Movie Review: Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013)

I found this review by Sam Staley of Star Trek: Into Darkness to reflect my own thoughts on the film. (And, of course, there is Mr. Plinkett's video review that shows how almost all of Into Darkness was ripped off from previous Star Trek movies.) Staley begins by stating his reaction was "ho hum." Why is this? Because Into Darkness lacks what makes science fiction most appealing as a genre, specifically dealing with matters of "individual autonomy, technology, free will, and the role of the State." Classic science fiction stories, such as those by Isaac Asimov, Frank Herbert, and Robert Heinlein do these things, as does the Star Trek television series.

The very first episode of Star Trek explores the question of how important human freedom is when Captain Pike encounters aliens with such fantastic mental powers that they not only are telepathic but can affect humans' brains so much as to cause them to see illusions (kind of like the Holodeck). These aliens capture Captain Pike and try to pacify him with the illusion of being back home on his farm with his favorite horse, a picnic basket, and a beautiful woman. The question thus presented to the viewer is: if you could indulge in all earthly pleasures (though artificial) to your heart's content, but would physically be trapped in a cage and studied by aliens, would you? Another interesting issue that Star Trek deals with (and which Into Darkness touches upon) is the Prime Directive, which is the principle that Star Fleet should not interfere with the development of more primitive cultures. (I wrote on this issue from a libertarian perspective here.)

But, states Staley, "nothing in Into Darkness rises to the level of meaningful social, political, or philosophical commentary." At best, it is a sign of how far we have come since the '60s, when "a biracial kiss was a big deal," a racial group could be openly denied equal protections under the law, and the Cold War potentially threatened thermonuclear war. But it is certainly not the case that the Western world is problem free or that moral issues involving technology are gone. This is clearly so when one considers the surveillance state, drone warfare, crypto-currencies, and so forth. One hopes that writers and artists will create content that grapples with such issues.

And this might be the biggest issue with Star Trek: Into Darkness: it is simply an action movie held in a futuristic setting. Star Trek didn't become the phenomenon that it is by doing action sci-fi well, but by presenting and wrestling with the political and social issues of our times (as well as future and past times), and allowing us to imagine what space exploration might be like. It's not that Into Darkness is a bad movie, but that it falls short of what we hope to see from Star Trek.