Why did Spock die after II? Did Nimoy want to quit the films?

[mrajan]

Don't expect to see Leonard Nimoy in the Star Trek sequel now in the works for 2012. The 79-year-old tells the Toronto Sun he's retiring from all acting gigs—including Spock—for good. "I've been doing this professionally for 60 years,” he says. “I want to get off the stage." After a few more sci-fi conventions he's got booked, he'll be done with those, too.

 

[Christopher]

Nimoy essentially had been retired from on-camera acting for years (he still did occasional voice roles) before he took the role in the 2009 ST film. His last on-camera acting job before that, and his only one in the prior decade, had been one episode of the Ted Danson/Terry Farrell sitcom Becker in 2001.

 

[jwb]

I'm always wondering what Star Trek III might have been like had they not searched for Spock. One thing the movies lacked was durability of changes. Spock died and returned, the Enterprise was blown up and returned, Kirk got a son and then lost it.

Well, that's one of the reasons I think Star Trek V was poorly received. In Star Trek II, there were the bold decisions to give Kirk a son and kill off Spock. Then in Star Trek III things really get messed up, with our heroes becoming outlaws, the Enterprise being destroyed, David dying and Spock and Bones getting all messed up in the head. When you get to the end of Star Trek IV and everything comes full circle with Captain Kirk back on the bridge of the Enterprise, Spock and Bones okay, and (as you mentioned) no David, whatever comes next is bound to be anticlimactic because we just saw a fantastic trilogy, and now we're back "home" like it never happened.