How serious am I about Star Trek? Last night I sat on a stage at the Alamo Drafthouse and got the Starfleet symbol tattooed on me before a screening of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. I feel that this solidifies my Trek bona fides.
So when I say that ridged/non-ridged doesn't matter when it comes to Klingons in Star Trek 2, take my word for it. Whatever the case, it looks like we'll find out in the movie, as JJ Abrams cannily let us see an image of a Klingon during some skit on the MTV Movie Awards.
For those not in the know: in the original Star Trek series Klingons looked like brown people. Space Puerto Ricans, sort of. Then in Star Trek: The Motion Picture they suddenly had these forehead ridges and that became the standard design. The exact answer for why the old Klingons looked like members of the Sharks was never really addressed fully (or maybe it was in some Star Trek: Enterprise episode. I'm really only into the original series, to be honest).
But when it comes to the new Star Trek movies I'm just not going to care. Canon is out the window, and unless Abrams has a character out so totally incorrectly I'm letting it all go. I wish that he had just done a clean reboot, not a prebootquel that introduces questions like "Which version of the Enterprise crew shows up in 1967 or 1986 time travel stories," but whatever. Again, I'm just taking this whole thing as a clean reboot, which I'm assuming means Klingons have ridges and they just do.