH! :P
Patrick - [<-- Gathering T-shirt Clearance Sale]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:55:11 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

On second thought, it occurs to me that Demona is strangely forgetful of some things (e.g. laying Angela's egg, seeing Katharine and the Magus take the eggs away, scratching Gillecomgain's face...) Maybe she didn't remember her encounter with her future-self after all.
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:44:24 pm EDT from 74.205.192.14

@ Patrick: I think what I wanted to say is that, yeah, the difference isn't bigger/smaller. However, here are things which do more or less only add up in the context of the CB arc, and not the issue itself. For example, how and why Coldstone is what Coldstone is remains, in the issue itself a bit cloudy. As I said before, I don't think that this criticism is 100% valid, but I can see where it is coming from.

I'm still waiting for CBV2 to make its way to me to post a big review of the entire arc, and that's definetely not a point of criticism from my pov. It's like saying "So yeah, I liked the meal, but I guess people who're not liking chocolate would dislike it." - it's irrelevant and speculation, yet also reveals that obviously the reviewer has HAD a problem with the story somewhere.
Brook
I agree with Rebel on EVERYTHING she says!!
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:40:21 pm EDT from 84.191.220.141

Just because WE know for 100% certainty (because Greg Weisman has told us so) that the past can't be changed doesn't mean various characters wouldn't presume that maybe they have a chance. Goliath didn't seem to completely figure out that rule for himself until "M.I.A."

Time Loops are a part of a balanced breakfast and always stay crunchy in milk!
Patrick - [<-- Gathering T-shirt Clearance Sale]
"Stay crunchy, men. Stay crunchy!" - Homer Simpson
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:38:45 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

Did Demona actually try to change the past in "Vows", or was she simply trying to teach Goliath a lesson about time travel? Given what Greg Weisman has said about time travel, Demona had already told her future-self "I will never be like you!" and since she remembered (and never forgot) her conversation with future-Goliath, she probably remembered her conversation with her future-self as well. So how could she not know that her past-self would say the exact same things to her that she had already said to her future-self? Does that make any sense whatsoever?

Oh, and speaking of time travel, I thought that the Archmage's comment about his past-self in "Avalon Part Two" (i.e. "Finally! I thought he'd never leave!") was pretty ironic. The Archmage's past-self HAD to leave eventually... and not before the "Are you sure you know what to do? I should; I watched you do it" exchange.

One final note about time travel: I love the way it makes circular logic... well, logical. "You won't, because you didn't. Time travel is funny that way."
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:27:45 pm EDT from 74.205.192.14

As Greg B. just said... it's not as though the "background info" is difficult to find for anyone with even a slight interest in it. What's different about that than someone who's picking up a "Superman" or "Batman" comic for the first time?
Patrick - [<-- Gathering T-shirt Clearance Sale]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:21:17 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

Accessible or not... I think that the main concern with "new readers" is, that, well... they're missing a lot of background info, which is not further elaborated on in the comic... well, that's not Gregs fault, or the comic's, in fact loads of comics don't inform their readers on what was going on, but... I can see where the criticism comes from...
Brook
I agree with Rebel on EVERYTHING she says!!
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:15:20 pm EDT from 84.191.220.141

Here's the thing, I read a lot of comic books. Are any comics accessible as individual issues anymore? Not really. That's nothing new.

A good friend of mine thinks "Gargoyles" reads better as trades anyway. It's like that with just about every comic book on the market these days.

And that's fine, since the trades are what we have to push now anyway. And since future releases will most likely be trades, it works.

As for the whole accessibility. I think the only hindrance has been the comic being unable to stay on schedule, due to a few factors.

Again, I have anecdotal evidence of people who had never seen the show before in their lives, reading the trade (the first one), and enjoying it and wanting to see more. More than one person, more than two people, etc.

You have your anecdotes also.

As for the reviews. Well, the people with negative things to say tend to be the ones who shout the loudest. Like that one guy who bitched for three straight reviews about Elisa panicking about being romantically involved with someone from another species and having a very realistic and human reaction to the whole thing. But nope, he didn't wait and see how it went, even when they got back together, he cried about how Weisman "violated the integrity of his characters." And went on and on about how in a fantasy world, anything should be possible, including children for Goliath and Elisa...

... which is, of course, the realm of fanfiction. Which tends to be less the realm of drama and more the realm of wish fulfillment.

His opinion though. His very wrong opinion.

Besides, it's not like the episodes of the series are unavailable. There are two DVD sets out, and well, YouTube.
Greg Bishansky
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 5:13:19 pm EDT from 74.88.215.133

Todd: A successful complete reboot would be an entirely Pyrrhic victory unless Greg could continue his universe off the back of it, and besides there are ways to access the universe with a relatively clean slate short of a reboot: the spin-offs for example. A direct, immediate continuation of a show on television would be almost unheard of anyway (Star Trek skipped a generation; Doctor Who skipped a regeneration); even long running comics have occasional "fresh starts" without jettisoning continuity entirely -- Waid's Fantastic Four run and Morrison's X-Men were especially successful. The common thread is smaller casts, dropping or freezing dangling plot threads, re-establishing the major heroes and villains in some order of importance. The comics were quite different in that even at the start they were promoted, by way of a selling point, as a direct continuation, picking up threads from the original series, as Season 3 not Season 1 etc. (cf. Greg's CBR interview right at the start: http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=6635). That's what we were all clamoring for of course.

Greg B: The people saying it's not inaccessible know it inside out too. Anecdotally, some people do take to it and some people drop it, and frankly the biggest group I've come across are the people who flip through it but decide not to try it at all ("don't remember half these guys", "rather start at the beginning" etc.). But with the one exception Antiyonder mentions, all the reviews are from fans who are saying *they* find it inaccessible: "I'm not the kind of person who goes to Gargoyles conventions, but I liked it enough to track down the comics. In other words, I'm exactly the kind of person this comic is aimed at -- a casual "Gargoyles" fan who wants more than the DVDs can offer... obscure "Gargoyles" continuity lost to most of us." Another: "And it can't be just me, admittedly already a Gargoyles fan, who is baffled by the vast scope of the cast." Another: "Frankly, at points it almost feels as if Weisman is taking the book's impenetrability and rubbing it in the collective face of the readership." I've read this on other sites too, from people who were fans of the animation and whose job is to champion books to newbies but who are doing the exact opposite based on *their* experiences.
Ed
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 4:49:00 pm EDT from 213.187.38.226

Anyone still looking for a Gathering of the Gargoyles souvenir or a nifty t-shirt that will have people stopping you to ask, "What's Gargoyles?"

A small number of T-shirts from the 2009 convention in Los Angeles and the 2008 convention in Chicago are still available in select adult sizes. They are now on sale for just $10.00 each, and priority shipping for up to three shirts purchased together is $5.00. That means you pay just $15.00 total for 1 shirt, $20.00 for 2, or $25.00 for 3.

Click the link below to see available sizes and place orders.
Patrick - [<-- Gathering T-shirt Clearance Sale]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 2:43:39 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

And finally...

My Review For Bad Guys #6, "Losers"...

[SPOILER] - Alright! I'm glad we are ending this mini-series with a pretty strong cover. And I'm really pleased that this cover is what made the cover for the trade. I had kinda figured we'd be getting a group shot for this final cover and it looks great. Matrix is very cool here and Hunter and Dingo look awesome here. My only complaints are that Fang looks a bit too cat-like and Yama looks like Goliath. But I can get over it.

- So, here we go. We don't pick up where we left off at Eastcheap Island, but back in Paris where the Mr. Director is chatting with Dolores and later Monsieur Le Maire. A bunch of characters we don't know anything about really, aside from the fact that they are part of the organization that formed the Redemption Squad. Hunter at one point claims this group is Interpol, but I'm not sure if I'm supposed to believe her or not. I hope (and suspect) these three unknown characters will be expanded down the road, particularly the Director. On a related note, I was expecting to see the story of Hunter's recruitment in this chapter, but it was not to be. A story for another day, I suppose. This issue has a lot to work with already.

- Back at Eastcheap, everybody chills out (except Hunter) and sits down to a nice meal. Falstaff couldn't be more right when he called this lot a motley crew. Something that has always appealed to me about the Redemption Squad is that they seem like they'd be perfect for and a lot of fun fighting another group. I've been looking forward to a Redemption Squad versus The Ultra-Pack battle for years, but Falstaff's Band of Thieves seems like they'd make a great group antagonist also, and I'm sure we'll see more of them in the Bad Guys series.

- We continue on with a lively discussion at the dinner table. Falstaff, Dingo and Hunter all have this great dynamic with each other. It is like none of them really like each other, but are trying to get along. Dingo in particular plays the middle-man so well here. Mediating between these two groups. And it is funny because he doesn't have much reason to trust either Falstaff or Hunter. He doesn't know or understand what Falstaff is doing here, but Hunter won't even tell him who he is supposed to be working for. And on top of that, he has this past relationship with Falstaff and this blooming future relationship with Hunter, so he really is stuck in the middle here, and it seems to me now that Dingo has always been the middle-man. Balanced. Not good or bad. Anyway, a fun scene. We also get a cool bit where Fang is chowing down... and Matrix is eating a fork! Funny.

- And speaking of Matrix. I find him to be very interesting is this chapter. What strikes me most is his non-direct interplay with Falstaff. Falstaff really seems to be bothered by Matrix a lot. Looking at him funny, thinking over the things Matrix says. I can't put my finger on it, but I suspect something is going on in Falstaff's mind concerning Matrix. And Matrix continues to be an incredibly resourceful and useful teammate. In that aspect, he is sorta the R2-D2 of the group. Maybe not the main hero, but consistently saving and supporting the hero. That kind of character has always appealed to me and Matrix is no exception. I do remember hearing Greg talking about Matrix doing something truly incredible down the road and becoming a foe the Redemption Squad must face. I hope we get to see that story eventually because Matrix really is fascinating.

- Meanwhile, Falstaff tries to convince the Squad that they really are the good guys. And he does this in such an interesting way. Falstaff himself talks to Dingo. Tries to show him that he has reformed and is some sort of guardian these days. And Falstaff sets up some communications with a couple other Illuminati members: Fiona Canmore and Thailog. This is just brilliant, great stuff. There are so many conflicting things going on around here. You have a team of villains who don't know who they are working for that are trying to be good guys confronting a team of possibly bad guys who are trying to prove they are good guys working for a possibly good organization and as proof they get a couple not-so-protagonists to vouch for them. And one of them is a gargoyle and the other a gargoyle hunter. Wow.
I'm not sure if it was just luck that Matrix went along with Hunter to talk to Fiona instead of, say, Yama. Would've been an interesting conversation with Aunt Fiona with a gargoyle standing next to Hunter. Nice to see Fiona in the canon finally. And not far away we get Yama make something of a joke for us ("Someone fix the color!" Very funny.) and he and Fang chat with Thailog. These conversations don't seem to go as planned for Falstaff though. Hunter has left the family business, but Fiona indicates that there is more to things than that. We don't see what happens next, but it seems to me that Hunter has a hard time going along with whatever else Fiona has to say. And Fang vouching for Thailog means little since no one trusts Fang. So, in the end it seems only Dingo is willing to give the Illuminati the benefit of the doubt. Maybe.

- So, the Squad takes a few minutes to confer. As a side note, anyone else notice the tapestry in the room they are left in? Looks like a gargoyle fighting a human to me. Hunter gives it a passing glance anyway. Safe inside the Matrix Isolation Sphere, we see some sharing of notes. Of course, all of this is intercut with the following scene. Like the last issue, these flashes back and forth in time really keep the suspense up. Sometimes it even comes across as if the scenes were talking to each other, if you get my meaning. Dialogue in one scene inter-plays with dialogue in another. And we are not always sure what each group, even each character, is up to until the end. Really great stuff. Kudos to Greg for that. And Fang starts off a pretty climactic battle. Matrix takes out Mistress Quickly pretty easily, which makes his point. He wraps her up in some sort of shell. Greg indicated at the Gathering that she was, in fact, still alive, but in some sort of hibernation. That can't be fun for her, yikes. Of course, her teammate Points is dealing out some damage of his own, stabbing Yama in the gut. I like how Yama admits that Points is a superior swordsman, but endures the injury to take advantage of his own superior traits, namely his strength and knowledge that he will heal. Still, must've hurt, yowch. Dingo pulls out his old bolas. I don't think we've seen Dingo use the bolas since "Thrill of the Hunt". Falstaff pulls a Goliath by snapping his way out of them though. Guess he still has some muscle under the medieval getup and pounds of fat. And Hunter kicks the face of the amazing, fire-breathing Bardolph. I guess his face was already messed up, but still...
But the Squad is outnumbered and out-gunned... seemingly. Falstaff and Dingo play a game of bluffing and Falstaff bails. He reveals that Eastcheap isn't an island, but a submersible vessel of huge size. Didn't expect that! The Band of Thieves leaves the Squad to its fate in the soon to be flooded chamber. I can't help think that despite his words, Falstaff knew they'd escape and survive like we all did. Matrix saves the day again and we get our last scene with our heros(?)
Hunter is frustrated that they did not manage to capture the island or the treasure or Falstaff. No one points out that they did escape with a prisoner however. Anyway, Fang is content just to survive and Yama... actually agrees with Fang sort of. Yama tells the team that the road to their redemption is a journey and that gaining a captive or an island or whatever isn't as important as walking the road. These results are not the destination, more like perks along the road. There is a beautiful but brief moment of comraderie here with everyone, but most notably between Fang and Yama. Yama actually puts his hand on Fang's shoulder (must be the blood loss) and Fang listens so intently to Yama's words. Of course, the sun rises and we don't get to hear the obvious answer of when we've reached redemption. Fang goes back to being Fang and gives us one last curse word for the books. His use of the word "crap" really serves to re-emphasize to me, the reader, about how dark this comic was able to get at times, yet how fun and comedic it was too. A cool moment. Hunter and Dingo's last little look at each other is nice too. Honestly, the last three pages are just wonderful. Very poignant and satisfying. A great ending to this mini-series. I really hope to see more of the Bad Guys spin-off down the Redemption Road.


P.S. Can't help notice that the Humility Spell didn't turn Yama's clothes to stone... guess the Squad is in for an eyeful at sunset. : ) [/SPOILER]
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"For science, which, as my associate Fang indicated, must move ever forward. Plus there's the money... and I do love the drama!" -Sevarius, 'Louse'
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 2:41:02 pm EDT from 70.230.170.153

Regardless if scanners are expensive to replace and/or are hardy little dealies, there's still going to be a marked difference between a scanner built ten years ago and one that just came off the shelf a week ago. Quality is always improving.

Once you're finished, Andrea, you may want to consider contacting Gorebash about adding your site to his lineup. Having multiple choices never hurt anyone. ;)
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 1:35:58 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

Actually, I scanned alot of those cards back then...and I'm still using the same scanner-going on 16 years now(originally designed for windows 3.1)on XP. It's a 8.5 x 14 scanner-which sadly aren't cheap to replace. Maybe someday if I win a lottery
Wingless
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 1:14:59 pm EDT from 99.245.254.123

By all means, continue. I'm sure your scanner is better than whatever was being used 10+ years ago when that Avalon Archive was made.
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2009]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 11:33:50 am EDT from 173.88.135.205

Patrick > Yes, I am aware of that. However, the sticker arechive is massively incomplete (theres 198 in the set), and the cards only have 1 side scanned.

I'm doing this for my own benefit (as working overnights and living at home, I am limited to what I can do on my nights off, and this is just the sort of project to keep me occupied), plus I just want to share it with everyone while I'm already at it. I would still be doing it even if no one else knew.

But if y'all don't want me to keep uploading them, then I won't.
Andrea - [SailorV77 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 9:56:24 am EDT from 24.41.18.162

I almost hate to point out that there's been an archive of card and sticker scans that's existed for quite some time:

http://avalon.gargoyles-fans.org/gallery/index.shtml

All the old Marvel comics are there, too.
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2009]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:56:09 am EDT from 173.88.135.205

ANTIYONDER - Thanks for the link. I liked the reviewer's comments on the Illuminati and how they were handled in "Gargoyles". (I'm still struck by the example of their deviousness in how Hacker says a different thing each time to the three lower-echelon members he meets with. I still wonder how much of the Illuminati's strategy towards the gargoyles, such as the Quarrymen, really is aimed at the clan, and how much of it might be a diversion, especially after seeing how many of Xanatos's schemes turned out to have a different purpose from capturing or killing Goliath and the rest. For that matter, I remember thinking for a long time that Duval's phone call in "The Journey" was about Xanatos sheltering the gargs in his castle - and instead, it turns out to be about the Stone of Destiny, with the gargoyles involved in that scheme because they tried to thwart it.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 7:08:59 am EDT from 4.244.211.175

Andrea >> Nice! On the cards page, I noticed some of the links are broken (hint: those links aren't pointing to the correct folder ;) ).
The One Known As Mochi - [shogi dot keima dot 08 at gmail dot com]
Current Mood: (>**)> Full of food...
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 4:09:47 am EDT from 72.199.85.169

Project scan cards & stickers going well so far! All cards have been scanned (though I finshed that the other day), and 1-30 have been resized. I have the first 10 uploaded onto a page. The thumbnail pics look kinda crappy, but that's only because they're about 25% of the original scan size. The larger images are better (which are at about 60%).

Stickers are a pain in the butt though. Since they're so small and flimsy, I'm having a hard time scanning them easily. I have to re-angle and adjust some in editing. 11 down, 187 to go! The good thing, however, is that because of the borders on them, I can scan 4 at a time (my scanner cuts off the right edge slightly. The cards I had to do 2 at a time because of that).

Linky to the temp stickers page below. Change the page to 1-10Cards if you wanna see those too (which also have the backs scanned as well).

I will be scanning the book itself as well, but that will come after all the stickers are all finished.

Hope you enjoy guys!
Andrea - [SailorV77 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 3:33:39 am EDT from 24.41.18.162

To back up the idea that the comic is accessible to fans, newcomers and casual fans alike, I resubmit a review from someone who didn't get to see the show frequently:

http://blog.newsarama.com/2008/05/30/weekend-reviews-tonoharu/

This is for Clan Building Volume 1.
Antiyonder - [antiyonder at yahoo dot com]
Algernon's comment about Norman Osborn: One of the neat things about Dark Reign is that it gives Osborn the chance to expand his horizons beyond tormenting a twenty nine year old who still lives with his mom.
posted @ Sat, Sep 26, 2009 12:55:17 am EDT from 71.115.241.194

BISHANSKY - Thanks. I'm sorry I became a wet blanket there.

PAUL - It took me a while longer to think about the other half of your question. The Canmores were wearing Hunter masks when they pursued Demona, so obviously they were trying to conceal their identities. But that might have been running into problems even before the events of "Hunter's Moon". Note that Matt reports that Jason, Robyn, and Jon had left a trail of violence behind them ever since their father's death, so evidently their activities had come to the attention of law enforcement, and people had made the connection between the Canmores and the mysterious hooded vigilantes. That might have been why the Canmores were using assumed surnames for their civilian identities in New York; the real surnames may have become too dangerous.

But whether Macbeth knew or not - only Greg Weisman can answer that question, alas.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 6:53:59 pm EDT from 4.244.211.50

TODD> I think the comics themselves prove that we don't need a complete reboot. I know first hand that some people found the comics easily accessible as well, and instead of being put off by being unfamiliar with the show, it made them curious to seek out the show.

So, yeah, I think it did it's job.

The people who are calling it unaccessible are people who are already fans of the property and know it inside and out anyway. Even as Greg pointed out, those reviewers knew it, but felt the need to speak for the newbie, which they themselves are not.

So, no offense, but I don't think any of them really know what they're talking about.
Greg Bishansky
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 6:44:20 pm EDT from 74.88.215.133

PAUL - Jason Canmore had to admit, when Elisa confronted him at the clock tower (in the missing scene from "Hunter's Moon", I'll admit, so it's still canon-in-training) that he didn't even know why his family began hunting gargoyles, that it had apparently happened so long ago that they had forgotten the reason. In that case, they've probably forgotten about the feud with Macbeth (which would be irrelevant by now, since the Canmores' hunt for Demona was completely devoid of politics).

Reading the interchange about the accessibility of the comics today makes me wonder whether it's too late to revive "Gargoyles", if any such revival would face these problems - short of rebooting the continuity from scratch, providing a different origin for the gargoyles (say, being regular gargoyle statues brought to life by a freak accident instead of survivors of an ancient race from medieval Scotland), and such alterations (which I don't think would work).
Todd Jensen
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 6:39:36 pm EDT from 4.244.211.50

How much do Macbeth and the modern Canmore siblings know about each other? I must assume that the Canmore siblings would know about their ancestor stabbing Macbeth in the back, and that it had apparently killed Demona as well... but since they know that Demona didn't actually die, do they know that Macbeth didn't either?

And did Macbeth know that he was impersonating living descendants of Malcolm Canmore when he put on the Hunter's Mask in "City of Stone"?
Paul - [nampahcfluap at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 5:03:47 pm EDT from 74.205.192.14

JJ> You think the Gargoyles comics are bland?
Algernon
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 3:58:01 pm EDT from 149.157.1.184

To me those last three stories felt more like history book name dropping.

The only time I can remember we saw some of these lords and other people was in the City of Stone were they played second fiddle to MacBeth and Demona.
So there are the two women (side characters from Avalon turned main characters) going apparently trekking all other the place between all these different people at such a breakneck story speed I never quite figured out who was on which side and connected how to the original stories. That the characters looked different from their original appearance due to different painting styles, different painters for different issues and their own story age, didn't help at all.
And suddenly, after all that dredging around with to me difficult to keep track of side characters, the story of the main characters (Tom's mom, Finella and Brooklyn) cuts off and leaving me me rather dissatisfied, especially with the second ongoing story cut off immediately after that, too. The "Hi I'm a back, a bit older with wife and kid, lets continue where we left, no questions asked." cut off of the second story didn't ring quite true to me either.


At least there wasn't Thailog again.
Anonymouse
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 3:56:27 pm EDT from 89.246.210.125

I think JJ makes a good point.
Greg Weisman
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 3:27:53 pm EDT from 64.236.243.16

I'm confused, Gregarius. You're going to let the review of someone who has the gall to peddle a different comic color your own opinion? Have you even read the trades?

Would you be willing to please clarify for my sake?
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 3:14:45 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

There are no spoilers in this post so..

Recall that the reviewer said:
<<
Supplementary material such as character profiles or "previously on"s could have helped a lot, without having to change the story. Absent those, there's **very little to recommend the books to non-fans**: Gargoyles may have been the cream of the cartoon crop in 1994, but the things that made it special have been replicated by countless series since then; in 2009, **it's just another decent comic book. There are better ones, which don't expect you to be familiar with a cartoon canceled in 1996 (note: buy Usagi Yojimbo)**.
>>
(emphasis mine)

That's not something one would say if one were truly interested in the story itself. The obvious conclusion is that the reviewer finds the story to be nothing that cannot be found in other comics and that others have better storytelling. To my mind "bland" would be a good adjective to describe such a story, just as one might describe an otherwise competent family sitcom that has no distinguishing aspects as bland.

On the positive side, the reviewer did like the writing style.
JJ Gregarius
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 2:58:27 pm EDT from 75.102.128.9

JJ> If you didn't like the story why don't you tell us that you didn't like it, instead of projecting your opinion onto someone else's review?
Greg Bishansky
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 11:16:28 am EDT from 74.88.215.133

Sorry for the double post, but my last post got me thinking something else. How much of our response to a certain story - that is, whether we like it or not - produced by whether we enjoy the genre it's in?

I've read many reviews of books, movies, television programs, etc. where the reviewer gave an unfavorable opinion of the work that he was reviewing, but commented in the review that he didn't care much for the genre that it was part of. I wondered when reading them whether it was his response to the genre that colored his response to the story, more than its objective strengths and flaws.

I'm a big fan of medieval stories, so a lot of my favorite "Gargoyles" episodes were the medieval flashback stories (the start of "Awakening", "City of Stone", "Avalon Part One", etc.), while many of the more modern episodes didn't interest me as much. On the other hand, those who prefer more straightforward modern-day action stories probably prefered the episodes set in Manhattan with the gargoyles fighting regular criminals or sci-fi-type menaces to the "Dark Age Scotland" tales. So how much of our response to such-and-such a story depends on how well it's told, how vivid the characterization is, and so on - and how much of it depends on whether we like, say, medieval tales, or westerns, or science fiction, or detective stories, or so on?

I think it's worth pondering.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 7:21:04 am EDT from 4.244.209.88

GREGARIUS - [SPOILER] I honestly did not find Brooklyn's Timedancer story boring or bland - I'm not certain whether you were describing it as that, or whether you just saw the reviewer you quoted as seeing it as that. Though I really like medieval stories, so I'm probably biased. [/SPOILER]
Todd Jensen
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 7:00:40 am EDT from 4.244.209.88

First, I'd like to apologize on behalf of the group to Steet, who came here from the TaleSpin fandom offering to exchange links (presumably to forums, information sources, etc.)

I would have said something earlier, but I have nothing to share. (I don't even know the address of the Wiki! I've been a bit of a lapsed fan :-/) :-(

ACCESSIBILITY>>
I reread the review of Clan-Building Vol. II at http://www.gaijinside.com/trade-review-gargoyles-clan-building-mana-from-the-heavens/ .
[SPOILER]
The complaints , in my estimation, stem (mostly) from the TimeDancer* sequence: to quote the review:
<<
Supplementary material such as character profiles or "previously on"s could have helped a lot, without having to change the story. Absent those, there's very little to recommend the books to non-fans: Gargoyles may have been the cream of the cartoon crop in 1994, but the things that made it special have been replicated by countless series since then; in 2009, it's just another decent comic book. There are better ones, which don't expect you to be familiar with a cartoon canceled in 1996 (note: buy Usagi Yojimbo).
>>
Basically, the reviewer thought that it was a mediocre unrecommendable story by its own merits. Not bad per se, but not any better than a plethora of material already out there.

As the quote alludes to, what *does* make it interesting is having an emotional connection to the characters: Gilcomgaine, King Malcom, Finella, Mary, etc. However, new fans, by definition, will not have this connection, leaving a rather bland battle with a (to the reviewer) abrupt end. It is important to note that the reviewer was *not* impressed by the story: this is not assuming that new fans would not be impressed; this is finding the story itself average, and only gaining an appreciation for it upon reflecting on the cartoon: again quoting the review, "Seeing all these old characters again is fun."**

Now think about *our* reviews: didn't a few mention having to meditate on connections to the cartoon to appreciate the work?

After all, the reviewer does have a point about the TimeDancer sequence: the story is just nobles doing what nobles do in a universe with magic, y'know? .

*The review hints at problems with the rest of the book, but it seems to focus on the TimeDancer story, in my estimation.

**... which apparently was source of the title's allusion to mana. That allusion also suggests that the reviewer was a Garg fan! I'd wager that the reviewer wanted to like the book better, but integrity forced an honest assessment of the work.
[/SPOILER]
JJ Gregarius
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 5:24:35 am EDT from 75.102.128.9

Todd> That video was showcased at the final Gathering, among others. :)

Good news about trade availability! I checked BookMaster this evening and saw that Clan Building Volume 1 is no longer out of print! It can be ordered! I'm not sure if it would take as long as it has for others to receive thair copies, however . . . I'm willing to test it out! Anyone want a copy or extra copies? You'll get them for thirty-percent off, as that's my employee discount.

Oh, and I can get the DVDs for twenty-percent off.
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 3:39:00 am EDT from 76.219.185.199

Question for the room (and one I may post to Greg as well):

It keeps being said that the trades must sell well for SLG to go back to Disney and make a new offer for Gargoyles. They said they were thinking about doing it a year from the cancellation. I believe we are past a year from the cancellation of the comics but, since the trades are obviously just now coming out, SLG is giving the trades some time to sell and gather numbers to take to Disney. Also, they probably want to give Disney time to work things out with Marvel, hopefully to the benefit of SLG. Do we have any idea of a date or how long it might take until SLG takes the sales numbers of the trades and starts to think of an offer?
Litwolf
<Be happy for me and for all who fly free.> - Tobias of Animorphs
posted @ Fri, Sep 25, 2009 12:09:11 am EDT from 209.243.38.9

Todd/Algernon - Yes I was trying to reply to Todd. Sorry bout that. That's what I get for trying to post while my brain is fried from data entry.
UncleDeadly
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 9:21:11 pm EDT from 69.232.212.155

BLAISE - Alas, you might be right. It fits in with what I've been suggesting this week: a lot of the flaws in the Goliath Chronicles aren't due to discrepancies with the first two seasons, but things that would be flaws even in an independent series.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 7:32:44 pm EDT from 4.244.215.76

****A big red ball bounces into the Room. Eventually, it manages to come to a halt, and two eyes and a mouth appear on its surface.**** Hello, again!

HARVESTER OF EYES> RE: Assassin.
Yes, exactly; all they did with the guy was make him a glorified thug. They could have at least tried something interesting with him. I mean, out of nowhere comes this mysterious masked man with never-before-seen cloaking technology and what do they do? They make him a one-shot adversary and give him a completely unexplained out-of-left-field motivation to kill the gargoyles (you commented on the absurdity of that in your synopsis far more eloquently than I ever could). Hell, a shot of his face without the mask is a "blink and you'll miss it" throwaway scene! That, coupled with the fact that we are never given a name for him (even "Assassin" is just what he's called in the credits), basically tells me that his identity is not important (at least not to the people writing the episode). Instead of making a character, they just made another obstacle--one with (heavily cliched) dialogue.
Now, I'll admit, I can't think of a whole lot you can do with an invisible mercenary outside of the "thug" stuff, but...it's like they didn't even try with this guy! And really, that's the biggest critique for many aspects of TGC: some of it really comes across as half-@$$ed. I don't know, maybe Greg Bishansky is right; most of the folks at TGC just looked at it as a paycheck and nothing more.

And...yeah, that's all I had to say right now. Until next time! ****Blaise takes a deep breath and begins to swell up. With no warning, his ball body becomes a balloon and he floats up and out through the skylight.****
Blaise
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 7:27:30 pm EDT from 76.208.150.176

Sorry for the double post, but I think you might like to see this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kIgOLKYYDo
Todd Jensen
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 7:11:24 pm EDT from 4.244.215.76

I made the post that Uncle Deadly was answering, but it was next to one of Algernon's, so the two of them might have been inadvertently conflated.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 6:37:58 pm EDT from 4.244.215.76

Joining in late, but...

Things I liked about the Goliath Chronicles: Having had to endure multiple viewings of "Generations" to do an episode synopsis on it, there was actually one part I really liked. At the very end of the episode, Goliath does not respond to Angela's question about Demona ever finding redemption, he simply looks away. I like this because it reminds me of the epiphany that Greg W has hinted at concerning Demona in 2198.

Though I have to disagree with Blaise about the concept of the Assassin. The man was a glorified thug. Nothing more.

I would have to say my favorite non-"Journey" episode was "The Dying of the Light," even though I'm still not sure how Hudson was able to glide down that hallway. Was it from air vents in the ceiling?

And "Angels in the Night" had the redeeming quality of being the last Goliath Chronicle. And now we have the trades, so may it rot until the ends of time.

Greg B: Yeah, "Lucifer" is a great example. Won't say too much for those who haven't read it, but really, all he wanted was to be his own man.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
"They talk of me going around and buying souls, like a fishwife come market day. Never stopping to ask themselves why. I need no souls. And how can anyone own a soul? No. They belong to themselves. They just hate to have to face up to it." -Lucifer
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 6:29:50 pm EDT from 70.177.182.14

UNCLE DEADLY> I don't remember mentioning the Falstaff plays but more power to ya all the same! :)
Algernon
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 3:03:46 pm EDT from 149.157.1.184

UNCLE DEADLY> I don't remember mentioning the Falstaff plays but more power to ya all the same! :)
Anonymous
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 3:03:20 pm EDT from 149.157.1.184

I would like to see an official [SPOILER] Wind Ceremony [/SPOILER] that I suppose is finally canon. For some reason, I picture the ceremony in Beast Wars Transformers after the death of Dinobot. "Code of Hero" is one of the best episodes of that show.
Anthony Tini
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 2:58:28 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

Algernon - I have not read the three Falstaff plays yet, but am planning to later on this year after I get through a huge stack of reading I have. And yes, I was inspired to read them after reading Bad Guys.
UncleDeadly
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 2:30:30 pm EDT from 128.114.248.32

Re: Shine A Light . . . Was SLG ever in the top 10 rankings? I noticed some companies had thousands of endorsements, so I'm guessing no . . .
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 1:49:27 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

Well, voting is open for AMEX's small business contest: http://shinealight.ivillage.com/ Apparently there's only three finalists so SLG never had much of a chance. In fact, two of the finalists weren't in the top 10 endorsement rankings, so it was pretty much all dependent on the judges.
Landon Thomas - [<- Gargoyles News Twitter Feed]
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 12:04:25 pm EDT from 128.101.32.234

ALGERNON - I think that Satan would have fitted the "heroic freedom fighter" role more if he'd taken Moloch's strategy ("storm the walls of Heaven again and again until either we win or God gets fed up enough to disintegrate us") instead.

I think that a lot of the romanticized approach towards Milton's Satan comes from the best-known parts of the poem being the opening books, where we only see Satan shaking his fist in defiance of God and he hasn't yet gone after Adam and Eve.

Moving back to "Gargoyles" - I've wondered for the past few days: how many people who read the "Bad Guys" trade paperback, and especially its last two chapters [SPOILER] started reading or rereading the Henry IV plays afterwards? After I got my copy and read the Falstaff chapters, I fished out a set of Shakespeare lectures on audiotape that I received as a Christmas present a couple of years ago and listened to the lectures on Falstaff in "Henry IV" and "Henry V". [/SPOILER]
Todd Jensen
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 8:59:25 am EDT from 4.244.214.127

TODD> Oh yeah, Satan is petty as hell, (pun not intended). He knows he doesn't stand a chance in a direct attack against God so he picks on a couple of naked hairless apes out of pure spite just because God likes them better.

I was just offering a counterpoint to the idea that demons shoulsd automatically be considered evil cannon fodder. Milton's Satan as villainious as he is at times is still one of the most complex charachters in literature.

I also admit I was deliberately whitewashing Satan as part of a gag. I thought it'd be funny if someone unfamiliar with the poem went to read it on my recommendation expecting the story of some noble freedom fighter. I have a weird sense of humour I'll admit.
Algernon
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 8:41:30 am EDT from 149.157.1.180

Re: Skybox Trading Cards . . . I'm not really sure, Patrick. I have two sets in my collection, though regrettably one of them is not complete. One has the picture and back/flavor text printed 'correctly', while another set can only work one way. I'm not quite sure which is considered the "correct" set, but my guess would be the one that can work both ways simultaneously.
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 1:26:13 am EDT from 76.219.185.199

Charisma > I sent you an email with my info, let me know if you get it. I would love to know who youre talking to since the emails I got back said none were left. I didnt get a chance to do any further digging but now I wish I had because I have a feeling the answers I got were from someone who wasnt searching storage for leftover posters.
Litwolf
<Be happy for me and for all who fly free.> - Tobias of Animorphs
posted @ Thu, Sep 24, 2009 12:09:34 am EDT from 209.243.38.9

While fair, it certainly didn't make...any lick of sense.
Harlan Phoenix
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 9:57:59 pm EDT from 76.5.104.241

Once again, Rebel, you're correct. Thank you.
Desert Coyote - [<- Buy my book, please?]
The Gargfic writer formerly known as Coyote the Bando
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 9:50:45 pm EDT from 4.157.32.111

Harlan > I don't think Coyote was trying to use his own book as an example of how things should be, or shouldn't be, in the Gargoyles universe. When he brought up his own book, he was just making conversation. He shared his opinion on what he thought would be most interesting for Sevarius from a character development perspective, but I don't think he was trying to use his own book to support that position.

(Coyote, I apologize if I'm mistaken).
Rebel
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 9:14:09 pm EDT from 69.134.195.157

Sorry for the double post, but:

ALGERNON - I don't find Satan's counter-strike that heroic (though the initial stages of making his way through Chaos are impressive); it consists of hunting out two people smaller than himself who hadn't even been created yet at the time of the war in Heaven and tempting them, just to spite God. Picking on people weaker than you are because your real hatred is for someone larger than yourself whom you can't get at seems petty to me.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 6:50:55 pm EDT from 4.244.209.78

CHIP - Thanks for the update. I hope that Left Bank Books will come through; it's a fine bookstore. (When you go there, say "hi" to Spike the cat for me!)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 6:48:10 pm EDT from 4.244.209.78

Gargoyles Read Poster> I know some of you were trying to find out if ALA still had Gargoyles Read posters for sale and weren't getting any answers about it from ALA (or they said they didn't have any left). I contacted ALA about the posters, telling them that I knew they had a few left because that's what they'd originally told me. One of them e-mailed me back at the beginning of the week and said that there is one left and gave me info on how to get it from them. If anyone is still interested in the last poster, e-mail me and I'll send you the specifics from the person who works at the ALA store.
Charisma82 - [charisma82 at clearwire dot net]
"The alien mothership is in orbit here. If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." -Zap Brannigan
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 6:41:49 pm EDT from 64.128.148.204

Sorry, that was me, not Anonymous. (Sorry for the double post too)
Chip - [Sir_Griff723 at yahoo dot com]
I AM THE MANTLE OF FATE...I AM THE ROCK OF AGES...I AM THE STONE OF DESTINY
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 6:24:56 pm EDT from 204.184.4.34

Matt & Todd> I'm afraid that the Fantasy Shop failed me, I still have no Bad Guys Trade...I called Starclipper, they're sold out and can't get any new ones for 8 weeks. I called Left Bank Books, and they said they can have one for me by next week, so come next Friday, I'm foraying into the city and FINALLY getting a Bad Guys Trade--My thanks to both of you for your help though.
Anonymous
I AM THE MANTLE OF FATE...I AM THE ROCK OF AGES...I AM THE STONE OF DESTINY
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 6:23:47 pm EDT from 204.184.4.34

A thought I had about Bronx. Now, when the gargoyles are at home (whether in the castle or the clock tower) rather than patrolling the city, Bronx usually spends his time snoozing next to Hudson's recliner (or, on one memorable occasion, on Lexington's magazines). But I wonder whether, [SPOILER] now that there's another gargoyle beast - Fu-Dog - in the clan, he'll be more active. Two gargoyle beasts running about the courtyard, perhaps, playing with each other - though Owen will probably be keeping a close watch on them to make certain that their idea of a game isn't a tug of war with the valuable tapestries in the great hall. [/SPOILER]
Todd Jensen
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 6:09:27 pm EDT from 4.244.209.78

I haven't read the book, so I can't fairly criticize, but...

Demons don't necessarily have to be throw away bad guys. I believe Lucifer in "Paradise Lost" was already mentioned. How about the "Lucifer" comic series published by DC?

Or, look at Buffy and Angel and the demons on those shows.

Even demons have a POV.
Greg Bishansky
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 5:57:09 pm EDT from 74.88.215.133

Were there any copies of that card that were NOT mirror-misprinted? My set is like that, too, and I was under the impression that was the norm for the "Gargoyles" cards.
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2009]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 5:30:19 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

Re: Skybox Trading Cards . . . Andrea, what you have in your hands, then, is a misprint or 'mirror image' trading card. They're a bit more rare than the 'regular' puzzle cards. If you're interested, I'd be more than happy to send you some mirror image trading cards.
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 5:28:15 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

Wow...glad I managed to inspire some discussion on gargoyle reproductive rates. I probably won't point it out to my father, but this stuff is still nice to know and fairly interesting. My thanks to Matt, Brainiac, Litwolf, Mrs. Jenson and Boyd, and any others I may have missed for their comments.

That aside, I'm pleased to say I finally own a copy of Clan Building Vol. 2, and will soon have a copy of Vol. 1 (already had the individual issues, and have never been a fan of TPBs). Hot dang it was worth the wait - between the hints given to the conclusion of the Stone of Destiny's story and everything else we saw hinting at what we've been told of the various spin-offs, I found it very satisfying. Here's hoping that however the circumstances, we can see more stories in the Gargoyles universe in the future. I'm especially hoping we can someday see more of Arthur's adventures, not to mention [SPOILER] the start of Xanatos and Demona's alliance and that Dark Ages story Greg mentioned [/SPOILER], and I don't care if we get them through Marvel or SLG.
Echowarrior - [WARendfeld at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 3:31:48 pm EDT from 75.46.94.217

Wow...glad I managed to inspire some discussion on gargoyle reproductive rates. I probably won't point it out to my father, but this stuff is still nice to know and fairly interesting. My thanks to Matt, Brainiac, Litwolf, Mrs. Jenson and Boyd, and any others I may have missed for their comments.

That aside, I'm pleased to say I finally own a copy of Clan Building Vol. 2, and will soon have a copy of Vol. 1 (already had the individual issues, and have never been a fan of TPBs). Hot dang it was worth the wait - between the hints given to the conclusion of the Stone of Destiny's story and everything else we saw hinting at what we've been told of the various spin-offs, I found it very satisfying. Here's hoping that however the circumstances, we can see more stories in the Gargoyles universe in the future. I'm especially hoping we can someday see more of Arthur's adventures, not to mention [SPOILER] the start of Xanatos and Demona's alliance and that Dark Ages story Greg mentioned [/SPOILER], and I don't care if we get them through Marvel or SLG.
Echowarrior - [WARendfeld at aol dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 3:31:44 pm EDT from 75.46.94.217

Desert Coyote> Your book, however, or how you treat various species or creeds within your book, has no real bearing of an example in a storyline where species doesn't matter in terms of morality. Humans in Gargoyles have every right to be as sinister, nuanced, or pure of heart as they please. Just as any other race. Races having no monopoly doesn't mean everyone has to be nuanced. If gargoyles can range from fanatical to understandable, humans can range from fanatical to understandable. It all balances when taken as a whole.

The fact that you've written a work dealing with races that are monolithic representations of good and evil has...no actual bearing on what we're talking about, nor do how they are treated prove or disprove anything. If anything, what you're saying goes against one of the principles the series stands for. "Sevarius SHOULD get some development, he's human!" is not a reasoning that makes sense in the thematic context of the Gargoyles series.
Harlan Phoenix
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 3:12:15 pm EDT from 76.5.104.241

Desert Coyote> "I personally kind of like my villains having certain shades of gray, especially if they're human villains ... a reason why I used demons as the main villains in my book: they're wholly unforgivable and unredeemable, so defeating/killing them is less guilt-inducing."

You ever read Milton's "Paradise Lost"? the main character in that is very complex, he does do some very bad things but sees himself as a champion of liberty and self-determination fighting against a cruel and despotic tyrant.

He's also very determined, even after being defeated and imprisoned in one of the worst places imaginable, he manages to rally his comrades, reunite with his long lost children and escape his prison to strike back against the ruler who imprisoned him.
Algernon
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 3:04:45 pm EDT from 149.157.1.180

So I finished my little project of scanning in all my Skybox cards (both sides!) today. Man, what a task that was. Good way to ease boredom though.

One thing I noticed, though, is when I tried to piece the images of the puzzle together...card 85's image side is BACKWARDS (text side is fine)! I checked all my other extras of it, and they are all fine, its just this single one. Of course in editing all it takes is a single flip, but it seriously drove me nuts for about 10 minutes until I put the cards on my floor and discovered the problem.

Next up is the book and the stickers.


RE: Goliath Chronicles: At best all I can say is MEH. I became a fan of Gargoyles in about 2000, already having been spoiled on half the plot of the show (as I had stumbled upon fansites literally by accident, browsing for other things). Because of that, the suspense factor with me was mostly gone, and the expectations weren't nearly as high (as I already knew before viewing them they weren't considered canon). Some of them are okay. And as for the "bad" ones, well, lets just say that any show is bound to having the occasional miss.
Andrea - [SailorV77 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 2:45:29 pm EDT from 24.41.18.162

Yes Matt, as Phoenician stated, you called me Braniac. TWICE. My response has become a running joke on several forums I frequent and, to be frank, this most common of typos can become a little grating on me (even though to err is human).

In addition, if anyone wants to rewatch TGC eps for this analysis going on at the moment, they're currently running in the DisneyXD timeslot (and surprise, surprise...And Justice For All is up next). Strangely though, when The Journey was supposed to run, they reran Hunter's Moon Part III. The only Weisman ep got dumped; how rude!
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 12:17:33 pm EDT from 192.44.136.113

A further comment on the Goliath Chronicles. I mentioned earlier that I thought that a lot of the flaws in it may be more due to the short amount of time that the production team had to work on it than to it being mostly a new team, since many of the weaknesses of the season would be weaknesses even if it was an entirely new series.

"And Justice For All" generally makes the list as one of the worst "Goliath Chronicles" episodes, and I think that the ending supports the argument above. Now, the flaw that frequently gets brought up (ever since Greg Weisman talked about it) was Goliath being recognized as an intelligent being rather than viewed as a wild animal (and most of the public would see him as the latter), and I think that this does stem from the new production team being unfamiliar with the series. If this had been an episode of "X-Men", instead, the trial notion wouldn't be a problem (and I wonder from there whether the series would have seemed less poorly-handled if you were to substitute "X-Men" for "gargoyles" and "Friends of Humanity" for "Quarrymen").

But the denouement, with Goliath conveniently tricking the villain into making his confession on audiotape and then playing it back for the court (equally conveniently missing the point where he offered to team up with the villain on a crime spree), would have been weak even if this had been a separate continuity. Small wonder that the episode is one of the least popular "Goliath Chronicles" of all.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 7:32:33 am EDT from 4.244.214.80

Matt: You've spelled the name as 'Braniac' when it's BraIniac . . . Bran vs. Brain . . . d:

Nothing to add, but I am enjoying the posts so far this week . . . got a kick out of Blaise's review of 'A Bronx Tail' and 'And Justice for All,' lol.
Phoenician
"The suspense is terrible . . . I hope it lasts" -- Willy Wonka
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 2:59:41 am EDT from 157.242.215.244

Braniac> I have no idea what you are talking about with the Raisin Bran...

But as for the gargoyle population and genetic diversity issues, well, we know in 1996 that the London Clan has nearly 200 members alone. And they are one of ten clans still around. Granted, several clans are really hurting in numbers (the Manhattan and Labyrinth Clans especially), but even other small ones like the Mayan and Avalon Clans are in good shape to grow relatively quickly in the future. And there is no reason not to assume the New Olympian, Ishimura, Loch Ness, Xanadu and Pukhan clans have pretty good numbers as well. The fact that by 2198 three new clans will be founded speaks highly of the gargoyle population growth to be had so I'd say their 1996 numbers are over a thousand for sure.

As for beasts, I suspect there was a time a few thousand years ago when beasts WERE more numerous than gargoyles in large part due to their slightly faster reproductive rate, but once humans became a major threat this all started changing. Increased intelligence and the ability to glide and thus become more inaccesible during the day kept gargoyles a bit safer than beasts. Maybe even the ability to talk and form alliances helped too. In any case, both gargoyle and beast numbers have been declining for the past couple thousand years, but beasts have probably been in more danger. And the fewer beasts there were, the fewer eggs were lain. And the odds of only a couple beasts hatching in each generation in a clan grew greater. Look at the Wyvern Clan; their 998 rookery (which later hatched on Avalon) would've only had THREE beast eggs. I think this shows that even in the clans that had beast members, they were on the decline and would eventually go extinct due to lack of mates and genetic diversity. In fact, though several clans have a handful of beasts (Manhattan, Avalon, Ishimura, probably Mayan etc.) I suspect most don't have any. And I would guess that had it not been for the actions of the Xanadu Clan, gargoyle beasts would be essentially extinct by 2198.

Accesibility> Keep in mind that 'Awakening' wasn't my first episode, 'Temptation' was. And I had no problem figuring things out and only watching the series from the beginning weeks later. I see the comics the same way. There may be more content pre-dating them, but I would think new readers could catch on to the general themse easily enough and catch up later on as I did. I think Volpe was talking about a friend of hers getting hooked on Gargoyles after watching 'The Green' the other day. Think about how much backstory an episode like that might need, and yet it worked for a new viewer. I wouldn't worry about it. Reviewers need something to criticize and accesibility seems like an easy target, but I don't think it is truly a valid concern.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"For science, which, as my associate Fang indicated, must move ever forward. Plus there's the money... and I do love the drama!" -Sevarius, 'Louse'
posted @ Wed, Sep 23, 2009 12:56:19 am EDT from 70.230.170.153

Greg has made the analogy that gargoyle beasts are to gargoyles as chimpanzees are to humans. Why are there so many more humans than chimpanzees?
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2009]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 10:57:45 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

Well, female dogs (despite having a much shorter lifespan than humans) can have many more offspring during their life than the average human woman. Yet, human communities aren't being overrun by dogs--part of that is because we spay/neuter them, but even back when we didn't, the dogs still weren't taking over. It's because we're the masters. WE domesticated THEM. THEY rode through history on OUR coattails, not the other way around.

I suspect in situations when resources were scarce, the gargoyle children would be more likely to be fed than the gargoyle beasts. Plus, gargoyle beasts may not be smart enough to avoid as many dangerous situations as gargoyles. I think there's a lot to be said for intelligence. Gargoyles beasts are way smarter than dogs, sure, but not smart enough. If gargoyle beasts were just as smart as gargoyles, they'd have probably overran them a long time ago. But they're not.
Rebel
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 10:57:18 pm EDT from 69.134.195.157

Gargoyles Population > An interesting discussion. Last year, I took an Environmental Studies class. As I mentioned in the Comment Room last year, parts of it made me think of Gargoyles. Gargoyles are the kind of species that have few offspring but take such good care of the few they have that they are almost certain to reach sexual maturitry and have offspring of their own. The common example of this is the elephant. So, given that the elephant has survived (more or less with all the poaching going on), I think gargoyles can make a come back.

There is something I would like to question: gargoyle beasts have a higher offspring rate than gargoyles because the beasts can breed earlier. They can have four, possible even five, eggs while gargoyles are limited to three. My question is why didnt gargoyle beasts completely overwhelm gargoyles with the clans? Now, we know their numbers, much like the gargoyles, have gone down drastically this last century. The London Clan is without any and the clan that Fu-Dog came from seems to be the only thing thats keeping the population alive. But back in the days when the clans were prosporous all over the world, theyre less in number to their gargoyle commrades. I wonder why this is. Any thoughts, theories, comments?
Litwolf
<Be happy for me and for all who fly free.> - Tobias of Animorphs
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 10:42:28 pm EDT from 209.243.38.9

Rebel is the closest to what I was trying to say. (Been getting misunderstood an awful lot lately ...)

My point was that in Gargoyles it works better to have nuanced villain characters who might not necessarily be all bad: by giving Sevarius Little Anton, it was sticking with that modus operandi, in that we were getting a more human side to Anton Sr. It works for the venue. Whereas my stuff is working from a more ... shall we say eschatological position, where there's really not too many shades of gray: there's either demons or there's angels, and occasionally demons posing as angels and vice versa. The book I've been plugging is not necessarily focused on "beat up the bad guys" so much as it's extended character studies which take place within the context of a "beat up the bad guys" story. To try to emphasize this, when my characters confront a human character he's not *totally* evil, just very fanatical and eventually becoming obsessive with achieving his goals. He's not specifically on the evil side. He's just a little ... okay, a *lot* unstable. Kind of like Sevarius if he were a bit more manic.

I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.
Desert Coyote - [<- Buy my book, please?]
The Gargfic writer formerly known as Coyote the Bando
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 7:59:36 pm EDT from 4.156.6.57

I think that Greg Weisman has far more of an advantage with "The Spectacular Spider-Man" than with "Gargoyles". "The Spectacular Spider-Man" rebooted the Spider-Man continuity to start all over again from just after Peter Parker became Spider-Man, with the first episode being his first clash with super-villains. The "Gargoyles" comic didn't have the option of starting all over again with Issue #1 being about a re-imagined version of the Manhattan clan appearing in New York in 2006 rather than 1994.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 7:42:01 pm EDT from 4.244.211.186

Accessibility> Just to clarify a little, I have never thought that new readers had to be told everything there was to know about Macbeth, for example, the first time he showed up. His connection with Demona, his immortality, his long-dead wife and son, even how he knows the Manhattan Clan are not things we need to know when he arrives on the scene. I was perfectly fine with him being introduced as a guy asking the gargoyles for a favor. After all, we didn't know much more about him the first time he showed up in the TV series. I think what concerns me are moments like when Arthur shows up. It just seems to me like King Arthur being awake would strike new fans as a pretty big deal, yet none of the characters are all that surprised to see him. I can't know for certain how this would read to a new fan of the series, but I know if I was reading a story set in the modern day and suddenly the characters said "Hey look, it's our good buddy Sherlock Holmes," my reaction would probably be something like "Wait, what? When did that happen?"

I thought the backstory on the mutates and the clones was handled very well. I just wish it could have come an issue or two before Thailog actually showed up. I know that would have probably been impossible due to various concerns, but my feeling is that it would have made Thailog's appearance a little more of surprise to the new readers.

And I never did think Greg was unaware or unconcerned about bringing in new readers and making the comic accessible for them. I thought that he had a very difficult challenge balancing the need to be accessible with the need to please the fans and that he did what he thought was best to juggles these and the various other needs of the comic. Whether it was the best possible way to do that is subject to individual opinion, but I do not doubt Greg's intentions or his knowledge that this needed to be done.

Harlan Phoenix> I don't entirely disagree and I wouldn't want to see Sevarius fleshed out just for the sake of making him a more well-rounded character. When it does happen, I'm hoping it will jusy feel like something that develops or is revealed naturally. But one of the things that I find interesting about the Gargoyles universe is how characters who you would think are nothing more than bit players eventually become more important and more dimensional than the initially seemed. I think Sevarius is fine as he is for now, but since he is a pretty major secondary villain, I have the feeling that we'll get a better look at who he is and what makes him tick at some point down the line. I don't expect that I'll like him or find his as complex as Demona or Xanatos. But I think it will be interesting nonetheless.

Not to speak for Desert Coyote, but I think there is a place for both nuanced complex villains and more one dimensional straight up evil foes. I like the former just fine, but it can be equally entertaining to see villains who are utterly irredeemable and who you really want the heroes to defeat without mercy. Some writers use robots, some use a species of monster, some just create characters who are literally evil incarnate. Whatever the case, it allowd the heroes to really let loose without confronting complex moral questions. Again, doing it the other way can be great, but I think both have their merits.

On the other hand...

Desert Coyote> I have to agree with Harlan Phoenix in that I'm a little confused about exactly what you're saying. Maybe you mistyped something, but as it is, what you wrote reads as "I like complex villains who aren't 100% bad, which is why the villains in my book are completely evil so the heroes can kill them without being concerned about doing something wrong." Please clarify?
Demonskrye - [<---"Snow White" at The Ink and Pixel Club]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 6:55:18 pm EDT from 209.6.214.14

I don't think he was trying to support a point, or saying that having a monolithically evil species is better than having more nuanced villains. I think he was just saying that, for HIS purposes, in HIS story, villains like that are easier to work with. After all, the Gargoyles universe has nuanced villains that you actually sympathize with at times, but then again the Gargoyles universe rarely kills its villains off. They usually survive for future stories. In Coyote's work, the villains die. So for his purposes, it makes more sense to have one-dimensional villains, because it's easier to kill them off.
Rebel
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 6:52:02 pm EDT from 69.134.195.157

Coyote> Also forgot to add...why would you try to use a monolithically evil species of your own creation to support a point regarding a work of fiction where no race having a monopoly on good or evil is one of the main points of the story?
Harlan Phoenix - [harlanphoenix at live dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 5:46:46 pm EDT from 76.5.104.241

Antiyonder: I think it's a case of different criteria for what's "accessible".

I don't think Greg has failed to consider new readers in his story. There are regular in-story recaps and exposition. Character names are spelled out at the start. Themes and issues are reiterated. But at the end of all this what he considers "extremely accessible" I wouldn't describe as anything of the sort.

Does it surprise me that Greg knows people who got into the comic without knowing the cartoon? Not remotely. I can think of counterexamples though. One person who was psyched for the comic but who drifted entirely, significantly because their reading age will probably never be high enough to really make sense of it. A couple of people who I expected to keep up with the comic but who didn't feel too hooked in (in fairness, I don't know if the writing or the schedule was the decisive factor).

And more than once when I've talked to people about the comic they've asked me if they can follow it without really remembering the series. And asked flat-out I'll give my honest opinion which is that it'll probably be difficult. (Of course I've loaned out my DVDs and that's worked out okay too). The latter examples might be considered skewing the audience but then again... (1) I'd argue Greg's samples are as likely to be skewed because if you know the author you're more likely to give it a shot; and (2) *I'm* the audience too. It's not my job to represent to others what I know Greg's intentions are but what my experience is.

And my experience, *even as an out and out fan*, is that as much as I love Clan-Building, as much as it fascinates me and thrills me and in some cases has educated me, as hugely as I geek out on it, it still feels far and away the most insular and complex comic I have ever committed to reading, bar none.

I have to say, the reviewer's choice of Bad Guys #2 to illustrate this density kind of misses the point. I distinctly remember when the comic came out I read it at the train station on the way to a comic convention and thought, "oh, this is a good one to show people because it's pretty straight-forward." And it is. And Greg's absolutely right about the ending with Sevarius. I even have a hunch I wrote something at the time saying what Greg said about how the "meet your maker" thing worked precisely because it DIDN'T assume prior knowledge. I actually think if you haven't read #1 or forgot Fang from his, what, one line at the start then the ending could feel like a disconnect, but that's not a bad thing necessarily because it's dramatic in its own right. The comic feels really focused and reminds me a lot of the kind of anthology comics popular in the UK. And I really liked that long walk down. It felt much more tense than any number of much more compressed scenes in the comic. And 'Bad Guys' overall does seem fresh and spry and unencumbered by baggage.

Clan-Building though...

Clan-Building 2 contains two main arcs and in the middle stories, #8 and #11, each have two huge casts where there is to my best recollection *absolutely no overlap* (bar the odd statue maybe). There is an entirely different cast of characters in #8 than #11. Many issues contain isolated scenes which pertain only to the ongoing continuity issues and not to anything happening in the story in the moment.

And each issue is brimming with characters and exposition. It's not that Greg doesn't provide backstory but there is a lot -- this is the Gate and it was there but Goliath did that and now it's here, that's the Grimorum, Demona has that, Goliath has this but not Goliath from then or then but *then*, and these know each other from there and you've never met him but he saw that and he knew him and she's his mother so...

Given the huge impediment of the backstory, it reads extremely clearly. Absent that caveat...?

With Bad Guys, the first read through (except perhaps #1) was like an electric jolt -- immediate and powerful. I found with Clan-Building that my first reaction was usually cooler, less visceral, but I enjoyed it more with successive readings as it all sunk in and I saw the links and picked up on what's going on. (It reminds me a little of how a friend of mine once described 'The Wire' to me: it takes a lot to get in but suddenly you're immersed and it's utterly compelling). I'm sure for new readers it would reward this kind of attentiveness equally well. But it's dense, and denser still for newcomers who have more to learn and less of an incentive to learn it.

Greg's ramble mentioned "the need to compensate" which I think kind of sums up how I feel about the way 'Clan-Building' was presented.

If I'm me -- English graduate, love legend, love mythology, love epic storytelling, love history, love smart writing, love 'Spectacular Spider-Man' BUT I've never seen 'Gargoyles'... much as it ticks my boxes, I need to be more than compensated for. I don't think I'm any kind of philistine or a lazy reader but I have no reason to assume the comic would be worth the outlay of effort to get into it.

Absent any prior knowledge of the universe, I'm almost certainly in the group Blaise just wrote off as not worth pursuing. *Even though* clearly 'Gargoyles' is absolutely my cup of tea, I highly doubt I'd stick around long enough to find that out. There's no shortage of cool stuff and if I want to spend some time on something challenging but probably up my street I'd rather read Langland or Spenser than a continuation of an obscure 90s cartoon. (Cheaper too).

Guardian brings up the "business perspective" and DC as an example, and DC is the perfect example. I speak as someone who has over the years spent upwards of £40 attempting to get into DC and while I've enjoyed some moments my lasting impression has always been "this is all well and good *but it isn't really for me, is it*?"

Either I was entertained in isolation but wasn't inclined to seek out more (e.g. "The Dark Knight Returns") or I found it totally up the backside of its own continuity and a huge turn-off (various floppies from the start of different runs, possibly not the best runs, but nonetheless ones that caught my eye). On the other hand, I don't buy a huge amount of Marvel comics but over the years I've felt several times, "I don't really know anything about these characters except by dim reputation but I'm enjoying this and I feel like it's aimed as much at me as anyone else". And I've collected scores of trades and a fair few floppies and have got into it and had a great time. Now always, but the point is that hard cash of mine that could have been in DC's pocket is now in Marvel's (and Image's etc.).

And by the way, I came to 'Gargoyles' totally out of order. I saw some late World Tour episodes up to "The Gathering Part ONE" and then a few months later S1 in order before the first half of S2 completely out of order (starting with "City of Stone") but with "Turf" thrown into the mix for some reason. But the World Tour stuff was self-explanatory, I'd just read "A Midsummer Night's Dream" for the first time and so Oberon, Titania and Puck *absolutely* reeled me in and if there was ever a point of no return "City of Stone" was it. There was plenty that confused me -- e.g. the Archmage and the Magus -- because I was watching the episodes weeks apart without having them taped but substantially I got through it. If I came across "Clan-Building" in this topsy-turvy order though...?

I don't think it's all bad, and I can see Greg's logic. I think adapting "The Journey" was a great move. "Nightwatch" is an excellent beginning, and "The Journey" and most of "Invitation Only" more or less holds things together but while the original series had the prism of Goliath through which we saw a tapestry slowly unfold, the comic is far less anchored and has a huge variety of ongoing threads advanced sometimes a panel at a time per arc. By focusing on so many characters it ultimately feels like we focused on few characters in any real depth.

Now *as a fan* I love Greg's stuff. I got all sorts of giddy thrills from "The Rock" and its time-bending structure. I want to see Katana and Brooklyn's family already. I definitely want to see more of Constantine and Duval and some Demona would be nice too and more Hacker please and Matt and the Canmores and, and, and, and, and... I love it. But I love 'Gargoyles' and I love Greg's writing so it's hardly a big stretch for me to come on board. (Though Greg had a totally unenviable task and kept us utterly engaged with endless new avenues of inquiry every 24 pages even when issues suffered substantial delays.)

I also think for anyone who is committed enough to stick with it, there's a lot to offer even if you haven't watched the series.

But when it comes to recommending the book for others I can't in good faith say it's totally accessible because I don't think it does target the audience at large. At best it accommodates them.

Frequently comic runs say stuff like "we're rediscovering the universe as-new and we'll gradually fold out the basics in a way that both new people and old will enjoy." I remember one comic I read for years as a kid got stale and the writer, who'd been off the comic for a few months, posted to the fans a section from his plot proposal to the editor which stated: "We're starting to get stories that explain continuity issues, and this kind of plot, by its very nature, looks backward. It's time to draw a line under what has gone before and start again. I want to produce stories that look forward, that give the reader the feeling that something exciting is just around the corner." And it worked: the stories felt fresher and more energised than ever before. It didn't matter that I loved the old continuity and there were threads I would have loved to see followed through immediately, it felt cutting edge and exciting and better than ever and I could tell people "read this" because even though it was #175 it read as fresh as #1.

I don't know if Clan-Building *could* have pulled off a clean slate like this without ruining the series but I do know that it *didn't*. Yes, the non-linear structure of "The Rock" could have been used in the series, but given Clan-Building is virtually a pilot for the comic in its own right, can you really imagine "Natural Selection" or "Temptation" or Buffy's "The Witch" using anything like this? (I guess Firefly's "Out of Gas" was pretty non-linear but it was the story of the main cast not "a rock").

What if "Market Forces" had a completely different cast from "Interactions", starring John Jameson or someone, with Pete only mentioned in the background? What if "Competition" had the Sinister Six and Tombstone and Molten Man and a scene with the Green Goblin chucked in for good measure? What if there was an episode which flashed back to one of Spidey's adventures in the Secret Wars before the season started?

'Gargoyles' isn't a new beginning. It is what the fans expect of it -- the direct continuation of a long-running series at the point it left off. I can tell people "read this" but I know there's a good chance I'll get quizzical looks back. I could list the comic's strengths all day but by the standards of most pop entertainment against which it's ultimately in direct competition, I don't think 'Gargoyles' is accessible.


And having written all this I see Greg's posted. *waves* And now I wonder whether it's worth posting this and keeping the discussion alive but... well, it's written now. It occurs to me to add, if you're reading and if it needs adding, that I don't think for a moment that any flaw in the comic is due to a lack of *effort*. I don't regret any aspect of my experience of the comic which was wonderful. And I really, really hope that I'm wrong and you're right.

Also, can't wait for the Crawlspace podcast. Loved the first two.
Ed
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 5:42:59 pm EDT from 213.187.38.226

Desert Coyote> Let...me make sure I understand this correctly.

You're a fan of a series that makes a point to say that evil is not the product of a single species, race, or creed (and being a fan of the series and what it represents, I would assume you agree with this notion)...and yet you single out a certain species of creatures for evil in your book?

Not to insult, I just want to clarify. I don't quite understand. (Not to say your work has to have the same morals as Gargoyles [if that were true, fiction would be boring], but...what?)

Humanizing Sevarius> I really don't think Sevarius is the type of character who NEEDS to be humanized. If he is humanized or given depth, sure, I won't mind...but I'm perfectly content with Sevarius filling the mad scientist mold. What's wrong with an amoral mad scientist who embraces how amazingly goofy and drama-loving he is? Save the complexity for Xanatos, Demona, and others. Sevarius is unique BECAUSE of his complete lack of an ethical code and enjoying every minute of it.
Harlan Phoenix - [harlanphoenix at live dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 5:33:43 pm EDT from 76.5.104.241

Hello Gargoyles fans,

I'm the owner of the Talespin fansite that you talked about in your previous comments (thanks about the nice comments, BTW)
Considering there are fans of both series, I was wondering if there was any way to do a link exchange or something?

It's pretty interesting that you got the creator of the series to answer your questions, in the same way I got both Talespin creators to do it - I thought this was pretty uncommon but, in any case, very appreciated :)

NB : I don't rule out the possibility to make sites dedicated to other series in the future, including Gargoyles ;) I already have a few : http://www.animationsource.org/
steet - [steetboris at yahoo dot fr]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 4:46:43 pm EDT from 88.164.92.141

Anthony - No current plans to attend any convention the rest of the year. If that changes, I'll let you know.

Demonskyre - My post at ASK GREG was NOT directed specifically at you. And you did nothing to insult me; please don't be concerned about that. Everything you right is always respectful, which is appreciated.

Rereading my post, I probably overstated my defense. It's totally fair to argue that the books are inaccessible to new fans -- but that only means I failed in my goal to make them accessible. What was kinda pissing me off about that latest review (which cumulatively played in with previous reviews the books have gotten) is this assumption that I didn't give a damn about new readers. That I made a decision to ignore their needs in favor of hardcore fans. That is objectively untrue. I tried very hard to make each arc (though not necessarily each issue in each arc) accessible. And personally, I think it's telling that the judgment that I didn't try was coming from readers who ARE familiar with the property, not from readers who are not.

FYI - I'm doing a podcast today for spidermancrawlspace.com. It's not too late to post questions here: http://spidermancrawlspace.com/wwwboard/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5521

Thanks for listening to me rant...
Greg Weisman
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 4:27:07 pm EDT from 64.236.243.16

Does anyone know if Greg Weisman is going to the Big Apple Comic-Con Oct 16-18th? Anyone else going or have gone before?
Anthony Tini
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 4:12:16 pm EDT from 159.240.11.254

Here's an interesting interview on the history of SLG with Dan Vado: http://www.hijinxcomics.com/blog/2009/09/21#danvado They talk about Disney/Marvel at 46 minutes and licensing at 51 minutes. Gargoyles is mentioned at 52:45.
Landon Thomas - [<- Gargoyles News Twitter Feed]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 1:16:55 pm EDT from 128.101.32.234

Harlan, re: humanizing Sevarius:
While giving him a son and trying to humanize him might not be a popular move, what it *does* do is further round out a character that, to tell the truth, occasionally comes across as highly one-dimensional ("I'm crazy, I'm smart, look at how many lives I can screw up with my happy syringes for the right price!"). I personally kind of like my villains having certain shades of gray, especially if they're human villains ... a reason why I used demons as the main villains in my book: they're wholly unforgivable and unredeemable, so defeating/killing them is less guilt-inducing. Sevarius may be a monstrous individual, but in the end he *is* quite human, and it would be natural for him to want to have a son, maybe to be protective of Little Anton. In the end, it makes for a more believable, more thorough character ... one that might have just a miniscule shred of hope for redemption.
Desert Coyote - [<- Please buy my book!]
The Gargfic writer formerly known as Coyote the Bando
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 11:45:56 am EDT from 209.130.194.114

Goliath did say something along the lines of "Save your sorrow for his son. He did not ask for any of this." So I think he might have cared, but perhaps he considered Little Anton to be more of an abomination than Thailog in "Double Jeopardy."
Rebel
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 11:11:02 am EDT from 69.134.195.157

Blaise> I had forgotten that, so thank you for bringing it up. I still feel like it's a rather disturbing scene. Normally, TGC was pulling punches that the first two seasons were willing to throw. Here it seems like TGC had Goliath doing something that he never did in the first two seasons without it being any kind of a big deal. There were certainly times when Goliath got close to killing someone, but we never saw him do it. Judging from what he says to Demona in "Awakening," Goliath considers killing to be a last resort, if you're in the middle of a fight and it is literally kill or be killed. I've only seen the episode once, so I don't remember if he had any other options. I just found it very disturbing that this was the first time we actually saw Goliath kill someone and he didn't seem to care. Of course, there are no long term consequences in TGC, so I guess it shouldn't have surprised me.
Demonskrye - [<---"Snow White" at The Ink and Pixel Club]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 10:54:57 am EDT from 209.6.214.14

****Blaise appears in a ball of flame.**** Simple entrance for simple responses.

TODD JENSEN> Really? (*reads through posts*) Ah, you're right. I beg your pardon.

ANTIYONDER> And I beg your pardon for the mix-up. So, with that being said, allow me to reiterate:
Oh, Antiyonder...why? ;-)

DEMONSKRYE> Um...I just feel I should mention that Little Anton (yeah, that does sound wrong) was about to crush Goliath in his fists before Goliath pulled out the virus-containing hypo.

Until next time! ****Blaise wraps his cloak about himself and slowly vanishes (while mimicking the sound of a T.A.R.D.I.S.).
Blaise
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 10:33:50 am EDT from 76.208.145.198

Matt> "I tend to agree with Braniac."

I am not obsessed with Kellogg's Raisin Bran.

As to Todd's point about potential extinction, the respondents he mentioned were pretty much right. The three-egg system would have been more than sufficient for gargates to populate the planet back in the time of Pangaea. It's only after a major destructive influence arose (namely, the Iron Age of humanity) that the slow population growth became problematic. The extreme isolation of the individual populations of gargoyles has probably caused genetic issues as well (it would in part explain the major physiological differences from clan to clan). I'd have to know Greg's thinking on the exact number of gargoyles living in his world, but I'd say they're close to the danger point of 100/1000 (a better warning level than Kerry's mentioned 50/500 - that's typically critical). In all honesty, I always figured that the creation of the Liberty Clan was both a show of Gargoyle Nation unity and a means to combat genetic variation problems.
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 10:25:52 am EDT from 192.44.136.113

Harlan Phoenix> Good question. I guess it depends on what you mean by "enhancing his character." I personally feel like characters are more interesting when we get to see the various aspects of their personalities. Right now, Sevarius is kind of a means for various antagonists in the series to accomplish plans that involve genetics. He's fun, but as I said before, he hasn't really progressed beyond a very enjoyable version of the traditional mad scientist. For now, that's fine. We have plenty of interesting, multidimensional, nuanced villains in "Gargoyles" and sometimes its nice to have a fairly uncomplicated bad guy or two in there. But given enough time, I'd like to see some hints at Sevarius being more than just the resident mad scientist or at least get some hints about why he is the way he is.

Is his portrayal in "Genesis Undone" an ingenious way of showing a more positive side of Sevarius? No. I still think it's a matter of personal opinion whether it works or not and I can easily see how people might find his relationship with Little Anton (there is just no way to make that sound right) forced or ridiculous. I didn't think it was great writing, but it felt more natural to me than, say, learning that Sevarius coaches little league on alternate Tuesdays. I could see how his initial enthusiasm for his new creation, which happened to be a living, sentient creature, could become something resembling love. Given enough time, Sevarius might have tired of his "son" just as he did the clones and moved on to something new. But as it happened, murderous rampaging Goliath killed Little Anton well before Sevarius was done with his latest creation. Between that and the performance, it worked for me.
Demonskrye - [<---"Snow White" at The Ink and Pixel Club]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 9:27:00 am EDT from 209.6.214.14

Birth rate and parental care are usually tied together. Species that produce huge "litters" of progeny at a time typically have little or no interest in the resulting offspring, and the sheer number of babies produced has to overcome a huge mortality rate. Species that produce very few typically show a lot of care, and the baby stays with the mother, sometimes for years, before becoming a functional adult. Both are very viable strategies, but they don't both bounce back from disaster in the same way. In fact, the caregivers are much the more vulnerable of the two, since the females don't come into heat several times a year and the children take a lot longer to become sexually mature. This is part of the reason that a lot of shark species are in a bad spot right now: low birth rate and a long time to maturity don't compensate for those that are caught in nets, fished up by people, have their fins cut off for soup, etc.

So, though the 3-egg thing is biologically viable, it makes the species vulnerable to any outside force that could wipe out large numbers in a short amount of time. As for genetic diversity, the 50/500 rule is a good guideline: at minimum, a species needs 50 breeding individuals to survive and 500 to maintain enough genetic diversity to be adaptable. These numbers obviously only count those individuals who could come into contact with one another, so the wide scattering of clans nowadays isn't doing them any favors either. When clans had neighbors allied with them, or at least not actively fighting for territory, this would have been much less of an issue.
Kerry (Kth) Boyd
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 8:42:24 am EDT from 24.99.188.243

Todd, Gargoyles Uniqueness> Continuity is one thing, but tone and writing is another. Continuity may not be entirely uncommon now among action cartoons, but assuming Gargs had the exact same freedom and content it did back then but was made nowadays, I would think it'd get a similar level of critical acclaim as, say, Avatar: The Last Airbender at the least. Avatar's similar to Gargoyles in the sense that both were action cartoons with strong continuity with largely original worlds and mythologies. And if I'm not mistaken, Avatar's series finale was the highest rated Nickelodeon program of all time.

So I think if Gargoyles was made today and had the same content as the series we know and love, there would certainly be a level of distinction (although I would guess slightly less than Avatar if only by the nature of environment: Gargoyles would likely be a Jetix series, making all of its peers action shows. Aside from Danny Phantom, all of Avatar's peers were comedy shows).
Harlan Phoenix - [harlanphoenix at live dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 8:28:38 am EDT from 76.5.104.241

BLAISE - I didn't start the Goliath Chronicles discussion; I only contributed to it.

EJERCITO - In light of the numerous differences between the familiar Arthurian cycle and its depiction in the BBC "Merlin" series (in it, Merlin and Arthur are the same age, Arthur grows up at Uther's court with everyone knowing who he is, Guinevere is a blacksmith's daughter rather than a princess, etc.), I seriously doubt that the content of "Merlin" parallels Arthur's story in the Gargoyles Universe that closely. (Though we know, from "The Gathering", that magic can bring statues to a kind of quasi-life in the Gargoyles Universe.)

THE ACCESSIBILITY ISSUE: It's difficult for me to imagine how the comics or trade paperbacks would seem to someone not familiar with "Gargoyles". I'm certain that even if I wasn't familiar with "Gargoyles", I'd have definitely liked "Clan-Building Volume Two" because it had so many elements that I enjoy: King Arthur in the first half, [SPOILER] time travel to the Middle Ages in the second half [/SPOILER], things like that. I don't know about Volume One, which focused on the more modern side of the Gargoyles Universe, or about "Bad Guys".

One of the reviewers raised another question: much of the excitement that "Gargoyles" generated when it came out in the mid 1990's was its continuity at a time when most adventure cartoons were written more in a "every episode is independent and could be aired in any order" way. But now, the continuity approach is more common in animated adventure series, so "Gargoyles" wouldn't stand out as much from the competition. What do the rest of you think of that?

Gargoyle Eggs: I'm not a biology expert, so I'll probably sit out the discussion - but I remember wondering at one point if the slow birth rate is a sign that gargoyles are nearing the end of their species' life-span - that even if the humans stopped slaughtering them and learned to live in peace with them, extinction isn't far off. When I raised this possibility in the comment room before, though, those who knew more about biology than I did commented that other species had similar low birth rates and yet survived as long as they weren't threatened by outside dangers.
Todd Jensen
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 7:18:42 am EDT from 4.244.208.121

****A large wave of water slams through the Comment Room. In its wake, a completely drenched Blaise stands on a surf board.**** Hey all! Seeing as how I missed out on most of last week's topics (count me as another who gets annoyed at seeing the gargoyles get too "humanized" in fanfiction), I figured I might as well get in on the ones this week while it's still early.

"GARGOYLES" COMIC BOOK ACCSESABILITY> Well, I can see where the criticism comes from, but at the same time, I don't see any REAL road blocks to a new reader "jumping on" as it were. Mind you, I do believe the comic works best when one reads MORE than one issue (at least a whole three issue-story, if not the entire "Clan-Building" arc), but maybe a few unanswered questions in one comic will entice this hypothetical "new reader" to pick up the rest (or watch the animated series) to find the answers (and thus, channel more funds into the "Gargoyles" property). Granted, there may be some readers that will read a comic, get confused and upset that every little detail is not immediately spelled out for them, and promptly trash the comic. My response to that kind of person is, "*(censored)* them!" If the comic isn't worth an investment of their time to find answers to their questions, then they are NOT the audience for the comic. And as far as detracting new readers, I can think of few things more detrimental than reviews saying things like "It's for fans, only." Seriously, why not be helpful and say, "If you like fantasy, Shakespeare, Arthurian legends, stories with rich continuity and characters, or monsters as heroes, check it out, see if you like it?"
As a coda, I would sometimes think to myself what a "new viewer" would think of "Gargoyles" depending on the episode they first saw. For example, if they saw "Monsters" first (and didn't write off the whole series as a result), would they think that Sevarius was intended to be the big bad of the entire series? Obviously, some episodes would make a better first impression than others. At any rate, it can sometimes be a fun little game.

REDEEMING POINTS IN TGC> Oh, Todd...why? ;-)
Actually, TGC is pretty fresh in my mind--believe it or not, I try to watch it every year or so (emphasis on "try"). Why? I don't know--maybe for the same reasons some people will watch footage of a horrific train wreak over and over again. There's just a strange sort of fascination. Well, let's go through this, episode by episode.
*"The Journey"--Well, it was written by Greg Weisman. That's good enough for me. Now for the other twelve....
*"Ransom"--Ummmm...hmmmm...yeah...well, I like the sound of Keith David's voice for the opening monologue, but aside from that...yeah, I got nothing. Who wrote this ep anyway? (*checks*) Adam Gilad? The same guy who wrote "Upgrade" and "Heritage" and "The New Olympians"--THAT Adam Gilad?! Well, okay, those don't top most peoples' "favorite episodes" lists, but some of them are solid enough. Wow, what a difference the Story Editor and Supervising Producer make.
"Runaways"--Okay...well, it focuses on Brooklyn. That's pretty much it. It's a shame, too. This episode was written by Lydia C. Marano, who co-wrote the ENTIRE "City of Stone" multi-parter, and solo wrote the "Avalon" and "The Gathering" multi-parters, not to mention "The Mirror" and the story for "The Reckoning". She also wrote and co-wrote seven other episodes, including the quasi-Brooklyn-centric "Metamorphosis." Again, what a difference the Story Editor and Supervising Producer make.
"Broadway Goes to Hollywood"--As an actor, I LOVE the scene with the producers in the restaurant. Oh god, that is how people in Hollywood think! Other highlights have already been mentioned: Fox's characterization (so much better than "Ransom") including her scheming, Xanatos's one-liners, and some of the moments with Jackal and Hyena. Hell, just having villains from the original series show up at all was a redeeming point. Who wrote this again? (*checks*) Cary Bates? Wow--solo writer and story editor for *11* episodes of the original series, some well-liked ("Sanctuary" and "Possession"), some not so well liked ("Monsters" and "Vendettas"). Got to give him props, though--this episode is a lot more palatable than the two before it.
"A Bronx Tail"--NEXT!
"The Dying of the Light"--Written by Julia Lewald (the Story Editor's wife). I like Robbins figuring out that Hudson was a gargoyle on his own, and the "old leather and concrete" bit. That was so good, it got into the comic. And, like Todd, I liked seeing that the hospital attendant was a Quarryman (heck, just seeing the Quarrymen without their hoods was a plus, however limited the characterization). I like the idea of a pro-gargoyle group, but not necessarily the execution. And I liked the voice work. That's about it.
"And Justice For All"--PULL! *TWANG!* *BANG!* That's what I think of this execrable piece of filth! Sorry, I try to be a bit more civilized than this, but I just hate this episode so much! I can't even watch this one (unless the sound's turned off).
"Genesis Undone"--Another one by Cary Bates, and it shows: out of all the eps of the third season, this one FELT the closest to the tone of the original series. It had Sevarius and Thailog in it, it followed up on the clones and it featured Talon. It was also daring enough to have a downer ending (which should NOT have happened anyway, but I still appreciated it). And Thailog's death scene--which, again, should NOT have happened anyway--had good dialogue and great acting. The rest of it was a bit of a mess, but those bits were decent.
"Generations"--Demona appeared, but that was about it. Okay, okay, I like the *idea* of the Assassin guy--his tech, his cunning, and some aspects of his personality--but the execution was still lacking. I just see so much wasted potential (he wasn't a character in the story so much as he was a plot device *to* the story).
"...For it May Come True"--I liked the "It's a Wonderful Life" idea. And it did have a couple of classic Owen and Xanatos moments (ignoring X's behavior at the end). Oh, and Goliath told Elisa those "three little words" (but we have THAT in the comic now, too). It was nice to see Titania again, and it was nice to have Scott Cleverdon voicing Castaway. That's it.
"To Serve Mankind"--Here's where I would say, "I'm happy to see the Illuminati," but...no. This episode managed to destroy any redemption that might have brought.
"Seeing Isn't Believing"--A follow-up to "The New Olympians" with Michael Dorn and Roddy McDowall reprising their roles, and I like that. The animation isn't always on model, and sometimes a little too "squash & stretch" but I like its smoothness. Actually, this is one of the few episodes I don't mind watching all the way through.
"Angels in the Night"--Well...it's animated by WD-Japan. And Cary Bates wrote it. Xanatos acted like a schemer again (though the "plan" was faulty, and I can't imagine Xanatos NOT planning for every contingency). I liked the Beatles reference, too. Otherwise...yeah, I got nothing.

Wow, those turned out to be more along the lines of "mini-reviews" than I had intended. Oh well, there's my feelings.
Until next time! ****Blaise snaps his fingers and the board rises into the air, allowing Blaise to surf out of the Room on the wind.****
Blaise
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 2:27:58 am EDT from 76.208.158.193

Hello guys I have started posting some of the opening ceremonies of the gathering up on youtube if anyone is interested. HalloweenkingTV channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiXEG_TM2Xs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiTX_GaGPR8
Aaron AKA Halloweenking - [halloweenking28 at yahoo dot com]
posted @ Tue, Sep 22, 2009 12:21:05 am EDT from 24.74.46.36

I tend to agree with Braniac. Three eggs per pair is sufficient to sustain and grow a population, but for gargoyles this happens very slowly. The Mayan Clan's population will still be recovering from the 1990's massacre in 2198! They won't be a 'full clan' yet without outside assistance and even in the best scenario, they will probably have fewer eggs to bring to Queen Florence Island than the other clans.

I theorize that the entire clan society and rookery system evolved in part due to gargoyles' slow reproduction. The clan needs to sustain and grow in size to survive, therefore the clan needs to work to ensure the survival of every egg possible. So gargoyles all work together to bring up younger generations, hence rookeries being synched to hatch together and brought up by the whole clan.
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"For science, which, as my associate Fang indicated, must move ever forward. Plus there's the money... and I do love the drama!" -Sevarius, 'Louse'
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 11:40:54 pm EDT from 70.230.186.229

Echowarrior> "So, with the accepted average of three eggs laid by mature female humanoid gargoyles, an assumed fifty-year period from hatching to sexual maturity (based on the timeline's statement of fifty years between the births of Goliath and Demona and their conceiving of the egg that became Angela) and assuming no massive massacres, could a population be sustained in real life? I'm not interested in proving my old man wrong, I'm merely asking out of curiosity."

Enter the resident (moral) geneticist. A similar question to this came out of my Population Genetics. Primarily you have to consider the effective size of the population and the overall progeny produced. The presence of three offspring is key. The point is often made in population studies that having each breeding pair produce two offspring (basically, replacements) is insufficient overall to sustain a population. Eventually, the death rate overtakes the birth rate. It is the excess of two per breeding pair on average that sustains and even grows the population (an average of ~2.1 is usually considered the point of stability). Of course, this is assuming a 50:50 gender distribution and a total pairing off (both likely not wholly accurate). Gargoyles would expand their numbers far slower than humans could after a major devastation (like that of the Guatamalan Clan) but it would be possible.

Honestly, I'd be more concerned from the possibility of a bottleneck on genetic diversity rather than the number of progeny (I doubt any one clan could exceed the minimum effective population size needed to sustain the species - it's part of why integration between the clans would be important). The lack of about three generations before large clutches of eggs could be produced would be a dangerous factor as well. The slow speed of gargoyle reproduction has its problems in coping with external forces against the population, but in terms of reproduction "in vacuum," the three-egg system is biologically valid. There's some information on population genetics on Wikipedia if you're interested that's pretty much accurate.
Brainiac - [OSUBrainiac at gmail dot com]
There is balance in all things. Live in symmetry with the world around you. If you must blow things up and steal from those around you, THAT'S WHAT RPGS ARE FOR!
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 11:07:24 pm EDT from 174.101.249.151

>>
Speaking of "Gargoyles" and King Arthur, I read last night that the second season premiere episode of BBC's "Merlin" had an evil wizard bringing to life all the gargoyle statues around Camelot and having them attack the terrified people. My immediate thought was, "Great, make gargoyles look like evil monsters who prey on humans once again." As I said before, with these kinds of depictions in the media, it's not at all surprising that so many humans in the Gargoyles Universe are ready to automatically view gargoyles as a threat. (I wonder how such portrayals will be treated by 2198.)<<<
Maybe such a thing actually happened in the Gargoyles Universe (an evil wizard animating stone statues mounted on Camelot).
Michael Ejercito - [mejercit at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 10:59:59 pm EDT from 96.229.59.19

Re: Accessibility . . . I have to agree with Greg's -- and Antiyonder's -- points. When you look at things from a business perspective, which Greg obviously did and does, you learn a few things. As rich as the Gargoyles universe is, not all stories need to be told. I go back to my original example of Thailog's return. We as hardcore fans know this is some pretty big stuff. New fans will also know this to be as something big, though perhaps not nearly as thoroughly as a hardcore fan. But is there a problem with that? Both sets of readers still get something out of reading the book.

As Greg said it, and I agree, he 'gave enough away' in the books for new readers to accept these characters and, if interested, go find out some more information.

As a comic reader, I understand this. You can't bring in too much information to new readers. Let's take the Green Lantern War of Light/Blackest Night run. No one needs to know that, at some point, Hal Jordan was possessed by Parallax. He eventually atoned for his sins and came back in Geoff Johns' Rebirth run. Hardcore Lantern fans will appreciate whatever references are made to Rebirth, but new fans need not make the distinction and may still enjoy the comic. Me? I just like the Hope Lanterns. :-P

It really is all about perspective, and we all know that's completely subjective.
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 10:57:44 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

Gargoyle populations can grow but the rate is very slow since each mated couple can produce at most three offspring over their lifetimes at the rate of one every twenty years. As compared to humans, where a one couple can potentially produce dozens children at the rate of one per year.
Patrick - [<-- The Gathering 2009]
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 10:20:13 pm EDT from 173.88.135.205

Demonskyre>But does humanizing Sevarius enhance his character?
Harlan Phoenix - [harlanphoenix at live dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 9:54:13 pm EDT from 76.5.104.241

Okay, help me out here. I was rewatching "The Green" just within the last half-hour on Youtube, my dad playing with his machine nearby, when he asked me whether the Mayan Clan had laid eggs. I answered yes, then elaborated on the detail that female gargoyles tend to lay three eggs in their lifetime. He called that absurd, as even with the long garg lifespan, they wouldn't be able to sustain the population.

Mind you, my father has no college degree, much less one in biology, and he's more inclined to believe he's right and go on his own opinions more than anything else, but still, he tends to make sense.

So, with the accepted average of three eggs laid by mature female humanoid gargoyles, an assumed fifty-year period from hatching to sexual maturity (based on the timeline's statement of fifty years between the births of Goliath and Demona and their conceiving of the egg that became Angela) and assuming no massive massacres, could a population be sustained in real life? I'm not interested in proving my old man wrong, I'm merely asking out of curiosity.
Echowarrior - [WARendfeld at aol dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 9:36:15 pm EDT from 75.46.94.217

Something very funny happened to me today that I thought I'd share XD I was working on some new Gargoyles artwork while watching "The Green" from one of my videotapes. My best friend was playing her DS and watching the episode at the same time. She remembers the series but never got really into it like I did. I think it was after Zephiro said,

"The Green is safe for now. Come with us."

That my best friend started to pay attention then about halfway through the episode, she goes,

"Anyone that protects my green rules!"

So she cut her DS off and watched the whole episode. She had a whole lot of questions so to appease her curiosity, we went back to the first episode and watched the entire series and I even let her borrow my comics to read. She says she's gonna buy the DvDs and comics when her next paycheck comes in :D

I just thought this was pretty cool ^^ And just in case anyone suspects, no I don't do the "green" and I don't have anything against those that do LoL
VoLpE - [sailorx78 at hotmail dot com]
"Gee, what gave me away?" ~ Jackal, 'The Green'
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 8:52:32 pm EDT from 65.14.83.34

Ed and Rebel> Except that he brings up some newcomers who enjoyed the comic even without enjoying the show, so I'd think that other readers could get into it and even interested enough in checking out the episodes.
Antiyonder
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 8:17:45 pm EDT from 72.87.7.89

Greg described the resonances and call-backs (which are accessible to hard-core fans, but possibly not to casual fans, and certainly not to new fans) as "gravy." I disagree with him, and perhaps that's why I don't feel the comics are extremely accessible to new readers. For me, the resonances and call-backs are way more than gravy--they are an essential part of the enjoyment that I get from the stories. For me, they are the meat.

Then again, there's no way I can possibly see Gargoyles from the perspective of a new fan. If I tried to experience Gargoyles that way, it would necessitate that I forget everything I know about the Gargoyles universe, and of course I can't do that. So, new fans might have an entirely different notion than I do of what constitutes the "meat" of these stories. I'd love to hear from someone who read the comics, but never saw the show, and what their thoughts were about it. Then I could make an informed opinion of how accessible the comics truly are.
Rebel
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 8:12:59 pm EDT from 69.134.195.157

Greg's argument is interesting but I'm with Demonskrye on this one. I adore the comic but accessible, still less *extremely* accessible? I don't think so. It's a complicated issue though and I don't have time to ramble about it, but I'll try to at some point.
Ed
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 7:50:35 pm EDT from 213.187.38.226

SPEN - Since the BBC series apparently didn't do too well in the ratings over here in the States, NBC probably won't show the second season. I've mixed feelings about "Merlin"; I found it fairly entertaining (I've a soft spot for the Arthurian cycle and the Middle Ages), but it didn't stand out to me that much (beyond my interest in studying the similarities and deviations - the deviations were far more prominent - with the legend). I can only wonder what the King Arthur of the Gargoyles Universe would say about it if he ever saw it (or other modern takes on his story - especially "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"); it might reinforce his "All things are true; few things are accurate" statement!

GOLIATH CHRONICLES MOMENTS THAT WORKED: Here are a few more that I thought of since this morning.

Three stood out to me in "Broadway Goes to Hollywood: First, Fox's motive in helping the gargoyles - not out of concern for them, but because she doesn't like the way that she and her family are being targeted by anti-gargoyle rioters. Second, her staging the plane near-accident, with Broadway promptly going to the rescue of the people on board, believing them to be really in danger - in front of all those news cameras (and Xanatos recognizing Fox's deceit and smiling in admiration from one trickster to another). And finally, Jackal and Hyena's familiar villainous wisecracking style (especially when Jackal just has to don a director's beret as he prepares to film Broadway blowing up a Los Angeles landmark, and Hyena's "We can't all marry billionaires" remark to Fox). I think that this episode made up for Fox's infamous portrayal in "Ransom".

Besides Jeffrey Robbins' role in "The Dying of the Light", we also had the moment where a hospital attendant turned out to be a Quarryman. I thought that was a great touch, an underused element in the third season which routinely portrayed the Quarrymen as nearly all professional mercenaries - the possibility that just about anyone in New York might be a Quarryman, and you couldn't be certain of who was one and who wasn't. (A bit like the Hunters' civilian identities in "Hunter's Moon".)

And while "Angels in the Night" had several flaws, I was delighted that it got one last touch of Shakespeare in the series with Xanatos's "To be or not to be" line, of all things. [SPOILER] I noticed a parallel with the comic - in the last new stories we got from it, Chapters Five and Six of "Bad Guys: Redemption", we get Falstaff, one of the best-known and most popular characters in Shakespeare, and his crowd. [/SPOILER]
Todd Jensen
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 6:58:10 pm EDT from 4.244.213.160

Re: Acessibility . . . Demonskrye, when I read your posts, it never came across to me that you were of the notion that new readers needn't be fans of the show. It is very possible that I am just dense and it didn't get through my thick skull, however. Most sugarcoatings and implications just go straight over my head. :\
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 6:55:37 pm EDT from 76.219.185.199

Accessibility> All right, since I've been doing a lot of the arguing that the comic might not have been accessible to new readers, I feel like I should say something.

Greg Weisman, I hope you know that I greatly admire and respect your work and that my opinions on the comics new reader friendliness were never intended as either a professional or personal slight. If they ever came across that way, then I apologize.

I still feel that there is some merit to my argument and I'd like to think I came in with the understanding that not every reader needed to know every character's entire backstory when that character first showed up. But you're right; it's really up to the new readers to say whether the comic is accessible to people who have never seen the TV show.

I'm going to at the very least wait until I've had a chance to reread the whole "Clan Building" storyline before I say anything more about the issue.
Demonskrye - [<---"Snow White" at The Ink and Pixel Club]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 6:35:23 pm EDT from 209.6.214.14

Greg recently gave his two cents on the accessibility of the comic for those not watching the show. Sound arguement to me.
Antiyonder
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 5:40:11 pm EDT from 72.87.7.89

Todd : Season two of "Merlin" premired already? Geez, I just finished season one about a month ago. Wonder how long it will be before we get it on this side of the pond.
Spen
"What if this wasn't a hypothetical question?"
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 5:09:47 pm EDT from 66.43.205.110

I really enjoyed the relationship between Little Anton and Sevarius--I just hated the way Little Anton sounded. He kept going "WOAH".
Rebel
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 11:50:41 am EDT from 69.134.195.157

TGC> Call me looney, but I actually liked the relationship between Sevarius and "Little Anton" in "Genesis Undone." I think part of the reason is because it does something that Greg hasn't got around to yet: it humanizes Sevarius. His depiction in the canon so far has been fun, but he is still kind of your stereotypical mad scientist, made more believable by the specificity of his scientific knowledge and the fact that he mixes in some business skills with his love of the drama. We've never really seen anything that breaks him out of that mold or hints at some positive qualities in him or a life beyond "bad guy scientist for hire." I guess it's a matter of personal opinion whether Sevarius's enthusiasm and genuine affection for his latest creation rang true for you or not, but i bought it. I also found it believable that Sevarius considered the clones old news and not worth revisiting or saving.

Of course, the rest of the episode is pretty much a mess, from the handling of the clones themselves to the believability of the science. I personally feel like Goliath's feeling about Thailog's potential death would be more complicated than what was shown here, since he stopped feeling quite so paternal to Thailog after "Sanctuary." And I've always found it unsettling that Goliath kills Little Anton. Despite all the talk of a potential cure down the road, there is no real evidence that any of the infected gargoyles will ever be revived. Goliath is basically lashing out in his grief and anger, and not even at the actual cause of Thailog's death.

I've only seen a few episodes of TGC. "The Journey" kind of gets a pass, though I think the animation is rather bad. The good parts of "The Dying of the Light" get talked about all the time. And I don't recall anything particularly redeeming about "And Justice For All."

Comic Accessibility> My main point is that this is the second review of the comics that I've seen that mentions the comics being difficult for new readers to pick up if they don't already know the "Gargoyles" story up to this point. Did the comics still manage to sell well? Yes, but not well enough that they were making a substantial profit when the licensing fees were factored in, and the licensing fees were always a consideration and always will be a consideration. If sales were fine and dandy and everyone was making enough money, there would be no need for Greg to keep encouraging us to spread the word.

What's done is done and sales of the trades will ultimately tell if "Gargoyles" will have a second shot at the comics format (assuming Dan Vado is willing to work with a Disney that now owns Marvel and vice versa.) But I still feel like it may have been one of the problems that kept the comic from finding a bigger audience.

Gargoyles in the Media> Since this has come up again, I have to say that I don't think the portrayal of gargoyles in popular culture is the sole factor, or even the main factor, in why the public reacted so negatively to the Manhattan Clan. If you're walking down the street and you see a pack of velociraptors (or utahraptors, more accurately) coming out of the town clerk's office, it doesn't really matter whether or not you've seen [i[Jurassic Park[/i] or if you even know what a dinosaur is. What you're seeing is a bunch of big lizard things with with huge claws and pointy teeth. But what if they're wearing pants? Not any better. This just means that they're smart enough to wear clothing, which means that they're smart enough to kill you all the more effectively. Why am I bothering with these hypothetical velociraptors? Because when we talk about gargoyles, we all like to think that our initial reaction would be open-mindedness and understanding. But if we're being honest and we were really faced with a situation where we were unexpectedly confronted by a creature we had never seen before that looked like it could kill us (paired with an explosion at the local police station, no less), we'd probably run first and ask questions later, if ever.

I don't think the normally negative portrayals of gargoyles in fiction are going to help in the long run, but most of the reactions we've seen from the general public so far have been very shortly after the clan was revealed to the world, while most people are still reeling. The idea that the gargoyles look "demonic" may feed into people's fear, but people in general need far less reason to be afraid.
Demonskrye - [<---"Snow White" at The Ink and Pixel Club (as soon as I get it posted)]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 8:38:44 am EDT from 209.6.214.14

Oh, and one other part of "The Goliath Chronicles" that I liked; in "The Dying of the Light", they mention that medical procedures designed to treat glaucoma in humans might be different for gargoyles. I liked that acknowledgement that, since gargoyles have a different biology than humans (they lay eggs and turn to stone in the daytime), human medicine might affect them differently. (It was a good thing for Dr. Sato in "Bash" that he was treating a blade wound on Goliath, which would probably be handled the same for gargoyles as well as humans, rather than a disease.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 7:06:54 am EDT from 4.244.210.211

10TH!
Matt - [St Louis, Missouri, USA]
"For science, which, as my associate Fang indicated, must move ever forward. Plus there's the money... and I do love the drama!" -Sevarius, 'Louse'
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 6:57:11 am EDT from 70.230.186.229

9th.

On a related issue, which do you think might have been more responsible for the weaknesses of the "Goliath Chronicles" - the new production team who weren't familiar with "Gargoyles", or the little time that they had to prepare for the season? I think that while both were important, the small amount of time might have been more important, since many of the larger plotholes in the third season (the Quarrymen having no rationale for hating the gargoyles, since they knew their true purpose, for example, or Margot and everyone else ignoring their violent track record in "Angels in the Night" until the end) would have been plotholes even in an entirely new series with a different continuity from the first two seasons.

Yesterday, I discovered an Arthurian wiki called "Quondam et Futurus", which included pages on the Arthurian legend as portrayed on television and in the comics. I noticed that the television page had an entry for "Gargoyles", but it was blank, so I registered at the site and filled in the entry with a brief description of the series and a summary of the Arthurian episodes ("A Lighthouse in the Sea of Time", "Avalon", and "Pendragon"). I also inserted an entry on the Stone of Destiny story in the comic book on the Arthurian comics page, focusing on the Arthurian aspects. If you like, you can read them here:

http://kingarthur.wikia.com/wiki/TV_Arthuriana

http://kingarthur.wikia.com/wiki/Four_Color_Arthuriana

Speaking of "Gargoyles" and King Arthur, I read last night that the second season premiere episode of BBC's "Merlin" had an evil wizard bringing to life all the gargoyle statues around Camelot and having them attack the terrified people. My immediate thought was, "Great, make gargoyles look like evil monsters who prey on humans once again." As I said before, with these kinds of depictions in the media, it's not at all surprising that so many humans in the Gargoyles Universe are ready to automatically view gargoyles as a threat. (I wonder how such portrayals will be treated by 2198.)
Todd Jensen
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 6:54:38 am EDT from 4.244.210.211

8th!
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 6:34:47 am EDT from 76.27.173.29

7th
VickyUK - [vickyfanofwwe at aol dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 4:19:14 am EDT from 205.188.116.10

Sixth!

Thailog's death -- that does seem to be a moment where the TGC folks got it right . . . course, only the line spoken . . . here's hoping Thailog causes mayhem for many, many years to come d:
Phoenician
"The suspense is terrible . . . I hope it lasts" -- Willy Wonka
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 3:14:31 am EDT from 157.242.217.222

Fifth!

I was always rather fond of Castaway's line to his spy in "Angels of the Night". I can't recall the exact wording (it's been 12 years), but he said something to the effect of "Good work, Maxwell. You'll get a silver hammer for this!" I got a chuckle out of it, at least. (Though I doubt many of the six year olds watching did).
Spen
"What if this wasn't a hypothetical question?"
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 1:25:17 am EDT from 66.43.205.110

Fourth!
Guardian - [Guardian105 at gmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 12:42:20 am EDT from 76.219.185.199

Third (good thing I opened another window before entering as second).

Something I've been meaning to ask for several weeks now. The Goliath Chronicles overall has been the subject of criticism (which I share in). In the 5th issue of the comic, Greg incoporated a scene from Dying of the Light that he felt was one of the better moment of the series. That said, for those with a vivid enough memories of the episodes, which moment(s) would you consider to be your favorite?

Mine are:

1. Ransom- Ignoring Fox's outburst and the monologue which states that money is the motivation for crime, I find the thing that makes the episode viewable is Lex's willing to protect Alex and just their friendship in general. Of course I still look forward to Greg's verson of the story as the bad elements will be a nonissue.

2. Runaways- Liked the ending where Kenny is arrested as he is so sure that he won't remain in custody, only for Elisa to wish him a Happy 18th Birthday.

3. Genesis Undone- Thailog's dying speech.

4. For It May Come True- Just because it's overdramtic, I found it funny when Goliath makes the "horrific" discovery that he's a glorified librarian working for Xanatos. Someone else mentioned it, but I'd have also go with Xanatos showing up at the hospital stating that he makes his own visiting hours.

Not adovcating these episodes to become canon, just figured a topic of this would be interesting.
Antiyonder
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 12:34:40 am EDT from 72.87.7.89

(2nd)Second to no one!
Vinnie - [tpeano29 at hotmail dot com]
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 12:31:49 am EDT from 69.54.209.20

First!

Wow, its been a while since Ive been up for the countdown.
Litwolf
<Be happy for me and for all who fly free.> - Tobias of Animorphs
posted @ Mon, Sep 21, 2009 12:12:36 am EDT from 209.243.38.9