Memory Alpha

Talk:Performers considered for Star Trek roles

Back to page

42,468pages on
this wiki
Add New Page

Missing citations Edit

There are a few more to be added, according to Shran and Jörg on this page. These include:

  • Martin Landau (Spock)
  • George Lindsey (Spock)
  • John Barrymore, Jr. (Lazarus) (added by Tim, 01:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC))
  • Sir Tim Thomerson (Willard Decker)Tim Thomason called this
  • Lance Henriksen (Willard Decker)
  • Frederic Forrest (Willard Decker)
  • Eddie Murphy (Dr. Taylor)
  • Jude Law (Shinzon)
  • Michael Shanks (Shinzon)
  • James Marsters (Shinzon)
  • James Earl Jones (Benjamin Sisko)
  • Eriq La Salle (Benjamin Sisko)
  • Robert Goulet (Vic Fontaine)
  • Tom Jones (Vic Fontaine)
  • Martin Sheen (Luther Sloan)
  • Charles Hallahan (Liam Bilby) (added by Tim from Tough Little Ship's suggestion below, 01:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC))
  • Frank Sinatra, Jr. (Vic Fontaine, according to the DS9 Companion)--31dot 20:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

-- I added all of them, except Tom Jones, which is not verified by any sources I know of. Where does that info come from? -- Ltarex 12:15, 4 August 2010 (CET)

  • Arnold Schwarzenegger (according to Jörg. Very interesting, not sure where) (Jorg is full of it, he got that information from here.)

A great many of these are very interesting and they should be included with citations, eventually. Additionally, those approached who already have pages should also be included. Off the top of my head, that would include Mark Lenard and Lawrence Montaigne for Spock, and the pre-production pages of Geneviève Bujold and (I think was agreed to be eventually made) David Rappaport.

Given that this page could become big, we might not want to place a paragraph for every single instances (although big ones for people like Bridges, Williams, and Murphy may be appropriate). Listing, or small bulletted explanations is good in some of these cases.--Tim Thomason 02:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Dont forget Tim Russ for Geordi La Forge and Jeffrey Combs for William T. Riker. --Alan del Beccio 02:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
I think Charles Hallahan would count as well. He was cast as Liam Bilby a few weeks before his death. -- Tough Little Ship 19:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Also, what about those people who played one role and approached to play another? That would include Famek Janssen. -- Tough Little Ship 19:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
For those performers such as Famke Janssen who played a role on Trek but were approached for a different role earlier or later on, I think just linking them in a list with a brief description should suffice. After all, we already have (or should have) full-fledged articles for them. Something like this, for example:
...and so on. If necessary, they can be listed under a seperate category. How's that look? --From Andoria with Love 11:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
There are different levels: Cast but... died, ill, fired, quit, etc. Auditioned but... not considered, shortlisted, etc. Approached but...refused, scheduling problems, etc. You can't obviously have categories for everything, but some general ones might be "cast, auditioned, approached/offered" with each entry having an explanation of what happened. Examples:
Michelle Forbes was offered a leading role on DS9 in her character Ro Laren, but she declined. (Listing reason and citation.)
Genevieve Bujold was cast as Captain Janeway on Voyager and began filming for the pilot but quickly left the show. (Listing reason and citation.)
Tim Russ auditioned for the role of Geordi La Forge but the role went to LeVar Burton. (Saying, maybe he was shortlisted or merely tried out for the role, plus citation.)
Additionally, just other tidbits like Marina Sirtis trying out for Natasha Yar and instead getting Deanna Troi, etc. --Lt. Washburn 13:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

In the DVD commentary for the Babylon 5 movie "Thirdspace", Jeff Conaway mentions having been offered one or more roles on Star Trek but declining. Most likely it would have been for something on DS9 or Voyager, given the timeframe. Unfortunately, not much detail is given beyond that. --T smitts 08:17, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I recall an interview with J.G. Hertzler in which he said he's originally read for the role of Dukat in "Emissary" but ended up with the role of the Vulcan captain instead. In the same interview, he talk about a "lucky thirteenth" audition in which he got a role, either the Captain or Martok, implying that he'd auditioned for roles on TNG and DS9 before. Does antyone recall the interview? --T smitts 17:00, June 6, 2010 (UTC)

Bujold ref Edit

I removed your Bujold reference from the Performers approached for Star Trek roles page, as it is for those performers who were approached for a role on Star Trek only, and not those who were cast. Bujold was indeed cast as Janeway and filmed for a few days, so she was not merely approached. Information on her can be found in the Background section of Kathryn Janeway and at her article.--31dot 01:47, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

I undid your removal of the Bujold reference from the Performers approached for Star Trek roles page. I respectfully contend that the exclusion of Geneviève Bujold from the page is incorrect, inconsistent, and compromises the integrity of the overall article.
This article documents performers who were approached for a role but ultimately never appeared in the cast list for the aired episode. "Approached" in this context of the present article ranges from performers who were trekers but never approached by the producers (Dave Thomas) to performers who the producers wanted but couldn't get (numerous), who were put under contract but never showed up (John Barrymore), and who made screen tests but failed to make the final cut (also numerous and Susan Gibney most notably).
These examples differ from Jeffery Hunter, who was "approached" for the TOS Captain's role and filmed a failed pilot ("The Cage") but whose footage made it into the cast list of an aired episode ("The Menagerie"). In contrast, there is no cast list for an aired episode with the name "Geneviève Bujold" on it. She was approached by the producers (like many others) and put under contract (like Barrymore) but--after a day-and-a-half on set—departed and her footage remains on the cutting room floor.
Compare her experience to Susan Gibney's (who is included in the article): a performer who made several screen tests (on set, in costume, and with other cast members) but was rejected by the studio. How do the experiences of Bujold and Gibney differ? (Answer: they don't)
Furthermore, excluding Bujold from the article seriously compromises the thoroughness of the overall article. It is a significant casting "what if" that is presently undocumented in an otherwise comprehensive article—on par with the revelations found in stories of Gibney and Barrymore.--TRHickey 16:28, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

The article states that it is for "who have been approached for roles in the Star Trek franchise, but were ultimately not cast". If we want to change the scope of the article, we can, but as it is now I don't think such a description includes Bujold, who was cast but left the production. I would contend that Barrymore (who was cast but did not show up) should not be there, either. Gibney was not cast for those roles, so her inclusion is fine.--31dot 16:42, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

I'm forced to agree with Hickey here. The article title is "performers approached for Trek roles." 31dot, you are having us discriminate to extreme tolerances what we will allow. That makes zero sense to me. The standard should be "you were approached for a Trek role, but for whatever reason (reason does not matter in terms of inclusion in the article, but should be mentioned in the article), you did not end up in the role." What's wrong with that, and how does that break proper scope of including all information? Honestly, sometimes I think newer members are right when they say we're closeminded to new ideas, no matter how sane they are... --OuroborosCobra talk 18:21, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
Seriously, this seems as easy as changing a couple of words in the opening paragraph to make it actually able to include everything under the article title. It isn't rocket science, and does not cause article rot. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:40, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
The crux of the matter is how literally to define the word "cast"--is it limited to performers who were approached but never placed under contract or never appeared in the cast of an aired episode or movie. The former definition reflects a legal nuance that is best left to agents, producers and their lawyers. The latter seems a more appropriate definition here: can the Wiki reader see the performer in a role for which they were approached?"
As a more practical matter, drawing arbitrary distinctions between calls-to-agents and contracts and between multiple screen tests and a day-and-a-half on set are boundaries that cannot be unequivocally documented to the satisfaction of an encyclopedic work such as Memory Alpha and are a distraction to the reader.
The appropriateness of the Bujold and Barrymore references were raised earlier in this discussion by Tim Thomason and Lt. Washburn. The case is made that there is a continuum of reasons why a performer does not appear in a role for which they are approached. If it is necessary, as 31dot suggests, to change the scope, it should read:
This is a list of performers who have been approached for roles in the Star Trek franchise, but ultimately did not appear in the role. Performers listed here have been verified as having been approached for a role on Trek.
Note the change eliminates the contended word "cast" from the scope, which was never part of the article title in the first place. I will wait for a response before effecting said change in the scope or undoing the removed Bujord reference.
On a related matter, however, I think the Dave Thomas anecdote should be removed. In this case, the article states that only Thomas claims that he tried to get a role on TNG but the producers but "didn't want to hear from," making him indistinguishable from any other Star Trek wannabe.--TRHickey 19:15, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
Not to prolong this discussion, but I just re-read the entry for David Rappaport in the article, "who was cast to play Kivas Fajo in the episode The Most Toys (episode)" (emphasis added) where several scenes were shot before the actor took his own life. This tragic example also speaks to the need to apply some flexibility in drawing boundaries between what should and should not be included in the article.--TRHickey 19:40, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and made the change in the opening. The distinction between not appearing without casting and not appearing with casting is a difference for the lawyers over at SAG, not the purpose of this article, which is performers who were approached for Star Trek roles. I agree that Dave Thomas probably still doesn't belong, as it isn't verifiable that he was ever approached for a role, indeed it seems he was not. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:18, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

Changing it is fine with me, which I implied in the first place, I was just going by what the article said, not "discriminating to extreme tolerances". It said "was not cast". It seemed to be pretty black-and-white, common sense to me, that it would not include people who were cast. I would have even been in favor of changing "cast" to "credited", which was the intent of Hickey, but the way it is now is just fine.--31dot 00:00, June 21, 2010 (UTC) I also do not appreciate the suggestion that I am not open to new ideas, when I said that "if we want to change the scope, we can".--31dot 00:05, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Per this discussion, I re-added Bujold and removed Dave Thomas. Here's the text for future reference:
'Dave Thomas' (born 1949) is a Canadian actor and comedian who was not approached for a role on TNG – rather, it was the other way around. According to an interview in Star Trek 30 Years, Thomas explains he would jump at the chance to appear on Trek, "as long as I don't have to wear a lot of latex like [his Second City Television co-star] Andrea Martin did when she played a Ferengi [in "Family Business"]." Thomas claimed that he tried to get a role on TNG, but "they didn't want to hear from" him.
Thomas first achieved fame as a cast member of the Canadian sketch comedy series Second City Television, better known simply as SCTV. Among the celebrities he impersonated on this show was TOS star DeForest Kelley. He also shared an Emmy Award and five Emmy nominations as a writer on the show. He later starred as Russell Norton on the hit sitcom Grace Under Fire for five seasons. He has also appeared in such films as Stripes (1981), Boris and Natasha (1992), Coneheads (1993), and Rat Race (2001) and voiced Tuke the Moose in the 2003 Disney film Brother Bear.
Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 00:34, June 21, 2010 (UTC)
Minor edits to the Bujold entry contributed by Cleanse: moved it to the top of the list of Janeway contenders as she was the producers first choice for the role, and changed the phrasing to be less spectulative about the facts of the matter (changed "quit " to "left" and removed the reference to 1½ days as that was how much shooting was done but not necessarily the date of her departure). More details are available in the referenced main article so there is no need to belabor this article.
Thanks to all for their contributions to this discussion. --TRHickey 01:07, June 21, 2010 (UTC)
And moved back into alphabetical order, like the rest of the list. Everything else on the page is in alphabetical order, so should this section be. -- sulfur 01:30, June 21, 2010 (UTC)
I didn't notice that organizing principle to the page. Thanks for fixing that.--TRHickey 04:48, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Article name Edit

Is it right to say that all these performers were approached for Star Trek roles? Some of the actors in the lists are people who auditioned for various roles through the normal auditioning process, and lost out to somebody else. To my mind, that doesn't mean that they were approached — they could have had an audition because their agent put their name in with the producers and/or the casting director, who agreed to see them, in which case it would be the agent who approached the Star Trek people rather than the other way around. Would it be better to say that this is a list of performers who were considered for Star Trek roles, but who did not ultimately appear in the role? That would cover everyone on the list, I think. —Josiah Rowe 20:14, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

The word "considered" versus "approached" seems more appropriate to the intent of this article, given the perspective of the recent discussion. To my mind, knowing about people who were auditioned (or screen tested, or even put under contract, or actually filmed but died) but did not ultimately appear in the role are all as interesting to know. I would be cautious, however, to draw the line at the Dave Thomas sort of story, where it is documented that his interest was not reciprocated by the Star Trek people (else this would become a very long article...who amongst us wouldn't have been interested in a part?).--TRHickey 03:01, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it would probably be better if it said "considered". If it did, we wouldn't have had the previous discussion. I agree that this article should be limited to those asked/considered by the Star Trek people. --31dot 03:14, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
Not that I didn't enjoy the previous discussion, but I concur and made the revison. Note that I only changed the initial definition, not the actual name of the article. --TRHickey 03:17, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
Logically, we should also move the article, but if anyone does that without updating all of the redirects, I will personally shoot them. :)
I'll look into sorting that out tomorrow or Monday if we still think that this should be "considered" rather than "approached". -- sulfur 03:21, July 18, 2010 (UTC)
I deliberately refrained from retitling the article because [1] concerns about getting the redirects right, [2] the word "approached" wasn't necessarily wrong but improved when modified by the word "considered" in the text definition, and [3] the title of the article has been long established in its present form. That being said, I could go either way on the subject of moving the article as long as someone with better skills and more expereince gets the redirects right.--TRHickey 04:24, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

If we agree that "considered" improves the text, why wouldn't it improve the article title as well? If we all agree that the article should be moved to Performers considered for Star Trek roles, I'll make that move and fix all the redirects (unless Sulfur gets around to it first). —Josiah Rowe 14:50, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, moved the page, half of the link fixes beyond the redirects were direct links to the page direct instead of Eddie Murphy. We really should only link to redirects at this point, just to know who's linked where. - Archduk3 22:13, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Shatner on EnterpriseEdit

Weren't the ENT people in talks with Shatner to get him to reprise the role of Mirror Kirk in "In a Mirror, Darkly"? 03:14, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Not that I know of, and it wouldn't have made any sense, seeing as it took place a century earlier. --OuroborosCobra talk 03:22, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, though the story would have been different. It would have established that the Tantalus field was a teleportation device, and Mirror Spock used it on Mirror Kirk, which sent him back in time where he encountered regular Archer. It would have happened but they could not get Shatner's agreement(too much money, I think) A longer version of this is at In a Mirror, Darkly (episode)#Story Development.--31dot 10:10, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
I stand corrected. --OuroborosCobra talk 10:22, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Split Edit

The article is getting a bit long. I propose we split this list along the lines of studio model into pages for the various series (and a page for the films). This would cover everyone except for the undeveloped series, which could remain on the main page (since there's only two so far).– Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 23:23, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

I agree. We could title them like this Performers considered for TOS roles, instead of adding disambiguations. - Archduk3 23:29, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Tom Hanks for "First Contact" Edit

"Tom Hanks was considered to play Zefram Cochrane in Star Trek: First Contact." This rumor's been around almost since the movie came out. Short of hearing it from a reliable source like Frakes, Moore, or Braga, I tend to take it with a rather large grain of salt, given Hanks' level of fame. Can we get a source on this, if we're going to keep it as a part of this list? --T smitts 09:23, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Need for the article? Edit

Although interesting, is there really a need for this article since none of the actors actually appeared in Star Trek in these roles? It just seems like it's going outside of Memory Alpha's remit, so to speak. -- TrekFan TALK 14:56, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Our mission as stated on the Main page is to create "the most definitive, accurate, and accessible encyclopedia and reference for everything related to Star Trek". A list of people considered for Star Trek roles provides insight into the production process.--31dot 15:19, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess. I didn't say it wasn't interesting. I was merely wondering why we had the page if none of the actors actually appeared in these roles in the show. -- TrekFan TALK 15:22, January 23, 2011 (UTC)

Spock replacements? Edit

In early 1967, just before the second season of TOS commenced, Leonard Nimoy's agent feuded with Desilu execs over the actor's salary, which nearly resulted in Nimoy quitting the series. During this period Herb Solow and the Desilu guys asked casting director Joseph D'Agosta to create a list of possible "Vulcan replacements". Three lists were made:

"A" List: Mark Lenard, William Smithers, Liam Sullivan, Lloyd Bochner, Joe Maross, Donald Harron, Edward Mulhare, James Mitchell, Michael Rennie, Peter Mark Richman, Charles Robinson, Chris Robinson, Stewart Moss, David Canary, John Anderson, David Carradine

"B" List: Anthony James, Perry Lopez, George Bachman, Alan Bergmann, Lee Kinsolving, Blaisdell Makee, Bill Fletcher, Henry Darrow, Anthony George, Curt Lowens, Jacques Denbeaux, Maxwell Reed

"C" List: Lawrence Montaigne, Ron Hayes, Patrick Horgan, Paul Mantee, Bruce Watson, Robert Yuro, Richard Evans, Joseph Ruskin, Ted Markland, Lee Bergere, John Rayner

The lists are reprinted in Solow and Bob Justman's book Inside Star Trek: The Real Story on pages 321, 322 and 323.

HOWEVER the book states that this "list" was only a ploy, a psychological warfare against Nimoy and his agent. By putting together names and sending the list to agents, they wanted to (falsely) indicate that they're seriously looking for a replacement for Nimoy's job, so they might be worried, and renegotiate the salary contract. Only two actors (Mark Lenard and Lawrence Montaigne) were seriously considered to be possible replacements for the role of Spock.

I might ask, if shall we include the actors on these lists in this article, or not. Or we shall only include Lenard and Montaigne, which would be my suggestion. Anyone? Thanks. --Ltarex 11:52, March 16, 2011 (CET)

I would definitely mention this on the articles of the actors who have their own articles here. The others could be mentioned in a single entry here(not one entry for each actor) but if not they could be mentioned on the Spock article, as it is part of the development of the character.--31dot 10:58, March 16, 2011 (UTC)

Auditioned for Arthur Batinades' role? Edit

I want to know what other actors auditioned for the part played by Arthur Batinades . I can see different actors in his role and i want to know which ones auditioned for his role.I am sure he wasn't the only one to audition. And who else auditioned for kirk's role beside Jon Lord. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stokleyioiooi (talk • contribs).

TOS actors question Edit

My question is urgent. I read about all the tos actors born between 1882 and 1961 but since no tos actor was born in 1893 or 1894 or 1890 or 1891 or 1889 or 1888 or 1887 or 1884 or 1885 or 1886,i want to find actors who were born in the above years who either auditioned for tos or were on the show but their birthdates aren't listed on this site or imdb. Can someone help me. I am sure the role Felix Locher played had people born in 1884 1885 1886 1887 or 1888 or 1889 audition for it ,right? He wasn't the only person to audition for his role.So point me in the right direction.Can i ask the casting director? Or Celia Lovasky's role could have been auditioned by actors born in 1894 or 1893? right help me out The preceding unsigned comment was added by Startrekfanfanfan (talk • contribs).

I am looking for actors who auditioned for TOS born between Feb 8 1887 and Feb 6 1888 and between Aug 4 1894 and Aug 2 1895, answer me or tell me someone from star trek who could help. Are there actors on TOS who don't have a birthdate listed who can fit this bill? Maybe Leonard Mudie's part was auditioned for by someone born in 1887 or Anthony Joachim's part was auditioned for by someone born in 1894? The preceding unsigned comment was added by Startrekfanfanfan (talk • contribs).

Removed Edit

I removed the following people from the list as they're missing citations. Tom (talk) 22:49, February 14, 2014 (UTC)

James Avery Edit

Main article: James Avery

James Avery (27 November 19481 January 2014; age 65) was alongside Michael Dorn and James Louis Watkins among the three finalists for the role of Worf in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Michael Dorn won the part and Avery, having gone on to a successful stint as Phillip Banks in The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, returned seventeen years later as General K'Vagh in the Star Trek: Enterprise episodes "Affliction" and "Divergence".

Marta DuBois Edit

Main article: Marta DuBois

Marta DuBois (born 15 December 1952; age 64) was among the finalists for the roles of Natasha Yar and Deanna Troi in Star Trek: The Next Generation, but the parts went to Denise Crosby and Marina Sirtis, respectively. DuBois later guest starred in the TNG episode "Devil's Due" as Ardra.

David Rappaport? Edit

Shouldn't David Rappaport be in the Performers whose scenes were cut article since technically he wasn't considered for the role; he already had it, but due to his personal circumstances his scenes were cut and refilmed with a new actor? --| TrekFan Open a channel 18:09, April 23, 2015 (UTC)

That's a good question and I am curious to see other comments. I think what we decide here should also apply to Geneviève Bujold. Tom (talk) 18:13, April 23, 2015 (UTC)
I lean to keeping both here, and my logic is as follows:
1) The performer in question was considered for the role. Filmed part of the role. Was not considered suitable. Was replaced.
2) The scenes were not cut, the performer was replaced for the role.
3) For people on the 'scenes cut' article, their role was not replaced, it was (typically) cut entirely, and in a handful of cases, lines were given to another role.
So, because these two (and possibly others) were replaced in the role entirely, I lean to 'were considered'. -- sulfur (talk) 18:17, April 23, 2015 (UTC)

I see your point, sulfur. It just doesn't seem to sit right with me though since they did actually have the part but for whatever reason the role never materialized for them. In Rappaport's case, it wasn't because he was unsuitable for the role - the producers really wanted him, he was their first choice - but due to his depression a new actor had to be found which was more of a neccessity than a consideration. I don't know now to be honest. Like Tom says I'd be interested to read what others think on this one. --| TrekFan Open a channel 22:45, April 23, 2015 (UTC)

I also think they should be left here, for the reasons stated. They both did not ultimately appear in the role for which they worked on, so their work would be part of the 'consideration'. 31dot (talk) 00:19, April 24, 2015 (UTC)

From Talk:Geneviève Bujold Edit

Quote? Edit

Didn't she say " I wasn't trained to play a cartoon character" or something similar"? Tough Little Ship 19:11, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I thought that was just a rumour. Rebel Strike 20:47, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Categories Edit

On her page, she has Category:Performers and Category:VOY performers. Since she never actually appeared in the final version, can she still be considered as a real performer in this way? -Platypus Man | Talk 16:20, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure she got a paycheck for being a performer/VOY performer, so I'm not sure I see that it hurts anything. --Alan del Beccio

Elizabeth or Nicole? Edit

The article says that Kate Mulgrew wanted Janeways name to be changed from Elizabeth to Kathryn... nearly (but not) all other informations about that topic say, that the name was changed from Nicole to Kathryn. Even the picture of Geneviève Bujold referrs to the role as Nicole... what is correct? -- 01:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

According to Stephen Edward Poe's book Star Trek: Voyager - A Vision of the Future, it was changed to avoid conflict with natural scientist Elizabeth Janeway. -- Captain M.K.B. 01:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
So why does it say "Nicole" now? --Bp 02:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Changed from "Elisabeth" to "Nicole" because of the scientist at the character design stage, changed from "Nicole" to "Kathryn" at Mulgrew's suggestion. I think. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Move Edit

I think that her article should be moved to Performers whose scenes were cut as she filmed her scenes which were replaced in the final version because of the actress change. I see no point why she should have her own article on MA. Opinions? – Tom 20:12, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Mild oppose of a move. I think this is a little different situation as it involves a lead character. That said, I think that if this is moved(which I will not stand in the way of) it should be moved to Performers considered for Star Trek roles, or the small reference to her already on that page should be removed.--31dot 01:19, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose to either move. Since Bujold was actually cast in the role, it's not the same as a performer whose scenes were cut; and Performers considered for Star Trek roles is already a rather long article. This can be considered a spin-out from that article, with the sentence remaining in the article as part of summary style. The article itself is justified as a fairly important element in the creation of Star Trek: Voyager. —Josiah Rowe 03:06, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
This could be considered almost a third category of actors- ones who were considered, ones who were cut, and ones who filmed and quit.--31dot 10:54, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Memorizing lines Edit

The actors have to memorize seven pages of dialogue a day? -- 01:40, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

In television, yes. That was apparently one of her problems.--31dot 08:56, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
In Earthquake Geneviève Bujold was great and truly was a star. Sometimes, one has to walk away from a script that is not right for you or has director/stars/staff that is not compatible with your skill set or personality. She was and is truly a wonderful and great actress. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Appearance in Juggernaut Edit

Is it just me, or does she appear in 5x21 Juggernaut at about 13:40 when Chakotay says "We'll meet you in transporter room one," it looks like that's her in the background as an engineering crewman?

It's just you. Probably someone who looks similar; Bujold really disliked the mechanics of TV production, which is why she left the show. 31dot (talk) 10:39, July 24, 2013 (UTC)
No Bujold on the call sheets for "Juggernaut", too. Tom (talk) 17:14, July 25, 2013 (UTC)
It's Christine Delgado who played Susan Nicoleti but is uncredited here. Delgado was to have been Bujold's double in the same way Sue Henley (who also played Ensign Brooks) was for Mulgrew. When Bujold left Delgado remained. The info about Delgado was in the ST magazine in the 90's. Lt.Lovett (talk) 15:36, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Merge Edit

Why does Bujold have an own article and David Rappaport is part of the article Performers considered for Star Trek roles? Rappaport filmed more scenes on more days as Bujold. Finally, she was not part of any released Star Trek production and should be on the aforementioned list. Tom (talk) 15:22, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

Support merge, as per reasoning -- Sennim (talk) 15:27, December 13, 2015 (UTC)
Support merge. However, I do think it might be worth keeping in mind that this has already come up in a post above (under the subheading "move"). -- Defiant (talk) 15:44, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

Sure it was discussed above but without any rational reasoning. See the comments and you'll find no real reason why her short Star Trek time should be handled completely different than the time of others. And 31dot agreed to this merge suggestion in his first comment, too. Tom (talk) 15:55, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

As brought up in that discussion, the Performers Considered article is very long and should probably be split up somehow, probably by series. I also suggested a separate article for those who filmed scenes but left the production(which would include Bujold and Rappaport, at least). 31dot (talk) 20:25, December 13, 2015 (UTC)
Comment: I think we run the risk of entering into two separate, but intertwined discussions here; a merge discussed here and which I still fully endorse, and a split discussion which should be treated separately (especially since it concerns another article into which this one is suggested to be merged with) after this one is decided upon.--Sennim (talk) 11:55, December 14, 2015 (UTC)

Merged. Tom (talk) 10:56, December 24, 2015 (UTC)

Patty Duke RIP Edit

I can't edit this page due to a browser problem but can someone mention her recent death in her listing please. -- RayBell (talk) 08:18, April 9, 2016 (UTC)

Actresses considered for Seven of Nine's role Edit

Found this. [1] The preceding unsigned comment was added by LauraCC (talk • contribs).

Is there any other citable documentation that can confirm these? --LauraCC (talk) 21:17, August 15, 2016 (UTC)

Organizing by role considered for Edit

In cases where multiple actors/actresses were considered for the same major character role, maybe we should also organize them that way somewhere on this page, if we haven't already done so. Has that already been done somewhere? --LauraCC (talk) 15:31, August 10, 2016 (UTC)

I know you could go to a major character's page and probably find a list of all actors considered for their role, but with a list, you could compare, for instance, the number of people known to have been considered for specific roles and see which role had the most potential actors considered. It could be sorted by show/film as well. --LauraCC (talk) 21:07, November 30, 2016 (UTC)

No. By series, and then alphabetical is easier to find stuff in general. -- sulfur (talk) 21:19, November 30, 2016 (UTC)

Are more people interested in specific actors, or the roles they could have played? I've never heard of many of these people. I was suggesting an additional way of sorting these, not a replacement, if that wasn't clear. --LauraCC (talk) 21:22, November 30, 2016 (UTC)

Dale E. Turner Edit

I once found an article online where actor Dale E. Turner told that he auditioned for the role of Worf on TNG but I cannot find the online source again. So I leave it here until it can be found and cited. [2] [3] Tom (talk) 20:39, August 16, 2016 (UTC)

Janelle Monae Edit

Which of the three recent films is she referring to? [4] It could be Beyond, but here it's just referred to as "Star Trek", so it could be the 2009 or 2013 films, too. --LauraCC (talk) 15:25, February 23, 2017 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.