Anyone else pumped for the new COSMOS series with Neil deGrasse Tyson?

Cosmos just about jumped the shark with that lead poisoning episode. Some interesting information, and I get what Tyson was trying to do, but the presentation was tedious and almost condescending.

 

Unfortunately, if you're watching Cosmos on the DVR, like I have been, it seems that Comcast, at the behest of Fox has disabled the fast-forward feature during the On-Demand presentations of the show in order to force you to watch the advertising. Shame on them.

 

I liked the episode. It illustrated the practical application of science in our modern world. I am glad each episode tries to vary the format of presentation somewhat, so that it doesn't become too predictable in its patterns.

I think it's important to show how scientists will often work for years on their research before applicable results are yielded (i.e., before answers can be revealed). And it was helpful to show that the path to discoveries is often a series of connections that are seemingly unrelated (or only tangentially related) - I enjoyed being guided through a transformation from a "this is how we can accurately estimate the age of the earth" series of methodical realizations that challenged the faith of religions, to a "this is why we're poisoning ourselves" discovery that challenged the claims of powerful industries.

I never saw the original Cosmos, but this new Cosmos seems to be on the defensive from the first episode, portraying scientists, thinkers, and explorers as frequently misunderstood, threatened, and attacked for their ideas - both within the scientific community and from non-scientists as well. Likewise for the ideas themselves, separate from the individuals who raised them. I don't mind that it takes that perspective. The producers of the series know they have a forum available during prime time to make a persuasive case, and they're trying to use that time wisely without tiptoeing delicately around. Was the original Cosmos series like that as well?

Craig.

 

You're kidding! That sucks. Typical Crumcast. I just record them all live and I fast-forward whenever the F I want to. (But only in the commercials.) Love the show. I was just telling a friend of mine the other day that I think Cosmos might be the very best TV show on the air right now.

 

I don't know if I'd put the blame on Comcast. I've watched some Comcast OnDemand shows from ABC that have the same restrictions on fast-forward and rewind. My guess (and it's only a guess) is that it's built into the contracts with certain networks/channels or whoever owns the rights to the content.

If I remember correctly, though, there are fewer minutes of commercials via OnDemand than watching the full hour on Fox when it first airs. (I'm basing that on watching a couple of Cosmos episodes on Comcast OnDemand last weekend with my wife. Pretty sure they were around 50 minutes in duration, even with forced commercials. And for at least one episode - I think it was episode #2 - I think there weren't any commercials at all, even though the timer suggested it would last >55 minutes. Perhaps that was just a glitch, though.)

Anyway, I usually watch the new episodes the next day on Hulu, where commercials are limited (more like 1 minute per interruption, as opposed to 3-5 minutes on live TV).

Craig.

 

I loved the original "Cosmos". I would still like to get it on DVD one of these days. It might seem a bit under-whelming itself considering how long ago it was made.

As for the new one, I only have the first episode on dvr. I've watched it and I did like it, but I don't know...the magic wasn't there for me. I feel this material belongs on PBS where they could have skipped all the commercials. And like DeadParrot, I thought Brian Cox would have been the natural choice for this. I like Tyson, but Cox has this infectious, almost child-like enthusiasm for this stuff, which I find appealing.

 

He did.

 

In some ways, yeah - some limited or outdated information, primitive space effects and some production and technical aspects mainly (if the old series were shot on film and the film given a strong new transfer, that sure wouldn't hurt; old video is pretty dingy). In other areas, no. It's still well written, informative and it has some advantages depending on one's point of view. The physical recreations of historic settings are, well, physical, realistic and convincing, whereas the new uses animation. The new music has a fantastic symphonic scoring and all, but the theme itself is pedestrian compared to the haunting original (by Vangelis, from Heaven & Hell iirc?). And of course, there's Carl Sagan himself, whereas the new, imh, feels more like the production of a committee. The new series is one of the best things currently on TV but the original was significant and justly admired.

 

That's a possibility that it's part of their contract with the various networks. I suspect that's why Comcast charges $2.99 per episode for previous seasons of Modern Family (The current season is free.) The Coxmox episodes do have fewer ads On Demand, still, it's pretty tacky that they make you watch the ads. How is the picture on Hulu? I've tried a couple of streaming services (Netflix, Amazon) and what they claim is HD isn't.

 

he's such a good host one would think he's and actor

 

Reviewing the old Cosmos, ep. 2, yes, Sagan briefly mentions Darwin by name in two sentences, a couple minutes apart, both in conjunction with Alfred Russel Wallace. I've thought that instead of doing that 7 minutes or so, very lame, segment on the Heike warriors of Japan, that time would have been better served by doing an overview on Darwin himself and what led him to his theories (voyage of the Beagle, Galapagos, etc.) Darwin's name seemed strangely downplayed, and I wonder if Sagan felt pressure from PBS to do so, or if he just on his own wanted to make the theories more palatable, since the name "Darwin" is one that the mere mention of inspires a negative reaction from a lot of folks.

 

I think that's the problem for me. To my English ears, the presentation style is very definitely "American", but that's not to say I'm not enjoying the series, and obviously Tyson is a good presenter who's not just a talking head but someone who extremely knowledgable about the subject matter. Maybe it's a cultural difference, but if this had been a British production it definitely would've been a little less Hollywood.

 

There are lots of us 50 and over here. While I keep up with "cutting edge" technology, I also understand why others my age or older might not care to keep up with it or pay extra for it.

 

If you aren't satisfied with the picture quality of Netflix or Amazon, you won't be any happier with Hulu. All of these services (with the possible exception of Netflix's 4K streams, which I have not seen) use a lot of compression to reduce bandwidth hogging.

I am satisfied with them as comparable to standard DVD quality on the 26-42" HDTVs I view them on, but would never consider any of them comparable to a Blu-Ray (and I wouldn't want to deal with 30-40GB of data streaming to view a single movie; not with current ISP download speeds and current wi-fi speeds).

Craig.

 

Not that I disagree, but could you go deeper into your thoughts on that?

 

I've been very impressed by the series. The latest episode (awesome) was designed to show that pure science and diligence can overcome the financial and political attempts to cover up or distort the truth.

 

True, and especially relevant given what is going on with some of the anti-science talking heads and organizations that are out there these days.

 

I can recommend Neil's Teaching Company series "The Inexplicable Universe". It lacks the high tech visual effects and is more focused on astrophysics (almost no astrobiology) so in that sense it is a bit drier. IMO having seen all of the Cosmos episodes up to now and The Teaching Company videos, it's the latter that would have me more interested in seeking out more in depth info from books. YMMV though since I have a science background.

 

Great series. Mind blowing!
And even better with a little help from my friends

 

Should be required viewing for the Supreme Court.

 

And anyone who doubts that global warming is real.

 

What do I watch next to fill the void that the cosmos left?

 

here's a few options for science programming

http://www.alternet.org/environment/5-shows-watch-now-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos-over

 

I just started DVRing reruns of this- I am loving it. Being an amateur astronomer, I don't know how I let this fly under my radar. I decided to order the Blu-Ray.