Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-E?

[Timo]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

If they aren't the same actor, then they probably still are the same character. Why else would Paramount have cast two almost identical-looking men for these two "prominent background" roles? Either it's Michael Horton all the way through, or then Paramount for some reason did not have Horton available for the entire shooting and had to find a substitute to carry the character of Daniels.

If the intent was to have two different security characters, surely the effort would have been made to make them look distinct.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[bbjeg]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

^That's what the credits are for.

 

[Oso Blanco]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

I don't know ... they look very similar, but their hairstyles are completely different. And the ears seem to be different as well.

 

[Timo]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

The hairstyle change is obviously a deliberate thing: first it's neat and Kirk-like, but then things go south and suddenly there's that forehead lock frantically trying to escape... Nothing else seems to change, though: the sideburns are identical, the temples are identical, the top is identical.

What's funny about it is that the "distressed" version actually looks less greasy than the "neat" one, as naturally the actor took a shower before the unkempt look was applied... Also, bridge lighting makes it shine differently from engineering lighting.

That's what the credits are for.

The ones for ST:FC aren't particularly helpful, as there are no characters referred to as security men.

FWIW, none of the bit parts that are actually associated with a name at the Memory Alpha credits list include a man looking like Mike Horton, and Memory Alpha (and IIRC the novelizations) also makes the assumption that it's "Lieutenant Daniels" down at Engineering, too.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Oso Blanco]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

The hairstyle change is obviously a deliberate thing: first it's neat and Kirk-like, but then things go south and suddenly there's that forehead lock frantically trying to escape...

But the hair is parted on the other side! And the "real" Daniels seems to have longer hair.

 

[FormerLurker]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

The other guy has deep lines in the center of his brow and around his mouth. Daniels' hair is fuller, lighter, and parted on the other side. Daniels has a broader face, a wider nose and jawline, and his ears stick out more. And the other guy has a ruddy complexion, while Daniels is redfaced from exertion. Not to mention their eye color is different.

 

[Timo]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

I deny all those points, FWIW. The deep lines are prominent on both the faces, being of very distinct shape on the forehead. The hair is exactly the same, parted on both sides in both cases. The nose is exactly the same, down to the unique light band above the saddle of the nose. The jawline including the second jaw is the same. The ears don't stick out in either case, and have the same knobless shape. And face color cannot be divined from these images which feature completely dissimilar lighting - whereas eye color is the same blue for "both".

These could be two similar-looking guys, but the nose and the brow ridges are so distinct that the odds would be heavily against this.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[FormerLurker]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

Daniels' earlobes are loose. The other guy's earlobes are tied. The exact same Difference as between Leonard Nimoy and Zachary Quinto.

 

[Oso Blanco]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

Daniels' earlobes are loose. The other guy's earlobes are tied.

That's what I wanted to say, but I couldn't find the right words!

 

[PCz911]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

I can just imagine the casting criteria: one non descript Generic white guy. Needs to be eminently forgettable. Or look like Gordon Ramsey's brother. Perhaps he's the ships chef?

 

[PCz911]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

Gordon.

 

[Lance]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

^

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

True story: When I was writing TNG books back then, I actually asked my editor who the security chief on the Enterprise was when Worf wasn't dropping by for the movies. He told me to just make somebody up--but to make sure they were gone by the end of the trilogy.

So I guess it was something of a revolving door in the books . . . .

 

[Lance]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

^ Has shades of the chief engineer in the first season of TNG.

 

[aj1981]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

It was never explicitly stated in the films but Daniels who was given the first name Padraig in the novels, was Tactical Officer/Chief of Security of the Enterprise-E. He wasn't Worf's immediate successor though, there was another chief called Linda Addison who it turned out had been replaced by a Changeling. Daniels was originally an Starfleet explosives expert who was a mission to check Federation bases for bombs following the Dominion bombing in DS9's "Homefront". Daniels helped uncover part of Admiral Leyton's plot and unmasked Addison as a shapeshifter. Following the mission he was invited by Picard to join the Enterprise crew and served as chief until the end of the Dominion War when he retired from Starfleet.

 

[Timo]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

...That was in one of the Slings and Arrows ebook short stories, yes.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Lance]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

I've just this minute re-watched Insurrection again.

I may have missed something, but I don't think we actually see Worf at Tactical at any point in the movie, despite Picard mentioning that he has been temporarily assigned to the Enterprise crew in some capacity. On the other hand, Daniels is consistently presented as the tactical officer on the bridge throughout.

This isn't true of First Contact (where Worf does take over at tactical on the bridge, while Daniels is elsewhere on the ship), or Nemesis (where tactical/security seems to be Worf's permanent position again). But in Insurrection, Daniels' and Worf's roles seem pretty clearly defined away from each other.

I only mention it because it's not something I've noticed until now.

 

[RoJoHen]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

^And that's one of the many things that bugs me about Nemesis. Where the hell is Daniels? Or that Trill helm officer? I actually enjoyed that First Contact and Insurrection attempted to introduce us to new characters. It bothered me that they all just disappeared by the time Nemesis rolled around.

 

[Kinggodzillak]

Re: Was it ever confirmed that Daniels was Worf's replacement on 1701-

Or that Trill helm officer?

I would have liked to have seen her again too, but not if she'd ended up getting thrown out into space.