Agreed. Locarno only cared about himself, Tom Paris cared about others. I could not see Nick helping poor Harry Kim from being coned by Quark on DS9 the way Tom did. Tom was a good guy ultimately, Nick wasn't, end of story.
Paris as Locarno
- Thread starter hux
- Start date
Agreed. Locarno only cared about himself, Tom Paris cared about others. I could not see Nick helping poor Harry Kim from being coned by Quark on DS9 the way Tom did. Tom was a good guy ultimately, Nick wasn't, end of story.
^Locarno may have protected the team in the end but he still got someone killed trying to show off. I don't expect Starfleet to forget that any time soon, nor do I expect them to trust Locarno a second time after they resubmitted him back into the Academy and promoted him to lieutenant so he could quit to join the Maquis.
Last edited:
In the hands of any competent writer, Nick Locarno is just as redeemable as Tom Paris. The "Nick was irredeemable" line is just what they say so they don't have to admit it was about royalties.
And in regard to those royalties, how much could we really be talking about here? I can't imagine it could've been more than a few hundred dollars per episode.
And in regard to those royalties, how much could we really be talking about here? I can't imagine it could've been more than a few hundred dollars per episode.
But why wouldn't they want to admit that? Everybody knows that's the reason anyway. What shame could there be in admitting something that's pretty much common knowledge?
Rehabilitation is suppose to improve the person, so the idea that Locarno was irredeemable was, well, lulzy. If Locarno had been in prison, as Paris was when Janeway got him out, either Locarno's maturing emotionally and seeing the error of his ways would have been plausible, or one believes that he should have been sent to the stockade for life over what he did, with no possibility of parole, and Wesley Crusher along with him.
I dunno...did they ever cop to Taurik and Vorik ostensibly being the exat same person?
Don't be naive. The only real reason Paris wasn't Locarno is because of money. If they wouldn't have had to pay royalties to the writers of "The First Duty" then Voyager's helmsman would have been Nick Locarno.
Maybe he was irredeemable due to the fact that he was expelled from the Academy. Didn't Tom make his "mistake" after becoming an officer?
Memory Alpha said:
Memory Alpha said:
Sorry, how are Paris' and Ro's backstories 'more redeemable' than Locaren's? He only caused the death of one person due to a bad choice. Bad call by the writers, but you can't win em all. Considering all the characters that reappear on DS9 from TNG, the penny-pinching thing couldn't have been a consideration. Unless they thought Voyager would be a flop and DS9 would make some money. Maybe they were right.
Also, the Doctor would have to have put a lot more thought into Paris' pseudonym in 'Author, Author'.
In the novels, they are twins.
Because it makes them look like they're pinching pennies? Again, I don't know how much the royalties would amount to, but I would think they would account for a pretty small portion of each episode's budget.
^ Possibly a more astute reason might be because if they just came out and said the truth ("Listen, we wanted to make a Nick Locarno character, and even wanted the same actor to play him, but we didn't want to pay royalties to the original writer so we changed just enough about the character so that we couldn't get sued"), then it would be in itself grounds for the writer of 'The First Duty' to file something with the Guild, stating that Tom Paris was evidently conceived as Nick Locarno or a very close approximation, and demanding that Paramount kindly cough up their fair share of the residuals regardless.
By Rick Berman maintaining even today that their sole reason for not using Locarno is because that character was "irredeemable", and that their casting Robbie McNeil as Tom Paris was just serendipitous casting on their part, then Paramount's hands are still (conparitively) clean. The official 'party line' remains even now that Tom Paris and Nick Locarno might be suspiciously similar characters... but not quite enough so that it's gonna get litigious anytime soon.
By Rick Berman maintaining even today that their sole reason for not using Locarno is because that character was "irredeemable", and that their casting Robbie McNeil as Tom Paris was just serendipitous casting on their part, then Paramount's hands are still (conparitively) clean. The official 'party line' remains even now that Tom Paris and Nick Locarno might be suspiciously similar characters... but not quite enough so that it's gonna get litigious anytime soon.
My theory is:
Nick Locarno was the result of a a love affair between Admiral Paris and another woman than his wife. The old Admiral helped Nick Locarno to be accepted at Starfleet Academy where he screwed it up. The similar accidents Nick and Tom had were coincidents. Tom's hatred of his father was because he found out about Nick Locarno's existence during his time at Starfleet Academy. A possible meeting between Tom and Nick would be something for coming books or movies, wouldn't it.
Nick Locarno was the result of a a love affair between Admiral Paris and another woman than his wife. The old Admiral helped Nick Locarno to be accepted at Starfleet Academy where he screwed it up. The similar accidents Nick and Tom had were coincidents. Tom's hatred of his father was because he found out about Nick Locarno's existence during his time at Starfleet Academy. A possible meeting between Tom and Nick would be something for coming books or movies, wouldn't it.
So you can blame all this lad hijinks, death and deceit on the old Admiral's genes.
And he can't do that right now, as it is?
Similar threads
