1. "The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many..."
Spock died so that his shipmates could have a future. His decision was logical: The needs of the many outweighed the needs of the one. "Star Trek III" is almost the anti "Star Trek II". Number two introduced Kirk's son and the Genesis planet and the death of Spock to save the Enterprise and her crew. Number three had Kirk lose his son, the destruction of Genesis and the Enterprise and the crew sacrificing THEIR futures to save Spock. Their decision was human: The needs of the one outweighed the needs of the many. Of course, "Star Trek IV" would have to be almost be the anti "Star Trek III". The crew would be forgiven for their crimes and they'd be back to their space travels. Even as a kid, I knew that they'd end up saving the Earth to end this trilogy, which was never actually conceived as a trilogy in the first place. But that's not the point. At the end of "Star Trek III", these characters did not know that. As far as they were concerned, they were facing court martial for their actions. But they did not care. McCoy was going to be all right and they got Spock back. It has to still bring a smile to one's face at the end of film when Spock says, "Your name is Jim" and raises one of those eye brows, the overjoyed crew surrounds Spock, and they all know everything was worth it. Again, film showed us what Star Trek is really about. Yes, its about exploring space, seeking out new planets and new races, finding out what's out there. But at its core, its about these characters. I found an old clip online of Siskel and Ebert reviewing a Trek film and commenting that these characters were just as much of a family as the Huxtables on "The Cosby Show". Can I get an amen? Or at least a raised eyebrow?