Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

Forums General Discussion Movies and TV Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
Profile Photo

Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3210

A re-make of Carl Sagan old tv-series documentary of about the earth, universe and science. Now with Neil deGrasse Tyson.

This show is amazing. If you want to be entertained and learn stuff meanwhile, then watch this. The animations and stories are really well done.

I’ve learned more watching this then I did in pre-school.

IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2395695/

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3211

I’ve tried to watch the new one but i gave up after a few episodes, i don’t think its nearly as good as the original, Neil deGrasse Tyson sounds like he’s talking to an astounded child when presenting it. I’m not saying its bad, its just that the original is a masterpiece, Carl Sagan doesn’t seam to dumb it down for a wider audience and its all still relevant today. Sagan sounds like a professor talking to a student, very eloquent and has a bit of gravitas about him. He can break down something complex into a simple explanation without sounding condescending, a feeling I get watching most American produced documentaries (including the recent Cosmos), regardless of the content but science documentaries are the worst for it.

If you haven’t seen the original I would get on it asap if you like the new one, I hold it in the highest regard. I suppose it was inevitable I wouldn’t like the new one when I’m comparing it to something I have such a high opinion of.

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3213

Carl Sagan is end boss. deGrasse Tyson just underboss ….
If you want to know bout the universe: LAWRENCE KRAUSS … Superboss, right next to Stephen Hawking who is ultimate boss.

They both got books out to reach a wider audience, and tons of youtube stuff that might just blow your mind.

all of them actually devote big piece of their braintime -which has to be viewed as a serious resource- to educate the populus.

Profile Photo

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3214

I still quite like this show. Tyson and the show tells the whole thing in a lot more “entertaining” way. Hence why it was made by Fox network and showed in prime-time. Plus it was co-produced by Seth McFarlane.

I will try to check out Krauss, have not heard about him before!

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3216

I think Seth McFarlane is the reason i don’t like the new one, he’s not a scientist he’s an entertainer, his contribution seams to have been all the animated stuff/CGI. I found Carl Sagan telling a story way more entertaining and interesting than a Seth McFarlane cartoon narrated by Neil deGrasse Tyson. Thats my problem with American documentaries, they produce them under the assumption that the people watching are so stupid need to be talked to like a child and shown animations/cgi just to hold their attention. There are some notable exceptions(CNN’s Cold War, Oliver Stones Untold History of the United States, the recent PBS special on Snowden), I dont want to piss all over American documentaries but just take a look at the American netflix documentaries section… so much shite.

I hoped the new Cosmos would be Neil deGrasse Tyson on screen explaining shit like a boss but its more like a Michael Bay remake packed with unnecessary CGI. The scientific content is there so its not all bad but I dunno, its hard to put into words but it felt weak compared to what I was expecting.

Profile Photo

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3217

Well, it’s made for Fox network, so it’s suppose to be for stupid people. Maybe that’s why I like it.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But I totally understand you and agree on it. American docs are made for money and the attention and not for education. Like that Michael Moore guy + others.

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3218

DeGrasse Tyson is the one that does this aswell, talk to you like a child i mean. If you see some panels where he explains some of the stuff which also comes up in the cosmos series, Tyson transports the wonder it presents like he is in a lot of awe from it but he takes a lot of time and explains it mainly for kids i guess. Hes not as cold a narrator as for example Dawkins is, who moves much faster throu his topics and frankly, i like him a lot better. Did not see the Sagan original, but atleast having a series that says the earth is older than 6000 years and this his how evolution works on FOX of all networks is probably a good thing.

Profile Photo

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3225

Dawkins is alright. He just feels a bit “uptight” or annoying at times.

Seen Sam Harris or Daniel Dennett? Ahhh, and Hitchens!? He is hilarious in his arguments.

This one is good too. All 4 of them together… “The Four Horsemen”, hehe..

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3235

Hitchens was a neo conservative mouthpiece, i hated him with a passion.

Profile Photo

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3236

Haven’t really digged into the whole Iraq situation, but I get why you think he was a neoconservative. Funny since he started out as a super socialist in his first years. Maybe he became too affected by the whole Rushdie, 9/11 thing etc.

Always liked his view on religion though, even though very negative, he had a direct way of saying how he felt about it.

This was actually the video I wanted to post about him:

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3237

I got a T with Hitchens on it. The “Riders of the Apocalypse” are awesome. I was raised catholic, these guys convinced me to not stay for sentimental reasons or tradition, but to take a stand for my view of things.

Neoconservative? I would like to know how you come to that conclusion. I mostly know hitch for his debates on religion and, sure he is political, but i cannot see hitchens support american interests being pushed thru and backed by military force.
Although i think he used to be pro-iraq-war, i think he later utterly regretted it. I thought the world would be better off without saddam hussein, too.

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3239

Haven’t really digged into the whole Iraq situation, but I get why you think he was a neoconservative. Funny since he started out as a super socialist in his first years.

George Galloway said of him that hes a unique case in science of a butterfly reverse metamorphosing into a slug, Galloway even acknowledges his past socialist ways and even said at some point he looked up to him, I think based on Hitchens outspoken stance against the first Iraq war. But some of the stuff he argued in his later life was the most infuriatingly ill informed right wing bullshit I’ve ever heard. He backed the second Iraq war and Im pretty sure he was on Newsnight with Russel Brand (a bell-end but if i had to choose someone for Hitchens to suffer and George Galloway wasnt available I’d choose him, just to rustle him.) where he pretty much argues that drug addiction isn’t really a thing, that its just weak willed people who are not afraid enough of the law cracking down on them, so just lock them all up until they fear the punishment enough not to take drugs. Such a stupid ignorant opinion which fly’s in the face of common sense after decades of failed “war on drugs”.

The first time I saw Hitchens I kinda liked him, he was debating a creationist on some youtube video i found so it was pretty easy to agree with him there, he was facing unbelievable ignorance and he was a well spoken, articulate man so it was pretty satisfying to see him argue a point I could get behind and put a pretty arrogant creationist in his place. But to have that same attitude when arguing against the majority opinion (as well as against scientific and recorded evidence such as shit that happened in Iraq and that drug addiction isn’t a thing) makes him look insufferably arrogant to me.

Neoconservative? I would like to know how you come to that conclusion. I mostly know hitch for his debates on religion and, sure he is political, but i cannot see hitchens support american interests being pushed thru and backed by military force.<br>
Although i think he used to be pro-iraq-war, i think he later utterly regretted it. I thought the world would be better off without saddam hussein, too.

The guardian have an article that can better explain it than me http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jan/18/christopher-hitchens-socialist-neocon – Quote from the title:

” Christopher Hitchens: from socialist to neocon
‘His tragedy is that he became what he had despised – a living and ignominious satire upon himself’ “

Reply To: Cosmos: A SpaceTime Odyssey

#3243

Yeah, makes a lot of sense. I can’t believe anybody believes in this kind of solution. Gotta be american i guess…

Thanks for the link, linc (barambam tschhhh)

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.