There can never be enough Nimoy. Never!

You got that right!

Doesn't Nimoy have a cameo in the new Trek movie? If so, that means that he, Fringe, and everything he ever touches will suck, so help me Kirk! lol

5kev, that barely made sense.

yeah, 5kev, your attempting at trolling fell apart there

This series keeps getting better.

Really? There's at least one point I know of where there was way too much of Nimoy!

Referring to the infamous Bilbo Baggins ballad, of course. Check it out on YouTube.

Live long and prosper Mr. Nimoy!!

I hope him popping up in the season finale opens up the notion of him joining the cast for season 2, in a recurring role type of thing.

I hope so that we'll also see Shat in the Fringe, maybe as Walter's nutty buddy. :D

I guess "retired" doesn't mean what I think it means.

Let me look it up:

Retired [see Nimoy] (adjective) - willing to whore yourself out for any JJ Abrams project.

Okay, so Nimoy helps lend legitimacy to Abrams' Trek film by doing a cameo, and he subsequently gets a recurring role in Abrams' floundering, overbudget series (well, one of them anyway).

So, is anyone else thinking "thirty pieces of silver" here?

Okay...maybe that was harsh...it is Passover/Easter. Still, I'm sure I wasn't the only one thinking it. I just had the cajones to say it.

Capt. Jack:

Actually, "retired" for folks in Hollywood actually is defined as "Unavailable to work until the money from the residuals/royalties checks can't pay the bills, or your agent rips you off, or your investments cratered." Given this economy, I'd say the latter may be more on target.

That's what living long and prospering gets you these days folks: retiring in your mid-sixties only to have to go back to work in your early seventies.

Sniff, you're probably right. What I was thinking of was something I read when "Indiana Jones 4: Indy Bombs at the Box Office" was in preproduction, Lucas and Spielberg went to visit Sean Connery to ask him to play Indy's dad one more time and they found him on the golf course. Connery told them he was retired and he was busy - playing golf. They offered him a huge paycheck. Connery said he was playing golf and they were disrupting his game. I figured it was a matter of class and dignity. It could also be Connery managed his money better. It could also be that Nimoy never made the kind of money Connery did, I'm willing to go out on a limb here with that. Still, I'm willing to bet we get an announcement in a few weeks that Nimoy's going to make a startling guest appearance on "LOST!"

Jack and Sniff

Nimoy certainly doesn't need the likes of me to defend him. Lord knows that off stage and screen through the years, he hasn't exactly been consistently logical or smart in dealing with the Trek franchise and its consumers. In fact there's been times that he's donned the redshirt and personally handed out the phasers (not set to stun).

Still, I think your suggestions and the pejorative invoked indicating that he really doesn't care for his craft and is only in this movie for the money is off the beam.

A man doesn't go to bat for the city of Vulcan, which doesn't even have a movie theater, because he's all about the shekels.

I'm willing to entertain the notion that the parties involved in this may have put together a successful movie but as Trek it's drek and look forward to your contributions to that end. But these personal attacks on Nimoy just isn't going to be your shining moment of clarity for the most of us.

Jack:
Hadn't heard that story. Not sure if it's true or not, as I'm sure any offer would never be made directly to Connery but through his agent, since the man has said repeatedly since the 90s that he won't act in anything that requires him to travel much. Even so, his appearance in the film wouldn't have repaired the moronic script.

Son:
Well-articulated though your thoughts may be (and trust me, it's appreciated), missing the point is still missing the point, which I think you have here. I'll try to simplify it to help you out. Think "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." Die-hard Trek fans may be having a hard time reconciling Nimoy's participation in a project being headed by someone like Abrams. Abrams' own comments about Star Wars and Star Trek show that he has no real idea what Roddenberry's vision of the Star Trek universe and its characters was or should be, and fans are understandably upset by that. So when Nimoy follows this cameo with a role in another Abrams project, and this appearance could be more than just a one-off, it would be "logical," if you'll pardon the pun, to conclude that this might be an instance of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours," and thus, conflict explained and resolved.

As for his work for the city of Vulcan (which is all well and good), it proves nothing. It's not all about the Benjamins, baby. Everyone has a soft spot. Hitler loved animals and was a vegetarian. Then again, Gandhi was obsessed with women's bowel movements, so go figure.

Bottom line: None of it matters. 1) Abrams' Trek film will succeed or fail based on how well it entertains. I haven't heard Trekkers/Trekkies say they're outright boycotting it in droves, so that suggests they'll at least go see it once. If they like it, they'll tell others to go see it, and see it again themselves. If not, it'll drop from the theaters in two-three weeks. 2) Nimoy deserves to make a living just like everyone else. If he's offered a part, looks at the script and thinks, "yeah, I'm okay with this," then that's fine. We can all think what we want, but who cares? 3) It's just a friggin' movie.

Sniff,

Thank you, and like-wise I appreciate your responding in kind.

One thing: whenever someone has recourse to that old Hitler chestnut, I'm always left pondering, "That anecdote would be far more effective if only he hadn't so callously used his dog as a cyanide ampule guinea pig." I suppose it gives a literal meaning to the phrase "to love something to death"? And oddly, I suppose that holds something for the meta-topic at hand, i.e. Trek.

But that's something to discuss in a less Nimoy-centric thread.

Guys (and you know who you are) what does it matter if Nimoy decides to abbreviate his retirement by taking acting roles ever so often? Who are you to say that is "Whoring" oneself out? That is really none of anyone's business but his. There is no written law that says one must retire by a certain age and NEVER work again ever. If he does work than he deserves to get paid for it and adding any ulterior motives to him going to work is inappropriate and downright spiteful. He's an actor, and like it or not that is what he gets paid to be. If you don't like the fact that Mr. Nimoy has supported a "trek" movie you don't like then deal with it, he's not entitled to act in productions that his fans only like. And comparing his retirement to Connery's is also stupid. Connery may never want to work again in acting no matter the cost and is willing to suffer for it unlike Nimoy. Who knows. The circmstances are theirs to work through, not ours.

Good Call !! GO-O-O SPOCK!!

IsoTek, you missed my point, probably on purpose. He went beyond a Trek movie when he turned up on Fringe. He's supporting Abrams other projects, not just a Trek movie. I'm telling you, he'll be on Lost next....

I don't care if he is retired, out of retirement, down on his luck, or maybe (I think this is true) just an actor who loves to act and why wouldn't he? My God! why wouldn't he just love to guest on a great series like Fringe!! I can hardly wait to see him on it!!