3
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Corgana@startrek.website to c/startrek@startrek.website

I am the kind of person who enjoys "big weird" scifi like Stanisław Lem. Stories about trying to relate to and find common ground with something so alien that the prospect of even understanding is basically hopeless. Star Trek usually doesn't do stories that, which makes sense as it often uses alien races as allegories or stand-ins for real-world human relations.

That said- I thought those early Klingons were super weird and scary because they were just so alien. It really made sense thinking about how it took a century before they could get to the events of Star Trek VI, and it made the Khittomer accords feel like so much more of an accomplishment. Like- you made a treaty with WHAT?

And just aesthetically their ships and armor looked like something out of HP Lovecraft or HR Geiger:

This is not to say I dislike how Klingons were portrayed previously, kinda like Mongols in TOS or Vikings in DS9, just that they never felt scary to me. They never felt like warriors. I was never afraid for the gallant crew of the Enterprise D (a science and exploration vessel) going into battle against Klingons. But I really enjoyed the alien-ness Disco tried to go with. Anyone else with me?

EDIT: PEOPLE I SAID WHO'S WITH ME NOT WHO ISN'T CM'ON Annoyed

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] williams_482@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I remain amazed that many people insist that T'Kuvma and company are irreconcilably different from the TNG era portrayals. These are big, carnivorous-looking aliens with prominent forehead ridges and significant individual variation in appearance. They're different in some small details, like the extra nostrils, but outside of the most extreme visually literalist stance, is it really that hard to square these guys against Chang, Martok, and Worf? Replace the shine and detail with a classic rubber mask, silicon makeup, and matte brown body paint in exactly the same head and body shape, stick them at a side table in Quarks circa S6 of DS9, and I challenge you to notice anything amiss.

What this rework did do was make them feel so much more alien, and so much more dangerous. They outright eat people, which was occasionally hinted at but is noted far more literally in Discovery, and very, very easy to believe looking at these guys. I wish they hadn't backpedalled so hard with a return to the 1980s makeup in SNW 2x01, because I would have loved to see these monsters chumming it up with Spock: that scene would immediately have been slightly more unsettling, bringing the audience closer to what Spock and his crew are likely feeling about their momentary drinking buddies, instead of the much more casual feel we got from Klingons who look just like our old friends from DS9. These guys are still dangerous aliens whose friendliness is tenuous and temporary; they would literally eat Spock if circumstances were slightly different. We shouldn't forget that.

[-] Corgana@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

Absolutely, well said. To quote Kirk "People can be very frightened of change."

because I would have loved to see these monsters chumming it up with Spock

Augh I didn't know I wanted this until now. Now I'm upset all over again!

[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

Replace the shine and detail with a classic rubber mask, silicon makeup, and matte brown body paint in exactly the same head and body shape, stick them at a side table in Quarks circa S6 of DS9, and I challenge you to notice anything amiss. I think that is true for how they looked s2 Discovery with the hair and normal skulls I stead of the elongated Crystal Skull shaped look we got in s1.

For me, having them look like TNG Klingons doesn't even solve the problem because ENT had implied that shouldn't happen until the TOS movie era. They could have rendered explicit the implication that not every Klingon was infected by the virus, but that still doesn't support making the Klingons look how they did in s1 DIS.

[-] echo@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The augment virus was a really dumb idea and I'm perfectly happy for them to ignore it and never feel the need to write a plot to explain the fact that designs will change over time in a 60 year old sci fi franchise.

[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

change over time in a 60 year old sci fi franchise.

This common refrain is so condescending, as if we're being ridiculous expecting consistency in a piece of narrative media! It doesn't matter if the Klingons, at the time of TMP, were intended to be a total retcon, because DS9 made lines of dialog that make that impossible. I understand that there isn't a cohesive narrative across all of Star Trek, and I don't expect writers of an episode of 1990s television to be cognizant that maybe a prequel will come along and show anachronistic Klingons, but what I do expect is the producers of Enterprise to make better decisions than "but da klingons have ridges, how will people recognise the klingons if they look like how they did in TOS?" (IDK Berman, guess you should have thought of that before doing a prequel series).

And today, in this day and age where everyone at least knows about secondary worlds (IE, a setting distinct/irreconcilable from the real world) if not in name than be experience, I absolutely do expect a level of consistency above what we got in the 80s and 90s.

Obviously, advances in real world technology will impact how TV and movies are made, but we're not talking about Matte Paintings vs CGI. It's not like when the shows in the 90s made the switch from physical models to CGI, they randomly decided "hey, lets make the Romulan warbird a completely different looking ship", they recreated the physical model. When they started to be able to show more activity or detail in establishing shots of the ship or station, they didn't then also decide to give DS9 an extra pylon, or make it yellow and act like it always was like that.

[-] echo@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

It doesn’t matter if the Klingons, at the time of TMP, were intended to be a total retcon, because DS9 made lines of dialog that make that impossible

are you talking about Worf's "we don't talk about it with outsiders" line in Trials and Tribble-ations? Because I also think it's ridiculous that people took that line so seriously. It's a little meta joke in a comedic episode that solely exists to celebrate nostalgia for TOS. I don't get how you can take it as serious confirmation that Klingon's appearance changed in universe in that context.

[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

I don’t get how you can take it as serious confirmation that Klingon’s appearance changed in universe in that context. Because it was said by a Star Trek character in a Star Trek episode and words have meaning? I don't get to pick and choose which lines of dialogue matter and what lines of dialogue don't, no one does.

Frankly, I don't get how someone can watch a whole scene and go "well that didn't actually mean anything for the characters that just experienced it". It makes more sense to assume that words have their intended meaning, and that Worf's friends were genuinely shocked to see flat-headed Klingons than it does to pretend Worf, Bashir, and company never actually had that discussion. Like, yeah it's all fake but main characters are supposed to be real people, the situations are supposed to be real to them...

[-] williams_482@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago

For me, having them look like TNG Klingons doesn’t even solve the problem because ENT had implied that shouldn’t happen until the TOS movie era.

That Enterprise arc was clearly intended to apply a (totally unnecessary) in-universe explanation for why Kirk's adversaries were just guys in vaguely asian facial makeup, but there's no reason we have to extrapolate that the Augment virus was a widespread and incurable until the late 23rd century. It could easily have been a relative blip on the radar; aggressively quarantined and/or cured much earlier than anticipated.

The idea that they also needed to make an explicit reference to the augment virus being cured, or explicitly point out "hey, these guys would look less different if they weren't shaving their heads!" strikes me as absurd. These are not difficult conclusions to reach for someone motivated to find them, and there were people mentioning those possibilities pretty much immediately after the first Discovery trailer dropped.

[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

All that needed to be maintained was that the Klingons we see Kirk face in TOS were all afflicted by the virus - while it's still reasonable to assume that, the presence of these hitherto unseen 3rd variant of Klingon complicates instead of simplifies, which is what ENT's arc did. Now what, it's ANOTHER coincidence that THESE klingons are even ridgier than we've seen before, but the other ones are still out there? To borrow your parlance, the Discovery redesign was intended to overwrite and replace what came before, because apparently Star Trek, unlike every other fantasy and science fiction thing I like, is Forbidden from being treated like a secondary world that should have its own internal consistency.

I was completely content to accept it was a coincidence that Kirk only saw augment virus-impacted Klingons in TOS, just like how ST Picard ended up establishing for Romulans (northern vs southern to explain the v shape bone ridge they had through TNG-ENT).

[-] LibraryLass@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

because apparently Star Trek, unlike every other fantasy and science fiction thing I like, is Forbidden from being treated like a secondary world that should have its own internal consistency.

Nonsense-- other long-running universes encounter retcons and visual redesigns all the time. Quick, how old was Dick Grayson when he first became Robin? What color is Superman's S? How old was Magneto during the Holocaust? What happened to Luke's father? Did James Bond fight in World War 2, or participate the Cold War?

[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

As far as I know, those examples all either explicitly exist or are treated as seperate and distinct when you look at their wikis. Comic book continuity sometimes is something the characters are aware of too, so differences are also explained. Crisis on Infinite Earths comes to mind.

[-] LibraryLass@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago

Then as someone who does know a lot about this stuff I can tell you that you are making a lot of assumptions that are not the case.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] williams_482@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

because apparently Star Trek, unlike every other fantasy and science fiction thing I like, is Forbidden from being treated like a secondary world that should have its own internal consistency.

How many other Science Fiction properties out there sprung out of a low budget TV show from the 60s but are still producing content in the same continuity without some kind of explicit reboot?

Star Wars is the classic comparison in all sorts of ways, and for better or worse Star Wars avoids this problem entirely by 1) having a much higher budget relative to the number of sets and costumes required for it's initial installment, 2) having picked an aesthetic that is crude, gritty, and seemingly practical which escapes looking dated many years after the fact, and 3) not being set in our future where the advances of modern tech make obviously retro elements look ridiculous.

[-] Vittelius@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

There is Doctor Who, and that's it.

Actually, DW is a good example, because the continuity of that show is a mess, and very intentionally so. That show thrives in its inconsistencies. There are three different explanations for why the Doctor can change faces when he dies, for example. And each one contradicts the others. There is also no beta canon, every tie in is considered canon. So the doctor has officially met Batman, Gandalf and Picard. That's canon.

In the end IP is a playground and continuity should enhance story. Nobody gains anything from lore for the sense of lore. What does the Klingons always looking a certain way say? Not all that much. It's a nice to have, because it allows you to recognise them quickly and make connections. But if the look is constricting for the creative team, then they should be able to change it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

Doctor Who has faithfully recreated sets, props, and costumes from as far back as the 60s as recently as 2017. Continuity is a different story - there's literally no doctor who canon - as the constant time traveling impacts things. Even the smaller TARDIS exterior from the Classic series is referenced as an actual, visual difference by the revival series. The current powers that run Star Trek would just pretend it was always that big.

I'll never accept the idea that it's okay to update a design but not properly reboot it and set it in a completely different and seperate continuity just because what you're making a spin-off of is old enough that it doesn't deserve to be treated legitimately. How many more years before the crude, gritty aesthetic of Star Wars suffers the same fate as the crude and campy aesthetic of Star Trek?

Whole series of television shouldn't be ignored by their own spinoffs just because their set designer and marketing teams decided something was lame or uncool.

[-] LibraryLass@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago

How many more years before the crude, gritty aesthetic of Star Wars suffers the same fate as the crude and campy aesthetic of Star Trek?

People complained about exactly that during the Prequel Trilogy.

[-] sambeastie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

To give credit where it's due, RotS and many of the Disney-era Star Wars products have gone a long way to fitting the glamorous, shiny prequel aesthetic into the gritty, used, "lived in" aesthetic of the OT. I'm not the biggest fan of The Last Jedi, but I actually think the implicication of the shiny galaxy just being a property of the rich inner rim planets was a great move in unifying everything.

[-] Trekman10@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

There's also the idea that the Empire mass produced everything to a cheaper quality which lead to less frills and faster decay. Supposedly The Acolyte show is gonna extrapolate from this further, and is set like 300 years before the prequels.

[-] LibraryLass@startrek.website 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Perhaps it implied that.

But it only ever implied that, and meanwhile we had other evidence that implied a separate conclusion, in the form of Kor, Kang, and Koloth.

Which is more likely-- that every Klingon Kirk encountered during his five-year mission was a survivor of the augment virus (edit: Including Kahless, who lived and died centuries before Archer!) and no Klingon encountered outside of that time period was; or that the Klingons ruthlessly quarantined or even executed carriers of the augment virus and wiped it out before it got too far, and TOS's visuals aren't literal?

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] felixxx999@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

I don't mind that they tried. And tried to link them with TOS and later Klingons. I just thought the makeup was too heavy. You never really got any memorable Klingon character faces. And I'm just taking about their faces. I enjoyed their costumes and ships.

The Bird of Prey design looks... imposing. The Armor, despite being very impractical, looks good. The Alien Race is well-designed, but it's not what I would think Klingon would be. But yeah I kind of like how they're portrayed, as a serious threat instead of some goofy alcohol-addicted space Vikings with a kind-of interesting way of life.

[-] LibraryLass@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

I dug 'em. It was a good experiment in pushing Trek's aliens beyond a forehead and an accent.

[-] T156@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I rather liked it, and the more alien take on them, but I can also see why people didn't.

Part of the issue is probably that Discovery changed them too much. Previous alterations to the Klingons tended to be one thing at a time, except for the TOS films, but even they kept some things the same, like their technology.

Discovery went with a bit more of a complete overhaul, with massive changes to the language (following the pronunciation guide more closely), and alterations for both their technology, and the Klingons themselves, which might have been a bit jarring for most, especially when people were expecting more of a settled look for the TNG/TMP Klingons.

You do have the visual changes for the Klingon Empire in the Kelvin films, but that gets excused as it being part of another timeline, hence all the differences.

Things like the Klingon cleave ship, and the T'Kuvma are massive changes from what people are used to when it comes to Klingons. Klingon technology previously tended to be birds of prey that cloaked and shot energy bullets/torpedoes, not cloaked ship-breakers that used ramming speed as their main vector of attack, and Klingon supremacists didn't really exist like that. The closest we had to something like that was Worf, who was much closer to a Klingon purist/fanatic than a supremacist.

Although I personally feel that there was a missed opportunity not interspersing things with the various other Klingon designs of the time. Having a supremacist faction within the Klingon Empire, with massive visual changes (maybe due to overcompensating for Enterprise's Augment Virus?), could have been an interesting way to add depth to the Klingons, and the Empire.

Especially if that diversity of thinking between the Houses is/was one of the strengths of the Empire. Each House was more like a separate power, and they simply collaborated under the banner of the Empire.

[-] Nmyownworld@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago

I thoroughly enjoy most everything about DSC Klingons. With their appearance, I didn't like or dislike their look when I first saw it so much as I was surprised. Klingons have a history of looking very different throughout Star Trek. I've rewatched DSC so many times, I'm used to how the Klingons look. However, I absolutely love the depiction of Klingon society. I still marvel at the Klingon armor and sets. The dichotomy of such a combative society and the intricate beauty of their ships, armor, everything. Their artistry goes beyond simple functionality. I think it adds depth to the Klingons.

[-] emr@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

Did it look cool? Yeah it looked awesome. But was it ever going to be sustainable, budget-wise?

[-] jaelisp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 year ago

The only huge issue I had with them was their makeup was so thick the actors clearly struggled to act through it. Contrast to such expressive Klingons such as Kor, Gowron and Martok which was very difficult to do when you can barely move your face.

If that hadn't hamstrung the actors so much, I think they would have been more enjoyable than people found them.

[-] canis_majoris@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They would have been fine with hair. The whole thing where everyone is bald was the point that made it look bad.

I have pictures of T'kuvma photoshopped with hair and he looks great.

Another thing I want to mention is that Gene himself never held the series up to visual continuity. When the budget got better, the sets got better and so did the makeup. It was just a natural progression of the series. I don't feel like it's a stretch to keep trying to improve on alien appearances, especially as the aesthetic for the show changes and evolves. I like the SNW bridge update. I like that it's all metal and glass and feels substantial.

[-] Emperor@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

I thought it was all a bit confusing - it was introduced with no explanation, which felt like it was setting up some big reveal that never came.

I like the, as you say, Giger-esque design but felt it was such a departure that they may as well have introduced a new species.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

Star Trek

10571 readers
58 users here now

r/startrek: The Next Generation

Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...

Maybe a little slash fic.


New to Star Trek and wondering where to start?


Rules

1 Be constructiveAll posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.


2 Be welcomingIt is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.


3 Be truthfulAll posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.


4 Be niceIf a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.


5 SpoilersUtilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episodes, as well as previews for upcoming episodes. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.


6 Keep on-topicAll submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/quarks.


7 MetaQuestions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.


Upcoming Episodes

Date Episode Title
11-07 LD 5x04 "A Farewell to Farms"
11-14 LD 5x05 "Star Base 80?"
11-21 LD 5x06 "Of Gods and Angels"
11-28 LD 5x07 "Fully Dilated"
12-05 LD 5x08 "Upper Decks"

Episode Discussion Archive


In Production

Strange New Worlds (2025)

Section 31 (2025-01-24)

Starfleet Academy (TBA)

In Development

Untitled comedy series


Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.


Allied Discord Server


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS