• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The New Klingons

Do you like the design of these new Klingons? What was your gut reaction?

  • I liked them

    Votes: 127 46.4%
  • I did not like them

    Votes: 147 53.6%

  • Total voters
    274
Agreed. I think a big problem was them basically keeping the same staff across four different shows and only changing people gradually over time. There was never a chance to start off with fresh ideas when you have carry overs from the end of another show. By the end of ENT they were pushing the 18th season of the same show. You had people who were doing the same thing forever basically saying, 'Hey, arcs are hot right now, we should try that!' when they're already a generation behind in writing talent.
The part of your statement I would disagree with is the fact DS9 was NOT following the same vanilla formula as the other shows. Despite resistance they created multi episodic arcs and serialized the show more than it had ever been. Plus it was a starbase based show which allowed more conflict between the characters along with addressing religious issues and even showed the federation struggling to hold on to their idealism in the face of a losing war. The only thing DS9 had in common with the other shows was the Star Trek name.

IMO Voyager was just a pale imitation of TNG and Enterprise couldn't even follow it's own original premise.
 
Evolution is a slow process. I don't see a major change happening in 300 years.

It also doesn't just happen for the lolz. 'Beneficial traits' and all that.

Bloody hell, 300-500 years is nothing. Frankenstein is nearly 200 years old. Anyone think Shelley was sporting an extra arm?
 
It also doesn't just happen for the lolz. 'Beneficial mutations' and all that.

Bloody hell, 300-500 years is nothing. Frankenstein is nearly 200 years old. Anyone think Shelley was sporting an extra arm?
The Bride does in DC Comics. ;)
 
I think they look fantastic.

Easily the most alien and predatory version of Klingons we've yet seen. I'm going to embrace the change because I think we're about to get a fresh new perspective on Trek that will give us thoughtful and interesting Star Trek on TV that's long overdue. Chances needed to be taken, and the formula needed to be shaken up. I welcome it. They look great.

I really wonder if TNG could have survived our own fandom had the internet existed in the late '80s? I honestly don't know.

But I do know what I like, and I liked these Klingons and the DSC trailer overall --- much more than I was anticipating. I'm much more interested in and excited for DSC after seeing the trailer.
 
Last edited:
I keep reading how die hard fans are not to be appealed to but drive-by fans are. How old school is passe and reboots and prequels rule. It was interesting to read Emilia suggest that I had moved the goal posts in something I thought was kind a flow of thoughts. I think there is a lot of that going on. So back to your question. Those four people are just four people, they are not in the 'dismiss them they are old fans' category, or the 'dismiss them because they are trekkies one'.. they were just some potential audience members. Surely some one has to count in that group? Their reaction was that of an non-invested bunch of nobodys. I just thought it was interesting..

Second question and my battery is almost dead. Star Trek Discovery set the rules by going there. By using TOS, don't be surprised if there is an expectation for something familiar. The best part of the trailer was that something familiar.

Oh and just because many science fiction authors share a lack of creativity on the human 'example' or the look of a human depiction says more about their sameness. Lots of unimaginative creators.
Or, they are trying to provide that familiar hook with human crewmembers. Same reason Luke, Han and Leia are human. It's an old storytelling trope that has functioned quite well for several thousand years.
Evolution is a slow process. I don't see a major change happening in 300 years.
I heard a commentary that the sharks had not had a major evolutionary adjustment in 50 million years, with some estimates. How would humanity evolve?
I think they look fantastic.

Easily the most alien and predatory version of Klingons we've yet seen. I'm going to embrace the change because I think we're about to get a fresh new perspective on Trek that will give us thoughtful and interesting Star Trek on TV that's long overdue. Chances needed to be taken, and the formula needed to be shaken up. I welcome it. They look great.

I really wonder if TNG could have survived our own fandom had the internet existed in the late '80s? I honestly don't know.

But I do know what I like, and I liked these Klingons and the DSC trailer overall --- much more than I was anticipating. I'm much more interested in and excited for DSC after seeing the trailer.
I have a feeling that Star Trek wouldn't have survived the way it did if the Internet had existed at TNG's production.
 
The part of your statement I would disagree with is the fact DS9 was NOT following the same vanilla formula as the other shows. Despite resistance they created multi episodic arcs and serialized the show more than it had ever been. Plus it was a starbase based show which allowed more conflict between the characters along with addressing religious issues and even showed the federation struggling to hold on to their idealism in the face of a losing war. The only thing DS9 had in common with the other shows was the Star Trek name.

IMO Voyager was just a pale imitation of TNG and Enterprise couldn't even follow it's own original premise.

That's funny that you mention that because as I was typing it out I was totally thinking, 'Well, besides DS9, that was way different and way better.' When I made the 18th season remark, I meant it as TNG to VOY to ENT as 7, 7, 4. Cheers to you, I love DS9.
 
Fictional alien species can change in just decades.. Fictional human representations remain constant...

Yeah that makes sense.
 
Fictional alien species can change in just decades.. Fictional human representations remain constant...

Yeah that makes sense.
The fictional aliens probably shouldn't be changing in decades either. Are there examples of that in Trek?
 
Changes in humans 200 years from now will be cybernetic, not natural evolution. And there'll probably be a whole lot of cybernetics in humans in the future.
 
Changes in humans 200 years from now will be cybernetic, not natural evolution. And there'll probably be a whole lot of cybernetics in humans in the future.
Not in star trek. The Federation is mind numbingly conservative on augmentation
 
I'm ok with re-imagining the Klingon's look. One does have to keep in mind there needs to be flexibility in the creative expression a newer series can have, hence you'll get these drastic changes I understand people are concerned with atm? However, as I suspect may have already been pointed out, my main concern is if the make-up hampers the actors expressions, rather aide them. The Klingons I saw in the trailer seemed to lack a bit of variety so in these areas I'm a bit concerned.
 
It also doesn't just happen for the lolz. 'Beneficial traits' and all that.

Mutation happens for the lolz...if a random change doesn't diminish reproductive success, it won't unnecessarily be selected against.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top