Cosmos rebooted

Streck-Fu · 03-10-2014, 09:28

Did any one watch the premiere of the new series last night? LINK

As a big fan of the original series ,as well as Sagan's books, I was looking forward to this update.

I came away pretty disappointed. The animated story of Giardano Bruno was weird....and it lacked the element of wonder that Sagan was able to communicate in his original.

I don't want to add spoilers for those that haven't seen it.....

JSMosby · 03-10-2014, 09:56

It seemed that they focused a lot on the visual aspect and the spaceship.

I thought the timeline/calendar piece was pretty cool, as well as the story Neil Tyson told about how Carl Sagan invited him to his house.

It was interesting enough to bring me back for another round.

Streck-Fu · 03-10-2014, 09:57

Have you seen the original?

I did like some of the new aspects of the calendar. Him putting on the sun glasses for the big ban was a cool touch....

Kemical · 03-10-2014, 11:14

I loved it.

However, I never watched the original so I had no expectations. I guess I should have known Seth MacFarlane had something to do with it being on fox but it caught me off guard.

Sdiver · 03-10-2014, 12:08

I was thoroughly disappointed in it.
As a fan of the original show, I was excited and looking forward to this "reboot", but went away disappointed and saddened.

I too, like Dr. Tyson, idolized Dr. Sagan. I, like Tyson, met Dr. Sagan several times and left in awe of a man whose vision is what I too shared. I was a little jealous of the fact that Tyson was actually invited to spend the night at Sagan's if he (Tyson) missed his bus. I had to take a train and brave gong downtown Chicago to meet one of my idols.

Growing up, I loved astronomy and space science in general. All I ever wanted to be was an astronomer/astrophysicist, but due to early family issues, I had to abandon that dream, so Dr. Tyson was/is the astrophysicist I dreamt of becoming. That is why I was so let down with this "reboot."

As has been stated above, the show focuses too much on animation and CGI/special effects. There is really no sense of wonder. Focusing as much they did on Bruno, who sounded a little bit too much like Antionio Bandaras (I thought at times I was watching a Nasonex commercial [more on that in a bit]), I really didn't think the show's producers where trying to explore science and the scientific principle.

One of the highly disappointing things I found was for an hour long show, there where exactly 16 minutes and 54 seconds of commercials. The original series was produced by PBS and ran on those educational stations. This show is on FOX. WTF !!!! (Yes I know it is also on NetGeo, but the bulk of the FOX stations ran the program.)

It was more commercialized than it was science wise.

Needless to say, I don't think I'll be watching the program any longer.

Streck-Fu · 03-10-2014, 12:22

I watched in on Nat Geo and didn't feel bombarded with commercials. maybe it was the bourbon.....

The original is available on youtube if you want to watch it again: LINK

Trapper John · 03-10-2014, 13:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sdiver

I was thoroughly disappointed in it.
As a fan of the original show, I was excited and looking forward to this "reboot", but went away disappointed and saddened.

I too, like Dr. Tyson, idolized Dr. Sagan. I, like Tyson, met Dr. Sagan several times and left in awe of a man whose vision is what I too shared. I was a little jealous of the fact that Tyson was actually invited to spend the night at Sagan's if he (Tyson) missed his bus. I had to take a train and brave gong downtown Chicago to meet one of my idols.

Growing up, I loved astronomy and space science in general. All I ever wanted to be was an astronomer/astrophysicist, but due to early family issues, I had to abandon that dream, so Dr. Tyson was/is the astrophysicist I dreamt of becoming. That is why I was so let down with this "reboot."

As has been stated above, the show focuses too much on animation and CGI/special effects. There is really no sense of wonder. Focusing as much they did on Bruno, who sounded a little bit too much like Antionio Bandaras (I thought at times I was watching a Nasonex commercial [more on that in a bit]), I really didn't think the show's producers where trying to explore science and the scientific principle.

One of the highly disappointing things I found was for an hour long show, there where exactly 16 minutes and 54 seconds of commercials. The original series was produced by PBS and ran on those educational stations. This show is on FOX. WTF !!!! (Yes I know it is also on NetGeo, but the bulk of the FOX stations ran the program.)

It was more commercialized than it was science wise.

Needless to say, I don't think I'll be watching the program any longer.

Didn't know you were such a Sagan fan.

He was married to Lynn Margulis who influenced me as an udergrad with her Symbiotic Theory of Evolution. She and Carl jointly came up with the Gaia theory that looks at Earth as a complex living organism- a concept I like as well. Can you just imagine some of the dinner conversations those two had? Oh, to be a fly on the wall.

My critique of the show mirrors much of what has been said here: too much emphasis on graphics, 5th grade science, and commercials were distracting. On the positive side this was just the introduction and I have faith in Neil Tyson. Following in Sagan's footsteps is a tough act to follow! I will watch again with the hope that there is something new and there is more substance than fluff.

Dusty · 03-10-2014, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapper John

Lynn Margulis who influenced me as an udergrad with her Symbiotic Theory of Evolution.

Could she correlate evolution theory with the pre-Cambrian explosion?

I've yet to find a "scientist" who could...

There's just no way to justify body plans with Darwinism.

MtnGoat · 03-10-2014, 19:09

I DVRed it and will have to report back after to watching it.

Seems like some mixed reviews.

Sdiver · 03-10-2014, 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapper John

Didn't know you were such a Sagan fan. He was married to Lynn Margulis who influenced me as an udergrad with her Symbiotic Theory of Evolution. She and Carl jointly came up with the Gaia theory that looks at Earth as a complex living organism- a concept I like as well. Can you just imagine some of the dinner conversations those two had? Oh, to be a fly on the wall.

My critique of the show mirrors much of what has been said here: too much emphasis on graphics, 5th grade science, and commercials were distracting. On the positive side this was just the introduction and I have faith in Neil Tyson. Following in Sagan's footsteps is a tough act to follow! I will watch again with the hope that there is something new and there is more substance than fluff.

I was a huge fan of Dr. Sagan. One of the times I met him , I got his autograph in my COSMOS book (which has been lost in one of my moves

) which also had a poster of the "cosmic calendar", of which I used to stare at for hours on end. I do wish I still had that book and poster.

I was lucky enough to work on the movie CONTACT, but was unable to meet him again due to his failing health, of which he passed away while we were filming, so in a way I was able to come full circle, albeit in a sad way.

That's why I'm a little disappointed in this current show. I feel that it's not up to Dr. Sagan's standards.

Also something that disappointed me about the first show, was the introduction by the community organizer, the teleprompter in chief himself, Barry Soetoro. That jackass has killed more scientific exploration than the Vatican ever has and ever will. I was "this close" to turning the show off completely once that festering sewer under his nose started flapping.

Trapper John · 03-10-2014, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dusty

Could she correlate evolution theory with the pre-Cambrian explosion?

I've yet to find a "scientist" who could...

There's just no way to justify body plans with Darwinism.

Nope, not goin' there Bro.

Dusty · 03-11-2014, 06:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapper John

Nope, not goin' there Bro.

lol Don't blame you.

Streck-Fu · 03-11-2014, 11:11

I may have found the problem....LINK

Quote:

“I want to make this so entertaining and so flashy and so exciting that people who have no interest in science will watch just because it is a spectacle,” said Mr MacFarlane.

The original did not try to be a spectacle. It was great because of the science. I think this new version is getting lost in the ambition.

Richard · 03-11-2014, 14:59

What this thread reminds me of:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPQ9ofrG04c

What was said of the 'spectacle' of the original 'Cosmos' series:

http://www.people.com/people/article...078104,00.html

And so it goes...

Richard

mark46th · 03-11-2014, 15:32

Yeah same material, better video effects. I didn't learn anything I didn't know before.

Besides- as Sheldon said, "Dr. Tyson, you are responsible for taking Pluto off the planet list and I like Pluto."