Most depth?

Deep Space Nine
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: Most depth?

Post by Teaos »

Well a big part of DS9s original story line is based around the Cardassians, so they had to get it right.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Most depth?

Post by Deepcrush »

The Klingons were left in a bit of limbo. I don't think anyone had a solid idea of what to do with them other then use them as a threat. Much like the Q, it fell on the actors to create something from nothing.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
Coalition
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 1142
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 3:34 am
Location: Georgia, United States
Contact:

Re: Most depth?

Post by Coalition »

One of the better portrayals of the Klingons was during the Civil War. It is a tavern on Quo'nos, where Worf is delivering a report to his CO, and the CO invites over another Captain to introduce him. It turns out that Captain was the one who nearly killed them earlier, so Worf's CO and that Captain indulge in a little boasting about killing the other the next day before going their separate ways.

The Klingon Captain tells Worf that he is too much into duty, and doesn't get a chance to relax. But later on Worf is kidnapped, interrogated, etc.


That could have been a good scene showing how the Klingon Empire stays together even in a Civil War. They will fight each other during the day, but they know they are all Klingon, so the fights are to get their respective leaders in range, so the leaders can settle the matter. The fights are fun, but the important part is to get the leaders to settle the issue, and keep the Empire strong. Essentially the Empire thrives on rivalry, rather than constant war.
Relativity Calculator
My Nomination for "MVAM Critic Award" (But can it be broken into 3 separate pieces?)
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Most depth?

Post by McAvoy »

Coalition wrote:One of the better portrayals of the Klingons was during the Civil War. It is a tavern on Quo'nos, where Worf is delivering a report to his CO, and the CO invites over another Captain to introduce him. It turns out that Captain was the one who nearly killed them earlier, so Worf's CO and that Captain indulge in a little boasting about killing the other the next day before going their separate ways.

The Klingon Captain tells Worf that he is too much into duty, and doesn't get a chance to relax. But later on Worf is kidnapped, interrogated, etc.


That could have been a good scene showing how the Klingon Empire stays together even in a Civil War. They will fight each other during the day, but they know they are all Klingon, so the fights are to get their respective leaders in range, so the leaders can settle the matter. The fights are fun, but the important part is to get the leaders to settle the issue, and keep the Empire strong. Essentially the Empire thrives on rivalry, rather than constant war.
Basically Space Vikings.

We have seen non-warrior types before too. I do think the Klingons would have been much better if they showed the other side of Klingon society.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Most depth?

Post by Deepcrush »

Coalition wrote: Essentially the Empire thrives on rivalry, rather than constant war.
Warriors have to show their worth and it also provides a release of tension for a naturally aggressive race. Rather then declaring war ever other day, they find more practical ways to vent.
McAvoy wrote:Basically Space Vikings.
IMO, its part of what made them fun to watch.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Most depth?

Post by McAvoy »

Deepcrush wrote:
Coalition wrote: Essentially the Empire thrives on rivalry, rather than constant war.
Warriors have to show their worth and it also provides a release of tension for a naturally aggressive race. Rather then declaring war ever other day, they find more practical ways to vent.
McAvoy wrote:Basically Space Vikings.
IMO, its part of what made them fun to watch.
I honestly did enjoy the Klingon episodes whether it was TNG or DS9. I do think people compare the Klingons with Worf too much. How would Worf really know how true Klingons behaved.


I think they could have shown the other side of what made Klingons be a power on par with the Federation. Whether it is slave/subjects or the lower class Klingons. People who made the Empire run.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Most depth?

Post by Deepcrush »

McAvoy wrote:I honestly did enjoy the Klingon episodes whether it was TNG or DS9. I do think people compare the Klingons with Worf too much. How would Worf really know how true Klingons behaved.
We got too see that every time Worf ran into Klingons from the Empire. He was constantly off put by how different they were to the idealized versions he had thought up.
McAvoy wrote:I think they could have shown the other side of what made Klingons be a power on par with the Federation. Whether it is slave/subjects or the lower class Klingons. People who made the Empire run.
Like the House of Martok, which was originally a House of Farmers of the Ketha-Lowlands. Praxus which was a mining and power generation station. We saw in TNG several merchants.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Most depth?

Post by McAvoy »

Deepcrush wrote:
McAvoy wrote:I honestly did enjoy the Klingon episodes whether it was TNG or DS9. I do think people compare the Klingons with Worf too much. How would Worf really know how true Klingons behaved.
We got too see that every time Worf ran into Klingons from the Empire. He was constantly off put by how different they were to the idealized versions he had thought up.
McAvoy wrote:I think they could have shown the other side of what made Klingons be a power on par with the Federation. Whether it is slave/subjects or the lower class Klingons. People who made the Empire run.
Like the House of Martok, which was originally a House of Farmers of the Ketha-Lowlands. Praxus which was a mining and power generation station. We saw in TNG several merchants.
Pretty much like that. Martok was different but for a farmer he still did behave like an average Klingon. It would have been nice to see more Klingons like that Martok/lawyer in ENT who had very little Klingon type behavior.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Deepcrush
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 18917
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:15 pm
Location: Arnold, Maryland, USA

Re: Most depth?

Post by Deepcrush »

Maybe, but that's not their way. Aggression is a simple part of their nature, much like fear or any other survival instinct in which a species carries with it. Its just that all those instincts come in varying degrees from one group to another.

Martok had his proud warrior moments but at the same time he was a rather practiced poet and mentor. Gowron, also a proud warrior was a skilled politician. Kempek wasn't so much a warrior which is strange by their standards yet a very successful leader and diplomat. The tone of the Klingon race isn't warrior but more of "Warriors who are also". They are warriors and farmers, warriors and diplomats, warriors and poets. They may be warriors first, but not warriors only. Much like the Federation in TNG, the overwhelming majority were scientists but in the end they weren't JUST scientists. With some races we were handed what Trek wanted us to see, even if you didn't want to see it that way. The Klingons, much like the Vulcans were left in a system of attention. You have to pay attention not just to what's being thrown in your face but what is behind the scene that may not stand out so much.
Jinsei wa cho no yume, shi no tsubasa no bitodesu
User avatar
Black Jesus
Ensign
Ensign
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:35 pm

Re: Most depth?

Post by Black Jesus »

The Bajorans.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Most depth?

Post by McAvoy »

Black Jesus wrote:The Bajorans.
In what way? Maybe there would be a case for that if for example no all Bajorans were religious and some were Atheists. Or at least portrayed in DS9 as a civilization not 100% religious.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Sonic Glitch
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6026
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 2:11 am
Location: Any ol' place here on Earth or in space. You pick the century and I'll pick the spot

Re: Most depth?

Post by Sonic Glitch »

McAvoy wrote:
Black Jesus wrote:The Bajorans.
In what way? Maybe there would be a case for that if for example no all Bajorans were religious and some were Atheists. Or at least portrayed in DS9 as a civilization not 100% religious.
Well you do have Ro in TNG. I don't recall her being particularly religious.
"All this has happened before --"
"But it doesn't have to happen again. Not if we make up our minds to change. Take a different path. Right here, right now."
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Most depth?

Post by McAvoy »

Sonic Glitch wrote:
McAvoy wrote:
Black Jesus wrote:The Bajorans.
In what way? Maybe there would be a case for that if for example no all Bajorans were religious and some were Atheists. Or at least portrayed in DS9 as a civilization not 100% religious.
Well you do have Ro in TNG. I don't recall her being particularly religious.
Still religious though. I would have liked to see an Atheist Bajoran. Someone who knows that the Prophets are wormhole aliens who protect Bajor.

But they do seem to have depth though. But that is because aside from the religion and wrinkly nose, they behave like humans.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
Teaos
4 Star Admiral
4 Star Admiral
Posts: 15368
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:00 am
Commendations: The Daystrom Award
Location: Behind you!

Re: Most depth?

Post by Teaos »

An Athiest Bajoran would have been very cool to see. Especially is they were a honored war hero who turned skeptic latter on. So they would still have political power and not just be marginalized.
What does defeat mean to you?

Nothing it will never come. Death before defeat. I don’t bend or break. I end, if I meet a foe capable of it. Victory is in forcing the opponent to back down. I do not. There is no defeat.
User avatar
McAvoy
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Most depth?

Post by McAvoy »

Teaos wrote:An Athiest Bajoran would have been very cool to see. Especially is they were a honored war hero who turned skeptic latter on. So they would still have political power and not just be marginalized.
Exactly. Someone who just isn't the run of the mill Bajoran and he wouldn't be the only one.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
Post Reply