[Onix]

Anybody knows if the people from Star Trek has an explanation about the change of appereance of the Klingons from the old human-look to the guys-with-turtle-shells-in-the-forehead? Seing again the DS9 episode where the crew goes to the past and is puzzled to find human looking klingons made me wonder if the issue has ever been settled. My wife wants to know also and I know that I would never be able to watch any Star Trek series or movies in peace again if I don't give her an explanation. Thanks and I hope you had a great Xmas.

 

[kelly]

This is the only episode to my knowledge that mentions the foreheads. Trek fans say that there was probably some kind of superficial fad in Klingon history where they tried to look more like humans/vulcans/romulans and that they're embarrassed by it. *shrug*

 

[DarkWolf]

I supose the obvious answer is that they didn't go as far with the make-up and costumes in the original Star Trek. I don't know how they presumed to settle this though, which is almost embarasing since I watch so much Star Trek. I would like to see that episode of DS9, is it possible that it was meant as something of a joke? It doesn't seem like the sort of thing they would joke about though...

 

[dokebi]

Quote:

guys-with-turtle-shells-in-the-forehead?

 

[Onix]

Well, yeah. The obvious limitation is make-up back then in th 60's. As for the fashion fad to look human, well, it's the sort of stuff Star Trek would do, but I don't buy the idea of the migthy klingons wanting to look like frail humans. Besides, most die hard trekkers have the weirdest ideas about the characters on the show. Maybe that theory is true, but I would like to know if there's som sort of "official version".

 

[kelly]

Onix
The ONLY official explanation is in that episode of DS9 where Worf says, "We don't like to talk about it."

 

[Matthew-Spaltro]

Star Trek is Gene Roddenberry's liberal view of the future. I'll pass. Beam me up Sennheiser

 

[redshifter]

 

[Matthew-Spaltro]

ROTFLMAO

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

ROTFLMAO

Me too!

The SNL skit where Shatner says that (book title) in his address at a Trekkie convention, is hiliarious.

 

[rickcr42]

OH MAN THAT"S COLD

Truth is , the original Star Trek had a very low budget and cheesy production values . The sets were cardboard and the "cast" was small with few extras .

What extras there were got killed off in that episode so the only got payed once

Special effects ! The crew throwing themselves back and forth on the bridge to "simulate" whatever disaster befell them that week.

The transporter was kinda cool , a new thing , Tri-corders were not much more than present day cell phones WITHOUT the ability to play video games

Any "Trekkie" explanation would be hollow , the show just ended up evolving with the times and the production cost more in each generation , better makeup artists etc.

The original Klingons looked no more menacing than the average guy with a goatee and sideburns

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

Originally posted by rickcr42 The transporter was kinda cool , a new

I liked the Tri-Corder, and the Universal Translator devices, too.

 

[Duncan]

What I don't get (although it goes with the 'budget' thing just mentioned) is how the new 'Enterprise' is better kitted out, and looks a lot better than the 60's 'Star-Trek', and even the newer NG and Voyager...

Makes no sense

 

[squirt]

The original series was pretty much state of the art for the 60s and i think they did a good job considering their budjet...along with the new turtle head thingy the klingons also evolved into speaking their own language instead of english...

The current version set designs are done primarily by Michael Okuda who started out as your typical trekky...he disigns all the sets and control panels and such and does a really good job and obviously has a much bigger budet...star trek just evolved as do all other sci fi series as did the technology, budget and public demand...it just wouldn't work if the new star trek had sets like Buck Rogers with the enterpirse flying around attached to strings...

The original version bridge set actually could rock this way and that to simulate battle damage sequences but there was a problem of creeking noises as actors walked around the bridge so the set had to be locked down and the actors had to fake their tumbles...can't beat Lt Uhura's twirl like a top fake job...

 

[elipsis]

Quote:

Originally posted by Matthew-Spaltro Star Trek is Gene Roddenberry's liberal view of the future. I'll pass. Beam me up Sennheiser

Yeah, gotta hate that DAMN LIBERAL SCIENCE FICTION.

Next thing you know, they'll be trying to contaminate your precious bodily fluids.