• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Least Relatable Character?

Emnabtond

Lieutenant
Despite all the characters in Star Trek so different from us - a robot, a girl with a 7 year lifespan, emotionless aliens, the character I thought that was least easy to relate to and least realistic was Captain Janeway.
I mean they really did a number on her character, nothing she did really made sense? I was never convinced that a real human being would act like her given her situation.
I also think the situation was exacerbated a small bit by Mulgrew's slightly distant acting, her model posing and over the top gestures.

So who for you is the character you can least relate to?
 
Ah, good topic. This requires some thought.

I was tempted to go with Trip, but I watched Cogenitor the other day, which makes me more sympathetic to him. I think you may have a point with Janeway. As much as i like Janeway and think Mulgrew's acting was great, I can see your point.

Probably Travis Mayweather then. Or Wesley. Or Troi.
 
Harry Kim, because I don't find it credible that a young man would get lost on the other side of the galaxy and finally come home exactly the same as he was before!
 
i say harry kim. he has less character development than chuckles and does way less. atleast chuckles developd into a wooden lug and can be relied apon to spontaniously crash any shuttlecraft he pilots
 
Another Mayweather vote because we know pretty little about him. Hell when the character dies in the Alternate Future of Enterprise someone just steps over his body (I also read it was intentionally put in the episode as an injoke to the fans).
 
I'm tempted to say Kes, just because I can't imagine why and how anyone could possibly be in love with Neelix, especially when he was being so super-annoying as he was whenever he was around her. :wtf:

I agree with the OP about Janeway... I don't think Kate Mulgrew's acting had anything to do with it, she was OK... but the writing for the character was inconsistent and she was never given real depth. After all that time, I still don't feel that I even know her, and I couldn't tell you what kind of person or what kind of captain she is, the way I feel I know Picard or Sisko. I think they wrote her a bit like a Mary Sue - the only idea behind the character seems to be that she would always be right, or rather, she would be whatever the writers considered to be right for the captain to be in a particular episode.

And of course, Wesley Crusher.
 
Actually, it's a alittle hard to find a character in Trek who I don't find something to relate to. However, I'll probably go with Mayweather just because we really learned so little about him as a character over the years.
 
Troi. I just didn't get the whole point of her role on the ship. She just seemed kind of useless.
 
It's too easy just to point to a character that was badly written or underwritten like Janeway or Mayweather. How about the most deliberately unrelatable character? Probably one of the very alien type of aliens, such as the Founders (who are still sympathetic since their motivation is paranoia through persecution) or even more, Q (who comes off as too much of a pompous/juvenile idiot to get much respect).
 
It's too easy just to point to a character that was badly written or underwritten like Janeway or Mayweather. How about the most deliberately unrelatable character? Probably one of the very alien type of aliens, such as the Founders (who are still sympathetic since their motivation is paranoia through persecution) or even more, Q (who comes off as too much of a pompous/juvenile idiot to get much respect).
There are lots of paranoid people (and nations) with the persecution complex in the world, and there are lots of pompous and juvenile idiots - which should probably make the Founders and Q easy to relate. ;)
 
For that matter, I have a hard time relating to Picard or Kirk. Both are born leaders, charasmatic types. Heads of their classes, etc.
In that regard, I relate more to Barkely.
 
Barkely: You mean no one has slammed their fists into his jaw, yet?

Janeway: Just a few lines wrecked everything, when she said men like Kirk and Sulu, legendary heros, would get kicked out of Starfleet of her time....yet she done stuff worse than any of them.

Harry Kim: He's the Federation's answer to Kenny McKormick.

Troi: Did she serve any purpose, apart from being Riker's booty call?

Wesley: Seems he was only there to fill the obligatory annoying character every 1980's series had.
 
Morn, I mean the alien dude never expressed himself on screen nor ever had a single line, he was there as a running gag, although I liked him being there, as an individual character; whats there to relate to?:cardie:
 
Discounting Enterprise & Voyager because my disdain for those shows can sometimes be too overwhelming.

I'm tempted to say Captain Sisko. While I think he was very well acted and we learned a lot about his backstory & his home life, I never felt like I could get into his head. There was something about the character keeping me at arm's length. I often viewed Captain Sisko as more of a distant authority figure like Admiral Ross. It's wierd because I related so deeply to all of the other DS9 characters.
 
7 of 9. She was supposed to be interested in learning the human condition but by the next week she was again derisive of it.
I mean, I know the writers like to have that one character to act as an outsider so the story can examine what it is to be human, but asking about why people want to eat communally was stupid as all Hell. What viewers need this explained to them?
If you're going to examine the human condition don't make it so silly. And also, like I said, have her at least retain this curiousity from one week to the next.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top