Klingons appearance - history repeats itself
- Thread starter PiotrB
- Start date
What am I doing with my life...?
Honestly, I'm less interested in rationalizing bad science of "natural" interspecies mating than I am just talking phenotypes...what do they look like? I suppose given that most humanoids are, well, humanoids, the genitals can't be too different from human ones...insert tab "a" into slot "b"...but I'd be impressed if they could come up with more interesting expressions of alien-ness than putting, say, Bajoran nose ridges on Bajoran weewees.
For slightly more alien aliens (who have, say, tympanic membranes instead of ears) maybe their private parts look more like flesh-colored coral?
For slightly more alien aliens (who have, say, tympanic membranes instead of ears) maybe their private parts look more like flesh-colored coral?
Am I the only one who remembers Kirk kicking someone in the knees in TUC and being told by the shapeshifter played by Iman it was where the alien's genitals were kept?
(See my first link on the word aliens lol)
Specifically, not everyone keeps their genitals in the same place.
Also, does not apply to Klingons.
Sorry. The text being all white on this forum means I sometimes miss when people are hyperlinking, and just think they're underlining for emphasis.
You can change that, under "Style chooser" in the lower left.
Agreed. Over the 80s and 90s they've gradually become caricatures of themselves. I think it was time for a re-imagining of them.
Actually we did get an explanation back in '79. The (out of universe) explanation was that the Klingons had always looked like that and it was only make-up restrictions that prevented us seeing that. Whether or not anyone accepts that as a good explanation is another story. Personally I never had a major issue with that being the case but others obviously did. That explanation came completely unstuck when DS9 integrated new era Klingons (Worf) with original series Klingons and actively commented on the difference and Enterprise only further highlighted the differences.
As for whether or not we'll see an explanation in Discovery for the differences only time will tell. It may well be once again "this is what Klingons have always looked like", which I can live with. I'm not a big fan of the look of the redesign but I don't have an issue with it conceptually.
It was just a joke. It was meant to be funny. It was a bit of a wink to the camera. Only the rivet counters would have taken that as some acknowledgement to be immortally canonized.
But then Enterprise just HAD to make that two-parter..
In my own case I've often seen two streams emanating from one,..uh..organ at the same time, especially first thing in the morning.I'm just glad this thread hasn't merged with the "Discovery Size Argument" thread.
As far as redundant pens , they could be stacked one on top of the other, like an extension. I couldn't wait to see the adverts: Klingon Hormones Could Provide Human Enhancements. Just call 866-555-1701 with your credit chip."
I've heard this story before...... The "it was just meant to be a joke" story that is.
I guess I don't doubt it not sure why I should but I do have to question if the writers of that particular joke remembered they were working on an episode of STAR TREK watched by STAR TREK FANS. Fans that are almost to the point of parody known for picking apart every single detail about their show of choice.
Even my Mom who is far from a canon head was like "WOW! I never thought they would ever acknowledge that". I think generally that was the feeling. Trek has no record of fourth wall breaking to self referential jokes. It aired on an episode so it was part of the lore at that point that Klingons once looked like this but now they don't which generally leads to "what happened?".
You sure?
I'll admit that I hadn't realized that. I guess one scene from one episode was going to slip through the cracks.
I suppose there is past precedent for it but it's not much of an overall case. I doesn't seem to be a regular part of the show otherwise. I wonder why they did it here and seemingly never again.
Because it was a show developed for an anniversary, with regards to "Trials and Tribble-ations." There was going to be a unique flavor to it.
As for "Journey to Babel" it would depend on the writer. Why not have fun with it?
In regards to Babel that's very likely what they did.
But in the realm of "like it or not" by the time we reached DS9 Trek had formed a lore and as I mentioned even if their intent was to make a joke they would have had to know that whatever they put on screen was going to become a part of lore and that it could result in what we ended up seeing some years later where Enterprise eventually dedicated essentially two story arcs to explaining the discrepancy. Maybe they would have done that without the joke being made regardless but I'd wager that one line probably got the ball rolling.
I think it was meant as a fun "wink" to the audience and nothing more.
As in: "You know and we know the real reason the Klingons look different now, so let's just not bother with some ridiculous technobabble explanation, but just kinda breezily acknowledge the issue and get back to our silly Tribble time-travel plot. This whole episode is just a fun exercise in nostalgia, so just go with us here."
Personally, I would have been perfectly happy to leave it there.
One could also cite the bit in the 2009 reboot where you just know that the guy in the red jumpsuit is not long for this world. Did we need an in-universe explanation for why he was wearing red? Of course not, because it was just a bit of self-referential humor . . ..
It's possible to take this stuff too literally. Sometimes it's enough to just do something for the fun of it.
As in: "You know and we know the real reason the Klingons look different now, so let's just not bother with some ridiculous technobabble explanation, but just kinda breezily acknowledge the issue and get back to our silly Tribble time-travel plot. This whole episode is just a fun exercise in nostalgia, so just go with us here."
Personally, I would have been perfectly happy to leave it there.
One could also cite the bit in the 2009 reboot where you just know that the guy in the red jumpsuit is not long for this world. Did we need an in-universe explanation for why he was wearing red? Of course not, because it was just a bit of self-referential humor . . ..
It's possible to take this stuff too literally. Sometimes it's enough to just do something for the fun of it.
Similar threads
