This would fit the hint of "something mentioned but never explored in the timeline. We could be looking at inbreed Klingons as well, or ones who have enhanced themselves.
The New Klingons
- Thread starter INACTIVEUSS Einstein
- Start date
This would fit the hint of "something mentioned but never explored in the timeline. We could be looking at inbreed Klingons as well, or ones who have enhanced themselves.
Cha'DIch and Chang star in "Nice Screams"
Also, if they have some sort of Klingon mummy come to life, Alex Kurtzman is the co-creator of DSC and the director of the upcoming Mummy movie.
The problem is that all the aliens need serious updating to bring them in line with the times. The Klingons are the easiest since they can be defined in broad strokes and fleshed out later or not. With Romulans and the Andorians, it's gonna require a lot of world building and talking head moments in order for them not to be cliche.
Enterprise's Andorians were so awesome. Bring them back!
Though I still support Talk Like A Klingon Day.
Though I still support Talk Like A Klingon Day.
I don't know if I entirely agree with that. Kor was hardly one dimensional. Certainly a very harsher different perspective to our own, but he wasn't unreasonable. There's a lot of lovely bits of subtlety all over Errand when Kirk and Kor discuss the situation, especially their argument near the end. It actually greys out the conflict, with subtle implications that the Federation may not be so even handed. "You're the one who issued the ultimatum to withdraw from the disputed areas." "They are NOT disputed, they are clearly ours!"
My thoughts are they are re-visualizing the Star Trek world for a completely new generation. This opens all previous Star Trek cannon to any revision they feel the need to make.
Actually, the TOS Klingons were fine, had personalities, were subtle, oftentimes well-spoken etc. TNG screwed their culture over and turned them into a one-trick pony. Planet of the Hats indeed. Even the more fleshed-out ones are ARGGH FAMILY HONOURRRRR, at least 99% of them. That's what's so annoying: they started out in cheap costumes and questionable make-up, but their personalities were fine. I'd pick them a million times over the TNG ones.
See if we can agree on this.
Kor's character had nothing to do with the resolution of "Errand." Over the course of "Errand," Kor's character served only one function, to advance the Klingon cause without mercy. The resolution of "Errand" was all about the Organians and their act of mercy to prevent death on a planetary scale.
In "Dove," on the other hand, victory was about changing minds. Mara and Kang made choices, first in Mara's case to cooperate and bring the case to Kang, and then in Kang's case to go along with Kirk, cease hostilities, and join with Kirk to defeat the Pinwheel of Doom. At first, neither wished to cooperate because they did not trust Kirk. Plus Chekov tried to rape Mara, confirming her worst fears and the propaganda she'd been told, as discussed in the episode.
Kor might have exhibited nuances, but his choices did not affect the outcome of his episode, except in a single direction. Mara and Kang, on the other hand, had the freedom to help determine the outcome. Furthermore, the choices they made defined the Klingons as, basically, people not at all unlike Federation people, not in just words, but in action.
I'd agree that Kor was a pretty dimensional guy. Kang was a big more of a barking militant. And Korath was something else altogether.
I guess what probably established the Klingons so strongly in TOS was that, however broadly they were played and however cliche their villainy, at least those three were easily distinguishable as very different individuals with different points of view on what they were doing.
I mean, other than Bob The Klingon in "Friday's Child."
I guess what probably established the Klingons so strongly in TOS was that, however broadly they were played and however cliche their villainy, at least those three were easily distinguishable as very different individuals with different points of view on what they were doing.
I mean, other than Bob The Klingon in "Friday's Child."
I'm a fan of Bob.
"The next man who raises a weapon destroys all of you. You and your primitive knives and your weapons, I'll teach you what killing really means."
That's one of my favorite lines!
"The next man who raises a weapon destroys all of you. You and your primitive knives and your weapons, I'll teach you what killing really means."
That's one of my favorite lines!
Exactly what I think.
You have probably seen by now some of the threads where people have explored this, but the moment that someone mentioned was the turning point was when the Klingon reactionaries from "Heart of Glory", in TNG season one, were taken to be examples of actual mainstream Klingons in later episodes - and I think DS9 is especially guilty and has a lot to answer for.
I've posted this before, so apologies, but in Star Trek we can identify roughly three eras of Klingon society:
- Archer's era - the 22nd century
- Kirk's era - the 23rd century
- Picard's era - the 24th century
- 22nd Century: They started out as a colonial empire in space with elements of feudal aristocracy or oligarchic despotism (which had become vastly inefficient by Archer's time - barely held together by coercion - suffering constant instability).
- 23rd Century: They went through a political revolution of some sort (comparable to the rise of nationalism in Europe) in the time after ENT and before TOS. The Klingon Empire was modernized into a centralized military state, abolishing primitive feudalism/levies/landholders, and replacing it with more modern forms of coercion such as conscription, propaganda, a prison system, a technologically improved military, etc.
- 24th Century: They reformed after Gorkon's peace initiative, into a more open society, but the old noble families, medieval ideas, etc, came back to some degree. Romanticism for the past was increased due to the stagnation of society.
And I honestly think this clip is their best portrayal since Chang in Star Trek VI:
I believe that Mara was actually at least as important to "Dove" as Kang. I feel like she always gets left out.
Last edited:
It is nothing more than bad make up. These new Klingons look horrible. They look like a completely different race, so why even bother calling them Klingons? A tie in to the original look would have been satisfactory. I will pass on this awful looking show.So, although I think most people have had a positive reaction to the new trailer, maybe we should address the elephant in the room. Not everyone has been too fussed about the Klingons (assuming that they aren't some offshoot, as some people believe). To give an example, I was up last night informing my friends via WhatsApp what was going on - two of them followed along, and both, one a long-time Trekkie, one more casual fan, were purturbed by the redesign - not ideal as an initial reaction - the same was true across blogs and stuff. I must admit, that, even though I am usually the first to caution people against being too literal and missing the point of the show, I don't really 'like' the new look particularly, it looks kind of generic to me - I'm forcing myself to be open minded, because I think the show has a ton of potential - but they don't look as cool as either the prime or Kelvin ones in just my personal opinion, which again, is not ideal.
Here are the Klingon cast members announced so far:
Kol - Commanding Officer, protege of T'Kuvma
T'Kuvma - Leader trying to unite Klingons
L'Rel - Battle Deck Commander, Kol's confidant
Dennas - A leader among the Klingons
Ujilli - A leader among the Klingons
It strikes me that this makeup is very concealing, which leads me to think it won't be the final makeup:
For comparison:
It raises some possibilities:
- Different Klingon ethnic groups exist, with some looking very alien, others more human
- The genetic retrovirus was not 100% endemic to all Klingon populations
- The more alien looking Klingons may represent some remnant aboriginal population
I kind of feel like a mix of these would work.
I know the augment virus is solidified as canon; and that Kor, Koloth, and Kang appeared in DS9 with ridges despite not having them in TOS. But to explain the various looks of the Klingons, I always liked better the theory that there is more than one Klingon species. Something similar to how on Earth we had Neanderthals, Homo erectus, cro-magnon, etc. But on Qo'noS, more than one species survived the evolutionary process. Mix that with the idea that the Klingons have conquerd many different worlds, and most certainly have interbred with natives of these conquerd worlds. So the Klingons could take on a variety of appearances.
With all that said, I think in the case of DSC it was just a straightforward reimagining, and I'm just going to roll with that for now. At least until CBS lets me make a Star Trek show.
I have a feeling that these Klingons shown will be a unique variant, and not representative of the Empire as a whole.
I've pointed out elsewhere how popular the trailer is...but without a doubt, these Klingons are the most contentious point for fans.
They're the most elaborate, alien, interesting Klingons we've seen, so we can only wait to see how the story plays out. I'm thinking the majority of people will come around as the show airs.
RAMA
I think this is true for all of the show.
Similar threads
