FLM films - My Webpage

2000-06-13 00:00:00 - "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (arlie88@aol.comNoSpam)


Recently re-watched this one. (A friend of mine wanted to see the much-vaunted Delaney twins. :-) Noticed a scene I hadn't really paid much attention to before. When Tom is being escorted to the slammer, we see, lurking in a side corridor, three of his friends. Harry, B'Elanna, and Seven. Obviously, they have been waiting there hoping to see him go past. Okay, Harry and B'Elanna are obvious. But why Seven...and not, say, Neelix? (Who, along with Harry and Kes, was the only one to say goodbye to Tom when he left Voyager, presumably forever, in "Investigations.") Even the Doc would seem to have more of a connection to Paris than Seven. Did they just blindly substitute Seven for Kes? Was it their policy to stick Seven into every scene it was remotely possible for her to be in? Or were they trying to start some P/7? (cf "Night," "Bliss"). Also interesting was the scene with Paris and Kim in the brig. (Presumably this was one of the scenes that was added later, when the episode ran short.) Harry appears to be the only visitor Tom has in his thirty days imprisonment. Neelix is allowed to bring food but not talk. Tom asks "How's B'Elanna?" and Harry answers, "She misses you" -- implying that she hasn't come to visit Tom herself. So how come Harry gets to visit, but no one else? Did he pull his "Resolutions" schtick on Janeway until she gave up, as Tuvok did? Or is there just something about Tom and Harry that makes people think they belong in jail together? <g> -- Arlie

2000-06-13 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Zabana Brandon <zabana@collegetoday.com>)


TOM Harry, I'd love to spend "thirty days" in the brig with you. HARRY Er ... uhm. Tom ... I'm getting the feeling that there's something you're trying to tell me.

2000-06-14 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (arlie88@aol.comNoSpam)


>> yep - they thought they'd try if they could pair their poster boy with their sex kitten... << I suspect you are right. Though we haven't gotten much Paris/7 lately. There was "One Small Step," and that horrible scene in "Tsunkatse," but that's about it. >>>Also interesting was the scene with Paris and Kim in the brig. (Presumably >this was one of the scenes that was added later, when the episode ran short.) >Harry appears to be the only visitor Tom has in his thirty days imprisonment. >Neelix is allowed to bring food but not talk. Tom asks "How's B'Elanna?" and >Harry answers, "She misses you" -- implying that she hasn't come to visit Tom >herself. LOL! Good point! << The more I think about it, the stranger it seems that Harry came alone to visit. You'd think he'd at least bring B'Elanna with him to visit Tom. Unless Janeway forbade it. Or Torres didn't want to come. And the conversation Torres and Paris had upon his release.... It was said in a joking manner, but the content was kind of nasty. He says, "Are you sure you want to be seen with an ex-con?" Which could be read as dig at her for not coming to visit him in the brig. And she responds by ordering him to her quarters, saying "That's an order, Ensign." Yeeks. Rub it in, why don't you. -- Arlie

2000-06-14 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (arlie88@aol.comNoSpam)


>> As for Seven, even a Borg is curious. She probably wanted to see what was going on and "assimilated" the knowledge that if Janeway gets pissed enough, even her favorite crewmembers will probably wish for assimilation.. << Or maybe she just felt she had a lot in common with Tom, having disobeyed Janeway so often herself. Of course, Janeway couldn't demote Seven, since she has no rank. She probably tried tossing her in the brig, but she just used her nanoprobes to escape. >>Janeway was very pissed at Tom, that's why he was basically in solitary and on a bread and water diet. << Or leola root and water.... >> I was surprised that Harry was able to actually visit Tom for a short while. << It was apparently not easy to arrange. Harry says, "Well, the Captain finally gave me permission to visit, but I've only got a few minutes." And it was Day 16. One has to assume it took him two weeks to convince Janeway to let him visit, and then it was a one-time thing, for only a few minutes. (When Harry leaves, he says, "See you in 14.") >> If I had seen a basically ticked off Janeway throw someone in the brig for a month and remove a pip, do you really think I would even try to approach her for at least two weeks without worrying about getting my own ass tossed there for defying the Captain. << Maybe Harry was the only one willing to risk it. >> Harry got lucky that Tuvok didn't have a cell prepared in Resolutions. I believe that Tuvok had made his orders quite clear and Harry really pushed his luck in badgering the poor Vulcan. << I agree, even though I loved seeing him to it! -- Arlie

2000-06-14 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (arlie88@aol.comNoSpam)


>>TOM Harry, I'd love to spend "thirty days" in the brig with you. HARRY Er ... uhm. Tom ... I'm getting the feeling that there's something you're trying to tell me. << LOL! The only thing saving Harry's virtue is that mantle of cluelessness he's always swathed in.... -- Arlie

2000-06-14 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Julianna Feigl <glacierqueenNOSPAM@hotmail.com>)


On 13 Jun 2000 22:20:59 GMT, arlie88@aol.comNoSpam (Arlie) wrote: >Recently re-watched this one. (A friend of mine wanted to see the much-vaunted >Delaney twins. :-) > >Noticed a scene I hadn't really paid much attention to before. When Tom is >being escorted to the slammer, we see, lurking in a side corridor, three of his >friends. Harry, B'Elanna, and Seven. Obviously, they have been waiting there >hoping to see him go past. > >Okay, Harry and B'Elanna are obvious. But why Seven...and not, say, Neelix? >(Who, along with Harry and Kes, was the only one to say goodbye to Tom when he >left Voyager, presumably forever, in "Investigations.") Even the Doc would >seem to have more of a connection to Paris than Seven. even (shudder!!!!!!!) Tuvok... But I tell you why: the WASP poster boy needed to get into the same scene with the sexy girl - it's *that* simple.... >Did they just blindly >substitute Seven for Kes? Was it their policy to stick Seven into every scene >it was remotely possible for her to be in? Or were they trying to start some >P/7? (cf "Night," "Bliss"). > yep - they thought they'd try if they could pair their poster boy with their sex kitten... >Also interesting was the scene with Paris and Kim in the brig. (Presumably >this was one of the scenes that was added later, when the episode ran short.) >Harry appears to be the only visitor Tom has in his thirty days imprisonment. >Neelix is allowed to bring food but not talk. Tom asks "How's B'Elanna?" and >Harry answers, "She misses you" -- implying that she hasn't come to visit Tom >herself. LOL! Good point! >So how come Harry gets to visit, but no one else? Did he pull his >"Resolutions" schtick on Janeway until she gave up, as Tuvok did? Or is there >just something about Tom and Harry that makes people think they belong in jail >together? <g> Julianna -------- Tuvok: The main reason to watch Voyager!

2000-06-14 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Merrick Baldelli <mbaldelli@mindspring.com>)


On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:27:55 GMT, Zabana Brandon <zabana@collegetoday.com> wrote: >TOM >Harry, I'd love to spend "thirty >days" in the brig with you. > > HARRY >Er ... uhm. Tom ... I'm getting >the feeling that there's something >you're trying to tell me. TOM Yes, it's time for you to come out.

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Julianna Feigl <glacierqueenNOSPAM@hotmail.com>)


On 15 Jun 2000 03:46:02 GMT, arlie88@aol.comNoSpam (Arlie) wrote: >>>> LOL! The only thing saving Harry's >> virtue is that mantle of cluelessness >> he's always swathed in.... > >What an odd name for a cologne ... << > >It's the one Neelix used in "Random Thoughts." > LOL! Julianna -------- Tuvok: The main reason to watch Voyager!

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Julianna Feigl <glacierqueenNOSPAM@hotmail.com>)


On 15 Jun 2000 04:01:06 GMT, juli17@aol.com (Juli17) wrote: >> >Though you're right. There's always some human subjectivity involved in >intepreting any scene. You (meaning you in the general sense) can take almost >any words or action between two characters and put your own spin on it. This >scene makes that clear enough; if you like Tom and B'Elanna you can see plenty >of underlying affection in their voices and manners, if you hate them, you can >see nasty undertones to it all. P/T aside, it's amazing how many Trek fans can >watch a single scene--any single scene--and often have totally opposing views >of it. > See? Then why are you so surprised that I don *not* see all the great things in Tommy that some others do see? :-) Julianna -------- Tuvok: The main reason to watch Voyager!

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Julianna Feigl <glacierqueenNOSPAM@hotmail.com>)


On 14 Jun 2000 22:31:40 GMT, arlie88@aol.comNoSpam (Arlie) wrote: >>> yep - they thought they'd try if they could pair their poster boy with >their sex kitten... << > >I suspect you are right. Though we haven't gotten much Paris/7 lately. There >was "One Small Step," and that horrible scene in "Tsunkatse," but that's about >it. > >>>>Also interesting was the scene with Paris and Kim in the brig. (Presumably >>this was one of the scenes that was added later, when the episode ran short.) >>Harry appears to be the only visitor Tom has in his thirty days imprisonment. >>Neelix is allowed to bring food but not talk. Tom asks "How's B'Elanna?" and >>Harry answers, "She misses you" -- implying that she hasn't come to visit Tom >>herself. > >LOL! Good point! << > >The more I think about it, the stranger it seems that Harry came alone to >visit. You'd think he'd at least bring B'Elanna with him to visit Tom. Unless >Janeway forbade it. Or Torres didn't want to come. > >And the conversation Torres and Paris had upon his release.... It was said in >a joking manner, but the content was kind of nasty. He says, "Are you sure you >want to be seen with an ex-con?" Which could be read as dig at her for not >coming to visit him in the brig. And she responds by ordering him to her >quarters, saying "That's an order, Ensign." Yeeks. Rub it in, why don't you. LOL! You have a point here... :-) Julianna -------- Tuvok: The main reason to watch Voyager!

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Zabana Brandon <zabana@collegetoday.com>)


Arlie wroteded: > > >> TOM > Harry, I'd love to spend "thirty > days" in the brig with you. > > HARRY > Er ... uhm. Tom ... I'm getting > the feeling that there's something > you're trying to tell me. << > > LOL! The only thing saving Harry's > virtue is that mantle of cluelessness > he's always swathed in.... What an odd name for a cologne ...

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (arlie88@aol.comNoSpam)


>>> LOL! The only thing saving Harry's > virtue is that mantle of cluelessness > he's always swathed in.... What an odd name for a cologne ... << It's the one Neelix used in "Random Thoughts." -- Arlie

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (juli17@aol.com)


> >The more I think about it, the stranger it seems that Harry came alone to >visit. You'd think he'd at least bring B'Elanna with him to visit Tom. >Unless >Janeway forbade it. Or Torres didn't want to come. I think B'Elanna wouldn't give Janeway the satisfaction of asking for that kind of favor. Not that TPTB notice these things, but this episode took place after "Nothing Human" and one could assume Janeway and B'Elanna weren't on the greatest of terms for awhile after that episode. Given B'Elanna's angry look when she saw Tom being led to the brig, I'm sure Janeway's choice of punishment only added to her irritation with the captain (after all, if B'Elanna didn't exactly "encourage" Tom to go as far as he did in that holodeck scene, she certainly didn't discourage him either). >And the conversation Torres and Paris had upon his release.... It was said >in >a joking manner, but the content was kind of nasty. He says, "Are you sure >you >want to be seen with an ex-con?" Which could be read as dig at her for not >coming to visit him in the brig. And she responds by ordering him to her >quarters, saying "That's an order, Ensign." Yeeks. Rub it in, why don't >you. > >-Arlie Actually, I'd say it's the words alone that could be taken as nasty WITHOUT the context. It was the context--clearly joking with each other, their tones of voice, and the smile on Tom's face--that made it clear there was no nastiness involved. Though you're right. There's always some human subjectivity involved in intepreting any scene. You (meaning you in the general sense) can take almost any words or action between two characters and put your own spin on it. This scene makes that clear enough; if you like Tom and B'Elanna you can see plenty of underlying affection in their voices and manners, if you hate them, you can see nasty undertones to it all. P/T aside, it's amazing how many Trek fans can watch a single scene--any single scene--and often have totally opposing views of it. Julie

2000-06-15 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (arlie88@aol.comNoSpam)


>> >The more I think about it, the stranger it seems that Harry came alone to >visit. You'd think he'd at least bring B'Elanna with him to visit Tom. >Unless >Janeway forbade it. Or Torres didn't want to come. I think B'Elanna wouldn't give Janeway the satisfaction of asking for that kind of favor. << That's an interesting idea. Though I think Harry would have asked for her, even if Torres wouldn't ask herself. >> Not that TPTB notice these things, but this episode took place after "Nothing Human" and one could assume Janeway and B'Elanna weren't on the greatest of terms for awhile after that episode. << One could, if one had real writers doing Voyager. >> Given B'Elanna's angry look when she saw Tom being led to the brig, I'm sure Janeway's choice of punishment only added to her irritation with the captain (after all, if B'Elanna didn't exactly "encourage" Tom to go as far as he did in that holodeck scene, she certainly didn't discourage him either). << I wondered if B'Elanna might have actually been angry at Tom, not Janeway, in that first scene. But she's never been terribly by-the-book, even if she does think of Janeway as her mom, and she did seem to be encouraging Tom to do what he did in that holodeck scene. >>>And the conversation Torres and Paris had upon his release.... It was said >in >a joking manner, but the content was kind of nasty. He says, "Are you sure >you >want to be seen with an ex-con?" Which could be read as dig at her for not >coming to visit him in the brig. And she responds by ordering him to her >quarters, saying "That's an order, Ensign." Yeeks. Rub it in, why don't >you. Actually, I'd say it's the words alone that could be taken as nasty WITHOUT the context. << Which means it's the writers' doing. I still think they should have showed us Torres visiting Paris in the brig. Or at least had Tom and Harry refer to a past or future visit from B'Elanna. And if they weren't going to do that, they could've at least given us a better reunion scene. I like Torres, but she was so smug and insensitive in that last conversation. Her behavior bugged me more than Janeway's in this ep. >> Though you're right. There's always some human subjectivity involved in intepreting any scene. You (meaning you in the general sense) can take almost any words or action between two characters and put your own spin on it. << This is true for any TV series (or book). But I think it's more true for Voyager. They give us so little that evey word and gesture becomes a big deal. -- Arlie

2000-06-16 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (Julianna Feigl <glacierqueenNOSPAM@hotmail.com>)


On 16 Jun 2000 04:25:41 GMT, juli17@aol.com (Juli17) wrote: >> >>>Though you're right. There's always some human subjectivity involved in >>>intepreting any scene. You (meaning you in the general sense) can take >>almost >>>any words or action between two characters and put your own spin on it. >>This >>>scene makes that clear enough; if you like Tom and B'Elanna you can see >>plenty >>>of underlying affection in their voices and manners, if you hate them, you >>can >>>see nasty undertones to it all. P/T aside, it's amazing how many Trek fans >>can >>>watch a single scene--any single scene--and often have totally opposing >>views >>>of it. >>> >> >>See? Then why are you so surprised that I don *not* see all the great >>things in Tommy that some others do see? :-) >> >>Julianna > >I'm not surprised you don't see all the great things in Tom. I don't see >everything about Tom as "great" and I like the character, despite the crappy >writing he's gotten lately. I'm just sometimes surprised that you see >absolutely *nothing* remotely good in him. To see him all great or all bad is >very extreme either way. And I'm not saying you're not entitled to your >opinion, but not that many fans see any character as completely bad (completely >good probably happens more often). it's just that compared to everybody else (okay, with the exception of Chucky, who bores me to death and is about as non-descript as one can get) he *is* no good at all... > I just figure if I argue with you enough, >you'll see one or two good things in Tom... > >Okay, maybe not ;-) :-) Julianna -------- Tuvok: The main reason to watch Voyager!

2000-06-16 00:00:00 - Re: "Thirty Days" - why Seven? - (juli17@aol.com)


> >>Though you're right. There's always some human subjectivity involved in >>intepreting any scene. You (meaning you in the general sense) can take >almost >>any words or action between two characters and put your own spin on it. >This >>scene makes that clear enough; if you like Tom and B'Elanna you can see >plenty >>of underlying affection in their voices and manners, if you hate them, you >can >>see nasty undertones to it all. P/T aside, it's amazing how many Trek fans >can >>watch a single scene--any single scene--and often have totally opposing >views >>of it. >> > >See? Then why are you so surprised that I don *not* see all the great >things in Tommy that some others do see? :-) > >Julianna I'm not surprised you don't see all the great things in Tom. I don't see everything about Tom as "great" and I like the character, despite the crappy writing he's gotten lately. I'm just sometimes surprised that you see absolutely *nothing* remotely good in him. To see him all great or all bad is very extreme either way. And I'm not saying you're not entitled to your opinion, but not that many fans see any character as completely bad (completely good probably happens more often). I just figure if I argue with you enough, you'll see one or two good things in Tom... Okay, maybe not ;-) Julie