^ I think I like that portrayal of the perception of events quite a bit. As for the OP, honestly I found the portrayal of Cochrane in TOS to be vapid, unengaging, and bereft of any opinions that were noteworthy other than what was originally proffered. How to reconcile this person with his presentation in First Contact? Well, while it seems somewhat tenuous, I would agree that there is no way to know the parameters or limitations of the Companion's reboot on him. How can we categorically say that a physical regeneration would be the extent of the changes that would be wrought? It's interesting in a sense to see it as a possible analogue to the Talosians work on Vina. Apparently, she retained the consciousness, sensibilities, and memories of her life before the crash. But with no template, the physical reconstruction was less than apt. In the same fashion, with no model to draw from, the Companion simply found it easier to restore the appropriate physical construct, but either by mistake or happenstance, personality changes of a very substantial basis took place.
At the same time. I don't dismiss FC Cochrane as a sot who literally stumbled into his place in history. Regardless of the brilliance or genuinely serious mien of someone, a trauma that occurs so recently in their past (though I don't think we know his own personal toll that the war exacted), can easily lead them into behavior that on the surface suggests an impudence, lack of responsibility, or concern about matters of potentially global concern. But, in fact, the aforementioned faculties and gifts very well may still be present, but require some perceptive excavation to expose. That was my impression of Cromwell's portrayal, tinted perhaps by the admission that I've always found him to be a superlative actor and powerful presence.
