Can't we just leave him alone? No one will change his mind for now and there's a good chance, that, a few years from now, he'll stand in line at a convention to get a Chris Obi autograph. In a DSC klingon cosplay.
When it comes to this situation, yes. Good actors don't save material so bad. At best, they make their screen time slightly more tolerable then the rest of the show. Which is nice, but it doesn't even remotely save the show. There is a better chance of me breathing underwater unaided then that happening, and as far as I'm aware I'm not Aquaman I don't make those kind of changes to opinion, I'm not someone to toe the popular line. If my opinion is unpopular, I don't really care.I change my opinion about some things, but nothing this out of line. Its like how Star Trek Beyond, which I really like, made me enjoy the reboot cast, but I still loathe ST 09 and think STID is only good in a "so bad its good" way. So, maybe if Martin-Green and Isaacs are on a second season of the show where every producer and writer is left (or gets fired) and the klingons go back to normal I might change my opinion on the show. But, that is just about as unlikely as the scenario you mentioned.
We are never going to agree.... I don't care if you hate Discovery, but I'll come back to what I've always said: it is impossible to judge until you've actually seen it... you say you like Beyond (so do I!)... Remember that first trailer though? Point made.
Stay with your opinion. It's ok. I was just looking for a nice sounding way to end this back and forth that's going nowhere but over pages and pages...
Nobody can write a good story if the Klingons look shit? And the heavy metal biker Klingons of TNG weren't also a bit ridiculous? The Klingons now look different for production design reasons. I don't see how a piece of production design can ruin a story or the whole show.
Changing klingons into an unrecognizable species not only makes them an alien species I don't want to see, it shows exactly how much disdain the people in charge has for the franchise. The look of the klingons from Star Trek 3(ish) through Enterprise are iconic, and I've always liked them (they're not my favorite Trek aliens, but they're easily top 5). If those aren't in Discovery, then there are no klingons in Discovery. I don't give a crap about the totally original alien species they slapped the name on, especially since they look atrocious and I'd hate them based on design alone even if they weren't called klingons. As "klingons" they go against every appearance of Klingons in everything, even somehow going against the stupid (but still less stupid then this design) looking Klingons in the reboot movies. They don't fit visually or from what we've seen culturally in with anything. They also invalidate every klingon character in Trek by existing like, you know, Worf. The character, especially in DS9, had some great Klingon stories. Give me the klingons that had a civil war, attacked DS9, fought for ancient weapons and had badasses like Martok over Discovery's weird, puss filled abominations that have no relation to the alien species or characters in that species that I like. The fact that every other element of the show (except, again, two actors and the exterior design of the federation ships) are all, in my opinion, terrible would kill the show even without the tumorous looking alien idiots. The "klingons" are just the garbage icing on the crap cake that is Discovery (and admittedly the element that passes from terrible into offensively bad for me as a Star Trek fan, which is why it would kill the show for me even if basically everything else wasn't also terrible).
Ah, that must be it then. I find them easily recognizable because of the forehead ridges. They'll also speak Klingon and be Klingon-y. I do think they're ugly but I don't struggle to identify them as Klingons.
How the hell does "forehead bump" equal klingon? Having a bumpy forehead applies to approximately twelve million sci fi aliens. If they didn't call these idiots klingons, no one would think they were. Excpet they didn't have to deal with stuff as horrible as the shit Discovery is doing.
I disagree, they were instantly recognizable to me. In fact the forehead ridges are very similar to previous iterations. I think you would also do well to respect other people's opinions. I just told you I found them easily recognizable, if ugly. I didn't doubt your reaction to the look so please extend the same courtesy. To me the jump from TOS Klingons to TMP Klingons was much bigger than this.
I honestly didn't mean to insult your opinion with the second statement, I apologize for that. I didn't really think about the implications when I typed it. That said, I suppose it would be more accurate to say that, in my opinion, most people would find them unrecognizable as klingons without being told they were. On an anecdotal level, my Dad (who isn't a superfan but likes Trek fairly well and has been watching since the days of TOS) didn't recognize them as klingons until I told them when I showed him pictures, and my brother (who is basically in the general audience of not really caring either way for Trek) also didn't know what they were based off of images. Without the context of the Discovery aliens being called klingons or the use of the klingon emblem we see in the trailer at one point, I think a lot of people would be in the same situation, which is pretty pathetic since the klingons are probably only #2 to Vulcan's as the most universally recognizable Trek aliens even among non fans.
No worries, it wasn't bad at all. I just wanted to point out how it came across. I appreciate you acknowledging it wasn't ideal. I'm now really curious how common it would be for people to really not recognize them. Somebody recently posted a side-by-side picture of TNG and DSC Klingons and the forehead was incredibly similar and that's kind of a defining feature. Much more so than the JJKlingons.
I think the total lack of hair actually changes the look considerably. Bushy eyebrows and beards has been one constant defining feature of Klingons over the years, and there has been maybe two bald Klingons in all the Trek before this. It is actually what bugs me about the design most, Klingons are supposed to look like werewolves, not like vampires!
Heh, "hair" is one of my alien pet peeves. It extends to other franchises including Mass Effect. So all aliens look relatively similar: two eyes, a mouth, two ears, and so on... but apparently hair is SUPER SPECIAL and rare. I think in Mass Effect humans are the only species with hair. I understand the production reasons of course: Hair is easy to hide/remove and makes aliens look less human whereas that's rather hard to do with an eye. I just wish hair was a little more common. Hair is cool. Where are my hairy aliens? Or the beautiful aliens with soft and pretty hair?!
Re-imagined Klingons, completely new looking tech, completely different designs that didn't fit in with what was established for that era.. And before you say the era was different, there was only a few years between TOS and TMP. The same complaints you are posting were written as letter in fanzines and what not. But sure, you're right. It was totally different.....
To me, the forehead ridges, as viewed from the front, are recognizably Klingon. But the huge misshapen back of the skull and the fact that none of them have hair of any kind makes them look like a different species. Kor
The way I see it, the producers were in a no win scenario with some fans.. if they had used no known races -no Klingons, no Vulcans, none- some fans would say 'this isn't ST, there's nothing recognizable, why even call it Trek?!' If they WOULD use the well-known races, some fans would say 'why rehash the same old same old, why not create something NEW?!' In my book, the producers went for a perfect middle of the road approach; using the races that symbolize Trek but reimagining them... and I for one love it!
The change from TOS to TMP-forward Klingons is a much bigger one than the current change(s) (I'll include Abrams-verse Klingons as "current"). As an adolescent, I was mildly curious about the change in TMP, but gave it very little thought. When ENT offered an explanation (one I never considered necessary, but one that I didn't mind in its execution), I viewed it as a closed topic (it made it easy to understand why the "smoothies" were grouped together--it's not like there are no real world examples of segregation based on appearances--in TOS; again, no need for further comment). When Into Darkness revealed another variant, my thoughts were limited to "oh, a different ethnic group" (they're alien, why should ethnicity be limited to skin colour as a visible physical marker?). And now, with Discovery--same thing. Not all that complicated really (and only something I think about if the topic comes up--while I watch, they are whomever they say they are, in whatever form they appear, cuz, production value variation). The whole "that can't be a Klingon" debate (going way back to 1979) is actually reminiscent of debates about portrayals of aboriginal North Americans in cinema. "What? No feathered headdress? No horses? No Monument Valley?--Those ain't real Indians?" (I've reduced it the issue to a caricature for purpose of saving time/space, but it is a serious concern of the vast majority of Amerindians who shared none of those "typical" characteristics in their respective cultures). The sheer diversity of humanity should make it exceedingly simple to accept what amount to four significantly distinct groups of Klingons.