


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Burton and Nichols Compare Baird And Abrams</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/</link>
	<description>the source for Star Trek news and information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:30:53 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dragan Glas</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-832632</link>
		<dc:creator>Dragan Glas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-832632</guid>
		<description>Greetings,

#148/190/192 - First Contact/Phoenix Project/Cochrane

For myself, I found the premise of HOW the Phoenix was built to be completely unbelievable.

Also, in the lamentable &quot;Enterprise&quot; series, Commander Tucker says - in effect - that &quot;an American built the Phoenix&quot;.

This is simply not possible.

For Cochrane to have built the Phoenix from scratch in these circumstances is like a drunk Lebanese scientist building the Space Shuttle in bombed-out Beirut.

From where does he get the resources to build it? What about the M/AM? And how would he manage to build it to the level of quality control required - all on his own!?

These questions are just a few of the gaping holes in this part of &quot;First Contact&quot; which leave a bad taste in the mouth.

A clearly more logical scenario would be this...

The Phoenix Project is one of a number of projects being developed by the canon - and historically relevant - &quot;Western bloc&quot;. The &quot;Eastern bloc&quot;, having found out that it&#039;s nearing completion and fearing the strategic advantage it might give the WB, launch a pre-emptive strike - thus starting WWIII.

At the time, Cochrane would have been a young man - perhaps in the first few years of his university education, majoring in Maths/Physics.

The war, with its consequent destruction of society, would have ruined his plans for a future as a scientist - like so many Arabic students in the troubled Middle East whose education has been all but brought to a complete halt. (Please note - I&#039;m not Arabic, I&#039;m Irish.)

As such, would it not be conceivable that Cochrane would have turned to drink to escape the nightmare of a hopeless future life in which he found himself?

After some years, he - or more likely, the group of whom he is a member eking out a existence in the post-war holocaust - discovers the location of the Phoenix Project.

With his intelligence and scientific training, he manages to access the projects&#039; R&amp;D papers and, over the following decade or more, reads up on it - gaining a complete understanding of what they were doing and where they were in the project.

The Phoenix itself was already built - the only thing they hadn&#039;t completed was to work out the all-important equation.

It is this that Cochrane solves - thus completing the project.

See?

No need to have him do the literally impossible by building anything on his own or with the help of his group - it was all done prior to the war - including the M/AM chamber and material - it&#039;s all been sitting there since the war.

All that  was required was to put the &quot;capstone&quot; on the project - solve the equation.

The sub-plot of his hoping to use the ship to escape to a Pacific island would still hold.

The above scenario would have made sense and explained everything without leaving any holes in the plot.

Just a thought!

Kindest regards,

James</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Greetings,</p>
<p>#148/190/192 &#8211; First Contact/Phoenix Project/Cochrane</p>
<p>For myself, I found the premise of HOW the Phoenix was built to be completely unbelievable.</p>
<p>Also, in the lamentable &#8220;Enterprise&#8221; series, Commander Tucker says &#8211; in effect &#8211; that &#8220;an American built the Phoenix&#8221;.</p>
<p>This is simply not possible.</p>
<p>For Cochrane to have built the Phoenix from scratch in these circumstances is like a drunk Lebanese scientist building the Space Shuttle in bombed-out Beirut.</p>
<p>From where does he get the resources to build it? What about the M/AM? And how would he manage to build it to the level of quality control required &#8211; all on his own!?</p>
<p>These questions are just a few of the gaping holes in this part of &#8220;First Contact&#8221; which leave a bad taste in the mouth.</p>
<p>A clearly more logical scenario would be this&#8230;</p>
<p>The Phoenix Project is one of a number of projects being developed by the canon &#8211; and historically relevant &#8211; &#8220;Western bloc&#8221;. The &#8220;Eastern bloc&#8221;, having found out that it&#8217;s nearing completion and fearing the strategic advantage it might give the WB, launch a pre-emptive strike &#8211; thus starting WWIII.</p>
<p>At the time, Cochrane would have been a young man &#8211; perhaps in the first few years of his university education, majoring in Maths/Physics.</p>
<p>The war, with its consequent destruction of society, would have ruined his plans for a future as a scientist &#8211; like so many Arabic students in the troubled Middle East whose education has been all but brought to a complete halt. (Please note &#8211; I&#8217;m not Arabic, I&#8217;m Irish.)</p>
<p>As such, would it not be conceivable that Cochrane would have turned to drink to escape the nightmare of a hopeless future life in which he found himself?</p>
<p>After some years, he &#8211; or more likely, the group of whom he is a member eking out a existence in the post-war holocaust &#8211; discovers the location of the Phoenix Project.</p>
<p>With his intelligence and scientific training, he manages to access the projects&#8217; R&amp;D papers and, over the following decade or more, reads up on it &#8211; gaining a complete understanding of what they were doing and where they were in the project.</p>
<p>The Phoenix itself was already built &#8211; the only thing they hadn&#8217;t completed was to work out the all-important equation.</p>
<p>It is this that Cochrane solves &#8211; thus completing the project.</p>
<p>See?</p>
<p>No need to have him do the literally impossible by building anything on his own or with the help of his group &#8211; it was all done prior to the war &#8211; including the M/AM chamber and material &#8211; it&#8217;s all been sitting there since the war.</p>
<p>All that  was required was to put the &#8220;capstone&#8221; on the project &#8211; solve the equation.</p>
<p>The sub-plot of his hoping to use the ship to escape to a Pacific island would still hold.</p>
<p>The above scenario would have made sense and explained everything without leaving any holes in the plot.</p>
<p>Just a thought!</p>
<p>Kindest regards,</p>
<p>James</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jordan</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-789828</link>
		<dc:creator>Jordan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:31:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-789828</guid>
		<description>A lot of things sucked about Nemesis. The director is a key part of that suckiness, but John Logan&#039;s script was derivative and unimaginative. I mean, come on, cloning!? He couldn&#039;t have done better? It&#039;s not as though cloning wasn&#039;t sort of explored in series past. I always heard that excessive editing eliminated some of the best parts of the script but let&#039;s face it, Logan wrote a stinker. I don&#039;t hate the film, but I have always resented it and so I applaud and welcome JJ into the fold, an ORIGINAL filmmaker.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lot of things sucked about Nemesis. The director is a key part of that suckiness, but John Logan&#8217;s script was derivative and unimaginative. I mean, come on, cloning!? He couldn&#8217;t have done better? It&#8217;s not as though cloning wasn&#8217;t sort of explored in series past. I always heard that excessive editing eliminated some of the best parts of the script but let&#8217;s face it, Logan wrote a stinker. I don&#8217;t hate the film, but I have always resented it and so I applaud and welcome JJ into the fold, an ORIGINAL filmmaker.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Short</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-505081</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Short</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2008 21:28:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-505081</guid>
		<description>Nemesis cut down to a one hour tv episode might be a good episode. I wish someone would try it on YouTube.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nemesis cut down to a one hour tv episode might be a good episode. I wish someone would try it on YouTube.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bv</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-504287</link>
		<dc:creator>bv</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:51:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-504287</guid>
		<description>The main problem with Nemisis was the script.  It  felt like a poorly writen comic book, with a lame plot, over baked lines, and poorly contrived drama.Secondary the cast didn&#039;t seem to having fun shooting most of the movie.  That may be from this apparently unlinked director.

The TNG movies unlike the TOS movies never quite gained an epic feel. They felt more like a 2 hour tv episodes.  But at least until Nemisis they felt like good episodes and  the cast, and audience appeared to be having fun.  

With luck this new movie will be epic and make up for far too many years of  mediocre stuff with just barely enough substance to keep the cash cow pooing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The main problem with Nemisis was the script.  It  felt like a poorly writen comic book, with a lame plot, over baked lines, and poorly contrived drama.Secondary the cast didn&#8217;t seem to having fun shooting most of the movie.  That may be from this apparently unlinked director.</p>
<p>The TNG movies unlike the TOS movies never quite gained an epic feel. They felt more like a 2 hour tv episodes.  But at least until Nemisis they felt like good episodes and  the cast, and audience appeared to be having fun.  </p>
<p>With luck this new movie will be epic and make up for far too many years of  mediocre stuff with just barely enough substance to keep the cash cow pooing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Short</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-499518</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Short</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:07:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-499518</guid>
		<description>204-  Enjoy your free time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>204-  Enjoy your free time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shaun</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-499372</link>
		<dc:creator>Shaun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:27:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-499372</guid>
		<description>203 - Doesn&#039;t the Nemesis DVD already has a bunch of deleted scenes (separate from the movie) on it. I haven&#039;t seen them (why waste any more of my life on that crappy film?), but I can&#039;t imagine it helps much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>203 &#8211; Doesn&#8217;t the Nemesis DVD already has a bunch of deleted scenes (separate from the movie) on it. I haven&#8217;t seen them (why waste any more of my life on that crappy film?), but I can&#8217;t imagine it helps much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Short</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-499266</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Short</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:24:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-499266</guid>
		<description>Remember Star Trek The Motion Picture got released with 12 minutes of added scenes on VHS . The same could be done with Nemesis on to DVD.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Remember Star Trek The Motion Picture got released with 12 minutes of added scenes on VHS . The same could be done with Nemesis on to DVD.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-497711</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 23:19:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-497711</guid>
		<description>What killed the movie was its bad casting behind the camera. The movie had an Oscar-nominated editor who sucks at directing (Executive Decision), and they let him direct, not edit, while two talented directors are right there on the set with him and have virtually nothing to do (seriously, what was the point of having Riker and Geordi in the movie at all?).
It had an oscar-winning writer who is best at tweaking scripts (like he did with Gladiator) but sucks at writing them (Time Machine), and they let him write it. It had a dude who has no experience in writing anything whatsoever (Spiner) as a co-writer. Seriously, I don&#039;t know what was the point there, if it was some butt-licking that made Berman do it or if Spiner actually improved some of the script, but why him is beyond me.
Oh, and of course the movie had a producer who did not understand what makes Star Trek good, which is dialogue, not action. Yet, from the three hours filmed they cut out 40 minutes of dialogue, not action. (And I&#039;m pretty sure Berman brought in a no-name director and editor to have full control over the finished product). I have read the script, I have seen the deleted scenes. They wouldn&#039;t have made Nemesis the best of the bunch, but they would have thoroughly improved it, without a doubt. To hell with the dune buggy, shorten the space battle, but for god&#039;s sake put back in the senate scenes to give the villains at least a bit more depth or the scene with Data and Picard right after the wedding. A *good* editor/director/producer would have seen that that scene was intended to mirror their conversation in the stellar cartography at the end, plus some superb acting by Stewart.
Oh, and before I forget: I am convinced that a better atmosphere on the set would have turned out better performances by the actors. All of them, even Stewart, gave me that &quot;just sign the damn paycheck and let me go&quot;-feeling throughout the movie. Especially Stewart just felt &quot;tired&quot; in many scenes.
That&#039;s why it sucked, IMO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What killed the movie was its bad casting behind the camera. The movie had an Oscar-nominated editor who sucks at directing (Executive Decision), and they let him direct, not edit, while two talented directors are right there on the set with him and have virtually nothing to do (seriously, what was the point of having Riker and Geordi in the movie at all?).<br />
It had an oscar-winning writer who is best at tweaking scripts (like he did with Gladiator) but sucks at writing them (Time Machine), and they let him write it. It had a dude who has no experience in writing anything whatsoever (Spiner) as a co-writer. Seriously, I don&#8217;t know what was the point there, if it was some butt-licking that made Berman do it or if Spiner actually improved some of the script, but why him is beyond me.<br />
Oh, and of course the movie had a producer who did not understand what makes Star Trek good, which is dialogue, not action. Yet, from the three hours filmed they cut out 40 minutes of dialogue, not action. (And I&#8217;m pretty sure Berman brought in a no-name director and editor to have full control over the finished product). I have read the script, I have seen the deleted scenes. They wouldn&#8217;t have made Nemesis the best of the bunch, but they would have thoroughly improved it, without a doubt. To hell with the dune buggy, shorten the space battle, but for god&#8217;s sake put back in the senate scenes to give the villains at least a bit more depth or the scene with Data and Picard right after the wedding. A *good* editor/director/producer would have seen that that scene was intended to mirror their conversation in the stellar cartography at the end, plus some superb acting by Stewart.<br />
Oh, and before I forget: I am convinced that a better atmosphere on the set would have turned out better performances by the actors. All of them, even Stewart, gave me that &#8220;just sign the damn paycheck and let me go&#8221;-feeling throughout the movie. Especially Stewart just felt &#8220;tired&#8221; in many scenes.<br />
That&#8217;s why it sucked, IMO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-5/#comment-497488</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 21:32:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-497488</guid>
		<description>The basic problem with Nemesis is that it felt like a big action film set in outer space plus it had the TNG characters. It was not, in any way, a Star Trek movie. And it was very clear that Baird had no knowledge or respect for everything affiliated with Trek, I could tell right from the beginning of the film when there was not a single credit at the start (I know, kinda small, but can you say &quot;breaking tradition&quot; more than not having a main title for a series that&#039;s always had it the other way). Sure, Baird seems like a good guy, he&#039;s one of the world&#039;s best editors, but as a director, no! can&#039;t do it! The real difference between what Baird did was he was surrounded by others in the crew (ie. Berman, Logan, and others) who didn&#039;t have a real respect and appreciation for Trek. 

At least when Bennett and Meyer came in on Khan was that the first thing they did was sit down and watch all the Trek that came before it, to get a feel for what it was supposed to be and figure out the winning combination of character development, story telling plus this space stuff (which was, as it should be, really the last thing they really thought about). 

The thing that Meyer did and what Abrams is doing right now is that they know how Trek has nothing to do with outer space, but it&#039;s all about the characters and telling a great story rich with character development and conflict. Plus, this outer space thing, that&#039;s just a background thing, not as important, but just an added. Something, of course, Baird never learned in his time on Nemesis, and more amazing, Berman had no idea of in almost 20 years in charge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The basic problem with Nemesis is that it felt like a big action film set in outer space plus it had the TNG characters. It was not, in any way, a Star Trek movie. And it was very clear that Baird had no knowledge or respect for everything affiliated with Trek, I could tell right from the beginning of the film when there was not a single credit at the start (I know, kinda small, but can you say &#8220;breaking tradition&#8221; more than not having a main title for a series that&#8217;s always had it the other way). Sure, Baird seems like a good guy, he&#8217;s one of the world&#8217;s best editors, but as a director, no! can&#8217;t do it! The real difference between what Baird did was he was surrounded by others in the crew (ie. Berman, Logan, and others) who didn&#8217;t have a real respect and appreciation for Trek. </p>
<p>At least when Bennett and Meyer came in on Khan was that the first thing they did was sit down and watch all the Trek that came before it, to get a feel for what it was supposed to be and figure out the winning combination of character development, story telling plus this space stuff (which was, as it should be, really the last thing they really thought about). </p>
<p>The thing that Meyer did and what Abrams is doing right now is that they know how Trek has nothing to do with outer space, but it&#8217;s all about the characters and telling a great story rich with character development and conflict. Plus, this outer space thing, that&#8217;s just a background thing, not as important, but just an added. Something, of course, Baird never learned in his time on Nemesis, and more amazing, Berman had no idea of in almost 20 years in charge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: W.  Johnson</title>
		<link>http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/comment-page-4/#comment-497346</link>
		<dc:creator>W.  Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:39:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trekmovie.com/2008/03/03/burton-and-nichols-compare-baird-to-abrams/#comment-497346</guid>
		<description>BAird was a bad choice, pure and simple.  Any responsible director(and I say this from working as an independent director/writer) will take the time to learn what it is they are directing.  Learn the backstory, the world, the characters, etc.  Then they will find what angles haven&#039;t been played up.  Then they will do their best to bring their angle, the angles that haven&#039;t been played up, and the existing world together.

In the interview with Baird, it&#039;s very clear he didn&#039;t do any of the above.  He approached the film as an off the shelf action movie and the turd that came out is pretty much &quot;Generic Action Movie&quot;  +  &quot;Star Trek&quot;.  A better director would&#039;ve wanted some rewrites, wouldn&#039;t have gone gimmicky with an offroad vehicle, wouldn&#039;t have brought in yet another Data relative... Baird dropped the ball, the writing could have used another revision, and in the end... it killed TNG. 

Granted, at that point in time, TNG/Trek was on the downswing... but god, with some half decent rewrites and a better director, that film could have been huge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BAird was a bad choice, pure and simple.  Any responsible director(and I say this from working as an independent director/writer) will take the time to learn what it is they are directing.  Learn the backstory, the world, the characters, etc.  Then they will find what angles haven&#8217;t been played up.  Then they will do their best to bring their angle, the angles that haven&#8217;t been played up, and the existing world together.</p>
<p>In the interview with Baird, it&#8217;s very clear he didn&#8217;t do any of the above.  He approached the film as an off the shelf action movie and the turd that came out is pretty much &#8220;Generic Action Movie&#8221;  +  &#8220;Star Trek&#8221;.  A better director would&#8217;ve wanted some rewrites, wouldn&#8217;t have gone gimmicky with an offroad vehicle, wouldn&#8217;t have brought in yet another Data relative&#8230; Baird dropped the ball, the writing could have used another revision, and in the end&#8230; it killed TNG. </p>
<p>Granted, at that point in time, TNG/Trek was on the downswing&#8230; but god, with some half decent rewrites and a better director, that film could have been huge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

