usernamefactory

You just inspired me to search for the original broadcast as I saw it, live from the Skydome. It was such a huge event:

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLiNzW5uoz4_tqNDirrP9rPcDEhp-YHye8&si=XhfmDjqlByOWEK3_

Canon is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Canon is a pretty flower… which smells bad.

That footnote points to an uncredited trekplace article from 2004 that itself has no citations. There was never an “original vision" that Klingons have bumpy heads, that was an idea entirely original to TMP.

Anyway, how do we feel about the Star Trek III redesign? In TMP it was one hairless bump that was supposed to represent a spinal column, running all the way from the back over the cranium. TSFS and onward, suddenly it was a flatter, wider set of ridges that was localized only to the forehead, with a full head of hair behind it. For some reason I’m always seeing people act like those are the same design, but to me the differences are glaringly obvious.

TV and movie productions are collaborative efforts undertaken by a huge number of creative people, and I don't think any of them make their decisions for no reason. The "original creator" of the Klingons was Gene L. Coon, who had nothing to do with their portrayal in TMP.

Because Wesley was a super annoying character, particularly in the first season? https://youtube.com/shorts/TzdnutR02NY?si=H5ihPkhP--hepd4H

Also, the second panel of this meme is just perfectly captured and captioned. It'd be hilarious whoever they were talking about.

Who wanted a visual reboot of the Klingons?

Gene Roddenberry, I guess. IMO the guy really fell off when he turned Trek into a saturday morning cartoon show. But yeah, sweaty orc is right, just look at these monstrosities:

Yeah, I’m facetiously comparing the 1979 arguments over bumpy headed Klingons to the 2017 arguments over cone headed Klingons. What’s “new” keeps on changing, but the arguments about it stay eerily familiar.

NuTrek started when they did a full visual reboot, including completely changing the look of the Klingons: TMP.

Then it got worse, when they followed that up with a grimdark shoot-em-up that felt nothing like Trek. These people aren't even fans of the show!

The distinction is lost on me, but cheers.

I like to think that, whatever it is that earns O’Brien that distinction, it had already happened by the end of DS9. Probably some technical wizardry he came up with while hacking together Cardassian and Federation technology. Just something he did to get the job done, but that would be fully appreciated as a genius piece of work with huge applicability sometime well after his death.

Picard is super relevant, though. If we're talking about an alternate reality where Picard S3 never happened, then yeah, I'd agree that complaints about nostalgia are a little over blown. I don't see why that would be a discussion worth having, though. Picard did happen, and so did a whole lot of discussion about a possible Legacy show, and if you're wondering why you hear complaints about nostalgia, that's a big part of why.

That's not the entirety of it, though. Outside of Picard, I'll say that Strange New Worlds and Lower Decks absolutely trade heavily in nostalgia. I can't agree with your view that either don't count. Having a fresh style doesn't change the fact that SNW is set on the classic Enterprise and is continuing to introduce more and more classic Trek characters. And Lower Decks built a whole episode around the reuse of a specific cave set from TNG, of all things. A huge amount of its humour and appeal is definitely based in nostalgia.

I will say that it looks like Starfleet Academy on a good course to do it's own thing, Picardo notwithstanding, so I'm not saying the franchise has gone completely bankrupt or anything. I just think there's enough nostalgia going around that it's pretty valid to feel a little put off by it if one is so inclined.