Well, given Alexander’s development, Worf was probably younger Han Wesley in far point.
Klingons appearance - history repeats itself
- Thread starter PiotrB
- Start date
Well, given Alexander’s development, Worf was probably younger Han Wesley in far point.
Whole point is that there is no one who doesn't know Worf appearance from later episodes of TNG, DS9 or movies. To everyone watching now Worf in season 1 is pretty same experience like watching new Klingon type. This[1] and this[2] are different like i.e. TNG Romulans and Vulcans or Mintakans.
1.
2.
Although, as this very thread demonstrates, there really is no fannish consensus on the matter. What's "accepted" to some fans may not be as "set" to others. Just as what constitutes a proper Klingon may vary from one generation of Trekkies to another.
We're a famously opinionated bunch. "Fan opinion" tends to be all over the place.
Last edited:
Just stopping by to check if they were going to explain why the Klingon head ridges look different. I'm guessing the answer is "Not yet". I'll check back again in a few weeks. I waited years for DC comics to fix New 52 before I started reading again. I can wait just as long for Discovery to explain the ridges.
Would an explanation help? I highly doubt it.
Klingon Foreheads: introduced 1979. Explanation offered: 2005. 26 years. If this time is like last time, well...
... 2043 sounds pretty far away.
... 2043 sounds pretty far away.
I imagine it was easier to accept the changes because TMP starred the entire original cast of actors. That alone would seal the deal for me if I'd waited 10 years for a reunion.
I would disagree the new Klingons look cooler. They look like mutants. It appears to be change for the sake of change whereas TMP had more money than the tv show so they used it to redesign everything visually for the big screen.
It's still dumb how the Klingons went from their TOS look to their later look but at least they stayed that way more or less for the next 30 or so years. The Discovery redesign just seems unnecessary at this stage. Especially since Worf has been in more episodes than any other character and he looked nothing like the Discovery mutants. That's a sizeable chunk of Trek to retcon visually.
Apart from all that the Discovery Klingons bored me rigid (pardon the pun). The redesign certainly didn't make them more interesting to me. So it was a fail visually and creatively in my opinion.
Good one, sir. You totally Rick-rolled me. Probably the best use of Rick-roll I've seen in years.
It is still dumb. That's the divide, at least for me. The look was also kind of lopsided at times and inconsistent across different mediums too:
Not to mention their behaviour.
That as well.
And that was accepted by many fans until Deep Space Nine brought 3 popular TOS Klingons and had them have the modern werewolf appearance. Then they went on with the Tribbles-Gump episode and proceeded that as a secret. So, the fans turn pro created an "augment" nonsense to explain everything. After seeing these Klingons from DISCO... which is after the Augment, now what???
It would've been better off if the tinkering of the race never happened, but Worf, an honorable man, and an important character of TNG needed developing but unfortunately this development was smeared with every Klingon after. TNG Klingons were more aping off of Worf then being individuals. At least the Duras' acted like... Klingons.
I would've been more than willing to accept variations of Klingons if the producers didn't felt it was necessary to claim their Klingons were the real ones.
To be fair, I think that dichotomy between the legend and the reality is very much part of the story, and addressed within it. Worf is more Klingon than Klingon after all.
Worf is a prominent, but isolated, instance of Klingons though. The behavioural norms of the species vary so widely it's at times only the make up which ties one portrayal to another.
Similar threads
