Anybody else thinks that the klingons would be more interesting if: a) There would be no nobility. It's a betrayal of their warrior ethos that some of them have unfair advantages not based on skill. b) They would accept the best warriors of other species in their ranks either segregated or mixed with klingons
I don't mind the Klingons as they are, but I'd like to see in the future a less conquest-driven rule within the Empire (someone other than warriors in charge), that reflects an evolution in their society or perhaps just an aspect of their society that we rarely get to see, but has always been there.
I'd just be happy to see Ron Moore's interpretations tossed aside. The source material, the Klingons featured in TOS, allow for other interpretations in future Trek productions.
The Klingon aristocracy is one of the things about the Klingon culture that made them different and interesting. In the future I would like to see a more in depth view of the overall Klingon civilization, not just the government and the warrior class. We did see some others in small amounts, need more.
Read the Gorkon books. They would still be interesting without a nobility. Wehad seen plenty of hereditary rulers and nobles.
Kor was a Soviet New Man with a bit of Mongol warrior and a dash of 1984. That was when Klingons were interesting. Space Vikings was done better by H. Beam Piper. Just losing the aristocracy doesn't change much.
I like the John M. Ford Klingons. The 'metal band' Klingons got irritating after seeing them a few times.
The Klingons have been done to death. Leave well enough alone for the next series and film, can't see any new angle on them that might be interesting.
While Worf discussed Klingon honor over and over, and I like his character, how often did we actually see Klingons being honorable? I'm sure that some books handled that aspect far better, but I haven't read them...yet. It would be fairly simple to create a Klingon antihero show with a few honorable ones and people would tune in. I don't know that it would last more than two seasons though. Without story arcs over say five or more episodes and doing a monster of the week episode for filler as Star Trek (or any science fiction show) is prone to do, then it's very hard to make races other than the Terrans or perhaps Vulcans be more than one-dimensional. Didn't folks like the Andorians in the last series? Shran was a very likable character. At least they were trying to deal with them as a species a little and not just have another angry race unlike the benevolent Terrans. Honestly, I'd rather see the Terrans get their comeuppance due to the fact that we're likely more screwed up than other species.We hardly have the answers. Could we maybe have a Star Trek that didn't have to resort to the women doing handbras, but wearing regulation uniforms, and honestly addressing sexism even in the 24th Century. Not to make them sexless, because undoubtably that would happen, but a honest expression of sexual identity without doing it just to be tittilating. It's so disrespectful of the actresses. What a double standard. The universe of Star Trek is incredibly interesting simply from being a show about exploration. It doesn't have to be a phaser battle against a threat every show. That's highly unrealistic and unnecessary. A crew on a long mission like that would have all kinds of social pressures as well as being homesick and trying to find way to deal with it. A little science, real science with failure and finally success would be great. How many deus ex machina inventions happened over the many series when the chips were down, some crew member on the fly invents something or tweeks some system to go far beyond what it should, though the collaboration of whole engineering departments took months and months to do the same thing. That's just crazy. Please no more Western episodes, and I like Unforgiven and Tombstone as much as anyone.