Why is it the current production team's responsibility to explain their changes? Nobody involved with TMP contributed to Enterprise's explanation of the Klingons. Which is apparently acceptable to those on that side of the argument.
Fan reactions to Starfleet Academy's female Jem'Hadar/Klingon hybrid character
- Thread starter jctechwizard
- Start date
You're right. Unfortunately, this isn't art or a historical reenactment. It is TV and every decision is financially based now.
There was, at least, an unbroken line. The current team should be so lucky.
Something to be said for this, honestly. There is no creative lineage between CBS Trek and the Trek prior to 2009. I'm all for changing things, just don't try to sell the changes as part of something you had no connection with.
There wasn't even an explanation for the huge variety from TMP to TSFS or all the variations in TUC despite TNG being on air for multiple seasons.
The producers of those films just did their thing and someone else decided it needed explanation. It is regarded as art and set dressing not historical reenactment. Even historical films are plagued with anachronisms usually owing to budget or dramatic potential.
Changes don't automatically merit am explanation. That was the attitude in TMP forward in the films.
Terry Matalas worked on Voyager, Enterprise, and Picard. There's a connection from the Berman era to the modern era for you. A fellow named Jonathan Frakes has directed Star Trek movies and episodes of The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Discovery, Picard, Strange New Worlds, and Starfleet Academy. Many cast members from The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager appeared in Picard, Lower Decks, and Prodigy. There are multiple unbroken lines between eras.
And it didn't.
Most viewers looked at that character and thought, "Oh, one of those Quark aliens."
Dude, this was embarrassing. I feel bad replying.
The concept we were discussing was of TMP production folk being part of the Klingon explanation in Enterprise. I referenced the unbroken line (meaning Roddenberry -> Berman), and so your reply is . . . bad.
No. Braga's assistant was no wunderkind running Enterprise. Props for him continuing in the business and becoming showrunner for STP and all, but when it comes to the notion of a continuity of production from Roddenberry, this is a joke. I'll happily grant that he's closer than Kurtzman and Goldsman, having at least been in the same room with Berman (I presume), but he was twenty years removed from the Star Trek Office.
Same notation. He at least met Roddenberry, but the directors are not producers in the relevant way.
In context, this is just nothing.
The concept we were discussing was of TMP production folk being part of the Klingon explanation in Enterprise. I referenced the unbroken line (meaning Roddenberry -> Berman), and so your reply is . . . bad.
No. Braga's assistant was no wunderkind running Enterprise. Props for him continuing in the business and becoming showrunner for STP and all, but when it comes to the notion of a continuity of production from Roddenberry, this is a joke. I'll happily grant that he's closer than Kurtzman and Goldsman, having at least been in the same room with Berman (I presume), but he was twenty years removed from the Star Trek Office.
Same notation. He at least met Roddenberry, but the directors are not producers in the relevant way.
In context, this is just nothing.
No need to make yourself miserable on my account.
Yes, but not in the direction you imagine.
TMP to TSFS isn't much variation. The weird overhanging cheek pieces (that only Mark Lenard seemed to sport) denote that Klingon Captain as a particularly ugly bastard, but well within spec.
The TMP guys didn't sport a whole lot in the way of proud temporal ridges (which can produce the square headed or ridge-plate look on some Klingons), but not all did from ST3 to ENT. Hairlines also varied. So, it is within spec. Given that we know houses run ships as per TNG, the fact that these guys on the bridge have built up brows and proud central ridges but without much in the way of protruding temporal ridges on the side isn't a big deal.
So, the make-up is basically locked in from then until JJ-Trek, though even the JJ look is potentially tolerable if we assume those goofy piercings caused hair loss. ;-)
Seriously, given what we know from Enterprise, this post shows one species until the lower right:
Well....
Strongly disagree.
Last edited:
But the new Ferengi are indistinguishable as a species from those on DS9, right?
I kind of liked the theory that DSC Klingons were the result of genetic engineering to regain their original appearance went wrong and they took on an appearance very similar to the proto-Klingon. SNW could be that they found a refinement to it but then maybe the virus adapts so they revert back to the smooth variation until they can finally fix it.
It's a lot but I like the idea that they were actively trying to fix it ever since they were deformed instead of just waiting 100 years for it to pass even if it had some hiccups along the way. Plus a better look at Klingon scientists helps diversify the culture.
It's a lot but I like the idea that they were actively trying to fix it ever since they were deformed instead of just waiting 100 years for it to pass even if it had some hiccups along the way. Plus a better look at Klingon scientists helps diversify the culture.
That's the opposite of what I'm arguing. For me, TMP crossed a line and they are not the same as TOS Klingons. They lack anything that would make them Klingons from a TOS perspective save their ships.
It was something fans and viewers were expected to roll with because the creators gave fans the benefit of the doubt that despite not being indistinguishable from previous designs audiences would still understand. From there, we've gotten multiple variations culminating in the virus explanation. So, given the virus, as well as the several phenotypical presentations of Klingons over the years I'm willing to accept updates in make up as part of an entertainment franchise.
Mileage will vary.
Fair enough, except that this was resolved. We even see individuals from the 2260s reverted to the traditional (in-universe) appearance.
Yes, the production went with showing them in traditional Klingon ships and identifying them repeatedly as Klingons, but didn't go into a long drawn out explanation for them (or for lots of other things).
This is the part where I disagree. You seem to be saying you don't agree that the TMP-ENT Klingons are all within the same specification, but I've already suggested why I think they are. (For me, ST6's main contribution to "they're not the same!" is in Klingon fashion, for instance.)
The bump is terrible look. And it still comes at the expense of breaking suspension of disbelief for me. TMP doesn't line up with TOS for me.
But, since it was stated by the production team as Klingons then there was the expectation of acceptance. So, Klingons I accept as changing for no good reason.
Changes therefore are something I expect and accept in Star Trek.
Okay, I feel we covered your TOS -> TMP issue, but I was specifically inquiring about your apparent view that there were drastic differences in the period 1979–2005.
Drastic? Not as drastic.
Noticable and distracting? Yes.
My biggest point is that changes were just accepted by the audience prior to the explanation. And, any explanation was divorced from authorial intent.
Similar threads
