Would ST Have Died If Nimoy Had Not Returned for ST3?

[Aike]

If Nimoy had decided not to return as Spock in The Search For Spock, what would have happened to Star Trek?

Would a third movie without him have flopped and killed Star Trek for good?

Or could it still have happened as it turned out with all the spin offs?

In other words, was Nimoy vital for the survival of Star Trek in the mid-80s?

 

[IrritatingGameOfChess]

That's hard to say. The spin-offs had complete casts created from scratch, whereas continuing without Spock would have left a hole in the original cast of characters.

Then again, the cast proved they had a lot of chemistry without him in the bulk of TSFS, regardless of what one thinks of the plot.

I'd have to guess that if Spock had not returned it would have been difficult for the original crew to survive in terms of the box office. Spock was just too integral to that team.

 

[Basil]

That's hard to say. The spin-offs had complete casts created from scratch, whereas continuing without Spock would have left a hole in the original cast of characters.

Then again, the cast proved they had a lot of chemistry without him in the bulk of TSFS, regardless of what one thinks of the plot.

I'd have to guess that if Spock had not returned it would have been difficult for the original crew to survive in terms of the box office. Spock was just too integral to that team.

With the exception of Kirk, no single character missing back then would have resulted in the end or decline of Star Trek. I think fans put more emphasis on the character of Spock than general movie audiences do.

 

[Claudia]

With the exception of Kirk, no single character missing back then would have resulted in the end or decline of Star Trek. I think fans put more emphasis on the character of Spock than general movie audiences do.

I don't agree with that assessment.

First of all, who'd watch a ST-movie if not fans? And secondly, Kirk as a character's only as strong as the cast enables him to be. Granted, the interaction in STIII worked - but I always felt something integral for Kirk missing. To me it's his interaction with Spock and to a lesser extent both their interaction with Bones that define Kirk... Take that away, and the special appeal of TOS(-movies) is gone as well. And thus perhaps the hope for the franchise to continue with 4 other series and lots of more movies...

 

[Therin of Andor]

First of all, who'd watch a ST-movie if not fans?

Paramount has estimated that organised fandom makes up only about 5-10% of a ST movie's audience. Collectors of tie-in merchandise are less than 1%.

 

[Aike]

But did not Paramount see him as vital?

According to Star Trek The Real Story, Nimoy wanted a raise after the first season since he was the most popular character. NBC agreed.

And according to Captain´s Logs:

*Nimoy didn´t want to appear in Phase two at all at first. Paramount thought he was vital and agreed to all his terms.

*Nimoy didn´t want to appear in The Motion Picture. Paramount thought he was vital and agreed to all his terms.

*Nimoy didn´t want to appear in Star Trek 2. Bennett and Meyer created the death scene to get him interested and then worked hard to create a great script for Spock. And wasn´t there a story in the Wall Street Journal that showed how much money Paramount would lose without Spock in a Star Trek movie?

*Paramount didn´t want Spock´s death to be final and made the ending, against Meyer´s wishes, less so.

*Paramount let Nimoy direct 3 and 4. And The Search For Spock focuses entirely on getting Spock back to life.

Concerning TNG, if Star Trek 2 or 3 hadn´t been succesful wouldn´t that have hurt the chances of getting the necessary financing for the series since the brand name would have been hurt?

 

[Claudia]

First of all, who'd watch a ST-movie if not fans?

Paramount has estimated that organised fandom makes up only about 5-10% of a ST movie's audience. Collectors of tie-in merchandise are less than 1%.

Well, I'm not sure what falls under "organised fandom". I love watching Trek, however, I'm not in any fanclub etc. And I definitely wouldn't go watch a movie based on a TV-series if I hadn't at least watched some episodes on TV. And TV-ST pretty much established Spock as the second main protagonist. Not knowing the background from the series, ST II and the conflict between Kirk and Khan wouldn't have meant anything, so I'd say ST II and its sequels were rather made for fans or at least loose followers of the series.

 

[Basil]

I was a teen in 1984. The only Trek then was TOS-related, and if you said "Star Trek," most people said "Captain Kirk" in response. Every once in a while, you might hear "Spock," but it was almost always erroneously connected with "Doctor." Fans liked Spock, sometimes more than Kirk, but the average person identified the show with the lead hero, the captain. Others generally saw Spock as a supporting character.

 

[sbk1234]

A simplistic view, to be sure. And I'm not in show biz or anything, so this is my opinion, but simply put: If the stories were good, the movies would have continued. If they were bad, they wouldn't have.

I do think that at the time of Treks 3 and 4, there was no other Star Trek than movies, so more latitude was given the films by the audience, and what they were willing to see.
But what do I know?

 

[Elder Knight]

If I recall cortrectly, there were a few "close calls" in the continuance of the movie series. The absence of Nimoy might well have tipped the balance somewhere.

 

[Praetor]

I think there's a distinct difference between whether the studio would have wanted to go ahead with further sequels without Nimoy, versus whether said sequels would have been successful without him.

I'm inclined to say the studio would not have wanted to go ahead without him, but if they could have been convinced to that the sequels might have still been successful. It all just depends on the stories which, if you think about it, are somewhat driven by Spock in III, IV, and VI.

 

[Kirk1980]

This thread would make Shatner blush.

 

[NathanielM]

But did not Paramount see him as vital?

According to Star Trek The Real Story, Nimoy wanted a raise after the first season since he was the most popular character. NBC agreed.

And according to Captain´s Logs:

*Nimoy didn´t want to appear in Phase two at all at first. Paramount thought he was vital and agreed to all his terms.

*Nimoy didn´t want to appear in The Motion Picture. Paramount thought he was vital and agreed to all his terms.

*Nimoy didn´t want to appear in Star Trek 2. Bennett and Meyer created the death scene to get him interested and then worked hard to create a great script for Spock. And wasn´t there a story in the Wall Street Journal that showed how much money Paramount would lose without Spock in a Star Trek movie?

*Paramount didn´t want Spock´s death to be final and made the ending, against Meyer´s wishes, less so.

*Paramount let Nimoy direct 3 and 4. And The Search For Spock focuses entirely on getting Spock back to life.

Concerning TNG, if Star Trek 2 or 3 hadn´t been succesful wouldn´t that have hurt the chances of getting the necessary financing for the series since the brand name would have been hurt?

This is very true. Nimoy although he wanted to direct the 3rd and 4th film he also wanted to be very creative, and his vision turned out to be the best ones. His vision was: No sets no ship no effects (very litttle) And an excellent story line.

In all rights Star Trek 2:Twok and Star Trek 3:sfs and Star Trek 4: TVH could be concievably a three part sequel.

It was very inventive and Nimoy's talent does show... And his eye for lettting the cast members try different things.

Example:

Kirk's fallling back on the floor next to the command chair when kruge's men killed his son was really an accident. (Star Trek 3) Nimoy actually had Shatner do that again, and emphisize on his line... And it worked really well, having a powerful effect of emotion...


I doubt if Nimoy did not do star trek 3 or 4, that the other cast members would have wanted to step up and direct. (shatner or Takai) And even then Paramount would milk this for all tits worth. They had a cash cow here... and popularity. i doubt it would have hurt the franchine much.

I met the full cast througout the years (original and new generation) I actually shook Nimoy's hand, after I gave the vulcan Salute at his dismay. He is is very smart and business savy.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Well, I'm not sure what falls under "organised fandom". I love watching Trek, however, I'm not in any fanclub etc.

You frequent a dedicated Star Trek bbs. That's organised fandom.

I'd say ST II and its sequels were rather made for fans

Then you'd be wrong.

or at least loose followers of the series.

Perhaps. In other words, members of the general populace who recognize Trek as something worth catching for a predictably good night at the movies. That's also why sequel movies often make less money than the first one. The law of diminishing returns.

 

[QuasarVM]

I think the Trek would have gone on without Spock.

If Spock was required for it to continue, then obviously there would have been no TNG -- which was a huge success without *any* of the original cast.

 

[guardian]

I think that Nimoy's involvement as director would have placated some fans, even if his character hadn't been resurected. Sort of him giving a stamp of approval for the series moving on without Spock.

I certainly would have contined watching the movies, but i was a fan of Saavik, Carol & David, so I was happy with what could have been a piece by piece replacement of the original cast as they aged. clearly Scotty went two movies too long IMO.
Or the older cast being in charge on the ship and younger crew members being on the landing parties etc.

 

[Praetor]

I certainly would have contined watching the movies, but i was a fan of Saavik, Carol & David, so I was happy with what could have been a piece by piece replacement of the original cast as they aged. clearly Scotty went two movies too long IMO.
Or the older cast being in charge on the ship and younger crew members being on the landing parties etc.

Yeah, as fond as I am of the original crew, it always struck me as a bit silly that their 'reward' at the end of TVH was basically having the TOS status quo restored. No promotions (actually a demotion)... it almost seemed more like a punishment. These people were all captains and commanders. They should have continued to grow as they did in the first three films. I understand that Kirk 'screwed up' and had to be punished but it was not only unrealistic but unfair to the characters. I also hated that Saavik was brushed a side and David (IMO) needlessly killed.

 

[LeadHead]

I think it's very possible that the trek film series would have gone on without Spock. They set up their new crew in TWOK, Saavik would have assumed Spock's role in the trio, but creating a different dynamic to it, Logic wuld no longer just be subordinate to Kirk, but to McCoy as well. I think if Spock were not going to return in III, Paramount would have given Kirste Alley what she wanted as far as her contract went, since she would be again a very central part of the story. It would have become a little more of an ENT vibe with Saavik becoming a sort of T'Pol, but that dynamic worked well enough on ENT.


I think if Nimoy had signed on to direct and not actually bring Spock back the fans would have responded to the movie and supported it. But I think there would be a required "Flashback" scene at some point with Spock in it in order to really hook them in. Sort of like what they did on The West Wing with Mrs. Landingham. After she died, they had 2 flashback episodes, both featured a brief cameo with her.


I think the wide Success of Trek IV was probably one of the most important factors in TNG happening though, so it's a real "Who knows?" situation there. They might have gone on to do IV in the same manner anyway with Nimoy just on as a director,so creativly it could have gne very similarly, with the exception of Spock's "Colorful metaphors"


Regardless, Trek would have been different, and I like th Trek Film Series the way it is. Well, TFF should be fixed. But that's not the discussion we're having right now.

 

[Ssosmcin]

I agree, I think if Nimoy had not returned to the role, and Kirstie Alley had remained as Saavik, the series would have gone on. Saavik was popular in TWOK and had a very good dynamic with Kirk. It would have been different, but no more than if the Phase II version of the series had been done with Xon instead of Spock.

There's a funny thing about Spock that a lot of the NBC guys and Spock-addicts didn't get. Spock worked best when he was with Kirk and/or Kirk and McCoy. Spock, on his own, was not as interesting. Spock was more of a reactionary character, i.e. there to comment on human bahaviors. Kirk, however, was KIRK. He didn't need the special alien character to bounce of off to be interesting. Arguably, he was interesting because Shatner himself was interesting.

Kirk is one of those characters who works well in any situation you put him in and with anyone you want. The films would have worked. Would they have been successful? That would depend on the fans.

 

[TigerOfDarkness]

Although they could have tried pushing Savik as Spock's replacement, I think Spock was a very important part of the general public's perception of what Star Trek was. It seems to me that it would have been very hard to do a financially successful Trek III without him.