Do you like the Discovery Klingon look?

Just wondering how people stand today, a few years after the fact and after a season of prominent absence.

 

Best look of the Klingons since Into Darkness.

 

The problem was not the looks. The problem was that the DIS team never explained why the Klingons looked that way, and why their ships looked they way they did, a decade before TOS. And all it would have taken was a few lines of dialogue to elaborate on it. It could have been said in an exchange between L’Rell & Burnham. Here’s an example.

L’Rell:“Klingons on a whole don’t like Archer and everything he stands for, but its thanks to him and that Denobulan doctor of his that the Klingon Empire ended its centuries long stagnation and unleashed creativity and a cultural renaissance not seen since the days of Kahless.”

Burnham: “How?”

L’Rell: “By treating the worst bout of Levodian flu the Empire had ever seen on Qu’Vat colony. Human blood being added to the Klingon gene pool to create this treatment caused the Klingon Empire to withdraw into our borders, and forced us to re-evaluate our priorities beyond cranial reconstruction.”

Burnham: “So that’s why the Federation from its inception did not hear from the Klingons for 60 years.”

L’Rell: “Consequently for the Federation, we were culturally awakened to such an extent that when you sent vessels to re-establish contact in one of your expansionist efforts and we opened fire on them, you interpreted our response as being quite hostile and that we were in a state of war. Even though, in our very first meeting with Archer, opening fire on him and his crew would have been the appropriate Klingon response to a first contact, as a symbol of strength. But the Emperor at the time was a dotard and his behaviour was unKlingon. The Levodian flu and Archer changed the Empire for the better.”

That’s it. That's all they needed to do. Discovery’s reluctance to elaborate on the change of appearances was lazy.

 

It's not something that requires explanation.

 

I have very mixed feelings on it. as someone who once aspired to be a Make-up Effects Artist, I was feeling in the late 90's, that the Klingons needed some updating, though not really in the sense of re-design, Silicone was not so common place back then, and I felt it would look good to upgrade to silicone, and thought a little more bone structure could be brought down into the face, nothing over the top, just enough that it wasn't so obvious(to me) that it was just the forehead with nose piece for prosthetic. but that's looking at it from a Make-up standpoint.

when the 2009 movie was in production, I certainly wondered what Klingons might look like, and I think the partial prosthetic makeups done for areas exposed beneath their helmets, had an interesting, upgraded look, less sculpted looking and more naturalistic. but all that was cut out of the final film. the Into Darkness versions, well the one that is actually show onscreen, is very interesting, and pretty good for a distinct character, but I certainly hoped that the rest of them did not look just like him, and had their own variations, surely some with hair. the bearded version of that makeup in Behind The Scenes shot looked great, I wish some of that facial hair had been kept.

I then saw concept art for those Klingons, and was intrigued, the elaborate elements on the head, I thought were great, and would work for what is beneath a Klingon's hair.

then Discovery came along, and it was a serious redesign, when seeing representatives of the other Klingon Houses, I was disappointed that they all had the same basic look, none of them with any visible hair, and really looking too reptilian. it's that Reptilian element that I think was too much, it's an added element that I personally think should have been left out. I though updating them was fine, making them look more elaborate and realistic and individualistic was great, but I felt it crossed the line into looking too little like the Klingons, while other Alien Species looking very recognizable.

I thought generally it was great design work, I just thought the direction of it was too extreme. but got used to the look and accepted it within the context of the show. I still really wanted to see some with hair. T'Kuvma I thought was actually the most Klingon looking of them all and had the least reptilian look to him.

then Season 2 retconned the Baldness in a half assed but understandable way. now, it is what it is, can only move forward. I personally would have tried to do something like this for an update with a contemporary aesthetic, but still recognizable as a Klingon

 

Georgiou: "Those are Klingons?!"

Burnham: "Genetic engineering. Different Houses are known to tamper with their own DNA to make the strongest, most durable warriors.

...

They learned that from us."

 

Why bog down the show with unneeded explanations? Did TMP grind to a halt so Crewman Exposition could explain why Klingons looked different?

 

It was fine. I don't have a problem with it.

 

The generally accepted explanation for the TMP Klingons is that ‘they always looked that way,’ and that the TOS Klingons actually looked that way as well; the audience just needs to ignore their human-with-oily-skin appearance as an inaccurate representation of them. And indeed, when we see Klingons in both the future (TOS films, TNG, DS9, VOY and the TNG films) and the past (ENT), the Klingons look pretty much the same as when they appeared in TMP. Even the Abrams films deviated very little from the ‘norm.’ Even the Klingon basic ship design has changed very little from TOS and its sequels and prequel. And like it or not, DSC and PIC (and presumably SNW) has solidified the idea that what we saw in TOS is an inaccurate representation of the actual happenings of 2266-69, rather than the more sensible route of making DSC a reboot.

However, the DSC Klingons and their ships represent such a radical change from the TMP-based Klingons that I think many are correct to question the in-universe reasoning for it. If someone who had watched every Star Trek episode and film was not told beforehand that those aliens in DSC were Klingons and their ships, there’s no way they would have known based solely on their looks. So @FederationHistorian is right to want an explanation. I don’t know if I’d do it in the way he described, but I also wouldn’t have just ignored the obvious extreme changes to the makeup like what DSC did.

 

If TMP can be ignored DSC can be ignored. The ships is even less confusing than the phenotype so that definitely doesn't warrant an expository scene.

But, what do I know? It's becoming clear that my approach is wrong to not want technical exposition bogging down my character interaction.

 

It's not that radical. It's just building on the bumpy head look that's been with us since TMP. A look that's always evolving. And sometimes devolving. The post TMP TOS movies seemed to pull back a bit on things like crazy bumps and teeth, while on TV they leaned into it.

A FIELD GUIDE TO KLINGONS​

 

Given the wide range of how individual humans look, it makes since that there would be a wide range of Klingons.

 

As a design, in the abstract, it was OK. From a practical standpoint, in terms of allowing the actors to act, it was a disaster. And in terms of the greater production, it was schizophrenic. They completely reinvent the visual look of the Klingons, because this isn’t your daddy’s nerdy Star Trek, but then they force the audience to sit through the most faithful, most ponderous Klingon-language dialogue ever recorded, with subtitles in that awkward, awful font. It was a bizarre mix of extreme fannishness and cavalier disregard for the franchise’s history that, to me, became a hallmark of a season (and a show) casting about for an identity.

 

Hyperbole. All they did was lose the hair and reinforce the more alien aspects like the ridges.

 

The look doesn't particularly bother me, although some aspects of it wouldn't be my first choice. The biggest failing was seemingly robbing the performers of the ability to act relatively unimpeded. Whether that's from the large prosthetics, the teeth, the voice modulation, a deliberate "Klingon performance style" or all of the above, I don't know. But something went wrong.

They also multiplied the nostrils, changed the ears, extended and pointed the skull, and corrugated the neck and throat. Not saying they shouldn't have, just that it was a bit more involved than just alopecia and forehead ridges.

 

Not to mention the costuming.

 

Which is fine. Still could tell they were Klingons and this is art. Creativity is an asset not a detriment.

 

I didn't care in season 1 and I don't care now. I actually found the the Klingons interesting for the first time since 'The Way of the Warrior'.

 

If I had to choose between the visual redesign and the tedious speechifying, I would definitely choose the redesign.

Really, I would have preferred more creativity in season one in general, rather than falling back on hoary Trek tropes of Klingons and the Mirror Universe. This was a show trying to be all things to all people, and I don’t think it worked very well.

 

Well, it can't be all for all. The MU should have been saved for Season 2. But, that's a story choice not a design choice. The Klingons demonstrated that a familiar alien race could be expanded upon and made to feel more diverse.