Star Trek Marks a Shift in the National Mood

Reader Comments
Back to blog

It was a fun movie, a pleasant change from the grim shows of Batman, Battlestar Galactica (which took itself way too seriously), etc. And '70s movies were awful. Yes, people wanted change, and we needed a change, but the change we are in now is not good. Pres. Obama is working diligently to march us towards socialism and further away from the principles upon which this country was founded, i.e., freedom. People don't seem to realize that with every law, and every tax increase, we lose a little more freedom. In CA, with revenues dramacically increasing from 2000-2008, did our legislature put that money away for the inevitable rainy day? No--they spent it all and significantly more. Now with people losing jobs and taking pay cuts to keep their jobs, the state is raising taxes dramatically. Pres. Obama's proposed tax increases are hidden from the paycheck for political gain, but are much higher than we pay now (value added tax). It is a frightening time.

Steve of CA 1:16PM May 12, 2009

I have been watching Star Trek since it was new (I'm in my early 50's.) I think the new movie is great, not politically correct, just a great action/adventure with a positive view of the future. I happen to be politically conservative, and I know there are lots of liberals who also enjoy Star Trek. This is encouraging, and transcends politics. Hope for the future is what we had in the sixties, and we can have hope again, and it doesn't begin in Washhington DC, it begins at home. Just enjoy the movie, hava an open mind about the changes, it opens up new posiblities for stories, and that means Star Trek will continue to be part of our culture. Enjoy the movie !

Leon of MN 12:14AM May 12, 2009

I agree with your assessment of the national mood here, but I think you're dead wrong on the reason for our collective want of optimism and what has inspired it. You implied that Obama deserves the credit, for most or all of a renewed national hope, but I propose that Obama and his ilk are what most of us desperately want and NEED to feel that we can defeat. The millions who were beyond depressed by the results of the last election are finally awakening to optimistically believe we'll survive this thing - possibly survive strong. We have tapped into this collective optimism and believe that at the end of his miserable term we'll still BE the United States of America and not forced into socialist slavery of a doomed world government.
We as American's may look to movies like Trek to remind us that there are the Jim Kirks and Spocks of our nation that will dare to fight against the evils of progressive liberalism and the evils of a man so entrenched in narcissism that he couldn't possibly know what's right for anyone besides himself. In my opinion THAT is the optimism Trek and movies like it have tapped into.
Art has always been used to inspire from as early as Greece and Rome so it's no surprise that our national cinema might do the same. It's job was to remind the masses of what could be accomplished if they willed it and what could happen if they chose to do nothing. We can sit back and let the "Neros" or Obama's of the world destroy the very essence of who we are or we can fight with everything we are and win.
If Star Trek has awakened that national optimism or merely serves as herald for it, you may be right- this will serve as a turning point for our decade.

Suzanne Terri of UT 11:37PM May 11, 2009

You say this film is "Politically Correct" So Kirk in bed with the ever popular green skinned hottie is PC?
Enjoy it for what it is, entertainment not an archaelogical dig or an exact telling of real history.
It's an alternate timeline to explore new things... hmmm wait that was done in just about every incarnation of the the show.
I enjoyed it and clearly many others did...
You probably pounced on TNG when it debuted too. As with all things give it time and lighten up.

Russ Schenck of TN 5:42AM May 11, 2009

Just saw the new Star Trek movie and it was sad. The writer had to change the characters to suit whatever he liked without thinking of the integrity of the original. The integrity is what gave it longevity. Scotty and Sulu were the only ones close to the true characters. All the others were a rewrite of history. Have the writer make a new movie with a his own characters instead of riding on another person's success. It's time to get off the Politically correct fad now. It's old, phoney, and look where it has gotten the world.

Was Fordem of CA 5:58AM May 10, 2009

Movies like the Dark Knight have a place in exploring how we deal with personal tragedy and universal evil. Rightly, we all have some mix of both. A la Aristotle, it is not a good idea to mix your character with too much of one or the other. But, given the number of movies and media selling so many stories about the "dark side" of politics, technology, religion and economics, and using the PAST in many cases, to justify conclusions, any film that can address technology, politics, and religion, even if it is science fiction (after all, the future IS science fiction,) a vision of hope is not extreme. Visionaries are the creators of the future, and looking at different combinations of future ethics, politics, race, religion, technology ARE worth the investment the producers made. Who needs Oscars if screenwriters, producers, and actors work together to create another alternative vision? Films are just brainstorming looking for a profit, or at least break-even. In our time, we need all the visions we can muster. But if we cannot sell optimism,as one of those visions, we ARE in dire straits. Suppose Thomas Edison had been a film producer for even half his working hours. The world can use quite a few doses of reasonably optimistic visions, if only to shift the "gloom and doom" attitude of humanity to at least SEE other possibilities.

James Martin of FL 7:03AM May 09, 2009

First of the first 43 years were not destroyed by the new trek movie. If you knew anything about string theory and multiverse theory you would realize that we have simply jumped tracks to a new parallel universe. You can not travel back in time. It is impossible. You can, however, travel to a parallel universe to what appears to be back in time. In multiverse theory all possible universes happen. So Spock and Nero had influence on another timeline not the one we were raised on and that is ok. Our Trek Universe still exists.
Star Trek needed to be reframed for the millenial generation anyway. While the baby boomers future was always threatened by the press of a button. The Millenials have never had to live under that cloud of fear. Their cloud is more of uncertainty with a dash of fear. Global economics, Global Warming, more people competeting for fewer resources and of course terrorism are the things that keep a millenial generation person up at night.
The Star Trek mythos of a future where finally realize our potential simply needed to be reframed so that the door was open to the Millenials. I am glad they did it.
BTW the movie f'n rocks!!!!
Regards,

Jose Kuhn of TX 12:55AM May 09, 2009

It is not my focus to try and hook pollitics to this movie, and why would you?, it is just a movie but Star Trek is an institution 42 years old, Barack is not, he wasn't even a Senator for 2 years. If I wanted to draw a political parallel, Kirk had not even finished Star Fleet Academy, and he is made a Captian, woefully Unqualified for the Job, Barack didn't finish his tour in Congress, and he is where and how qualified?
This is an attack on Hollywood or Hollyweed if you go by what they put out. Now if you want to talk about the "dark" characters of now..The Watchmen came out in 1987, Batman the Dark Knight series before that, the 60's show, that was a product of the times.
This circles back to Nothing truly Original is coming from Hollywood. This is my Focus and complaint, Stan Lee has kept the Marvel movies Faithful to the story line, Hollywood will make the Wolverine My Little Kitty. Thanks Stan. The only way they can Think they did something Original is to take an established show and destroy it beyond all recognition. Richard Hatch could not save BattleStar Galactica, and since Gene Rodenbury has passed there was no Chapion For this Star Trek.
Go ahead and make fun of us we are the ones Who have spent Millions upon Millions of dollars at Trek Cons, over the internet, have and wear the costumes, speak Klingon, can tell at a glance the rank of any in costume. There is a story line and that is sacred to us. The way this movie should have gone is the past gets fixed, there was the technology at hand, what Billions of can be killed off, no problem. so go back and fix it.

Jon means of WY 10:46PM May 08, 2009

Haven't even seen the movie (cause I'm watching MY pennies) but by the descriptions it sounds like the producers tried to capture the old fun-hopefull-sci-fi "western" flavor of the original series.
Hmmmn...mid-sixties, nasty lingering war, less than thrilling slimey leader, scandles-lies-deceit.
People NEED an escape!
Doesn't mean ANYBODY is feeling hopefull except for GE/MSNBC.

Chris Petty of GA 10:31PM May 08, 2009

but I think I'd be as well off watching reruns of Andy and Barney. They're still running (more than 42 years, too). Mayberry was imaginary, of course, but not in a way that defied any sensible concept of distance and physics.

Muser of NM 7:55PM May 08, 2009