“IT HAS got to a point where the general public are not particularly shocked or even bothered that the Pentagon would directly intervene on a script that was critical of the US or its military,” says Abu Dhabi-based writer and academic Stephen Trinder.

Trinder is alarmed by declassified government reports of direct interference in film-making by people in power but the real focus of his research and writing is the extent to which neoliberal thinking is reinforced by subtler forms of influence and constraint.

“Understanding how the taken-for-granted truisms came to be there is most important in encouraging self-reflection and, ultimately, real change,” he says. “How did we get to this point? What are the underlying reasons that ultimately see such an action treated so apathetically by the public?”

In his book Critical Perspectives on Hollywood Science Fiction, Trinder considers the influence of a “neoliberal framework” in determining narrative, design, language, characters and casting of mainstream science-fiction films. What inspired his reflection on these structural influences?

“As a masters student, Michel Foucault’s concept of discourse was central to a lot of the things I read and discussed,” he responds. “Truth is the result of competing statements, and which of those ‘wins out.’

“I became interested in the idea that propaganda, in the totalitarian sense of  ‘all hail the beautiful leader,’ was redundant in the modern world, where things are more understated and ambiguous.  

“The state of play relies less on objective truth than which actors, and how many of them, are saying something. The Iraq war was an example of this and, more recently, the alt-right have employed the same techniques to push their agenda.”

Trinder compares sf movies expressing confidence in neoliberalism to those exhibiting doubt. He suggests historical colonialism depended on white Europeans imagining themselves at the apex of civilisation.

This has provided an enduring perspective for sf filmmakers, even those ostensibly engaged in a critique of the current world order. So what hope is there for a more critical form of sf cinema?

“The PR disasters of the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions and the 2008 economic crash made people aware that the system underpinning our socioeconomic lives is not working in the interests of most of the global population,” he says.

“The self-doubt we see in District 9, which allegorises Iraq war flashpoints and Elysium, a film that critiques wealth inequality, responds to this.

“While this is a good thing, it is important to point out that these films fall short in their racial stereotyping of Nigerians and Latinos and the way they promote individualism and white privilege.

“But self-doubt often means reflection, which shows reshaping the neoliberal focus is something on people’s minds.”

The allegorical power of sf is often seen as a way of getting subversive material past cultural gatekeepers but Trinder believes it can become a means of avoiding genuine confrontation with neoliberalism.

“There are many factors influencing film production, including time, money and studio intervention on scripts and some directors resort to binary stereotyping for storytelling reasons. Attempts to put across a complex point on the ambiguous nature of human beings make studio execs feel the narrative has become muddled.

“This might confuse its target audience. District 9 and Elysium director Neill Blomkamp says he prefers avoiding big-budget movies because he loses his creative freedom with regard to storytelling.”

A recurring theme in Trinder’s book is the tendency of films ostensibly opposed to neoliberalism to become safety valves that ensure dissenting sentiment does not translate into something more threatening to the established order.

“Although such films fail to provide active solutions to the issues facing us today, I, and other film scholars, would argue they make us feel better in the way the big bad corporation gets its comeuppance, or the racist white man gets stabbed to death by the noble native.

“From a psychoanalytic perspective, these emotionally charged and  sometimes violent moments provide relief for the audience.

“I’m not saying Hollywood films should be encouraging a radical overthrow of the current world order through the way they tell their stories but the industry has a larger influence on society than we might think, so it does have a duty to inform its audiences in the right way.”

Another of Trinder’s concerns is that films tackling anti-capitalist, pro-environmental and ethical themes can become a kind of “performed anti-capitalism.”

Does this mean passive consumption of an angry, oppositional narrative can become a harmless substitute for taking genuine action?

“Ultimately, this is the case. Slavoj Zizek, who I know isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, and the late Mark Fisher highlighted how these themes have been incorporated into late-capitalist logic.

“Over the last few decades, big business has been able to exploit the damage capitalist expansion has done to the environment.

“Richard Branson, who in 2007 pledged 10 years’ worth of profit from Virgin Trains and Virgin Atlantic to help in the fight against global warming, best represents the way the environmentalist movement has been appropriated.”

Trinder’s take on the film Cloud Atlas is particularly interesting. He identifies problems with the film’s reputation as a liberal-humanist piece, a key one being that it makes prejudicial assumptions about the inferiority of “otherness.”

Does this mean cinema, mainstream and independent, is doomed to sustain neoliberal perspectives?

“A large majority of independent and foreign films go beyond the neoliberal tropes seen in Hollywood. Cloud Atlas is an interesting case. While it is an independent film, it had a $100 million budget and internationally renowned actors and directors attached.

“It had a wonderful opportunity to really push the envelope. There were genuine progressive elements but the energy put into its liberal-humanist agenda obscured its potential a little.

“In terms of mainstream film, the main points I identify in my book are the inability to move beyond capital as a phenomenon that governs our social reality, white saviour narratives, the promotion of radical individualism and employing physical space to articulate difference. These appear in many contemporary sci-fi, and other, films.

“While Hollywood isn’t doomed to continue its facilitation of neoliberal ideas, it has a very long way to go to be free of its shackles.”

I ask Trinder how a sci-fi movie could conduct a genuine and comprehensive critique of neoliberalism?

“US literary critic Frederic Jameson explains that in the neoliberal era, it seems easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. The film would need to envision a world without capitalism as the underlying rationale for the way a society works.

“It would also encourage us to confront our own role in perpetuating certain aspects of the exploitative nature of the neoliberal project. It would have to show us another way is possible.

“Funnily enough, several sf films and TV series of 1960s and 1970s Hollywood like Star Trek did do this quite well. I can’t think of many, if any, that have managed this in recent years, which goes back to Jameson’s point.”

Mark Fisher said capitalism is “an infinitely pragmatic system which, in the absence of overarching laws, can improvise endlessly to retain control of the culture,” yet Thomas Picketty and Yanks Viviparous suggest that capitalism is in its death throes. Who does Trinder believe has it right?

“Both camps are correct. The question is are we ready to deal with this end point when it arrives?

“In terms of economy and culture, heads are buried in the sand. Trump’s speech at Davos, promoting fossil fuels, was profoundly depressing.

“Coming back to the UK I see how austerity has crept up on towns around the country. At Christmas, street lights in my village were turned off so the local council could save money.

“This is the world’s sixth largest economy we are talking about. Neoliberal mentality in action. It would be unthinkable in the UAE, the populace wouldn’t accept it.

“On the other side, Picketty points out that neoliberal economics is not sustainable for the population or the environment. But these messages are crowded out of the conversation.

“For me, this comes back to discourse. Can we tip the balance to the point where people are willing to really take action and embrace radical economic and societal change? Let’s hope so.”

Critical Perspectives on Hollywood Science Fiction is published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing, £58.99.