John de Lancie: Getting a little tired of Q August 3, 2009
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Celebrity, TNG , trackback
On Friday we previewed the upcoming ‘Q’ comic book from IDW, which prompted many fans to talk about the beloved character, including some who want to see more. But there is one person who seems to have had enough of TNG’s omnipotent troublemaker. In a new interview with John De Lancie, the actor says he is ‘tired’ of Q.
de Lancie and Q
John De Lancie appeared in 12 episodes of Trek, spanning all three of the 24th century shows, starting off with the pilot episode of Next Generation in 1987. And even though those are just a tiny fraction of his acting credits on the big screen, small screen and stage, it is still what he is most famous for, and apparently that isn’t sitting too well for the actor.
After telling AMC’s Sci-Fi Scanner that he thought JJ Abrams had "really breathed life" into the franchise with the new Star Trek movie, he had this to say when asked if he was going to try and get Q into the next movie:
Uh, no. I have to say as the years have gone on I’m getting a little tired of just Q, because I do a lot of other things. Almost everywhere in the world you go, people will come up and say, "Oh my God you’re from Star Trek." But I was in Syria recently, and I had people stop me on the street, they came up to me and said, "Oh my God, we just saw Breaking Bad." That was a surprise. And it was great.
So there you have it, no more Q for De Lancie.
Go to AMC Sci-Fi Scanner for more from De Lancie on Alien Voices, his new futuristic version of Madame Butterfly, and more.
Here is the recap of the Breaking Bad season 2 finale, which featured John de Lancie (his third episode).
Loading ...
Comments»
Good. Never really a huge fan of Q anyway.
First?
It’s understandable. On those few episodes he probably covered as much as the character could go through and he has done so much other stuff. I blame Voyager for his disenchantment. Janeway would do that to anyone ;-)
2, agreed. As time goes on, the more I dislike The Janeway. She killed Trek.
I wish Trek IX / the third TNG movie would have been about the Dominion War and X / the fourth and last TNG movie about Q…
I too have grown tired of Q. Ever since “Encounter at Farpoint.”
@Trekee You mean BERMAN would do that to anyone, eh?
I for myself really loved that character “Q” and the way DeLancie acted. It was always a lot of fun with him around.
And I would really like to see him as Q in STXII. But that’s not going to happen I guess..
Voyager ruined a lot Q, the Borg and time Travel in Star trek.
De Lancie’s at that point a lot of actors go through; actually doing the thing is in the past and it irritates being known for something, however pleasant and worthwhile, that is in the past and can’t really do you any good financially or career wise. All it does is gets you bothered in restaurants or buying coffee on the streets. It’s not unlike Nimoy in his ‘I Am Not Spock’ phase or Tom Baker in the 80s. I don’t blame De Lancie for that at all.
Thought: He’s great as Q but Q works because he’s a foil for Picard. It’s the Stewart/De Lancie chemistry that makes those episodes work. That’s why the DS9 ep and the VOY eps work less well/not at all. (The only one I think works at all in ‘Death Wish’.)
I love Q and Janeway. But I’m not surprised to hear that the actor is tired of it. Who wouldn’t be.
Janeway had rock solid principles. Hard not to like that.
Saw him speak in Flagstaff AZ at a convention there. He was the ONLY guest… small venue. It was before DS9 had even finished its first season. Anyhow, he seemed to be tired of the character THEN. Thought Trek itself was a little tired and only wanted to be in Trek again if they could write something more… artistic and literary with Q. He took the job to pay the bills but really wants to be “an AAaaaaactooooooorrrrrrr.” Doesn’t see Trek as serious acting, art, or drama. The crowd was not pleased in Flagstaff.
The Sisko, Bajoran, Cardassian, Vic Fontaine, Dominion War, Blah Blah Blah ruined, killed Star Trek.
@9 – Jim Smith
I can’t remember DS9 episode names normally, but I thought he was a great foil for Sisko too, I don’t remember anyone else pushing all his buttons quite so much as Q. I think though, that in the end that was about all he did.
And I’m just being mean about Voyager of course, I don’t really know what I disliked about Voyager but I think that Janeway was a good idea poorly implemented. I don’t think the character really developed, but then as I skipped the last couple of seasons apart from dipping in now and again, I may have missed something.
I think for me, Trek jumped the shark when the brought 7 of 9 on. It said to me that they’d run out of ideas and were going all out for the spandex.
I know there were some good individual episodes and arcs in there, but I couldn’t face wading through the fluff to get to it.
I didn’t think Voyager was THAT bad. I mean, Kes was terrible, and the episode when Tom Paris broke the transwarp barrier and ended up turning he and Janeway into giant fish things who ended up mating, yea, that was bad. But there was a lot of good in Voyager too. And I always loved Q!
I loved voyager!!
#12 eh…no it didn’t. It was the most well written star trek series with characters who had a bit of DEPTH to them.
I can understand that de Lancie is tired of Q. It’s been two decades, and anyone would get tired of a character after it being tied to them for that long. Just look at the original series cast. They all went through periods of hating Trek.
I liked Voyager as a whole – I just wish they’d broken new ground with it as they did with the simply wonderful DS9. It started to feel like Trek by the numbers by the end. I always think they chould have taken ‘The Year of Hell’ two-parter and made that into at least a season-long ark and really put the crew and ship through the ringer, perhaps even killed some of them. That would have created an edge/excitement that was maybe missing – and would havfe broken the forumlaic nature of the show.
Agree about Q tho, enough’s enough – where on Earth (or elsewhere!) would you be able to take the character now, it’s all been done to death…
Well, I raise my glass in respect to John’s work in bringing the character of Q to Star Trek and I hope he finds some good memorable work in the future.
Well I don’t understand how he can be “tired” of Q, when he hasn’t played that part in the last 10 years! And only 12 episodes overall spread over many years…hardly pushing it. I was actually kinda hoping he’d be in the next movie, but I guess not now…
Time to bring on R
@16
Yeah I agree.
“a bit of depth” nails it – they never came close to “Babylon 5″ or had never characters that deep like “Farscape”’s John Crichton.
He’d be far too old to play Q anyway.
re: 10
“Janeway had rock solid principles. Hard not to like that.”
Only when it suited the plot… Discovered an instant-home piece of technology in the first season? Nothing like the good old prime directive to put a stop to that… But when you’re trying to squeeze an ending out of your show she’s changing the past and attempting genocide left right and centre just to make her own life a little easier.
8 Tiberius1000: I agree 100%!
DS9 wasnt Trek to me, it was Babylon 5/Love Boat. Watched it thru 7 seasons because i felt obligated. Going back and watching Voyager on DVD again, I see it as better all around, a ship traveling thru space meeting aliens, going where no one had gone before….thats Star Trek, not sitting still and waiting for stuff to come to you.
I consider Enterprise seasons 3 and 4 as better than anything DS9 had to offer.
I agree with #9, de Lancie is going through this “thing” that most actors do when they want recognition for their other efforts, other than the ones they are currently most remembered for. Maybe he will do like most have, eventually learn to embrace his Star Trek character once again…
Q for Trek 12!!!
just kidding…
btw yknow that Pirate Galaxy ‘Explore Deep Space’ ad on the right on TM.com…im pretty sure thats an anime of Sophia Loren (with the red hair)…i just figured it out…been bugging me for a while
I’ve always liked Q. Shame that DeLancie is tired of him but hey, so what? If there’s another movie, I’d love to see Q in it. Bill Murray would be a great Q.
@ 26. Apologize for NOTHING Officer Crowley
DS9 episodes “Duet”, “The Visitor” and “In the Pale Moonlight” were the 3 best hours of Star Trek ever produced.
Maybe this was the evil Q from the parallel universe..like Shat on SNL …”get a life”…ha ha ha…I honestly loved Q..though in little doses…the TNG series finale especially..and had actually hoped they would put him into a TNG movie or something…I ‘m surprised he didn’t show up on Enterprise…he does not belong in the next movie though///please move on with TREK…no Q, KHAN, or SHAT…..there are plenty of stories for the new TREK to stand on it’s own without any of them!
Its interesting that while i never liked 7 of 9, thats when voyager started to get good. There were hints of it when the doctor was liberated from sickbay, but it really took off in the 4th season.
Enterprise was ALWAYS good.
I believe that if anyone in the industry killed star trek, it was UPN. However i blame the winy fans more than anything or anyone else. Appreciate the various star treks for what they are. Don’t complain about them just because it doesn’t have captain kirk in it. I love ALL star trek (even nemisis even though i thought it could have been better) and as such consider my self one of the few true fans.
Not that I want to see it in Trek 12 but I’d bet if JJ waved a big wad of cash under DeLancie’s nose he’d change his name to Q in a lens flare’s flash.
Hey now, John. As I recall he hasn’t had any trouble with milking the Q character over the years for every penny he could. Just be up front and admit the well has run dry!
Q, like the Borg, got overplayed. Bravo to Mr. de Lancie for speaking his mind.
Interesting. An article talking about John De Lancie, but the photo is of Jonathan Frakes? Wrong Jonathan. What gives?
I suspect that De Lancie is less tired of his portrayal of Q, but more for not being remembered for his many other roles. He has played on many types of programming, including West Wing, TREK and the Stargate universe.
I would think the TOS cast might feel much the same way (I know Walter Koenig has addressed this very issue at ST conventions before; during the years he playing Bester on B5 he mentioned wearily that people still remembered him more for Chekov than for the evil character Bester).
IF JJ brought Q in he’d recast the role anyway… he’d probably get Robert Pattinson from Twilight or James Marsters to play Q…or Megan Fox LOL
I remember John de Lancie from Days Of Our Lives. Anyway, I’ll never forget going to a convention and he asked that people stop taking photos while he was speaking. People continued taking photos and he was so irritated. I can understand him not wanting to be remembered just for Q, but he had an idea what he was getting into when he decided to join the Star Trek Universe. He should learn to accept it and use it to his advantage. Shame that he can’t.
imho Q was best in Voyager.
Q in next Star Trek movie? will be a next one? wasn’t the last movie enough terrible?
Agree that if Q was to return to Star Trek in any way, he would be best in a Next Gen movie (and I still hope there is another one someday.) Q was never one of my favorite situations/plot points, but it was usually fun to see his interaction with Picard.
#26 “DS9 wasnt Trek to me, it was Babylon 5/Love Boat.”
Agreed. I liked DS9 but I felt it was totally disjointed from the Trek I love. Imo, war hardly fits in Trek episodes.
I never understood the fascination so many had with “Q”, and frankly found the character to be tedious.
The problem with “Q” is that he was the opposite end of Wesley Crusher – where Crusher perpetually saved the ship, “Q” would reliably imperil it unil Picard doubletalked some sort of solution just before the final commercial. “Q”s semiomnipotent character strongly suggested that the core creative Trek team did not have great faith in their characters, or the perpetual conspicuous reinsertion of “Q” would hardly be necessary
I kept expecting the Q character/continuum to end up BEING humanity itself, highly evolved. Then along came Voyager to make them just as flawed as anyone else.
Q was fun, but it has been done, time for something new in the new films.
I like the idea of trying to tie the Multiverse Trek to Next Gen in some unique way – but I agree that Q is probably not the best thread between the timelines.
And just a question – maybe some of you can share your perspective. Why is it acceptable to the fanbase for stories in the novels to retread on past Trek territory and characters – but in movies it is verboten? I personally would love to see a big-screen take on some elements lifted from the TOS, TNG even ENT stories.
“Well I don’t understand how he can be “tired” of Q, when he hasn’t played that part in the last 10 years! And only 12 episodes overall spread over many years…hardly pushing it. I was actually kinda hoping he’d be in the next movie, but I guess not now…”
#20 – Hmm let’s see… frequently when appearing at conventions he is asked to perform a one hour play that was turned into an audio cassette featuring Q and other Trek characters… frequently being asked at conventions what is it like to play Q… stopped on the street for an autograph. Shopping and hearing someone say, “Oh my God!!! It’s Q!!!”
I’m sure with the body of work he has performed its flattering to be remembered for one role, but I’m sure it gets quite tiring hearing the same questions, performing the same play on stage at conventions and having few if any fans acknowledge his work in other areas. How many people ask him about the NID guy, Colonel Frank Simmons on Stargate SG-1? Or remembers his appearences as Odin from Charmed? Or even his performances on The West Wing? Anyone?
It’s his right to be sick of Q. He’s earned it, thanks to fans who only have eyes for Q. The man is a decent actor with a large list of credits. Fondly remember Q, but try to see something else he’s been in. You won’t be disappointed.
I can understand him. I kinda figure he doesn’t want to be remembered as a simple guess role.
@#36 MC1 Doug
That IS a picture of John de Lancie. It’s from his role in Breaking Bad this past season.
Killed Trek? Gee I hadn’tnoticed it was dead.
And he hasnt played Q in what, 8/9 years? LOL!
“38. Jeff – August 3, 2009
I remember John de Lancie from Days Of Our Lives.”
Yeah,…maybe he can go back to being Eugene on Days if Q’s not doing it for him.
So, we have seen a Marina Sirtis meltdown/delancie meltdown, where is Rick Berman’s tell all book? Do you know anything about that?
i always liked him better as simmons in sg-1, or as what’s his face from Andromeda, what was his name in Andromeda, if anyone remembers, please let me know as I sem to have forgotten
It was always my hope that there would be a final TNG movie with Q making Data fully human. Ah well…
In fact, I really only think of him as anything other than weird Eugene from that show. He was teamed up with a weird girlfriend on the show named Calliope. Forget her name at the moment but she went on to be the voice of Harlequin on the Batman cartoons.
Putting Q on DS9 and Voyager probably wasn’t the best idea. It felt forced. Then again, Voyager probably wasn’t the best idea — they should have just continued TNG and let the cast gradually change, like how soap opera stays on the air forever.
I don’t get that he’s tired of Q so much as he’s a little tired of being recognized ONLY for Q. I can see where he’d be frustrated. How about some love for Janos Christoff Bartok? Anyone?
46 – How simple a guess are we talkin’ here? ;-)
#12 “The Sisko, Bajoran, Cardassian, Vic Fontaine, Dominion War, Blah Blah Blah ruined, killed Star Trek.”
Spot on!
#55, I agree with you, Berman and company should have treated TNG like the show ER or Doctor Who or even (surprise!) like a real military ship and have people get promoted and move on. Picard could have become a commodore or Admiral and still stayed on the ship and Riker could have become Captain.
As for Q I agree that Voyager was the downfall of the character, “The Q and the Grey” anyone?
And what’s with the hatred of DS9? Q was only in one episode, he was on Voyager 2 or 3 times. Plus Janeway’s character was all over the place. I like some of Voyager, but the writing for the characters left a lot to be desired.
I’m tired of Q too.
I remember John in a made for TV Get Smart movie back when Don Adams was still alive. It must have been in the 90’s because I recognized John from being Q when I watched it. I just remember his character acting annoyed with Maxwell Smart’s antics. Funny! See most of us have seen him do so much more but we remember those rolls because we noticed him as Q first.
Man, you guys need to stop downing Voyager and Captain Janeway…. I loved that series. And it defienately didn’t kill the Star Trek or did it cause all it’s loyal fans to hate Star Trek. If it did they wouldn’t have made any more movies, ST:Enterprise, and wouldn’t have any lovely parodies from Robot Chicken….
If john de lancie doesn’t want to do Q any more that’s his choice. Leave him alone about it. We all love to hate Q, that was the character was meant to be played and john de lancie did an absolute fantastic job at that.
So think before you say Star Trek is dead, because it’s not. Hell, because of the new Star Trek movie Star Trek has a whole new line of Star Trek fans.
Yes, I thought that Q was Next Gen’s thing. Q should have been kept away from Voyager. Oh well…
If JJ gives DeLancie a big fat check,i bet he will be more than happy to play Q again…..
Apparently those convention checks are not that annoying.
#20: “Well I don’t understand how he can be “tired” of Q, when he hasn’t played that part in the last 10 years!”
Probably the combination of not playing the part but still being identified with it is part of what makes him tired of it, which is too bad but totally understandable. And if DeLancie cashes a convention check, eh, who can blame him? Acting’s a noble profession but it’s also a hustle, as I heard one respected actor say somewhere….
Wave a large enough check under anyone’s nose and they’ll bite. Could deLancie afford to turn down a couple of million American to reprise the character with a good script? I think not. With a bad script? Probably.
That’s all wishful thinking anyway.
I wish Trek’s TV division would hurry up and get with the program. A series of straight-to-DVD movies featuring the old characters [a'la Stargate] would be just the ticket to keep interest piqued during the hiatus between movies, as long as Abrams or Orci or someone strong attached to the latest movie acts as showrunner**. A DVD every 6 months would be about right and would be insanely profitable with the 2 or 3 marketing windows it opens.
**Or even Manny Coto- he resuscitated the dead series 24, after all and did well in his too-short stint on Enterprise.
I’m all for Megan Fox as Q in the next Trek film. Or Shia LaBeouf. ha ha ha ha
I get a little annoyed when i see these guys say something like this….instead of being grateful for being recognized as a iconic figure, they want to be recognized for other things. The truth is without Q, not a damn soul on earth recognizes John De lancie for anything. And how much work did he get because of Q.
If John DeLancie is tired of Q, that’s his right, I suppose – but it’s his own fault for being so great in the role. I seriously doubt that Q would have made so many appearances, especially on DS9 and Voyager, if John hadn’t brought so much life and energy to him.
The problem, if we can even classify it as that, is that DeLancie took the role of Q and made it notable. In Star Trek fandom, if you’re “notable” as a character, you’re going to be latched onto.
It got him a lot of good-paying con gigs… and not just for “autograph guarantees”. I like John, he was a good guest and a good person at our convention many moons ago. I hope he finds a role that is as “notable” to another realm of fans.
John,
Are you also tired of the money you made, and make, from your portrayal?
Too bad I think he’s a charasmatic actor and Q was the only character I really liked from the TNG series.
I think it’s funny how some fans get all offended when an actor who has been on Star Trek says “I don’t want to do it anymore.” Star Trek is definitely a type-casting curse for actors.
I guess it’s understandable, but at the same time its still a good thing. I mean isn’t it better to be known for playing a unique and great character than not being known at all? Reminds me of Nimoy and Spock. Id say its too bad that’d he’d never play Q again, but at this rate I doubt they’d give TNG another movie. But for me the fact that he played Q makes me want to check out other stuff he’s been in and its cool when Im watching something and he has a roll.
Q’s whole schtick grew tired after his first couple of appearances. For me, it was overkill for a character that was never that good to begin with.
72: Now THAT was a petty comment. Do you believe John de Lancie to be the first person to tire of some aspect of their job and want to move on? He didn’t say he dislikes Q, he didn’t say he dislikes YOU, he’s simply expressing a legitimate human need for closure and progression.
Anyhow, I’d like to take this opportunity to say goodbye to Trekmove.com. I’ve enjoyed the information, but the discourse I’ve found to be akin to children arguing over their favorite sports teams. The extremely vocal minority of TOS-Firsters has also become a bit much. So, enjoy your bickering and I’ll continue to enjoy ALL incarnations of Trek.
14 – yeah, that was bad. That was Voyager.
Damn that sucks. It’d be great to see Q in the new Trek… whether DeLancie wants to admit it or not, I have to believe that if JJ freakin’ Abrams called him with an offer to do the next Trek movie, he wouldn’t refuse. I mean, he’d have to be a moron, it would be an opportunity of a lifetime.
I didnt mind that Q was in so many episodes of star trek, except the robinhood episode …I hated that episode…was it everyones wish that the TNG actors would play the parts of robin’s merry men? not mine..as for Q’s legacy? I hope that john will embrace it forever like the rest of us who enjoyed his performances as Q. The best charactor in the history of 23rd century trek!
#77: I’m not quite at *that* level of frustration to leave, but the general discourse on the site does – at times – devolve into petty bickering and apparent contests as to who dislikes something the most. I’m all for stating opinions, but they are just that: opinions, not fact.
I suggest that people really try hard to respect other viewpoints on Trek and recognize that we may not agree on our favorite character, series, episode, movie, or book, but that we all love the franchise in one way or another.
I think DeLancie was terrific in TNG, and they should have closed him down before he appeared in DS9.
A terrific foil for Stewart’s Picard, and the stoic Riker, I’m just grateful he had his run, and book-ended that series. Good luck to him in the future.
69: “I get a little annoyed when i see these guys say something like this….instead of being grateful for being recognized as a iconic figure, they want to be recognized for other things. The truth is without Q, not a damn soul on earth recognizes John De lancie for anything. And how much work did he get because of Q.”
Iconic, yes, but that’s a mixed blessing. I think what DeLancie and a lot of Trek vets struggle with is the double-edged nature of the iconic role. I’m sure there are many great things about the role, the money not the least of it, but the actors also have to deal with the fear that their careers or aspirations as actors will never get one good step beyond those roles. A totally fair concern that fans of the actors ought to allow them.
Maybe we could recast Q for the next Trek movie. I think Tom Hanks would be a great Q.
Bet he’s not tired of those checks he gets for showing up at a convention and answering questions for half an hour
54
Just for my sake…her name is Arleen Sorkin. Was real nice. Met her at convention once. Still a great looking woman. She and DeLancie were a very eccentric couple from Days of Our Lives. She was Calliope, he was Eugene. Only other screen role I ever saw her in was she was one of the last of the loose women Eddie Murphy kicks out of his house in “Trading Places”.
DeLancie’s still Eugene to me.
#84: You are kidding, right?
Q’s one time on DS9 was better than all his spots on Voyager, combined.
Voyager was Lame.
I didn’t take as that. I think DeLancie’s just had the Spiner epiphany that he’s reached a decade in his existence at which he can’t credibly play an immortal “ageless” character.
Although current level movie computer animation may offer a solution that would make the character’s “power” even more realistic as well as restore his agelessness, it still would be expensive and not conducive to increasing his screen time. So he’d probably rather just accept his resignation to the fact that his time to play Q has passed.
I can understand how most of you like the character of Q, but I think a Q movie would have been awful. Q was never a good “bad guy”.
I suppose that answers the question that I’ve wondered about since TNG films began, namely “Where’s Q?”
His first & last appearances were the best on TNG and these bookended appearances not only reminded us of Gene Roddenberry(How many times did he come back to the “Insane Deity Figure” thing? It was a staple)but it also promised more for the future. Remember in “All Good Things” when Q said “See you out there..” almost with a wink as if to say “In the MOVIES!” Sadly (For me at least) this was a promise unfulfilled. After the travesty of “Generations” I accurately predicted that the NG franchise would expire within 4 films if they didn’t bring in another Original series cast member, kill off one of their own(And I DONT count the Data thing from “Nemesis”. That was a cheat.), or bring in a big star with their own NON Trek fan-base like Tom Cruise, Will Smith, or Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Say what you will about Q he DID introduce us to one of the best things about Star Trek in “Q Who?” with the first appearance of The Borg.
As far as the NEXT Star Trek film, I CAN live without DeLancie as Q(And I TOO remember him from Days of Our Lives as Eugene Bradford)but what I hope that they DONT blow the opportunity for is the rumored return of the single greatest villain in Star Trek history to be possibly portrayed by “No Country For Old Men” star Javier Bardem, none other than KHAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!
Loved Janeway. Hate Q. Most of the time won’t watch episodes with Q. Glad not much chance of him anymore infecting Trek, though I suppose with the reboot they could get someone else to play him or it or whatever.
Love Janeway. Love Q. Can’t see anyone else playing him though but that’s just me…
Well, the solution is obvious, isn’t it?
Next movie features Q… as portrayed by…. The Shat.
@ 94:
Naw, if Shat’s going to play an omnipotent, galaxy-spanning nuisance, he has to play The Big Giant Head :P
Q wasn’t really the best idea, however De Lancie made it an interesting part to TNG.
However, like all things, Berman and Braga messed up Voyager. Berman and Braga ran off Ron D. Moore and Michael Pillar to DS9, and Jeri Taylor ‘decided’ to retire after a few seasons and voiced that she was overruled by them when it came to plot decisions. (Including the Maquis wearing starfleet uniforms)
Anyone seeing a pattern here?
Want Proof? Look at the book “Star Trek Action!” for the inner workings of the writing staff and how Braga went over Jeri Taylor’s head to Berman.
Also see Ron D. Moore’s interview where he talks about Braga and Berman betraying him.
As for Q, meh.
I have to agree with those that have said Q worked best as a foil for Picard. There was really no need to continue with the character beyond ‘All Good Things’, but restraint was never a Berman-era strong suit. If I were DeLance, I too would be tired of Q.
Would he rather be remembered for that one role he did on a soap 20 years ago?
I love Q! But if they want to bring a Q back, I would prefer Q’s son. Keegan de Lancie was great in that Voyager episode and John de Lancie is getting old.
If only Q was in one of the TNG movies, one can only dream.
DS9 rules! There is no better Trek in my opinion, and I am getting tired of all the DS9 bashing! And as for Janeway/Kate Mulgrew, there’s noone better! Shows and characters are limited by the writers, not the actors usually. Do I think that Voyager could have been better, yes, but I still enjoyed it! Do I think Enterprise was slow in the initial seasons? Yes, but I think seasons 3 and 4 were awesome, and the show put to rest prematurely! I loved TOS, TNG, DS9 the best from start to finish with i’ts complexities, loved the new movie and hope for more to follow as well as a new TV series. Overall, Trek has been and continues to be Awesome, and as much as i enjoy other Sci-Fi series, I always love Trek the best! I did hate UPN/Paramount for not promoting Trek when they had the opportunity, if anyone killed Trek (though it is resurrected!) it was UPN and the unsupportive, whiney fanbase!
Response to 77 “72: Now THAT was a petty comment. Do you believe John de Lancie to be the first person to tire of some aspect of their job and want to move on?…”
Here’s the rub: He’s NOT moving on. He’s still milking interviews and conventions
( cited source: Trek Expo – June 2009 – http:/trekexpo.net/SCHEDULE%20OF%20EVENTS.htm )
I merely poked at the irony.
And “children arguing over their favorite sports teams”, or nacelles, is sometimes fun. If you’re not having fun, maybe it’s good you’re leaving.
Thank God. Q is the last character that needs to show up again in Star Trek.
While Q was interesting, I think Berman and Co. poorly handled the character after Roddenberry’s death. Q was based upon the much more interesting Trelane and while De Lancie gave a wonderful performance and indeed made the poorly developed character palatable, the character ultimately became a mere plot catalyst of little interest himself.
As for Trekmovie’s “no more Q” quote, well that’s about as likely as there’s no more McCoy because DeForest Kelley is dead.
#97 – Not to mention Q’s specific relevance to the Next Gen plot.
The character just didn’t have the same narrative punch in DS9 or VOY – and not because De Lancie couldn’t play off Brooks or Mulgrew (we got a few solid LOLZ off of them after all) – but because the narratives guiding the Sisko and Janeway characters weren’t in symmetry with Picard’s “the trial never ends” narrative told over the 7 seasons of Next Gen.
From a storytellers standpoint, we can see how Q serves as something of a narrator for TNG – he observes and evaluates the supposed progress of mankind through the morality (and immorality) of the Next Gen characters, hence the stronger emphasis on the moral overtures of the stories told in respect to that series versus, say, TOS. Q is also given depth as we see how he responds to the changes he’s affected through his observations and interaction with mankind – in the end we’re left to wonder if it was all in accordance to greater designs or not.
Taking Q out of the context of Next Gen and inserting him into the DS9 and VOY narratives may have made for a few sentimental fan LOLZ, but I think ultimately served to undermine the overall purpose of Q as an omnipotent-yet-evolving Next Gen character, and or course, as an occasionally convenient plot device.
You’ve said, “restraint was never a Berman-era strong suit”, and sadly, we both know that Next Generation-ish gimmickry certainly was. :/
- 24thCRS!
re: #96 (Marv)…”Also see Ron D. Moore’s interview where he talks about Braga and Berman” –
Anyone have a link to this?
As for Q, I never liked the whole concept, and hope it never turns up in the new ST series. That said, DeLancie was still entertaining to watch.
Hmmm…that is to say, Next Generation-ish gimmickry well and far beyond the confines of The Next Generation as an entire cohesive tale. (think ENT: These Are The Voyages) :P
- 24thCRS!
One last thing regarding Q:
How many minds would have been blown if the final scene from Trek 2009 was a shot of a nebula; the camera burrows further and further in, to the center; in the center is a rotating quasar and a spot is seen on the quasar. We match speed with the rotation of the quasar in a sweeping CG shot and the spot is revealed to be a stone bench and a seated figure deep in thought [like the venerable Thinker statue]. The image coalesceses and the figure is revealed to be Q, who gives us a smile and a wink, making the whole movie make a lot more sense. Cut to end credits…..
#107 – Bwahahaha! Woulda been a far more appropriate use of the character than boxing with Sisko or getting parenting advice from Janeway that’s for sure! XD
-24thCRS
@107
Nice idea!!!
It always bugs me actors bite the hand that feeds them.
So…if JJ shows up and wants Q to be a major (or even minor) character in the next $150mm-bugeted Star Trek film, John De Lancie is going to say “No…I’m tired of Q.” rrrrrrrriiiiiIIIIIIiiiiiiiight.
107 – The average movie goer would not get it, so there is no way it would have been in Star Trek 09. It would be way above the required knowledge threshold set by A, O, and K.
only liberal nut jobs think Q is beloved
I get tired of actors who don’t want to acknowledge their famous roles…and rock stars who don’t want to sing their big hits. E Weekly had a blurb about Kings of Leon signer not wanting to sing “Sex on Fire” for a couple in the audience.
#51 – What Marina Sirtis meltdown???
Hmmmm….Now that the wheels are turning, I can see how De Lancie might get a little burned out on Q. If anyone in the world is an authority on how that character fits into the mythos of Star Trek, its him – and he probably got a touch bit tired of guest spot offers from the post-TNG Trek office that wouldn’t permit him to expound on the character (in a dramatic sense), or to have an impact on the narrative course or tone of any of the post-TNG plot lines or characters.
I mean sure, a paycheck is a paycheck, but who out there can really say they enjoy being made to dance a progressively diminishing dance on command?
I’m not trying to speak for De Lancie or anything – just that I can see how he might be turned off to doing the Q dance over a few bucks if he’s already lined up some fresh work – like Breaking Bad – that might be more relevant to where he is in his life. Sure, if someone dumps a huge chunk of change in his lap, he might be inclined to don the Trek tights again (who wouldn’t?), but, like Nimoy, he’s got his own life, family, and interests, and as a freaking adult, isn’t going to be immediately interested in having his strings pulled over someone else’s gimmick or profit-motive.
But also like Nimoy, I hardly think he’s washing his hands of Trek either – just being a little more particular concerning which Trek projects he attaches himself to, if any.
To us, a well-played character can mean a great flight of fancy, but to a professional actor, a well-played character can mean job security – and no one is interested in undermining their own job security right?
-24thCRS!
#5: Amen. I do like DeLancie, though.
#32: Dude, you’re creeping me the heck out.
He’s perfectly entitled to be tired of it, but if so, then he needs to stop doing conventions.
Several years ago now I saw him dis some seven or eight year old kid at a con who asked him about playing Q. If you’re going to be all “I’m a thespian” about it, then it’s time to stop cashing in on the appearance fees.
“If you’re going to be all “I’m a thespian” about it, then it’s time to stop cashing in on the appearance fees.”
I begrudge no man his livelihood.
Yay!
I never wanted to see Q back anyway. They wrapped his character up in All Good Things for Jebus’s sake!
Q was tired 20 years ago. Onward with fresh ideas.
I would be tired of Q too if they never used my character in a movie.
Seriously, I don’t think he would pass up the chance to play Q in a Trek film, but I imagine he would want to be in a TNG film, and not the abbramms films. Sure, he appeared in DS9 and VOY, but he will always be a TNG cast member.
Voyager was the best in my opinion…sure they had their embarrassing moments, but each series did. It was the closest to Gene’s original idea, and the feel of a family working together was spot on…It mixed emotion with story telling, and to me that is what Star Trek was always about…mixing the “what is it to be human” type of questions with a good sci-fi plot around it. I for one will always have Voyager at the top, but I know I am greatly outnumbered in this area…
#117: “He’s perfectly entitled to be tired of it, but if so, then he needs to stop doing conventions.”
Is that a new actor’s union rule, or some kind of federal law?
# “I begrudge no man his livelihood.”
You’re perfectly entitled to begrudge no man his livelihood, but if so, you need to report to the termination booths.
#122: “sure they had their embarrassing moments,”
I think Voyager’s only real misstep was strategically placing their embarrassing moments in the portion of the episode I like to call “virtually every minute between the opening and closing credits.”
Other than that, brilliant stuff.
So I guess I’m a Liberal Nut Job. It’s much better than….nahhhh… let’s not get political here.
#55
Or like my beloved Law and Order….
Q was comedy relief. Period.
Even the “pre-Janeway” TNG version was very campy. The lipstick, ridiculous costumes, and over-the-top dialogue pretty much sealed the deal. At no time did I feel particularly threatened by him. And that’s part of the problem. They tried to make him into this menancing omnipotent being, even though De Lancie basically played him as one of those “villians” from the old Batman series.
#110. Check the Circuit! wrote: So…if JJ shows up and wants Q to be a major (or even minor) character in the next $150mm-bugeted Star Trek film, John De Lancie is going to say “No…I’m tired of Q.” rrrrrrrriiiiiIIIIIIiiiiiiiight.
LOL! JJ would NEVER ASK John De Lancie in the first place. He would hire someone more relevant (and bankable). Secondly, If JJ wants Q in the next Star Trek film, then the franchise really IS DEAD. Besides Orci won’t allow it since Q violates all the laws of MWI QM. ;-)
#127: “Besides Orci won’t allow it since Q violates all the laws of MWI QM. ;-)”
And we all know that Orci really sincerely cares about that, and it’s not just something he said for the very gullible.
#126: “[...] even though De Lancie basically played him as one of those “villians” from the old Batman series.”
He did, yes; the Q/Picard relationship was very much Joker/Batman (which is fine by me … Picard, like Batman, needs someone to unstuff his shirt now and then).
But like it or dislike it, either way: don’t lay it all on De Lancie. The screenwriters and episode directors clearly didn’t do much to slow that portrayal down, and generally may be assumed to contribute to the creative process. Q was comedy relief because he was written as comedy relief, directed as comedy relief, _and_ portrayed as comedy relief, and with other fingers in the pie besides.
I really don’t get the people that bash DS9 because it wasn’t “very star trek”. These are some of the people who probably started taking a poke at ST09 for “not being very star trek” as well.
It tried something different and to be honest, despite it’s critics (which seem to be many from the core fanbase and not outwith) it had a very successful and popular run with a very talented and diverse cast. DS9 and TNG stand out a mile in terms of character development over their 7 season run.
Babylon 5 does not come CLOSE.
VOY and ENT had some great episodes but never a point where you are really warming to the characters or feeling that you’re watching them grow (perhaps with the exception of 7of9 or the Doctor).
As for Q, he was great in TNG but it felt that he didn’t really have a purpose to be back on the other series.
So when you talk to Mr. DeLancie, talk about stuff other than Q.
PS: WHAT SIRTIS MELTDOWN???
@130 I really don’t get the people that bash DS9 because it wasn’t “very star trek”.
I don’t get the people who seem to be bothered when something with the word “Trek” in the title doesn’t cause everyone who identifies themselves as a Trek tan to spontaneously foam at the mouth.
I watched DS9 for a few episodes, and found it to be tedious and uncompelling – yes, even though it had the letters “t-r-e-k” in the title. But that’s just me. Lots of people liked it, and that’s cool, too. If you are among those that enjoyed it, terrific!
There’s this undercurrent of implied loyalty assessment among some in the Trek fandom if you dare suggest you don’t get all itchy over any particular Trek franchise, unless the broader fandom has granted their sanction to dislike it, eg it generally seems to be “acceptable” to dislike Voyager. By extension, any former Trek actor is a traitor to the cause if they suggest, as DeLancie has, that he might be “tired” of the recognition the “Q” character has drawn. Can’t we understand that, like most of us in *any* profession, would like to be recognized or appreciated for the broader body of work, not just a single effort? Granted, in a high-profile franchise like Trek, its hard to escape, but we shouldn’t villify him just because he has mentioned that he’s done stuff other than Trek in which he takes pride.
Bottom line – I wish DeLancie well in whatever he attempts in the future, and I don’t condemn him for expressing “Trek fatigue…”
Q was just great for the next generation; i really enjoyed those episodes, and the interaction between him and picard. but to be honest, if they were to put Q in the next movie, it would bomb. no one would be interested at all besides the trek fans. it would be too corny to be a blockbuster. people want to see action, and with Q’s being so powerful, there would be no suspense for the average movie goer.
#130: “I really don’t get the people that bash DS9 because it wasn’t “very star trek”. These are some of the people who probably started taking a poke at ST09 for “not being very star trek” as well.”
I think it sounds like you get us perfectly.
When things aren’t very Star Trek, we say so. Is that so complicated?
Not all of us are slaves to whatever stuff Paramount slaps a Trek trademark on (and I think DS9 was a good show, from what I saw of it – very intelligent and intense … but not very Star Trek … and I think ST09 is a good film – loud, fast, funny and boom-pow-exploderiffic… but not [really at all] Star Trek).
“It tried something different and to be honest, despite it’s critics (which seem to be many from the core fanbase and not outwith) it had a very successful and popular run with a very talented and diverse cast.”
It had a very successful and popular run because it was a good TV show. I’m not a critic of it at all, unless you consider anyone who points out that it isn’t very Star Trek to be a “critic.”
“DS9 and TNG stand out a mile in terms of character development over their 7 season run. Babylon 5 does not come CLOSE.”
News flash: Babylon 5 was a different show.
Also, it was slightly more Star Trek than Deep Space Nine was.
128. S. John Ross wrote: “And we all know that Orci really sincerely cares about [MWI QM], and it’s not just something he said for the very gullible.”
I would laugh right along with you except for the fact Orci spent sooooo much time on this site and elsewhere defending his rather flimsy position. The guy’s either been taking his own medicine, or he’s a pathological liar. Oh – or a corporate shill.
And here I thought they could use Q in the next movie to explain why a black hole sent people back in time instead of crushing them into oblivion… the “new” Enterprise could see the classic one, 1701-E and a few other versions. Kirk, confused asks for theories from the crew. An unknown ensign turns… none other than Q. He says something like “I miss Jean-Luc… he would have caught on to this much quicker… you humans… so linear…”
134-
In many ways, Babylon 5 was very “Star Trek.”
The Shadow War served as the catalyst for a whole new age. The crew served a noble purpose that will long outlive them. We know this because the show tells us as much. And B5 further implied that, despite hiccups and setbacks, humanity has a bright future ahead of it.
DS9 is a completely different creature. The spiritual successor to DS9 was BSG rather than Voyager or Enterprise. Aside from the Moore connection, the two shows had similar – and decidedly not Roddenberry friendly – approaches to the primacy of survival. The Federation didn’t “win” the Dominion War. It survived the war. There’s a big difference between the two. This is a theme BSG would revisit under even more extreme and grim circumstances.
I liked DS9 precisely because it was willing to challenge some of the Church of Roddenberry’s sacred precepts. I’ve never been a fan of high-minded dogma getting in the way of making a good television show. But I can see why purists might find DS9 less a “doctrinal conflict” and more like an outright schism. I can also see why many Trekkies think they went too far. Behr and Moore had proposed even more radical changes (including a Federation Civil War and Starfleet using WMDs). Berman wisely vetoed or severely dilluted much of this.
#135: “Oh – or a corporate shill.”
There we go ;)
I think it’s 80% corporate shill, and 20% actually enjoying being part of the ridiculous banter that is Trek fan-chatter.
Still, I do hope one day to be regaled with the story of the most successful and tested theories regarding Red Matter :)
#137: “I liked DS9 precisely because it was willing to challenge some of the Church of Roddenberry’s sacred precepts.”
I liked DS9 because it was a good show on its own merits. I don’t need a reactionary crutch to appreciate the program. But I’m glad you found one that worked for you within the precepts of your faith.
For my own part, I don’t regard Trek as a religion, and I’m one of those fans who think people like D.C. Fontana and Gene L. Coon (and the often-underestimated contributions of the cast themselves) deserve a lot more credit for Trek’s greatness than the look-at-me “great bird” and his box of IDIC pins for sale.
“I’ve never been a fan of high-minded dogma getting in the way of making a good television show.”
For your next assignment, find a single person who considers himself of anything “getting in the way of making a good television show.” While you’re at it, look up “straw man.”
“… considers himself [a fan] of anything …”
@134
[quote]For my own part, I don’t regard Trek as a religion, and I’m one of those fans who think people like D.C. Fontana and Gene L. Coon (and the often-underestimated contributions of the cast themselves) deserve a lot more credit for Trek’s greatness than the look-at-me “great bird” and his box of IDIC pins for sale.[/quote]
Absolutely agree. Roddenberry provided “the vision thing,” the basic concept, the idea, but it was Fontana et al that flushed it out and made it a workable concept on an ongoing basis. In many ways over the course of 40+years of Trek, there’s been more than a few stories regarding ways Roddenberry was a *hindrance* to Trek production because of his predisposition on certain matters. There were issues about the quality of his writing. There was a reason he was *not* the producer of Wrath of Khan after TMP’s result (although there were reasons outside of GR’s control regarding TMP’s problems, but that’s another issue).
This isn’t to bash Roddenberry (although I’m sure some will call me a “hater” for it, which is laughably untrue), but to offer a bit of a reality check that suggests Trek *had* to depart from its somewhat abstract Roddenberryism to allow it to become a commercially viable entity.
In all this, I think Trek owes a debt of gratitude to Harve Bennett; because had he not captured the right “vision thing” as the exec producer of Wrath of Khan, I think the Trek franchise would have been dead and buried 25 years ago. Heck, even Nimoy himself thought Wrath of Khan was going to be the end of Trek….
139-
The definition of “getting in the way of making a good television show”?
See “Star Trek fan.”
But of course, you already knew that.
When I hear people say “this isn’t Star Trek,” what they mean to say is it doesn’t fit into their prejudices about what Star Trek was. But they’re right only insofar as one assumes there’s only one way to do Star Trek.
I think JJ Abrams and RDM has shown that such staunch devotion, whether it is elevated to the status of a “religion” or just plain ole “secular” fanaticism, is misguided. There’s absolutely no reason why ST can’t be a summer action movie.
Q in the first two seasons of TNG was a mysterious, cynical, cruel, yet playful villain, and maybe a serious threat to the Enterprise crew and the Federation. And it was good.
Then it was season 3-4 when they began to lighten him up, making him somewhat of a funny joker guy, and a buddy of Picard. Finally, Voyager was the ultimate demise of the Q character. In Q2, the last and possibly worst Q episode, he was nothing more than some puny comic relief. Sad.
#141. Author of The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers wrote: “There were issues about the quality of his writing. There was a reason he was *not* the producer of Wrath of Khan after TMP’s result”
Lest we forget the Gene’s script for ST:II – The Klingons use the Guardian of Forever to go back in time and prevent John Kennedy from being assasinated and Kirk & Co. have to go back in time to stop them.
That story would even get you banned from TV today.
#145 That story would even get you banned from TV today…
Man, I didn’t know how many people really remembered that prospective story. The end result, as I recall, was that Spock walks up, invisibly, to the Dallas motorcade and phasers Kennedy himself.
Thank heavens that story never saw the light of day.
Dunno if it was a GR story, but one rumor about Trek III was that the “spirit” of Spock was “haunting” the Enteprise and randomly killing crewmembers…….yikes…
58. Ran – August 3, 2009
#12 “The Sisko, Bajoran, Cardassian, Vic Fontaine, Dominion War, Blah Blah Blah ruined, killed Star Trek.”
Spot on!
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Why all the hate?? While I obviously liked them all, Vic Fontaine made Trek swing, baby! Vic was the coolest character on any of the shows. I love the story behind getting James Darren to play the role. He was approached by the producers, he said in an interview, and he was very excited about playing an alien. He told them that he wanted to wear any make up and latex they wanted as long as he didn’t have to sing. Then they told him of the Rat Packer, Vic Fontaine, that they wanted him to play and he immediately said, “I’m in!” Mr. Darren played with Frank Sinatra and knew him well so he saw this as a fun tribute. A few months ago, Mr. Darren was hosting a show on XM’s Sirriusly Sinatra channel and he told some stories about being on DS9 and how he really enjoyed it and being able to do the standards again. He had two great albums that followed his stint on DS9 on which he sang many Rat Pack hits. He’s a class act who helped develop a wonderfully fun and interesting character.
#143: ” When I hear people say “this isn’t Star Trek,” what they mean to say is it doesn’t fit into their prejudices about what Star Trek was.”
It’s good to see you admit that you respond to what you imagine people mean, instead of what they actually say.
“But they’re right only insofar as one assumes there’s only one way to do Star Trek.”
It’s interesting that you imagine that they mean “one way.”
“There’s absolutely no reason why ST can’t be a summer action movie.”
Indeed. It’s interesting that you imagine that others disagree.
Sorry to ask again (for the third time):
But what “meltdown” of Marina Sirtis was post #51 referring to?
I saw John de Lancie hosting the Toronto Symphony Orchestra performing music from Star Trek just over a year ago, and he showed no signs of being tired of Star Trek. That seemed like an off the cuff remark to me, and likely wouldn’t hold true if the producers came up with him with a good script and a big cheque.
141. Another Roddenberry basher, no matter how many times you deny it. I have four questions for you.
1. If Gene was such a “hindrance,” why did no one have the courage to say so while he was still alive, save Harlan Ellison?
2. If he was such a bad writer, why the WGAw award? And how many do you have?
3. If Harve Bennett was necessary for Star Trek to be “commercially viable,” why oh why did Paramount spend $42 million on TMP, and put it in the hands of a man whose only previous theatrical film was a failure?
4. And how did he manage to produce a film which, despite Paramount’s illegal accounting practices, not only made a profit but was, adjusted for inflation, the most popular film of the series until this year?
@151
Thanks for fulling my prophesy; that saying something negative about Roddenberry would get me labeled “hater,” (okay, “basher”), but whatever. It’s sad to know that subset of Trek fandom is so predictable.
As for your questions, I’ll be glad to answer them.
1. Because at the time of production in 1967, no one *cared* enough to say “No” to GR. As much as we might hate to admit it, we have to be reminded that Trek was a modestly popular TV show, but no smash hit.
2. It doesn’t matter how many I have. The fact remains that there were many who felt GR’s writing was not always up to par. I’ve read more than a few very frank criticisms of GR’s writing, particularly pertaining to some of his Trek movie contributions as having been “unusable,” and I’m not going to sit and try to recall each one just to suit your denial. You have to understand how GR was perceived in reality, *outside of your Trek bias*, without the Robe of Trek Deity. He was a great concept guy, an average-to-above-average writer, and apparently only a middling movie producer. As for the WGAw award, who cares? How many one-hit wonders have won Grammys, Oscars, etc. It isn’t about bashing GR, its about viewing him *honestly*. He built a great thing in Trek, and others helped perepetuate the reality.
3. The point wasn’t that they gave it to Bennett, *but that they took it AWAY from GR*, and GAVE it to someone who at least *had* a movie track record. Besides, the TV division of Paramount was responsible TWOK’s production even though it was a theatrical release, and Harve Bennett had a *great* TV track record at that time. They basically asked him, as I recall reading somewhere, “can you make a better movie, and make it for less than 45 million **** dollars?”
4. You have all this grand insight on Paramount’s illegalities, so I’ll let you deal with their legal department for accusing them of such. Had Paramount and GR not bungled ST:TMP so badly, and I will grant you it was as much if not more Paramount’s fault than GR’s, and produced a film only *half* as good as TWOK, it would have made probably *double* the box office and been heralded as one of the great TV-to-movie transitions ever. TMP succeeded as the result of over a dozen years of latent anticipation for a big-screen treatment of Trek. That the franchise was a beached whale, and someone found out a way to make it a $380M worldwide baby again, is nothing short of phenomenal.
I guess its pointless to say it, but the point is not merely to bash GR, but to understand that while he was the underlying driver for Trek, he was not and never could be the one who persisted into reality. That’s to the credit of the myriad writers, producers, and directors down the road who did.
#152: “It’s sad to know that subset of Trek fandom is so predictable.”
Awwww. Not _sad_ … it’s _comforting,_ like an old pair of slippers or Mom’s apple pie. Something familiar and reliable :)
I think that all Mr. De Lancie was saying here is that it is refreshing to be realized and known for his current work. I recently spoke to him at a CON in Boston and although I ribbed him about not ‘wanting to admit’ he’s known for Q; he gave me no reason to believe that irritated him or that he meant to give that impression.
As far, as a few of you stating that no one would know John De Lancie except for the work he has done on STAR TREK. That would be just you. When he first appeared on TNG in Far Point the first thing I said was “That’s Eugene from DOOL’s.” So… while in your neck of the woods, John isn’t a household word or staple… I’m certain he is somewhere. I know I recognize his adorable face in other things and usually end up loving the show or whatever it is; simply because he’s part of it.
After having met him and speaking to him I have to say he is without a doubt a very genuine person. A regular guy like the rest of us making a living in a career known as acting. More than that, an incredible and devoted actor who takes the time with his fans, regardless of the genre.
i have got to say i am disappoint because i wanted to see in in star trek titan if the show ever gets the green light he could be in the first eposide when riker leaves the enteprise e Q turns up and warns riker of what is to come
I wonder what would happen if I saw him on the street and called him Simmons (his role in Stargate).