Isaac Asimov Did Not Hold Back About Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

Isaac Asimov was as prolific with his opinions on other sci-fi series as he was with his pen. One area where he had multiple thoughts was "Star Trek." While he had good things to say, he was not encouraging when it came to the fifth feature film of the franchise.

"Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" isn't the most popular "Star Trek" movie. It wanders from the science-grounded script and has an imbalance of action sequences – more than is usual for the intellectual sci-fi IP. The reasons for its shortcomings were apparent to Asimov before it was released. The movie was directed by William Shatner, and the script was written without mastermind Gene Roddenberry's oversight. When Roddenberry finally saw the script, he roped in Asimov for his opinion. The two went back and forth, but in the end, one thing was clear: it really wasn't good — for anyone who might watch it. Asimov opened up his final memo to Roddenberry by saying:

I am sorry to say that I think it breaks with the rationalist tradition of STAR TREK.

Not a great start. From there, he criticized the plot as one that would move "the more educated and sophisticated end of the audience to embarrassed laughter." At the same time, he pointed to the film's irreverent posture toward religion as something that could offend sincere people of faith by what he called "so primitive a conception of God." He didn't stop poking holes. He talked about the lack of universal appeal of a Judeo-Christian worldview of God for a global audience, the watering down of Spock's intellect, and an overall lack of scientific intelligence.

Asimov summed up his thoughts to Roddenberry twice. In the middle of his feedback, he said:

Why on Earth should STAR TREK meddle with such things and seize upon a subject that will be treated in a way that offends nearly everyone.

Then came the real kicker. He tersely wrapped up the memo by saying:

In short, I consider the treatment an out and out disaster.

Not great news for William Shatner and company. Asimov wasn't wrong, either. The movie's abysmal 5.5-star rating on IMDB bears that out, as does a chorus of commentary from fans online. Asimov's thoughts on "Star Trek" as a whole were kinder, though. In an interview at a "Star Trek" convention in 1973, he was particularly positive. He praised the IP's ability to tackle previously unthought-of problems and show respect for intelligence in the universe. Asimov specifically loved the idea of the Prime Directive. He summarized his praise (which also explains some of his criticism for "Star Trek V") by saying:

Star Trek was, in a sense, the sanest, the most meaningful... it tackled real social problems. It was not devoted entirely to adventure. And most of all, it had fully realized characters.

Asimov's judgment wasn't reserved for the expansive "Star Trek" canon. The man had opinions on other sci-fi projects, too. He had good things to say about "2001: A Space Odyssey's" special effects and its ability to be scientifically accurate. On the flip side, Asimov didn't mince words when it came to his dislike for Battlestar Galactica. He saw it as too close to "Star Wars" while mirroring all of that universe's "less attractive portions," saying he was "impatient with it." Again with the laconically damning statements, his summary was "One felt it was unworthy."

Some opinions were a little more balanced, or perhaps the right word is backhanded. For instance, he felt novels, like Frank Herbert's "Dune" books, were good but built on sci-fi foundations he had created (in that case, literally with his "Foundation" novels).

It's the sign of an honest critic when you can praise a franchise while being willing to criticize its weakest links. In the case of Trekkies, there's no need to feel crestfallen when the father of sci-fi criticizes a part of your canon. Asimov was being honest, both in his praise and his critiquing, which is why his words, both kind and harsh, continue to resonate for fans right into the present.