Star Trek: Discovery - spoilery thoughts?

[Alasar]

So they are saying that the Klingons seperated themselfs into seperate houses for so long and inbred so much that they gained extra nostrils, went bald, ate silver and were unable to turn their neck.

“You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.”

[Madner Kami]

Okay, so maybe it's a lot closer to the original design than we think, but that still doesn't justify giving them forehead ridges when canonically speaking they shouldn't have them now. In regards to what I said, that I'd heard a rumor a creator said they come from a different house, have they EVER mentioned anything about their foreheads in the show? Or anything to support this idea? Because if not, it might really be false.

It took till DS9 for this "issue" to be adressed and Worf's words on that matter were: "We do not talk about that with outsiders!", implying that being a somehow shameful thing for some undisclosed reason. It was Enterprise that ran with the idea of this actually being a real thing within the universe and tried to make an asset out of it, with the augment-virus. Nowhere else this was adressed and both options really are fine. In the end, it's just a costume-change that was done, because finally they had a better budget and could play around a bit with their alien designs. The show didn't highlight this and actually tried to make an asset out of it, which is commendable, even if the result is a bit sketchy in terms of quality.

Now then there's Discovery. The Klingons were visually distinctive since TNG, having their own distinct style, manerisms and aestethics mainly from that show, where before they were brownfaced in stylish clothings, not even visibly alien. Discovery updates the costumes, which would be fine, due to improved technologies and budget, but instead of just ignoring it, like TNG did or making an asset out of it, like Enterprise tried to, they lampshade it wiith stupid reasoning, shooting themselves into the foot.

[Durandal_1707]

Okay, so maybe it's a lot closer to the original design than we think, but that still doesn't justify giving them forehead ridges when canonically speaking they shouldn't have them now. In regards to what I said, that I'd heard a rumor a creator said they come from a different house, have they EVER mentioned anything about their foreheads in the show? Or anything to support this idea? Because if not, it might really be false.

It took till DS9 for this "issue" to be adressed and Worf's words on that matter were: "We do not talk about that with outsiders!", implying that being a somehow shameful thing for some undisclosed reason. It was Enterprise that ran with the idea of this actually being a real thing within the universe and tried to make an asset out of it, with the augment-virus. Nowhere else this was adressed and both options really are fine. In the end, it's just a costume-change that was done, because finally they had a better budget and could play around a bit with their alien designs. The show didn't highlight this and actually tried to make an asset out of it, which is commendable, even if the result is a bit sketchy in terms of quality.

Now then there's Discovery. The Klingons were visually distinctive since TNG, having their own distinct style, manerisms and aestethics mainly from that show, where before they were brownfaced in stylish clothings, not even visibly alien. Discovery updates the costumes, which would be fine, due to improved technologies and budget, but instead of just ignoring it, like TNG did or making an asset out of it, like Enterprise tried to, they lampshade it wiith stupid reasoning, shooting themselves into the foot.

When have they lampshaded it with any reasoning, stupid or not? Unless I've missed something, nothing we've seen on-screen yet has mentioned anything about the Klingons' new look—so far, it seems like they've been treating it the way TNG did and ignoring it.

Which I'm fine with. The Augment Virus thing was kind of silly anyway. From the TOS movies through Season 3 of Enterprise (so, most of the franchise), it was assumed that the Klingons, like Ruffles, have just always had ridges, and TOS just didn't have the budget to portray them. Enterprise retconned that. If Discovery re-retcons it back and just pretends the Augment Virus thing never happened, I don't think we lose much.

OTOH, if they do decide to go with the Augment Virus thing as the motivation for the Klingons' fear of losing their identity (with the shaving to emphasize their ridginess and subsequent status as "pure" Klingons), I'm fine with that, too. I guess I'm easy to please as long as the story is interesting.

[Madner Kami]

When have they lampshaded it with any reasoning, stupid or not? Unless I've missed something, nothing we've seen on-screen yet has mentioned anything about the Klingons' new look—so far, it seems like they've been treating it the way TNG did and ignoring it.

The show itself didn't, the showrunners did however.

Which I'm fine with. The Augment Virus thing was kind of silly anyway. From the TOS movies through Season 3 of Enterprise (so, most of the franchise), it was assumed that the Klingons, like Ruffles, have just always had ridges, and TOS just didn't have the budget to portray them. Enterprise retconned that. If Discovery re-retcons it back and just pretends the Augment Virus thing never happened, I don't think we lose much.

We loose continuity. Retcons are sometimes necessary, obviously, to accomodate for unforseen consequences and new ideas, but one shouldn't ever retcon with a crowbar, which this kind of is.

[Durandal_1707]

When have they lampshaded it with any reasoning, stupid or not? Unless I've missed something, nothing we've seen on-screen yet has mentioned anything about the Klingons' new look—so far, it seems like they've been treating it the way TNG did and ignoring it.

The show itself didn't, the showrunners did however.

If it's not on screen, it doesn't matter.

Which I'm fine with. The Augment Virus thing was kind of silly anyway. From the TOS movies through Season 3 of Enterprise (so, most of the franchise), it was assumed that the Klingons, like Ruffles, have just always had ridges, and TOS just didn't have the budget to portray them. Enterprise retconned that. If Discovery re-retcons it back and just pretends the Augment Virus thing never happened, I don't think we lose much.

We loose continuity. Retcons are sometimes necessary, obviously, to accomodate for unforseen consequences and new ideas, but one shouldn't ever retcon with a crowbar, which this kind of is.

We don't even know what this is. It hasn't come up yet. The stupid virus could still be out there, and it could just be the uninfected ones that are causing this whole mess (which wouldn't be surprising, given their obsession with racial purity). Or the virus could be out there, and the producers don't want to show TOS-style Klingons because the makeup is a bit problematic in 2017. Or the producers are retconning the virus away because it's stupid and the TOS makeup is problematic. Or something else. Why don't we wait and see what actually happens?

Personally, this kind of stuff always feels like window dressing to me, à la the "NX-01 looks like the Akira Class!" complaints while Enterprise was on the air. If this kind of thing ends up being the biggest problem the show has, I'll be pretty happy with it.

[Alasar]

If it's not on screen, it doesn't matter.

That's very unequivocal. I do not think that this sentiment is shared by everyone, and especially not by me.

My personal opinnion is that they will try to reach our modern Klingons from interbreading, or some genetic mixing technobable, the Ork Klingons with the Ash klingons. Although this already might be thrown out since I stoped halfway through the season. Felt I could spend my time more productively, like rewatching SFDebris episodes I have watched a dozen times.......

[da5id]

Although this already might be thrown out since I stoped halfway through the season. Felt I could spend my time more productively, like rewatching SFDebris episodes I have watched a dozen times.......

ST:D is a decent SF show with great visuals and ideas. It's just not ST compatible, not even with the Kelvin-verse.

Not only is it more entertaining to watch old SF/SF:D material, I'd argue that it gets your mind thinking deeper about the themes than ST:D. More than the heavy-handed analogies, bad caricatures and shallow social commentary of the show does at least.

I've tried, more than once, to sit through a complete episode of ST:D but the seismic shift in both format and tone just feels "wrong".

ST has always been about a brighter future to me, even the "darkest" show DS9 has a positive theme overall despite dealing with genocides and wars. ST:D felt more like if someone took the BSG reboot, added some GoT-styled "Gritty Realism" and season-long story arcs and then did a ":s/BSG/ST:D/g" on the show bible.

[GandALF]

I've tried, more than once, to sit through a complete episode of ST:D but the seismic shift in both format and tone just feels "wrong".

ST has always been about a brighter future to me, even the "darkest" show DS9 has a positive theme overall despite dealing with genocides and wars. ST:D felt more like if someone took the BSG reboot, added some GoT-styled "Gritty Realism" and season-long story arcs and then did a ":s/BSG/ST:D/g" on the show bible.

Arguably the thing that ultimately killed Enterprise was that it was using the TNG formula in the age of 24 and BSG. The very first Trek episode that was broadcast , "The Man Trap", is pretty dark as are a lot of TOS episodes compared to TNG. And Discovery is only halfway through its first season, we don't know what it's overall themes are going to be yet.

[Madner Kami]

Is the show really meandering that much, that one doesn't know what the show is about already? That'd be a fairly fatal flaw

[da5id]

I've tried, more than once, to sit through a complete episode of ST:D but the seismic shift in both format and tone just feels "wrong".

ST has always been about a brighter future to me, even the "darkest" show DS9 has a positive theme overall despite dealing with genocides and wars. ST:D felt more like if someone took the BSG reboot, added some GoT-styled "Gritty Realism" and season-long story arcs and then did a ":s/BSG/ST:D/g" on the show bible.

Arguably the thing that ultimately killed Enterprise was that it was using the TNG formula in the age of 24 and BSG. The very first Trek episode that was broadcast , "The Man Trap", is pretty dark as are a lot of TOS episodes compared to TNG. And Discovery is only halfway through its first season, we don't know what it's overall themes are going to be yet.

True, ST:D is still in it's infancy and the early seasons of both TNG and DS9 really struggled with bad writing and figuring out the characters. But they tried to build on earlier shows and stay true to the Roddenberry ideals (while dealing with Gene's health and mood swings). There were some big changes but they were rooted in the lore and added to it. Wasn't ignoring or directly contradicting it every chance they got. Discovery doesn't even follow their own lore and contradict their own "bible" or earlier episodes all the time.

Like I said: it has potential to grow in to a good SF show but it shouldn't be called ST and I think the name will end up hurting it in the end.