[TV] Cosmos (2014)

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:50 pm

Unless my search-fu is off, I'm guessing the original thread was eaten during the great 2013 Summer OOutage?

Here's the first trailer. Show starts 3/9.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:51 pm

I suppose I should get back to watching the old series, too.

Vorret · Post by **Vorret** » Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:51 pm

Smoove_B wrote:Unless my search-fu is off, I'm guessing the original thread was eaten during the great 2013 Summer OOutage?

Here's the first trailer. Show starts 3/9.

That's on fox?
I'm ... surprised.

Rumpy · Post by **Rumpy** » Fri Jan 31, 2014 1:34 am

Yeah, surprised that Fox opted in for that. Maybe they're trying to shed their image.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Sat Feb 01, 2014 11:22 pm

Rumpy wrote:Yeah, surprised that Fox opted in for that. Maybe they're trying to shed their image.

You should hold off until you see how they've re-written the script.

"For 6,000 years, since the dawn of time, the Earth has been the center of the universe."

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 12:03 am

Jeff V wrote:
Rumpy wrote:Yeah, surprised that Fox opted in for that. Maybe they're trying to shed their image.
You should hold off until you see how they've re-written the script.

"For 6,000 years, since the dawn of time, the Earth has been the center of the universe."

You obviously don't know anything about Neil de Grasse Tyson

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 12:38 pm

Oh, I know him plenty well. I also know what Fox editors and spin doctors are like. Among them, who do you suppose approves the final copy for air?

AWS260 · Post by **AWS260** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 1:54 pm

Jeff V wrote:Oh, I know him plenty well. I also know what Fox editors and spin doctors are like. Among them, who do you suppose approves the final copy for air?

You may be confusing Fox News with the broadcast network.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:07 pm

Fox was undoubtedly inspired by GZA's collaboration with Tyson.

God put the needle on the disc of Saturn
The record he played revealed blueprints and patterns

Startalk with Tyson and GZA.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:13 pm

AWS260 wrote:
Jeff V wrote:Oh, I know him plenty well. I also know what Fox editors and spin doctors are like. Among them, who do you suppose approves the final copy for air?
You may be confusing Fox News with the broadcast network.

This. I don't watch a lot of TV but I'm not aware that Fox has an anti-science bias outside of their so-called news division.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:24 pm

Even if they did, Tyson is too smart to be blindsided with something as obvious as edits. For something as significant as Cosmos, I don't doubt that he was very, very careful with the contract.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 4:47 pm

Kraken wrote:
AWS260 wrote:
Jeff V wrote:Oh, I know him plenty well. I also know what Fox editors and spin doctors are like. Among them, who do you suppose approves the final copy for air?
You may be confusing Fox News with the broadcast network.
This. I don't watch a lot of TV but I'm not aware that Fox has an anti-science bias outside of their so-called news division.

Aren't they both owned by the same asshole who would throw his mother in front of the train if it suits his political agenda?

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 5:46 pm

Fox News gave us Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck. Fox TV gave us Married With Children, The Simpsons, and Fringe.

Just sayin'.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Jeff V wrote:
Kraken wrote:
AWS260 wrote:
Jeff V wrote:Oh, I know him plenty well. I also know what Fox editors and spin doctors are like. Among them, who do you suppose approves the final copy for air?
You may be confusing Fox News with the broadcast network.
This. I don't watch a lot of TV but I'm not aware that Fox has an anti-science bias outside of their so-called news division.
Aren't they both owned by the same asshole who would throw his mother in front of the train if it suits his political agenda?

Well they're both entertainment networks, but Fox TV is mass market...so, whatever sells. Fox News is directed at a much more specific audience.

Rumpy · Post by **Rumpy** » Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:57 pm

Blackhawk wrote:Even if they did, Tyson is too smart to be blindsided with something as obvious as edits. For something as significant as Cosmos, I don't doubt that he was very, very careful with the contract.

I agree with this. If they screw this up, just imagine billions and billions of Carl Sagan advocates crying foul. It has quite a reputation to fullfill, or I should say, big shoes to fill, and they'd be stupid to mess that chance up, for something they very likely paid lots for the rights to air. Although, I know of one person in particular in my group of friends who already feels they've messed up by having Tyson be host. But in all honesty, I'm not sure who else has the respect and gravitas needed to pull it off, other than maybe Michio Kaku or Bill Nye. So, I'm willing to give Fox some slack and see if they manage to pull it off.

Formix · Post by **Formix** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 7:29 am

So, that means they'll play the season out of order, and cancel it before it finds its audience?

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:15 am

I was pretty turned off with the IN YOUR FACE FAST EDIT DUBSTEP WUBWUBWUB ads they were running for it yesterday. Either the ads are really misrepresenting the tone of the show (dumb), or they're accurate and my head will explode.

Can you imagine a promo for Planet Earth done in that style?

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 10:57 am

Jeff V wrote:Oh, I know him plenty well. I also know what Fox editors and spin doctors are like. Among them, who do you suppose approves the final copy for air?

I'd bet the good doctor does, he's not going to let himself be used in the way you seem to think he would be.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:00 am

Chaz wrote:I was pretty turned off with the IN YOUR FACE FAST EDIT DUBSTEP WUBWUBWUB ads they were running for it yesterday. Either the ads are really misrepresenting the tone of the show (dumb), or they're accurate and my head will explode.

Can you imagine a promo for Planet Earth done in that style?

This isn't a 1980 PBS version. It's on a mass media network that needs buzz to find its audience. A repeat of a Sagan version wouldn't have the sizzle to make it during primetime.

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:06 am

So you're saying to expect an in-your-face, fast edit, blaring music production? I'm sincerely asking, because I haven't been following it.

If that's the tone they're going for, then I'm definitely not interested.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:26 am

I haven't seen anything specific that I can hang my hat on in terms of actual footage that I recall, but if you're expecting a retreat of beelyuns and beelyuns, you're going to be disappointed, I'm sure.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:27 am

I think it is going to be very modern, but what is relevant is the content and how it is presented. None of us know that, but I have faith in NDT, so I'll give it an episode or two rather than deciding whether or not it is any good before I've seen it.

The Meal · Post by **The Meal** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:33 am

Isgrimnur wrote:This isn't a 1980 PBS version. It's on a mass media network that needs buzz to find its audience. A repeat of a Sagan version wouldn't have the sizzle to make it during primetime.

The original has such a deliberate, calm pace, that it's all but guaranteed that the remake is going to disappoint folks familiar with the source material. I'm interested to see the remake, but only because I know they aren't destroying all copies of the original at the same time.

Cosmos (1980) will always have an audience. It remains a beautiful thing.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 11:37 am

As long as it's better than Through the Wormhole, which I turned off in disgust, I'll be cool with it.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 5:26 pm

My problem with science shows (being somebody who follows science news) is that they're mostly on a remedial high school level, so they're only going to hook me with snazzy graphics that illustrate difficult topics in some new way. It needs a gee-whiz factor if 90% of the content is familiar.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 5:35 pm

Kraken wrote:My problem with science shows (being somebody who follows science news) is that they're mostly on a remedial high school level

Most of the audience would be lucky to claim a current elementary school level of science knowledge.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Feb 03, 2014 10:57 pm

Blackhawk wrote:
Kraken wrote:My problem with science shows (being somebody who follows science news) is that they're mostly on a remedial high school level
Most of the audience would be lucky to claim a current elementary school level of science knowledge.

I realize I'm not their audience. Even most of those who mastered basic science back in the day don't keep up with ongoing developments, but I do. There is very little that a popular science show can teach me. In my eyes they succeed by presenting advanced concepts in a new and intuitive way.

I saw a good example of this a couple of days ago. I don't know how to find the image so I'll try to describe it. They were illustrating the particle/wave duality of light -- how something can look completely different depending on how it's observed. This is not an intuitive concept.

The image was a cylinder suspended in space. When you shine a light on its axis, the shadow is a circle. When you shine a light on its side, the shadow is a rectangle. Very simple example of an "aha!" illustration.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:09 pm

I watch science or history programs for entertainment purposes only. If ever I hear something of interest that I don't already know, I'll look to verify and expand my knowledge through more effective means (such as reading a book on the subject).

Crabbs · Post by **Crabbs** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:17 pm

Watched the trailer and then stumbled into Tyson being interviewed by Bill Moyers. Great example of why Tyson is such a star. He manages to create great answers and open minds even in response to some pretty silly questions.

Scuzz · Post by **Scuzz** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:38 pm

Tyson is maybe the one guy who could make this work. They will need state of the art graphics as well. Actually the Michio Kaku might be good with this as well.

Moliere · Post by **Moliere** » Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:28 am

10 Things I Didn’t Know About Neil deGrasse Tyson Until After Reading His Profile in the New Yorker

Ann Druyan, Sagan’s widow and a producer of the new series, says that other networks, including PBS, had a chance to air the new series, but none of them could top the budget or creative control that Fox gave them.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Fri Feb 14, 2014 1:14 pm

Tyson recently interviewed God.

What is one of God's greatest achievements? Meticulously planting the fossil record in a young earth.

Inverarity · Post by **Inverarity** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 4:57 pm

Reviews of the first episode are coming in and they are, for the most part, positive. http://www.metacritic.com/tv/cosmos-a-s ... ic-reviews

I'm not expecting to be overwhelmed by the content, but I am overwhelmed that a science program is getting such a large mainstream audience. I am eager to watch it.

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:05 pm

An interview with Family Guy creator and Cosmos producer, Seth McFarlane.

Seth MacFarlane hopes Cosmos counteracts 'junk science,' creationism

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 1:55 am

Looking forward to it for the visuals and whatever new factinos might be scattered throughout, but especially hoping for a sweeping narrative that will tie together the latest science news that I keep up with in a disjointed way. Science is the most interesting thing that humans do, and yet so many are peripherally aware at best.

noxiousdog · Post by **noxiousdog** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:12 pm

Both my kids (5 and 10) enjoyed it and are looking forward to next week. I was touched by the the tribute they gave to Sagan.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:53 pm

I wasn't impressed, got bored during the cartoon history lesson. From the previews there look to be more of those segments so we'll see how it goes. It also seemed a bit disjointed.

Lassr · Post by **Lassr** » Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:54 pm

I'll have to catch the replay tomorrow night. Who thought it was a good idea to put it on at the same time as Walking Dead.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:19 am

Grifman wrote:I wasn't impressed, got bored during the cartoon history lesson. From the previews there look to be more of those segments so we'll see how it goes. It also seemed a bit disjointed.

That was the only segment that taught me something new and I think the cartoon format was better than using costumed actors. I'm giving its rambling approach a pass as the introductory "survey" episode. Hoping future episodes will be more focused.

My wife is my barometer for this show. She's mildly interested in science but doesn't follow science news or programming. She was impressed with Tyson's passion and personality and enjoyed the show overall, so that's a win.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:08 am

I enjoyed it enough but it seemed like an awful lot of commercial breaks.