Friday night at Star Trek Las Vegas ended with a 90-minute reunion event for the cast of Star Trek: The Next Generation. The entertaining evening mostly showed this cast still has great chemistry as they jovially shared stories of hijinks on the set, such as comparing who stole what when the series ended (Patrick Stewart took a combadge, Marina Sirtis took home a director’s chair and three costumes).
Marina Sirtis and Michael Dorn at Star Trek Las Vegas 2017
One moment that stood was out when a fan asked a question to the women in the group about why they have talked about having difficult contract negotiations when you don’t hear the men in the cast make the same complaint. Marina Sirtis was quick to respond saying “Women are paid less than men in Hollywood, like everywhere else.” The actress then recalled a story she says she has never spoken about before:
When I was negotiating for [Star Trek:] Nemesis they literally threatened to fire me and recast Troi, well not actually recast, but they said “We are going to fire you and hire Jeri Ryan (Seven of Nine from Star Trek Voyager).” And I said “Well Jeri Ryan won’t do it for that money, that is for sure.”
Nemesis offer previously confirmed by Ryan
While Sirtis noted this is the first time she has talked about this, it isn’t the first time the subject has come up. In 2011 TrekMovie reported on Jeri Ryan revealing she had turned down an offer to be in Nemesis from producer Rick Berman. At the time it wasn’t clear if the offer was just a cameo as the final film did include a cameo from Ryan’s Voyager co-star Kate Mulgrew.
And in 2014 TrekMovie reported from Destination Star Trek London where Ryan gave more details on the offer:
The call [from Paramount] came and they said “Put Jeri Ryan in the movie,” and I’m like “Okay… in what way are you going to put Jeri Ryan in this movie?” “Well, we’re going to replace one of the characters with Seven”…which makes absolutely no sense.
But at the time it wasn’t clear who it was Berman and Paramount had in mind to replace or why. Now with Sirtis’ comment it appears to be related to her contract negotiations. And it may be that Ryan’s reluctance to do it removed Paramount’s leverage and obviously Sirtis did eventually sign on for what was the fourth and final film for the TNG cast.
And as both Sirtis and Ryan noted, swapping actresses would not have been a simple task. Star Trek: Voyager had just gone off the air in mid-2001 as Nemesis was in development so Seven was at least back in the right quadrant of space, but she had no relationship with the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise-E. The change would have required significant changes to script, notably the opening wedding scene with Sirtis’ playing the bride. There was also a substantial subplot involving Troi’s psychic connection to the Reman Viceroy (Ron Perlman).
Publicity photo for Star Trek Nemesis (2002)
Sirtis and Stewart decry pay inequity
Sirtis went on to talk more about her problems with Paramount:
Women are always paid less and the negotiations are always uglier because there is some kind of feeling that we don’t deserve the same money as the boys. It was always ugly. I quit smoking for six years but what got me started again was contract negotiations with Paramount. That is how bad it was.
The actress noted that she was “getting wound up” on the subject saying that the problem even exists with women producers. Sirtis then described actress Jennifer Lawrence as her “hero” for taking a stand against gender pay inequity in Hollywood, adding:
I wish there were more actresses like her in the business because we are not treated the same. If a man is difficult it is artistic temperament. If a woman is difficult, she is a bitch.
And while the other women on the panel (Gates McFadden and Denise Crosby) didn’t weigh in, Sir Patrick Stewart did, agreeing with Sirtis as she was talking about the issue:
Women are paid less than men almost everywhere in most countries in the world. And it is an inequity that has to be corrected.
Sir Patrick Stewart at Star Trek Las Vegas 2017
More Star Trek Las Vegas Coverage
Star Trek Film Academy at Original Series Set Tour Announcement
Patrick Stewart talks about Gene Roddenberry opposing his casting as Picard and more
Denise Crosby talks about her plan for ‘Trekkies 3’
Full videos from ‘Discovery’ actors and writers panels
Star Trek Online announces LeVar Burton to reprise his role as Geordi LaForge for game
Panel: Details and covers for first ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ novel and comic revealed
Interview: Sam Vartholomeos and Wilson Cruz
Interview: Mary Chieffo And Kenneth Mitchell
Panel: Writers Talk Technobabble, Timelines And How ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Is Telling Our War Story
Stay tuned for additional coverage coming all week long.
:”(
We’re in the 21st Century and there should be gender-equal pay in place , but there isn’t , and that actually shows the reality we’re faced with !
There is. Not all men get the same money in the entertainment industry. Sorry, but Sirtis is not as important as Stewart or Spiner. Not even Frakes or Dorn. IMO, Troi and Crusher where the two weakest characters in TNG.
Yes. Crusher and Troi were the “two weakest characters”.., but because of sexism. First, why the sexist overwhelming majority of characters being male? Second, why the sexist focus on men in story naritives? Oh yeah, just a continuation of the sexist male supremacy system in a supposed egalitarian future. You confirm Marina’s point while trying to refute it. Average messy thinking from an average person. Yawn.
Boom. Well said.
Sorry, but you sound bitter. Look at how Ds9 worked. Same producers and BY FAR superior female characters. By far. Even in the TNG films, Crusher and Troi, are simply weak. I was gutted they brought Crusher back as Palaski was far more interesting a character. So sexist? Please. Don’t go for that simplistic argument.
You are really reaching trying to find some sexest reasoning why Troi and Crusher were poor that simply does not exist. Troi’s character was just not written as well as it could have been, whereas Crusher was a very bland actress which shows at conventions. DS9, Voyager and Enterprise ALL had numerous, very good female actresses, powerful performances and well acted. Grow up, think objectively and take your propaganda elsewhere.
So then are they also inferring that Mulgrew was NOT the highest paid member of the Voyager cast because of this gender inequity thing?
I have heard Kate Mulgrew was payed less than the male leads from the other star trek series of the time . I’m only a fan and can’t verify it’s truth though .
That could be something, Darfyn but the comparisons would need to be correct. Adjusted for inflation, value of the other actors at the time, etc…
So, experience, education, years on the job, etc, etc…none of that makes any difference to you? How would you like it if you worked at a job for 10 years, having received raises each of those years only to find the company hiring someone with zero experience, less education than yourself, but is brought on making the SAME amount as you? Does that sound fair?
The numbers don’t lie. The so-called wage gap has to do with the factors I mentioned as well as personal choices of which men & women make different ones. THOSE are the reasons for this ‘pay gap’ of which you speak.
The future is female.
That’s sexist and goes against star trek egalitarianism
Nope. The present is male dominated oppressive idiocy. The future will be different in that girls and women will have full opportunity and not be held back by men. In contrast to now, the future is female.
This attitude alone is why things are the way they are now.
If women want to be included in a great show, they should make a great show. Not cry that they aren’t being included in someone else’s creation.
If you want something, build it. Take some ownership instead of whining like children. If women truly are equal, it should be easily possible. Basically, less talk more action.
You have now become the problem, not the solution. What he said is black and white sexism.
Um, women aren’t oppressed and they have the same opportunities as men and they are not held back by men. What an insult to women. You really need to get out more.
Women are still oppressed in many ways, and quite overtly in a number of countries outside the First World.
Are you crazy, a woman pretending to be a man, or a man who gets walked on a leash by the women in his life? If you are a man you are a sorry excuse for one. I’m surprised your wife or whatever woman runs your life allowed you out of your cage long enough to type that bile you just wrote. Actually I take that back imnot surprised as that was probably the only way your woman let you out of your cage!
Mmmmmm Voyager/DS9/The original series had majorly superior and better written female character than next gen if we are completely honest and unless I see payslips how can anyone really comment?
I’ve never inderstood the logic of “oh ok I’m being treated like crap but am gonna stay” when in this example Sirtis had the major upper hand due to her characters history on the show.
I know in DS9’s case the writers and producers have gone on the record saying that they were trying to create strong female characters. It wasn’t always perfect…there is the example of them changing Terry Farrell’s make up because they wanted to make sure she stayed “pretty.” On the other hand, there are great expamples of them standing up for the women and their characters. Ira Steven Behr refused to change how they wrote the character of Kira Nerys just because of criticism from the studio etc. that she was too strong. (Among other complaints about her.) He maintained that if you didn’t like her that was your problem. If Crusher and Troi had someone fighting for them in those kinds of ways how might they have turned out?
Oddly enough TNG did have one strong (in that way) female character in Tasha Yar. But she was obviously killed off early because the actress wasn’t happy. But my guess is if she lasted as long as the others we would’ve seen her as a strong physical character that TNG was missing compared to the other shows.
As for Kira, thats exactly why loved her. Hard as nails, opinionated and could take on anyone.
Agree on both accounts!
Equal pay is something to strive for to be sure. Marina ended up with a large role in Nemesis. Gates was barely in it, so they must have paid her a very small wage?
Equal pay will NEVER happen in entertainment. You negotiate what you’re worth. It’s like when Paltrow wanted the same pay as Downey JR for Iron Man 3. If that was true, that’s rediculous. You’re telling me she’s worth the same as Downey JR for that franchise?
Here, same with Jennifer Lawrence for The Hunger Games. If she got more money, that’s possibly due to the face she’s not just the star, but the face and so is WORTH more money than her co stars.
Not all men get the same pay as each other I’m sure. No way does, sat, Jeremy Renner gets the same pay as Downey JR or Evans for an Avengers film.
Thing is, it depends on the job. I think if a job involves a lot of physical, strenous work, a woman isn’t going to compete with many of her male counterparts. She will will certainly have to work harder to compete. The female body is – generally – simply built a little less to withstand physical work.
But fpr acting, I see no reason for pay inequality.
Most people who do “physical” work get shitty pay to begin with and they all deserve more than what they get.
I agree.
And you can find inequality in all walks of life. It is not just simply a man v woman issue!
The point is not that Mark Rafalo and Chris Hensworth are not paid the same because they have different roles and therefore women shouldn’t expect to be paid the same either. It’s that women are valued less by our male dominated society and that also reflects itself in what women in entertainment are paid. When women are paid 78 cents on the dollar for the exact same work as men in the US, Marina’s comments just give us a window into how true that fact is.
Again, you’ve said it perfectly.
Wow, you clearly have a very distorted view of the US. By the way, the 78 cents thing has been debunked. Sorry. Look at it this way, if that were true, every company would be hiring women over men. Think about it.
Far left wing loons like this mutt are the reason our country is in the shape it’s in right now.
If women were to receive equal pay for equal work then I would expect Marina Sirtis to get the same pay as Wil Wheaton because they were both ham actors playing annoying characters.
Sirtis seems to have forgotten about doing Deanna Troi’s accent for a number of the TNG movies.
She ditched the accent after neither of Troi’s parents used it.
Good thing you’re getting paid the value of your opinion.
Earlier I said that Troi was the most worthless character in all of Trek-dom. But you reminded me of Wesley and decided I may have been mistaken…. Or not. But he does give Troi a real run for the money.
Counselor Troi at best was a busybody that Star Trek could of very easily had
done without with. Jeri Ryan was quite compelling and unique and was a much-
needed character to the show. It’s a shame she wasn’t replaced or her spot on
the show eliminated.
I think you are mistaking Jeri Ryan (7 of 9) for somebody else… she was never replaced or eliminated.
I’m a guy. It’s guys like you that hold us back as a society. Gross. Average thinking by an unimpressive mind.
No one who is so uneducated that he or she thinks “could of” has any meaning whatsoever in English is worth paying any mind to.
Next?
Wow I actually saw an interview with Jeri Ryan last year during the 50th anniversary and she brought up the fact they wanted to have her in the movie and replace her with a long time actor on the show. She never said who and also said she would’ve never had did that (especially probably after the grief she got from some people for ‘replacing’ Jennifer Lien on Voyager) but she never mentioned it was over money. I thought they just wanted to get more interest in the film (well obviously lol) but nothing more than that.
To sadly hear it was because they did’t want to pay Sirtis more money just sounds dirty. She’s right, we all know all those actresses don’t get paid the same as the men and I don’t she was expected to be paid as much as Patrick Stewart but something fairer.
I guess in the end it worked out because she stayed in the film and as someone said she had a big role in it. In fact that was probably her biggest role in all the films ironically because they gave her a direct subplot.
But my guess is if Ryan said yes she would’ve been cut like there was no tomorrow.
I am very glad that Jeri didn’t go for that idea.
Well Done.
Shitty behavior of Paramount. What sense would Seven would have made in a TNG movie (besides a small side role like Janeway)?
It is sad. They never had any idea what to do with Troi. She acted like a 1920 psychologist. They should have hired a real psychologist as advisor to give her role more depth. A counselor actually makes perfect sense when you are alone in deep space facing many dangers. But the true counselor of the Enterprise was Guian not Troi. They should have made Troi more like her. With a psychologist – especially when lead officers are obligated to visit her – you also could have given Picard and Co more depth.
Troi was wasted potential. Sirtis was reduced to her big boobs instead of giving her a real personality :(
@Mark — not just Paramount, they could have never gotten away with it if Bergman and Braga weren’t in board with it. Remember Braga dated Ryan too … talk about conflict of interest …
Yes. True.
And as I said the wasted potential started at episode 1. they never knew what to do with a psychologist. They had good ideas how to include natural sciences but no idea about psychology.
And that is tragic. Picard e.g. always had to play the strong man. Rarely he could show weaknesses. With a better Troi his different layers that you only could see rarely (like his Borg trauma) could have been shown in more depth. Or Datas search for becoming more human … A good psychologist could have supported him.
So much potential.
The problem really was that they made the ship’s shrink a member of the bridge crew. Which was absurd. OK… The ship can have a therapist. But that should have been a recurring character at best. Like Barclay. There just wasn’t much for Troi to do. As weak as Dr. Crusher was at least she had some medical technobabble from time to time that contributed to moving stories along.
To me Sirtis ought to have been very happy her role was never reduced over the run of the show rather than whine about what her pay was in the 4th feature.
At my job, all women are payed more than me. All team leaders are women as well. So don’t talk to me about inequality.
You are one of the exceptions to the rule. Statistical outliers will exist in large numbers.
awwwww, poor you! You’re like the white guy who insists racism isn’t real because he has some black friends and they all get along.
Yet no doubt you’d put weight to a single woman’s personal experience, which I’d call a double standard. And indeed this has been my personal experience for decades in several jobs. Women have reached equality decades ago, yet they insist on complaining. It’s as if they have grown accumstomed to it.
Calastir you’re the one putting weight to a single experience, your own. You’d have to be out of your mind to claim that women reached equality EVER, let alone decades ago. Sorry *you’re* personally not paid as much as the women you work for. You sound pretty bitter about it. But news flash: women make less than men, on AVERAGE, in pretty much every industry, and saying that just because you haven’t personally experienced it and therefore it doesn’t exist is laughable.
Yes, poor male you. Inconvienced by these “complaining” women who “achieved equality decades ago.” They must just love whining. Yeah that’s it. They don’t have anything real that they are fighting against. It’s just their silly lady brains at it again. Who better to say that sexist oppression is over than a man! I’m sure your understanding of how men are advantaged and women disadvantaged is spot on! Dull witted sexist guy.
You poor brainwashed misandrist you. What damage third wave feminism has done to society and itself.
I speak for myself, although I’m sure most would agree, but I love men and women both, and would love to see them both getting equal treatment. That’s coming from a straight white male of privilege. I’m not a misandrist, and I’m also not a male apologist. It’s just a fact that women don’t have it as well as men do. I hope you come around to seeing that someday.
For a moment I thought you might respond that you were simply giving your own personal anectode and were in no way unsupportive of women being treated better in the workplace, including pay, and that you weren’t a complete misogynist.
My bad.
Spend 5 minutes researching “gender pay gaps” and you’ll see how wrong you are.
No time, got another day of work ahead of me for all those ‘oppressed’ women…
Annoying. Ok, because women are your boss and paid more than you we won’t talk about the fact that women are paid 78 cents on the dollar for the same work as men in society in general. Sad that even with male supremacy on your side propping you up that you are still behind. What’s that say about your capacity as a person? With a booster chair of sexist male advantage you still can’t reach the table and want to shut women up from talking about inequality.
Do some research. That 78 cents isn’t for the exact same work. Plenty of studies have debunked that claim. When you start comparing apples to apples the wage gap nearly disappears. It’s a few cents and in some fields the woman is paid more.
“Plenty of studies have debunked that claim. When you start comparing apples to apples the wage gap nearly disappears.”
I agree, and think that this a rampant issue in this argument.
The ‘ask’ is usually put out as “Equal pay for equal work” or phrases along those lines, and I don’t know any sensible person who will disagree with that.
The problem is, as you point out, that the evidence often provided does NOT reflect that we have an equal pay for equal work problem. What we have is a potential lack of equal work opportunities, and it’s not necessarily just women who face it.
This position vs. pay disparity is a subtle, but extremely significant, distinction that I think frequently muddies this problem.
The ratio of women vs. man working in equal positions is the thing that needs to be understood–are there women who are seeking these positions and being denied? Failing to be promoted? Not being encouraged or provided opportunities to gain the experience and education required to hold the position? Being pushed out once they reach them?
Maybe they can spell paid?
Any guy who thinks gender inequality favoring men doesn’t exist is an idiot. It’s that simple.
@arggggggh I don’t think that’s necessarily true. Folks believe what they see directly and what they’re told.
Look for a better job or a better education.
However in big companies I think there is no systematic discrimination.
Most of the gap is because of :
– job choices. Social jobs are usually less paid than engineering etc. Man and women often make different choices wether to study social or natural sciences
– age. Usually the older you’re the higher you’re income. You stark low and rise with you’re successes. However older generations still have a male majority. In older generations men were responsible for providing the income
– work experience. Even in younger generations women still have more gaps in the CV cause of raising children. They stay home in order to care for children more often than men. Therefore they have less work experience than a man of the same age.
However in smaller companies you might experience discrimination. When the owner thinks only men could be good engineers. And on Tv you have discrimination: women are usually used as sec objects.
Also, my first job out of college there were women hired in the same hiring group as me with the same educational background as me doing the exact same job as me making more money than me. I’m sure there are places where the opposite is true but my personal experience is the women make as much as the men if not more than. This was true in the 4 full time jobs I’ve had in my life. And yes, my experience could indeed be off the norm. But 4 for 4 seems to be a bit unusual if it were as bad as some say it is.
Shame Stewart & Spiner vanity sunk Nemesis without a trace creatively as both had veto power on story. That more than anything sunk the project along with a director who was only doing it as a favour to Paramount it seems.
I wouldn’t say that. It was really more Spiner’s doing and the concept of B-4 would have worked much better if they never had Data’s evil twin back in the series. I was never a huge fan of the Data character but I have to admit that his interrogation of B-4 and subsequent deactivation was more touching that I though it would be. Especially for a character I never liked that much to begin with. Nemesis ended up being a very close 2nd best of the TNG cast and was an excellent send off for them.
As with any job out there it does depend on how well you negotiate and your role in the big scheme of things. That being said it’s really sad that pay inequality is still an issue.
And considering how Nemisis turned out I’d say Jeri dodged a bullet.
I guess it all depends on who she is comparing herself to, now if it’s the star of the films, then no way would she be paid the same, however, if it someone on her, want of a better word, level, fair pay is very important, it is not just about that fair pay, it also has to do with how much money the actor brings in, now you are not going to pay someone who films make £500 million the same as someone making the company $1 billion are you? glad you worked it out as the film would not be the same with out her
The character of Troi was never written well, almost useless. We all know that. Having a studio head suggesting she could be replaced by Seven is a 100% sexist response, but not the first problem that character had because of sexism. I’m hopeful that more women in the writers room on Star Trek Discovery will be creative and root out these kinds of problems.
Just off the top of my head, some of the multiple reasons why Troi suffered:
Having a woman on the bridge was just a vestige of a romantic idea Roddenberry had about Decker and Ilia– a relationship which met it’s end in 1979. Nothing can surpass that. Is it possible that the character never should have been a woman? And not had a relationship with the second in command? Wouldn’t Starfleet know and keep them apart? Picard would know.
Is it possible that such a character, an empath, is a dramatic non-starter because she/he always gets the feels and then needs to talk about it? And every time she “feels” it makes the audience really uncomfortable, but the narrative never treats it as uncomfortable to everyone else? Much better science fiction writers would keep someone like that as a real outsider on the crew. And there was little unique in her interpretations of what was going on. In movies you have to show it – so what she felt was rarely different from what we could see or imagine we were seeing. Isn’t Troi just a cypher for the audience?
Her charcter itself was never treated well, especially as it was continually written by men. Does she have a narrative arc of her own that shows her as an agent of her own destiny, even within Starfleet? Would she be doing more good somewhere else? Maybe not on the bridge, aren’t there kids on board, aliens on board to learn about, I don’t know, something? (Maybe she had an episode like this, IDK)
Wouldn’t a different actor/actress have played the character differently and imbued the character with some semblance of a star quality? Marina in real life seems a little biting in a good way that I like more than the character. Nothing of that was in Diana. Why the hell not?
She is sort of right to be angry. Just because she was miscast is no reason to be mistreated after all those years of work. Certainly she had her place and fan support. Hollywood producers in the 1990s were trying to imagine themselves in 70s and 80s but without the need to make great movies.
I always used to find it odd that Troi could feel the emotions of someone via a viewscreen ( where she is physically so far away from the subject, her powers couldn’t possibly work that far – and if they DID work that far, she’d be one of the most powerful Star Trek characters ever).
Yes. Exactly.
Spock wasn’t even as telepathically sensitive as Troi but he could still feel the deaths of the Intrepid crew at an even greater distance in ‘The Immunity Syndrome’. So it’s certainly an established thing. I guess you just have to accept that it works like that in the Trek universe.
Spock Jenkins,
Except she NEVER revealed anything that wasn’t amazingly obvious about the people on the viewscreen. Guys sweating bullets and acting shifty and she tells the Captain, “He’s hiding something but I don’t know what.” As if no one else on the bridge could figure that out.
I couldn’t agree more with what you said about the writing and the studio having an impact on how some characters turn out in tv shows. While both Crusher and Troi suffered I felt like Troi was worse. In the early seasons she had little to do or say other than being made to wear tight, low-cut outfits and talk about how she felt. Which speaking of the outfits, in the Star Trek Costumes book, the designer who worked on the show didn’t even know that she was in Starfleet. He thought she was a civilian, who was attached to the ship and then decided to join up in the episode Chain of Command. I ultimately believe that these kinds of attitudes lead people to consider her less valuable and then they paid her less. When they stopped focusing on her physical appearance she was finally allowed to got the proper attire and the writing began to improve. As a result she became a more valuable character. Too bad they just didn’t do it from the start.
Regarding “Marina in real life seems a little biting in a good way that I like more than the character.”…
I think I read somewhere that she originally read for Yar. Or am I not remembering that correctly?
She did but then they switched them. She has also stated that she never would have left the show like Denise Crosby did. Which I have always found interesting on Marina’s part. Denise has stated that she left because she didn’t like the way she was treated. Marina has said she didn’t like it but stayed anyway. Maybe she was hoping to improve the system from within? Nonetheless, no matter their reasons for leaving or staying it’s too bad the ladies didn’t band together and fight it as a group. Maybe change would have come faster for them all.
It is sad that Paramount would do that to Marina, and to Jeri because the script called for a Betazed/Human Deanna Troi in a telepathic connection to Ron Perlman’s Character and to the clone. And the other factor is that Seven of Nine had not been on Earth, long enough to have a long relationship with the Enterprise Crew so that would have been a forced friendship and a contrived telepathic link….
@Ren –Par couldn’t have done it without Berman/Braga blessing
Something something nanoprobes.
As it was, the script didn’t make a lot of sense – I don’t think monkeying with it would have necessarily hurt.
I’d be surprised if this also wasn’t also about somebody thinking Ryan (34 in 2002) was younger/a bigger draw than Sirtis (47). Something none of the guys had to worry about.
Thank goodness we have all these men explaining that there’s no problem with pay inequality. Whew! I’m relieved to be told they just aren’t worth as much. Thanks, guys, for clearing that up. I guess we can move on now…
Trek fandom has been aging out and dying for years now. Between this and all the racist claptrap regarding Discovery, I’m not sure it’s worth saving.
I think Discovery will go a long way toward righting the ship and curing both those ills. Young people like me very much hate racism and are very pro-diversity. I think DSC was tailor made for us, and if we wind up replacing the aging bigots in the fan base then more power to us.
It saddens me to agree with you about some of the older “fans.”
There are quite a few awful people here, and in the Trek community overall. It’s pretty depressing, especially when that vocal minority ends up being the face of this community. I’d hope there are way more open-minded and reasonable Trek fans than there are racist sexist jerks.
Yet when people give reasons that there is pay disparity in entertainment that isn’t just solely on women, or even just wanting to discuss it, those people are IMMEDIATELY labeled ‘sexist / misogynist’. Reactionary replies to people who have an opposing view that is not “ew, womenz”.
If anything, I do find the Trek community to be a mixed bag. Tbh, I find it almost like a Borg hivemind if I have to use some form of analogy.
All the racist, sexist and homophobic straight white guys crying in these comments lately is depressing. I thought Trek fans were supposed to be more enlightened. Maybe for some of them it’s all about phasers and explosions?
I think that’s it. Too much time on the shoot-em-up, not enough time on the message. I used to frequent the Trek Prop Zone (I also love the pew-pew) until it became clear the forum was teeming with racist, sexist, homophobic straight white guys. Including, most importantly, the owner.
Sorry, sexist? How?
Using ‘sexist’ to shut someone down from a discussion is not very Star Trek. No one here is saying she shouldn’t get more money because she’s a woman. And if any are, sure, idiots, for there is NO justifiable reason to say that. But no one that I’ve seen has said that.
Cool Would you like to hear a woman say it then? How about Christina Hoff Sommers. I could link you to some youtube women also if you’d like?
It’s funny how race and sexual orientation haven’t previously been discussed in this thread, and only a few commenters have mentioned their gender and sexual orientation, but somehow it is a fact that this thread is full of ‘racist, sexist, homophobic straight white guys.’
Name-calling isn’t effective, and, when it is without evidence, it’s also ridiculous. If you’re name-calling instead of specifically citing studies with good methodology, you aren’t interested in intelligent discourse, and you shouldn’t be surprised when only your in-group takes you seriously. But maybe that’s all you want — to signal your virtue to like-minded people.
If you want to change people’s minds, you’re going about it the wrong way.
This, by the way, coming from someone who thinks women should receive equal pay for equal work, and is willing to receive evidence that such is not currently the case in the USA.
I thought it came out of nowhere that Seven ended up with Chakotay, but having her marry Riker would have been ridiculous.
She would obviously have married Data and Riker would have played Trumpet instead of Data singing. Easy fix, don’t even need a rewrite except for Picard’s speech.
Noooo counselor Troi and captain Picard! Please don’t let the Borg assimilate you too! I love you all, but the gender paygap is a myth that has been debunked countless times!
@Ian – Bull. The only people who deny the gender pay gap are Fox News cult members are others of their ilk. It has been proven time and time again, no matter what the right-wing morons try to say.
@Ian. Academic sources please.
Supply and demand. She’s lucky to be on the show at all.
Whoever threatened to fire Marina and replace Troi and Seven is an idiot. It’s that simple.
It really bums me out to think that Sirtis and McFadden are probably aware of some of these comments being made by “fans”.
In reality women tend to get the shitty end of the stick on pay. However Sirtis and other Trek secondary actors fail to talk about the convention and speaking engagements they have been milking for years? They make a few grand or more doing this on a weekend DECADES after being a “star” I love me some George Takei but he’s spent years getting paid to bitch about William Shatner? Nothing kept them from signing on the dotted line for their initial acting part and I would love to play Ensign Cardboard and make fat cash for years after…
@Starfleet Security – Nothing you wrote has anything to do with gender-based pay inequity, which is what is being discussed here. Getting paid for conventions doesn’t change the gender pay gap. Your entire comment is just…utterly unrelated to this article.
Not to mention that even the higher paid men get to do cons too.
But it’s like saying you should be paid less at your job because you learn skills there that allow you to freelance and make extra money on the side.
Look I get that the series leads (Stewart, shatner, etc) should make more than the other cast members (Sirtis, Koening, etc) but somehow I get the sense that she was being offered less than Burton and Dorn, or else this would not have been an issue.
Besides, I have to imagine that when a TNG fan goes to see a TNG movie, they want to see the whole cast, so why not pay them fairly and make them feel welcome and wanted on the set?
So you could of just ignored my comment?
“Could have” (No such thing as “could of”)
You posted in a chat forum designed for conversation, so don’t whimper about me replying. You could have replied with something on topic and relevant, or perhaps tried to explain why I was wrong about your comment (still could!), but no…you wasted more time.
Paramount should have fired Marina. Her attitude towards many is abysmal. Yes, women should have equal opportunity to be paid the same as men but her arrogance and her mouth have pissed off a number of the other TNG crew – even if they aren’t willing to publically admit it. She is a narcissist. Plain and simple.
@Sama What arrogance? Who’d she piss off? I’ve never seen/read/heard evidence of this – is there any?
Hey Patrick, you sould have taken a pay cut to actively equalize the salary “inequality” you see. Instead you just babble on and on……..
So this is one of the reasons why Nemesis failed because of Paramount making bad decisions. Seven of Nine character would not work out for the Enterprise E crew because she just came back from the Delta Quadrant in Voyager series finale. It would not make any sense because she does not have anyone to romance nor is familiar with Captian Picard. Fans would be outraged if this happens in the film.
I am sick and tired of gender discrimination, women can perform well as men in any situations. Marina Sirtis is one of the best actresses in Hollywood, ever.
If Paramount wants to bring back Seven of Nine, then make a Voyager movie. I wouldn’t mind.
Well, they squeezed in Worf and Wesley Crusher. They also cast an actor who looks/sounds nothing like Stewart. So Seven wouldn’t have surprised me. I even think it could have worked.
A total aside, but was the psychic rape subplot handled on an icky/sexist way?
“Best actresses in Hollywood, ever”? Emmy’s, Golden Globes or Academy Awards? I don’t even think she’s cast in commercials? She’s lucky to have the convention circuit…
The problem isn’t based on gender, the problem is based on talent. I am sorry but a great deal of the various shows cast members male and female are TV rate actors, not high caliber film actors. Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner commanded the most because of their higher talent level. Gates, Marina, Will Wheaton, and Denise Crosby aren’t that good and don’t have a resume to stand on outside of Trek. Levar has Reading Rainbow and Roots but he wasn’t paid as much as professor X. Frakes also probably gets a bit more because of his directorial repertoire too. Plus Sirtis is NOT a lead. Her role was minimal at best and cringe worthy on top of it in this film.
Jennifer Lawrence playing Troi would have deserved the money but all we got was Sirtis who couldn’t even keep her accent straight over the years. I hate to say it but Jeri Ryan from my least favorite series of Trek is a better actress than she is anyways.
I ramble though because it seems like every time she opens her mouth something idiotic and offensive comes out.
I think that’s what people seem to forget… Levar Burton, Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner are all successful actors–they had significant roles outside of the Trek franchise.
What has Marina done? What was Frakes done? Or Dorn? By choice or fate they have all had careers where their Trek role was their most successful mainstream role. They can’t command higher pay, they also can’t push for positions. Any one of those three could have been written out of the last couple of TNG movies as their career shifting or moving on. The only reason they are kept is because audiences wanted the same troupe back as a crew, but that only goes so far when push comes to shove over significant amounts of money that these contracts are for.
trouble was in the tv show sirtis/troi was part of an ensemble while in the movies it was mostly picard, data, worf and geordi who got top billing.
All this “gender pay gap” nonsense just shows how people don’t really know how negotiations work or how various roles are valued. The “gender pay gap” is a myth.
Actors and actresses are products, unique products to be sure, but at the core Ms. Sirtis’ “Troi” character ended up as a “Hydrox” in a cast, and franchise, with quite a few “Oreo’s”.
She wasn’t considered one of the high value names in that franchise. Being sold at a cheaper price is the only way to move that product.
The fact that the potential replacement might also be a woman, an “Oreo” on Voyager, only further weakens the argument that this was simply another example of sexism at work.
Please don’t muddle the gender wage gap argument with stuff like this, keep the examples strong and obvious because a problem this large doesn’t need examples like this tossed around that are easily picked apart or dismissed.
This is nothing against Sirtis. It’s just regarding the character of Deanna Troi. Losing Troi wouldn’t have hurt Trek any. She was easily the weakest and most worthless character in the cast if not all of the Trek regulars of any Trek series.
I don’t the specifics of her situation and but this gender-pay gap this is largely stupid. Women tend to go into fields that don’t make as much money or in her case, Sirtis isn’t a leading role, she’s got a fraction of the time Picard and Shinzon did on screen, why should she be paid as much as ‘the boys’. But, I’ll agree that if a women is in the leading role and puts as much effort and work into work as a man, she should absolutely get paid as much, however, in most situations, this is not the case. I’m an Burmese-American who married a white woman. Please tell me I’m a bigot, racist, sexist. . .
In that kind of business people get paid based on their profile and what they can bring to the bottom line. An example… LPGA players do not get what the PGA players get. Why? The men’s tour garners more eyeballs. Sponsors throw more money that way. Bigger named film actors garner more money than others, too. All based on how many tickets one actor will sell vs another. Is it fair? Not really. But it’s a bottom line business. They could get rid of Troi from any of the features and the films would probably do just as well. Take away Stewart… It just won’t work. What Marina REALLY needed was for Stewart to stand up for his lesser important cast mates. Like what Nimoy did in TAS. He actually put his money where his mouth was. “Either hire the other cast for their own voices or I’m not a part of it.”
I completely agree with you. . . we can be friends.
There is common sense for sure. But there is definitely a gender gap. I dont know what Zoe got paid, but she should have been paid on part with Pine and Quinto and in fact, probably more. And certainly more than the rest of the cast.
The problem though is, does Sirtis deserve less because her role is less important or is her role less important because they want to pay her less (ie. because she’s a woman?)
If Stewart and Spiner got the most, which they certainly did, thats fair.
Its really an issue of value. Should she get more than Burton? Well, one would argue he’s the more acclaimed actor. But his role was no bigger. In fact, Sirtis’ character was more important to the story.
I’m not a huge fan of Nemesis but one of my favourite scenes is between Picard and Troi mere moments before the former is transported off the Enterprise. They managed to hit an acting beat that rarely happened in Berman-Trek.
If Troi had been removed so too would an incredibly dark sub-plot that is one of the saving graces (albeit dumbed down) of the entire film.
TS
There’s no excuse for pay inequality based on gender, but, my sympathy only goes so far. These are still people who get paid more for essentially playing dress-up doing movies or TV than most people would make in years of working a 9 to 5.