Zombie Cheerleader wrote:
Delta Vega wrote:
I know its probably been done to death, but enlighten me.
Why did the writers, producers, studio, whatever decide that between Star Trek TOS and The Motion Picture, that they should have evolved cranial ridges, or skullplates ?
Is there a definitive or canon explanation for this, as personally, I preferred the old dusky, gold shiny breasted Klingons, who always had a perfectly coiffured hairdo
In later incarnations of Star Trek I actually cringe when the Klingons appear, I just cant get my head round all their warrior psyche, I think its just plain silly.
Star trek III was supposed to have romulan villains instead of klingon villains, and when they made the change, they hardly altered the script to reflect that change.
Before that, Klingons were devious scheming villains (Kor) , and romulans were the honorable warrior race (Balance of Terror). After STIII switched them around, Klingons became the honorable warrior race and Romulans became the scheming backstabbing villians. They just kept going with that from then on forward.
At least that's how I remember the explanation.
What's not devious about stealing Genesis, killing prisoners and blowing up your informants ship?
What's honorable about sneaking into your opponent's territory to test a new weapon in violation of a treaty?
Yes yes, and klingons do plenty of dishonorable things afterward in the guise of "honor" as well. Kruge killing his informant was for the empire, and she acted "honorably" when she was killed. Stealing genesis was for the empire so it was honorable in the eyes of a klingon. Is this stuff really honorable? not particularly, but it still fits with the pattern post ST3.
The point remains, st3 was when the switch happened. They are after that generalized as the "honorable warrior race", and romulans the "sneaky bastards". It was the other way around before that.