G
Gonzo
Guest
It looks like someone shoved the Shard up the Gherkins butt crack.
"Choose Your Pain" Klingon ship (Visual spoilers?)
- Thread starter Cranston
- Start date
I am ninety percent sure the augment virus is going to explain much of the visual differences later in the story, and possibly the whole Matriarchs and Tyler thing. How well it does this..is another question. The answer is probably mushrooms. It always is one way or another with DSC.
Another pic:
Holy goodness to quote Bill Walton...
That's horrrrrribbbbbbbblllllllle,
Just awful, glad that was cut. Wow
I kinda wish Alex Kurtzman or whoever would see the thread, just to see that most people are not being unreasonable - they understand dramatic license and the need for fresh creativity - but the thing with the D7 feels like 'Enterprise', or the Kelvin films, all over again - we are getting mixed messages from the showrunners - ambiguity over it's canonicity - sitting on the fence, which actually creates bad faith.
1969:
1979:
2001:
2009:
If this is a reboot come out and say it, definitively. Perhaps honesty would serve better than trying to muddy the truth for ratings, and only pissing people off with mixed expectations?
Instead we have producers saying it 'takes place in the Prime Timeline', authors saying they respect what has been done with the setting, and officials saying 'it will all be explained in time - all seeming canon contradictions will be resolved/explained'. Well that's a pretty fucking specific and expectation-building claim to make, so if it turns out that we are being misled, how are people going to feel?
Oh, and the worst thing? This has all happened before. Are producers not aware of how controversial these things can be, and how much bad faith can be created when a clear message isn't given, after what, a half-dozen very public controversies? In an era when Marvel is highly faithful to 1960s comics, Star Wars basically makes a big budget fan film in Rogue One, and Blade Runner 2049 is praised for it's fidelity to the original in terms of both visuals and themes, why is Star Trek again at the center of a mounting controversy over fidelity, with something as basic as a ship design that has existed for 40 years being replaced outright, in a show that executives insist is 'Prime Timeline' and 'faithful'?
The 09 image is moving toward what we saw. Now remove the neck. and the federation style nacelles and its pretty damned close. It is a visual reboot, and updating just as TMP and TNG were. Events are more or less the same. They went an art direction you dislike, but they went there and you guys are too caught up too see how they got there and how very klingon it is.
Agreed. Can update it AND still be "traditonal ish" or recognizable
Yeah the the virus was a stupid storyline based on a joke, but it is canon now. I am really hopping they make them TNG style kligons really. That would fit oh so well as augments.
Well STID has so many issues, one more would not have hurt or helped.
According to John M. Ford's novel The Final Reflection (which is relevant to this discussion because the novel has clearly been used as background material for STD), the D stood for the Klingonaase word "drell," which was a radiation-safe engine design. Fanon in the old days explained the word "drell" as originally referring to a type of Klingon lizard (I don't know where this meaning originated).
Kor
It was a non-pewpew scene where Uhura talked down the Klingons and prevented a war.
FWIW, the designer himself was not a fan and wanted to create "the most bitchin' warbirds" instead.
Oh come on.
Well STID has so many issues, one more would not have hurt or helped.[/QUOTE]
Careful, I can feel the STID protectors on the board gathering pitch forks n lightening torches........ lol
Careful, I can feel the STID protectors on the board gathering pitch forks n lightening torches........ lol
Careful, I can feel the STID protectors on the board gathering pitch forks n lightening torches........ lol
I do not hate it, but it had issues, it was two movies cramped togather with a mess in the middle.
Agreed, had issues across the board, but I still watch n own electronic copy
I'm a ST ho....
Modern concept design is lazy. The redesigned Klingon ship is just cut and paste a chunk of some cathedral postacards and drag it in a shape to see what happens. Drawing is a lost art.
Sure it would. The only thing that makes it "prime" is the fact that Nero didn't arrive there and that all other events play out (or more less) like how we'd expect them to.
Bear in mind, the only -- and I do mean ONLY -- reason why ST09 wasn't a full reboot is because they threw in that "parallel universe" line of exposition. There's no reason why a reboot has to be justified IN UNIVERSE at all, as from a continuity standpoint there is only ever one timeline anyway.
G
Gonzo
Guest
I liked STID personally, I also loved the Vengeance.
I would have done backflips if they had rebadged it the Enterprise-A at the end of the film and kept it as the sole Dreadnought in Starfleet.
It would truly have been a case of "We Come In Peace, Shoot To Kill".
It even has the saucer cut out as well.
Mainly I wanted it for the gonad lasers, who wouldn't want those.
Admittedly if it had happened large areas of the forum would have gone up in flames.
Once they had Nimoy, it was only ever going one way.
What I think might be going on in the thinking behind the new Klingon ships, based on two things; 1). knowing how some modern film-makers tend to think about changes like this, and 2). reading two years worth of statements and material surrounding the development of Star Trek: Discovery - is this....
....I think, basically, that the producers of the show think that they are making the Klingons more alien and intricate for an audience used to less humanoid aliens in video games, and other modern media - like say, the Covenant from Halo, the Krogan from Mass Effect, or the Fallen from Destiny. They feel that new audiences, raised on the less constrictive media than television, wont take alien antagonists seriously unless they are visually quite exotic, and packed with filigree suggesting high budget. I personally disagree and feel that Star Wars, Star Trek, etc, do quite fine with humanoid aliens, or plain minimalist Stormtroopers as antagonists, and much of the interest in a society comes from how it is written, not how it looks - I'm a video gamer as well as a Trekkie, and often (not counting the esteemed and incomparable Mass Effect) video game aliens are quite bland culturally anyway. But as part of this thinking, which also lay behind a lot of the choices in the Kelvin movies, some of which were controversial, they feel they have to authorize vast departures from established designs, for the sake of attracting a new audience, and being artistically novel.
Now, as we have said, this is an unwise thing to do while simultaneously putting out interviews in which you claim 'all discrepancies with canon will be explained in time, and arn't what they seem', or the show is 'Prime Timeline, and set ten years before TOS'. That is basically telling audiences the exact opposite of your intention - you are making a reboot, but telling them you are not. When they say they are being faithful, they may just mean to broad themes, quirks of dialogue. They should clarify themselves, or risk yet another controversy that alienates fans, if so. Say it definitively, or else, maybe backtrack and throw in a few K't'ingas and bearded Klingons.
The Klingon ship above looks like it's keel was laid down by the Borg, based on sketches sent to them by lead designer H R Giger. It's very video gamey, in the sense that it's got polygon overload and looks like it was created by a graphics designer who wanted to make something chiefly 'look alien' or 'look ornate' as a criteria. We are assured that designers research the material they are working on extensively before approaching it, but I get the sense that, perhaps, the designers know what Klingon ships role is in previous Star Trek academically, but don't know their value in context, or else they would know the value of the Klingon battlecruiser having a recognizable shape.
The problem with their choice of highly ornamental ships for the Klingons, is that it flies in the face of a hell of a lot of Star Trek's visual design history. The ornamentation of the Klingon ships almost makes them look like something out of Final Fantasy, full of purely decorative spines that probably do nothing, other than rendering large parts of the ship's internal volume useless. The Star Trek franchise is malleable, but there is a lot that shouldn't be changed simply because wisdom makes the change unnecessary - the effect can be achieved alternately.
The Krill in the Orville basically serve the same thematic role that the Klingons and Romulans did in TOS and TNG, and really capture the feel of what they once were - an antagonist who's values stand in opposition to the Federation's democracy and individualism - and who's ships act like a French frigate in a Hornblower novel, or a band of outlaws arriving in a Wild West town - they roll up in orbit facing off against the hero ship, and contend for the resource on the planet below.
The Klingon battlecrusier, like the Romulan warbird, is iconic as fuck for having played that role for 50 years from 1969 to 2009 - the ship speaks of Klingon identity like an enemy sailing ship "running up the colours" and facing off against their rivals in a high seas adventure. This is what has been missing from these Klingon designs - and why having a recognizable silhouette was important.
Similar threads
