JohnRogers Posted March 20, 2017 Posted March 20, 2017 Have you read or heard rumors of this show potentially being a disaster??? Let's discuss it. I remain cautiously optimistic. I want this new Trek to be really good. 1
KenJennings Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 CBS should've just scrapped Fuller's vision the minute he jumped ship. That being said, this 'dumpster fire' is nothing compared with the disasters surrounding the leadup to TNG. 2
Ancient Ways Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 They recast janeway after filming started. 1
JohnRogers Posted March 21, 2017 Author Posted March 21, 2017 They recast janeway after filming started. Picard sounded British and Janeway sounded French...oh my. What concerns me most is the rumor that Les Moonves who doesn't know Star Trek might have micromanaged the series. 1
Del_Duio Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 CBS should've just scrapped Fuller's vision the minute he jumped ship. That being said, this 'dumpster fire' is nothing compared with the disasters surrounding the leadup to TNG. I don't know, this is shaping up to be a contender for the worst.Already have reformatted Klingons AGAIN.
ReRushed Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon. Personally, I feel Star Trek is done. Enjoy the re-runs, I say. 3
JohnRogers Posted March 21, 2017 Author Posted March 21, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple. 2
ReRushed Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show. 1
JohnRogers Posted March 21, 2017 Author Posted March 21, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery. 1
ReRushed Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is. 1
KenJennings Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 Given the Klingon penchant for fighting, even among themselves, It's entire possible that the Klingon smooth forehead mutation was not total across their species, and that ridged klingons and unridged Klingons separated into two factions or castes. 1
ReRushed Posted March 21, 2017 Posted March 21, 2017 Given the Klingon penchant for fighting, even among themselves, It's entire possible that the Klingon smooth forehead mutation was not total across their species, and that ridged klingons and unridged Klingons separated into two factions or castes.Sure. They have an opportunity to tell a potentially good story. 1
Principled Man Posted March 22, 2017 Posted March 22, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is. It's been established in the canon? I know of no official decree about anything in Star Trek TV shows or films being "canon". With so many time-travelling and alternate universe conflicts, the possibilities for any species - Human, Klingon, etc. - are endless. The only "canon" about Star Trek is that anything goes. The changes to Klingon anatomy in The Next Generation and other series and films were a great move. They look like a real alien species - not just humans with goatees. 4
ReRushed Posted March 22, 2017 Posted March 22, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is. It's been established in the canon? I know of no official decree about anything in Star Trek TV shows or films being "canon". With so many time-travelling and alternate universe conflicts, the possibilities for any species - Human, Klingon, etc. - are endless. The only "canon" about Star Trek is that anything goes. The changes to Klingon anatomy in The Next Generation and other series and films were a great move. They look like a real alien species - not just humans with goatees.I get it. And I don't disagree. I'm just pointing out that it was explained why the ridges disappeared. And for the record, sans the animated series, anything on the television shows and the movies is considered canon. I know it's true because I read on the internet and some official Star Trek book now gathering dust on my book shelf. 2
Del_Duio Posted March 23, 2017 Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon.I never understood that position. For a fan base of such thinkers how can't they grasp that ridges look cool, make the Klingons look more menacing and that prosthetic ridges was just beyond the budget of the original show. It is really that simple.It's established. It's been referenced on multiple series. If it was consistently ignored there would be no problem, but it hasn't been ignored. Yes, it could be seen as nitpicking, but that's part of the fun of being a fan of the show.So from that point, an explanation has been made convoluted it may be but ridges were explained. Ridges appear in much more Star Trek than ridgeless Klingons. Ergo ridges should appear in Discovery.Honestly, at the end of the day, I don't really care. All I am saying, as a Star Trek fan, is that during the Star Trek time period that Discovery is taking place, it's established that Klingons do not have ridges. As convoluted as it seems or is. It's been established in the canon? I know of no official decree about anything in Star Trek TV shows or films being "canon". With so many time-travelling and alternate universe conflicts, the possibilities for any species - Human, Klingon, etc. - are endless. The only "canon" about Star Trek is that anything goes. The changes to Klingon anatomy in The Next Generation and other series and films were a great move. They look like a real alien species - not just humans with goatees.I get it. And I don't disagree. I'm just pointing out that it was explained why the ridges disappeared. And for the record, sans the animated series, anything on the television shows and the movies is considered canon. I know it's true because I read on the internet and some official Star Trek book now gathering dust on my book shelf. I have quite a few of those books, and I know what Okudagrams are.I have the ENT-D blueprint book, the complete DS9 episode behind the scenes guide or whatever it is for all 7 seasons, and "The Klingon Way" which has phrases and etc. in both English and Klingon. And somewhere I also have the Ferengi Rules of Acquisition. It's amazing I'm married and have children when you think about it! Edited March 23, 2017 by Del_Duio 4
ReRushed Posted March 31, 2017 Posted March 31, 2017 Discovery character and casting news that Original Series fans might appreciate: LINK 1
Del_Duio Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 Discovery character and casting news that Original Series fans might appreciate: LINK Harry Mudd? Bah, I'd almost rather they make up all new characters at this point. Same thing with having Sarek in this.They already soured me on "prequel".
ReRushed Posted April 3, 2017 Posted April 3, 2017 Discovery character and casting news that Original Series fans might appreciate: LINK Harry Mudd? Bah, I'd almost rather they make up all new characters at this point. Same thing with having Sarek in this.They already soured me on "prequel".It all depends on the writing and the stories. Good writers will pull it off. 1
furie Posted April 8, 2017 Posted April 8, 2017 The Klingons should not have ridges. It's established in the canon. Personally, I feel Star Trek is done. Enjoy the re-runs, I say.it wasn't all the Klingons. while most of the population was infected with the human augment virus, the Klingons were curing their population on a rolling basis.
KenJennings Posted April 10, 2017 Posted April 10, 2017 (edited) Just heard Michael Dorn said that he is playing an ancestor of Worf in the Star Trek Discovery pilot. Edit: report is being called a misquote now. Edited April 11, 2017 by KenJennings 1
JohnRogers Posted May 18, 2017 Author Posted May 18, 2017 The uniforms and tech look too advanced to pre-date Kirk. They should have went with the JJ Abrams look. Still I'll be watching.
IwillchooseFreeWill Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) I'm not a fan of prequels though I admit Enterprise grew on me although I hated it to begin with. Trying to squeeze a new story into the existing canon is a recipe for disaster and a head honcho who doesn't know the canon is worse. Kill it now. Edited May 18, 2017 by IwillchooseFreeWill
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now