Sherlock Kahn.
Gotta have a first and last name after all.
Y/N?
Gotta have a first and last name after all.
Y/N?
It's gonna be Khan (pretty damn sure now with the pics)
- Thread starter Lord Garth FOI
- Start date
Sherlock Kahn. Sounds like the prime minister of Malaysia. Is Derek Zoolander going to attempt to kill him?
Nowhere Man
Commodore
Since Enterprise happened in both timelines, this could be augmented Klingons that look like Humans. They could be still pissed about Archer as well as anything else that has happened since. Starfleet could be infiltrated and a silent invasion is going on.
Yes because Paramount and Bad Robot would make a $150 Mil film about a storyline from a failed TV show that many Trekkies even failed to watch
Sorry Garth, but how is merely not violating a minor point of "Enterprise" canon making "a $150 Mil film about a storyline from a failed TV show"?
No one ever even hinted that the story would even mention, let alone be about, this obscure bit of canon, merely that the existence of said canon would pretty much invalidate anyone later nitpicking the existence of the inclusion of smooth-headed TOS style Klingons in a JJverse Trek story.
No one ever even hinted that the story would even mention, let alone be about, this obscure bit of canon, merely that the existence of said canon would pretty much invalidate anyone later nitpicking the existence of the inclusion of smooth-headed TOS style Klingons in a JJverse Trek story.
Too reliant on understanding the continuity, and being a Trekkie who actually watched those episodes. Klingons are lumpy and nasty. Introducing the less-simple concept of smooth Klinks will leave the casuals scratching their heads. Remember, JJ Trek is the tall tale version of Star Trek. It is not LOTR, it's the Hobbit.
Need something simple, or something new that can be introduced quickly with little fuss.
Need something simple, or something new that can be introduced quickly with little fuss.
^Nope...Not reliant on continuity at all.
Say, "this is a Klingon", and the audience will accept that at face value.
Newcomers will accept it, because they have no continuity baggage to tell them otherwise.
Anyone with a pre-conceived notion of bumpy-headed Klingons will either know the canon explanation for smooth skulled klingons, or will merely put it down to this being a whole new interpretation of Trek.
To wit: Because smooth-skulled Klingons are canon, canon freaks pretty much won't have a problem with it. And those who aren't canon freaks, simply won't give a f... er, damn. Won't give a damn.
Say, "this is a Klingon", and the audience will accept that at face value.
Newcomers will accept it, because they have no continuity baggage to tell them otherwise.
Anyone with a pre-conceived notion of bumpy-headed Klingons will either know the canon explanation for smooth skulled klingons, or will merely put it down to this being a whole new interpretation of Trek.
To wit: Because smooth-skulled Klingons are canon, canon freaks pretty much won't have a problem with it. And those who aren't canon freaks, simply won't give a f... er, damn. Won't give a damn.
Last edited:
Didn't the "Klingon infiltrators that look like humans" idea start in the ST books?
Exaclty.
They did that in ST:TMP. They didn't feel the need to explain why the look of the Klingons in that movie suddenly changed from TOS.
In fact, I was more OK with the Klingons' make up changing than I was with any attempt to explain the change. DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" touched on that, but they were vague enough about it, especially considering the "tongue-in-cheek/wink and a nod" way they handled the question.
I have a bigger problem with ENT feeling the need (unnecessarily in my opinion) to explain why all Klingons after TOS did not look like like those original klingons.
All TMP needed to do was say "These are Klingons", and the audience was OK with it, even though they didn't look like the Klingons Star Trek fans remembered.
Damn straight. DS9 was a better show, but Worf's "we do not discuss it with outsiders" explanation stopped being adequate after a few years. I'm glad Manny Coto and ENT had the balls to tackle the issue after a quarter-century of people wondering what the hell happened to the Klingons to make them look the way they did in the original series.
That said, there's no proof whatsoever that Cumberbatch is a Klingon. Chances are that J.J. will show ridged warriors if they are in the next movie. If there are any smooth-headed ones they'll be mixed in with the ridged Klingons. Remember, J.J. isn't making pure fanwank here...he needs a movie that will have the widest appeal possible and be understandable by even those who never, ever saw ENTERPRISE, much less saw the Klingon forehead 2-parter in Season Four. And even casual moviegoers probably know what a ridged Klingon looks like.
^
^^ Meh. When I saw TMP, I wondered "why do those Klingon look different?" for about 5 seconds, then I stopped worrying about it.
...but yeah -- I agree that there is no reason to believe Cumberbatch is a Klingon.
^^ Meh. When I saw TMP, I wondered "why do those Klingon look different?" for about 5 seconds, then I stopped worrying about it.
...but yeah -- I agree that there is no reason to believe Cumberbatch is a Klingon.
Look, no offence intended but you guys don't seem to get it.
Firstly , as much I personally may have enjoyed some of Enterprise, it was a failed tv show. The ratings were abysmal in every key demographic.
Secondly, 4 years later some of you can not yet grasp the fact that JJ and crew could give a rat's ass what we as the Trekkie community think in so far as their game plan toward these films. They could care not one whit. They are not going to use obscure (as the general public goes) plot threads from an obscure (as the general public goes) tv show for a major motion picture where their only goal is a hook or sizzle to grab that general (mostly 18-30 yr old) movie going audience. That is the demo folks, the Star Wars audience, not the Star Trek audience.
Kirk, Spock and Bones are american pie like Luke, Leia and Han are american Pie. And like it or not Khan is american Pie which is why this next film is going to be an action adventure specticle, hopefully with some meaning, aimed at 18-30 yr olds who know who Khan is like the same 18-30 yr olds know who Vader is
Firstly , as much I personally may have enjoyed some of Enterprise, it was a failed tv show. The ratings were abysmal in every key demographic.
Secondly, 4 years later some of you can not yet grasp the fact that JJ and crew could give a rat's ass what we as the Trekkie community think in so far as their game plan toward these films. They could care not one whit. They are not going to use obscure (as the general public goes) plot threads from an obscure (as the general public goes) tv show for a major motion picture where their only goal is a hook or sizzle to grab that general (mostly 18-30 yr old) movie going audience. That is the demo folks, the Star Wars audience, not the Star Trek audience.
Kirk, Spock and Bones are american pie like Luke, Leia and Han are american Pie. And like it or not Khan is american Pie which is why this next film is going to be an action adventure specticle, hopefully with some meaning, aimed at 18-30 yr olds who know who Khan is like the same 18-30 yr olds know who Vader is
I get it. And to a large extent I agree with you.
J.J. is aiming for a huge, fun adventure that even casual audience members will love. They won't care about Klingon ridges or Arne Darvin or Gary Mitchell. I'm sure J.J. will toss in a lot of references for the hardcore fans, but he already knows they're gonna come see the film no matter what. They're not his target audience. He wants as many butts in the seats as possible, and basing an entire megabudget sci-fi adventure film around obscure canon from one of our beloved TV shows isn't gonna cut it. He wants it to be appealing to everybody.
That said...I don't think Khan is in the film. There are other universally-known TREK elements that Abrams can use. Klingons for one.
I will pay Nowhere Man $150 million if they go with that storyline.
That's how convinced I am that they won't.
Well, the fourth season was pretty transparently subsidized to capitalize on DVD sales and maximize syndication revenue.
So it really lasted about three seasons on its own merits, which still isn't bad.
Also, it was dry, tedious, and all-around horrible.