"Collective"
Jeri was 29 when she started on Voyager.
There's really not a whole hell of a lot of difference between a woman of 26 and 29. For that matter, Jeri has played both younger and older than her own age in her career.
Seven of Nine
- Thread starter Praetor
- Start date
"Collective"
Jeri was 29 when she started on Voyager.
There's really not a whole hell of a lot of difference between a woman of 26 and 29. For that matter, Jeri has played both younger and older than her own age in her career.
Ah, thanks.
Double-thanks, and generally agreed. I was more interested in trying to figure out if the age difference would reconcile in a significant way with the number of years she spent in the tank.
So if we assume that Annika was seven (as an ironic happy medium) when she went in the chamber, and add the five years plus three to accommodate for Jeri's real age, Seven is physically 15 when she's 'actually' 12 years old.
So then my question is, do the Borg age up their drones to 15, or should we assume that Jeri was actually playing a physically older drone than she appeared? IIRC, most human physiological development isn't completed until around 21, which would make Seven's actual physiological age 36 instead of Jeri's real-world 29.
Icheb and his fellow drones didn't seem fully emotionally mature to me, but I suppose it's questionable what age they were supposed to be playing too. Also, their situation was somewhat unique, and emotional maturity may not usually play a role in what age the Borg mature their drones to.
It's also possible that the Borg would only age up their drones to a specific age for a specific function. Some drones (say, medical drones, or any generic use where physicality might not be of utmost importance) might be useful as early as 15, whereas others (perhaps tactical drones) wouldn't be truly useful until they are fully physically developed, say 21 or even 25. And indeed, the Borg might only select drones for a specific function based upon what they are physically capable of. For example, an assimilated person of small stature might never be assigned as a tactical drone to start with.
I think you're overthinking it...
In "Drone," Seven said that One's maturation was faster than the average drone's. I just look at it that it takes 5 years to mature an assimilated child to adulthood.
I usually do.
Hm, that's interesting. Perhaps the maturation chamber can be adjusted to various 'levels' then to account for the varying-age children on VGR and the baby Riker saw in TNG's 'Q Who.'
I've always just seen Seven as a character more or less totally robbed of her individuality because she was robbed of her adolescence, helping to explain why she'd initially be afraid to leave the collective. In that way, the maturation almost seems analagous to brainwashing designed to break down a captive and then limit the captive's will to run.
By George, I think he's got it!!
I usually do.
Hm, that's interesting. Perhaps the maturation chamber can be adjusted to various 'levels' then to account for the varying-age children on VGR and the baby Riker saw in TNG's 'Q Who.'
I've always just seen Seven as a character more or less totally robbed of her individuality because she was robbed of her adolescence, helping to explain why she'd initially be afraid to leave the collective. In that way, the maturation almost seems analagous to brainwashing designed to break down a captive and then limit the captive's will to run.
Yeah, while I liked Seven, that bugged me. It was sort of like how they emphasized Ezri Dax so much in the last season of DS9. I understand what they were trying to do, but it was nonetheless annoying to me, because it felt like it overshadowed the other characters a bit, even moreso on VGR.
Maybe but on the same note, if the audience had found the other characters as compelling while the show was on air when the ratings counted, we would have never needed Seven of Nine.
Mulgrew, Dawson & Russ are great actors, unfortunately they had to play off of ones like Beltran, Wang and to a degree McNeil, who couldn't keep up. Mulgrew, Picardo, Ryan and to a degree Dawson got the most scripts thrown their way because they did prove capable of carry eps. by themselves.
^ I have to disagree with you, Exodus. There is nothing wrong with the competance of any of the Voyager actors (well, maybe Wang - I haven't seen him in anything else so it's hard to judge). If they didn't get stories, is because the writers didn't have the imagination to come up with stories for them. It's a failure of writing, not of acting. If they were that bad, why not just write them off the show and introduce somebody else? It's not hard to do.
Mulgrew, Picardo, Dawson & Ryan took some dumb stories and made them tolerable. If fans felt the same way about Beltan & Wang, they wouldn't get compared to pieces of wood by the fans.
It's not always the writing.
And just because "the fans" say something, that doesn't make it true. First, define "the fans." The fans that you've talked to or the fans who post here or fans in general? What objective criteria do you have?
Second, I've seen all those actors in things other than Trek (except for Wang, as I mentioned before), and they were competent and sometimes a lot better than that. Yes, that's my opinion, but it's not my opinion alone.
I think some fans - and I'm not saying you're one of them, Exodus - make a judgement based on what other fans say. A lot of people do this about a lot of things, actually. That is why to this day you will hear people talk about how Voyager was horrible in every way. Some of them watched it and gave it their best judgement, but others decided half way through the 3rd episode that it was horrible in every way and as far as they were concerned, that was that, whereas others don't even remember the show but have heard other fans say that so often that they believe it. That doesn't make it true.
And again, if these actors were all so awful and so hated by fans...why weren't they written off the show? That just doesn't make sense.
Second, I've seen all those actors in things other than Trek (except for Wang, as I mentioned before), and they were competent and sometimes a lot better than that. Yes, that's my opinion, but it's not my opinion alone.
I think some fans - and I'm not saying you're one of them, Exodus - make a judgement based on what other fans say. A lot of people do this about a lot of things, actually. That is why to this day you will hear people talk about how Voyager was horrible in every way. Some of them watched it and gave it their best judgement, but others decided half way through the 3rd episode that it was horrible in every way and as far as they were concerned, that was that, whereas others don't even remember the show but have heard other fans say that so often that they believe it. That doesn't make it true.
And again, if these actors were all so awful and so hated by fans...why weren't they written off the show? That just doesn't make sense.
Last edited:
But, just because you or "the fans" say so, doesn't mean everyone is going to find them compelling.
Frankly, there's only been one thing that I've really enjoyed Beltran's work in, and that was "Broken Sky." Otherwise, I find him rather boring and one note. That's my opinion. I could also say that it's not my opinion alone.
I also think Kate and Picardo have a terrible habit of chewing the scenery as if they haven't had a meal in months. And there are others that agree with me, too.
How is someone stating an opinion of actors any different from the common assertion that Voyager's problems were all in the writing?
ETA: As for writing characters off the show... Jennifer Lien was.... Just sayin'.
Last edited:
She was an iconic character that outgrew a middling sci-fi show. The first season she was introduced in was arguably the strongest run of episodes for Voyager, but after S5 everything seemed to gradually run out of steam past the introduction of the Borg teens.
Jeri Ryan is an underrated actress and she didn't have much to do in The OC (a rather crappy show that "Jumped the Shark" quickly like Heroes and Boston Public), while she held her own against James Woods in Shark (she had the best run of episodes towards the end of S1).
Jeri Ryan is an underrated actress and she didn't have much to do in The OC (a rather crappy show that "Jumped the Shark" quickly like Heroes and Boston Public), while she held her own against James Woods in Shark (she had the best run of episodes towards the end of S1).
Because fans don't control everything done in production.
Come on, you haven't heard posters say ad nausium how Mulgrew, Picardo & Ryan got more scene time than the others. Why exactly do you think the producers/writers threw so much their way if they didn't also consider them the more capable members in the cast?
^ Because they wanted to? Because their characters were easier to write for?
You said yourself, Exodus, that Tim Russ is an excellent actor, and I agree. He is. And yet he didn't get nearly as many episodes centered around his character as did Mulgrew, Ryan and Picardo. I don't blame that on his competence (edit: and I don't blame the other actors either, by the way), and I don't think you do, either. I think it was because of other factors. So why couldn't it be because of other factors with some of the other actors as well?
In any case, Tim Russ shows that there are other reasons besides competence why one member of the cast might not get as many scenes written for him as did other members of the cast. Doesn't it?
You said yourself, Exodus, that Tim Russ is an excellent actor, and I agree. He is. And yet he didn't get nearly as many episodes centered around his character as did Mulgrew, Ryan and Picardo. I don't blame that on his competence (edit: and I don't blame the other actors either, by the way), and I don't think you do, either. I think it was because of other factors. So why couldn't it be because of other factors with some of the other actors as well?
In any case, Tim Russ shows that there are other reasons besides competence why one member of the cast might not get as many scenes written for him as did other members of the cast. Doesn't it?
Oh, I totally agree.
After all, as a 'shipper who didn't like J/C and did like C/7, I'm often arguing against the "but the fans wanted this" argument.
What fans?
Similar threads
