Nick Locarno/Tom Paris
- Thread starter Vorta
- Start date
Well, that "arc" was concluded within the pilot episode of VOY anyway, so I don't see the great advantage of Nick vs. Tom in this respect. Both had been drummed out of Starfleet at an earlier point (one in the aftermath of an episode, another in backstory); Tom got reinstated as a reward for betraying his Maquis comrades. End of story.
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
^
One possibly story would be a reunion with Nick and Wesley (with Traveler). Such a story could have potential. Of course it would have been dependant on two other things:
Wheaton would have had to been up to it, and, more importantly, would we really want to endure the Super Kid again?
One possibly story would be a reunion with Nick and Wesley (with Traveler). Such a story could have potential. Of course it would have been dependant on two other things:
Wheaton would have had to been up to it, and, more importantly, would we really want to endure the Super Kid again?
That's assuming that Voyager played out with only a name change in each script. Having Nick as a different character would remove this.
He could be taken on board by Janeway simply because he is able to lead Voyager to the Marquishe could have to work hard to get the job flying the ship he so desperately wants. With a clear goal to work towards (being assigned to conn, because flying is the only true freedom he has), he'd have a long story arc to lead to the rest of the crew trusting him, working to reassure their doubts that he's going to turn on them again.
How do you figure? Changing a character's name like that is a common tactic. Paris/Locarno, T'Pol/T'Pau, Taurik/Vorik, etc. Everybody knows they do this. If the writers come right out and admit "We were going to use this character, but we changed the name, so now it's a different character," there'd be no grounds for a lawsuit.
^ It would depend on how any particular court wanted to interpret the contracts and what defines a character. Certainly, I can see someone arguing in court that simply changing the name, but keeping all of the other characteristics the same, down to even having the same actor playing the part, does not make it a different character. And I bet you could find a judge and/or jury to agree. Not coming out and directly stating that's what you did at least gives you a little bit of cover.
Plus, it's one thing to create a one-off character for a standalone episode, when you never expect to see him again. Once you're talking about a series regular on a show expected to run at least seven seasons, I can see the creative advantages to changing his name and doing a rewrite on the character. If you're going to be stuck with him for seven years, why not take moment to tweak him for long-term use--and get rid of any old baggage that might get in the way of your new plans for him?
Basically, Locarno is the first draft of Paris, just like Will Decker and Ilia were the first draft of Riker and Troi. And Pike was the first draft for Kirk!
Basically, Locarno is the first draft of Paris, just like Will Decker and Ilia were the first draft of Riker and Troi. And Pike was the first draft for Kirk!
B'elanna once reminded Tom "you were expelled" from the Academy, even though he wasn't. Obviously the writers had Locarno on the brain. They weren't as careful as you think.
But they do reference many recurring characters. Some would say too many. Space is big. Running into familiar characters too often is always a problem for believability.
You really want episode budgets slashed to compensate for the additional red tape, legal fees, account-keeping to keep track of royalties, etc, which would be caused by indiscriminate reuse of previous characters created by writers outside of the regular team?
And that's what they do. They don't hide it, they just choose their words very carefully, and it gives them the freedom to change the character in all sorts of ways as the writing evolves, ie. T'Pol is not that much like the young T'Pau we eventually met in "Enterprise", even though they started from the same concept.
Riker and Troi are essentially Will Decker and Ilia. Data was essentially a rejig of Questor from "The Questor Tapes", but all three were already characters created by Gene Roddenberry. Pulaski is essentially a female version of McCoy. Dr Selar and K'Ehleyr were both conceived as Worf romances, and played by the same actress.
Koloth and Kang, in TOS, were originally scripted as Kor, but the actor was unavailable. Yeoman Mears and Dr Helen Noel were both originally scripted as Rand. In the episodes where George Takei was filming a movie that ran overtime, his Sulu lines were given to Chekov, unchanged. Admiral Cartwright in ST IV was scripted as ST III's Admiral Morrow, and the name changed when the original actor was unavailable. Valeris was scripted as Saavik.
And Kira was originally going to be Ro, but Michelle Forbes didn't want to do DS9.
Stuff happens and you adapt. And there's seldom just one reason for doing anything. It's all about weighing the pros and cons.
In this case, it's sounds like there were a couple of advantages to going with Locarno 2.0 instead of the original.
Stuff happens and you adapt. And there's seldom just one reason for doing anything. It's all about weighing the pros and cons.
In this case, it's sounds like there were a couple of advantages to going with Locarno 2.0 instead of the original.
But that was changed because they didn't think Saavik would betray the Federation like that.
And possibly because they didn't want to cast a third actress as Saavik . . . .
that's kind of unfair. She was told to play the character as full, stoic Vulcan. She did a good job of that.
I didn't realize Catrall was intended to play Saavik.
Perhaps, but it's probably not surprising that Meyer, who cast Kirstie Alley in WOK, wanted a character more like his original Saavik, and not the Robin Curtis version (which he had nothing to do with).
And, I confess, I vastly prefer Alley myself. Curtis fell into the trap of turning "stoic" into dull. Vulcans are tricky to play; you need to imply the seething emotions underneath the stoic facade, not just act cold and robotic.
Last edited:
Robin Curtis was every bit as easy on the eyes as Alley, though. 
And while most women benefit from the Vulcan makeup treatment, I didn't really feel that otherwise attractive Catrall did.
And while most women benefit from the Vulcan makeup treatment, I didn't really feel that otherwise attractive Catrall did.
That was Roddenberry's script note (ie. the character was also "popular with the fans"), but Meyer explains in the ST VI commentary that he was angered that Roddenberry took that stance, since GR had resisted the addition of Saavik into ST II in the first place. Meyer didn't have to listen to Roddenberry either time. It was Kim Cattrall who did not care to be the third actress to portray the character.
Exactly. Robin Curtis did a "Starlog" interview where she mentions her agent wasn't even approached about her returning in ST VI. Meyer wasn't interested in even finding out if Curtis was available. Alley turned down an invitation to return and Meyer went straight back to his original choice for the character: Kim Cattrall.
