• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

So, Jennifer Garner as a Klingon...

This raises an interesting question on whether ENT's Arik Soong storyline is valid or not (while I actually found the episodes entertaining, I still don't buy the concept of Klingons being biologically "forced" to appear more human as an excuse for the difference in makeup between TOS and the movies/sequel shows).
 
^I don't think it matters if you think it's "valid" or if you "buy" it or not, it happened, for better or for worse.
 
FordSVT said:
^I don't think it matters if you think it's "valid" or if you "buy" it or not, it happened, for better or for worse.

Agreed.

And it wasn't ENT that started the whole mess, anyway, it was DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations". (Although that in itself raises an interesting point: If that episode had *ignored* the difference, would fans have complained?)
 
Babaganoosh said:
FordSVT said:
^I don't think it matters if you think it's "valid" or if you "buy" it or not, it happened, for better or for worse.

Agreed.

And it wasn't ENT that started the whole mess, anyway, it was DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations". (Although that in itself raises an interesting point: If that episode had *ignored* the difference, would fans have complained?)

Oh please. That was nothing more than a gag scene, inserted for laughs. The rabid need to 'explain' the makeup changes for the Klingons never made an ounce of sense to me. I don't see any clamoring to explain away the differences in the Andorian look, or the huge evolution of the Cardassian makeup from their first appearance on TNG to the end of DS9.

Shatners words were never more apt. :p
 
I'd love to see her as a Starfleet officer one of these days, but if she wants to do a cameo as a hot Klingon woman, and Mr. Abrams agrees, that's fine with me.
 
FordSVT said:
^I don't think it matters if you think it's "valid" or if you "buy" it or not, it happened, for better or for worse.
Um...REBOOT! No it didn't. NOTHING has. Trek 2.0 doesn't owe Trek 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, or 1.5 SQUAT.
 
...if we're talking about her walking around as an extra or a brief cameo, I couldn't care less either way. I don't think it'll help or harm the movie - unless, of course, there are no extant scenes with Klingons wherein she could be inserted.

None of the rumours I've heard involve Klingons featuring at all in this movie, making the whole forehead thing academic for now. (And I'd bet if the Klingons do appear in the new franchise... it'll be a revamped look. Forehead bumps, probably, but compare the Klingons on TNG to, say, the Klingons on TUC. A similar difference in styles will no doubt be evinced.)
 
Kryton said:
FordSVT said:
^I don't think it matters if you think it's "valid" or if you "buy" it or not, it happened, for better or for worse.
Um...REBOOT! No it didn't. NOTHING has. Trek 2.0 doesn't owe Trek 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, or 1.5 SQUAT.

Oh, you're one of those "personal canon" people. Guess what? Some people don't count anything beyond ST:TMP. They're just as wrong and irrelevant as you. :)
 
I still say she should play Red Shirt #9....

Only, she should be turned into a cube and crushed ;)

- W -
* Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh *
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top