You nailed history pretty close to the mark. Toss in a reference to pawn stars and pickers and you'd be spot on.
Cosmos - With Neil deGrasse Tyson
- Thread starter Greylock Crescent
- Start date
You nailed history pretty close to the mark. Toss in a reference to pawn stars and pickers and you'd be spot on.
Neil deGrasse Tyson promoting Cosmos during Youtube's Geek Week:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxfTa_fSSC0[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxfTa_fSSC0[/yt]
Awesome video. Thank you for sharing it. #2 is by far my favorite. Seriously, check this shit out!
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA&list=PLec1lxRhYOzuOdZyvrlvPEvg9_MYE_Jg-&index=3[/yt]
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA&list=PLec1lxRhYOzuOdZyvrlvPEvg9_MYE_Jg-&index=3[/yt]
I'm looking forward to the new Cosmos series probably more than the new Trek movies. While I love/adore Tyson, he is one of my personal hero's, I must say... I sooooo miss Carl Sagan! He was just... THE BEST! Earth just isn't the same without him.
WE MISS YOU CARL SAGAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE MISS YOU CARL SAGAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
^ Yeah, thanks to that Youtube video, I wound up listening to Sagan's narration of Pale Blue Dot ... and it's just ... poetic. He will be missed.
I'm glad his legacy is continuing, though. And Tyson seems like a good fit for it.
I'm glad his legacy is continuing, though. And Tyson seems like a good fit for it.
I have never seen the original Cosmos but have always wanted to see it. I have to say that this new trailer does absolutely nothing for me. I have no idea who this Neil deGrasse Tyson is or why he spends all of his time in this trailer with his arms outstretched infront of windmachines.
Having spent years watching documentaries on the BBC and the Discovery channel, I also have didficulties watching these kinds of shows when they are not narrated by someone with a British or a Sottish accent.
I think Brian Cox's Wonders of... Series is the closest to a modern day Cosmos. It's a brilliant show with high quality visuals and, more importantly, Cox doesn't talk down to the audience and has a genuine passion and enthusiasm for astrophysics that's infectious. Also, he doesn't fly around in a interstellar probe as Mr deGrasse Tyson seems to be doing in that trailer.
Having spent years watching documentaries on the BBC and the Discovery channel, I also have didficulties watching these kinds of shows when they are not narrated by someone with a British or a Sottish accent.
I think Brian Cox's Wonders of... Series is the closest to a modern day Cosmos. It's a brilliant show with high quality visuals and, more importantly, Cox doesn't talk down to the audience and has a genuine passion and enthusiasm for astrophysics that's infectious. Also, he doesn't fly around in a interstellar probe as Mr deGrasse Tyson seems to be doing in that trailer.
Having spent years watching documentaries on the BBC and the Discovery channel, I also have didficulties watching these kinds of shows when they are not narrated by someone with a British or a Sottish accent.
Then you are doing yourself a disservice. The original Cosmos may be a bit dated but Sagan's voice is something I can spend all day listening to, same for Tyson.
A
Amaris
Guest
Having spent years watching documentaries on the BBC and the Discovery channel, I also have didficulties watching these kinds of shows when they are not narrated by someone with a British or a Sottish accent.
Then you are doing yourself a disservice. The original Cosmos may be a bit dated but Sagan's voice is something I can spend all day listening to, same for Tyson.
Agreed. I like to take his lectures, put them on a CD, and listen to them in the car when I drive. Aside from just being generally all-around awesome, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has a great teaching voice.
Yeah, I really can't wait for this. It's going to be awesome!
Absolutely. Tyson really does have an engaging voice and persona. The moment I fell in love with him was his interview with Colbert. I hadn't laughed that hard (while still learning something meaningful) in a long, long time. And his Star Talk podcasts are a must-listen.The original Cosmos may be a bit dated but Sagan's voice is something I can spend all day listening to, same for Tyson.
Agreed. I like to take his lectures, put them on a CD, and listen to them in the car when I drive. Aside from just being generally all-around awesome, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has a great teaching voice.
Absolutely. Tyson really does have an engaging voice and persona. The moment I fell in love with him was his interview with Colbert. I hadn't laughed that hard (while still learning something meaningful) in a long, long time. And his Star Talk podcasts are a must-listen.The original Cosmos may be a bit dated but Sagan's voice is something I can spend all day listening to, same for Tyson.
Agreed. I like to take his lectures, put them on a CD, and listen to them in the car when I drive. Aside from just being generally all-around awesome, Neil DeGrasse Tyson has a great teaching voice.
He was also great when on The Today Show with Jon Stewart, especially when he pointed out that the globe they use in the begnning is spinning the wrong way and Stewart loses it
I love guys like this who have such a passion for science and are able to bring it closer to non-scientists in a way that's not dumbed down but interesting (only professionals really need/want and understand the specifics concerning advanced mathematics and physics/chemistry). It's like Harry Potter.. not world literature but it gets people reading and maybe they'll stick with it, like it and start expanding their horizon.
I'll be definitely watching this.
A black man who loves space, the space program, and the idea of space travel-never thought I'd see that in a million years. 
The only time I've ever heard of space being mentioned by a brother, it's in the negative;
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtBy_ppG4hY[/yt]
Good to see something on Fox that's not the usual crap.
The only time I've ever heard of space being mentioned by a brother, it's in the negative;
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtBy_ppG4hY[/yt]
Good to see something on Fox that's not the usual crap.
We're just two weeks away!
And, if you don't want to wait that long, there are special premiere events across the U.S. on Tuesday, March 4.
http://cosmosrsvp.com/
And, if you don't want to wait that long, there are special premiere events across the U.S. on Tuesday, March 4.
http://cosmosrsvp.com/
This will be good.
I went to the premiere here in New York City (at the Hayden Planetarium) last night. I was pleasantly surprised by the size of the crowd (we were told they could admit 900 and the theater was completely full). It's a testament to how powerful the original Cosmos was.
As for this one? I thought it was stunning. It's simply gorgeous to look at and I even learned something (I hadn't known much about Giordano Bruno before). And Alan Silvestri's score is suitably epic. This has the potential to catch the interest of a whole new generation, and I cannot wait to see my 7-year-old's reaction when I show it to her next week.
That said, there are some differences and criticisms. The episode is framed by Sagan's voice - his original intro to the series, as a matter of fact. And, in particular, it honors Sagan's legacy. But this isn't Sagan's series. It lacks his poetic and personal flare. Tyson is good - but he's not Sagan (the most compelling moment was toward the end, when Tyson shared a personal anecdote about Sagan). That's not necessarily a bad thing, but for me at least, it'll take some getting used to.
My only real criticism is that the episode seems too quickly paced. Part of what made Cosmos so elegant is that its deliberate pace made it immersive. It allowed you the time and space (pun intended) to absorb the knowledge and beauty of the universe. This version (aside from its historical anecdote) seems to rush from one (albeit visually stunning, musically soaring, and informative) segment to the next. Perhaps that'll also take some getting used to - and perhaps it's what will help drive modern audiences to the show and to science.
All told, though, I'm thrilled that the series is back on the air, that it's being made with such a dedicated attempt to pay homage to Sagan and update its look and approach to, hopefully, inspire others as I (and so many) have been inspired. And if it accomplishes even a fraction of what the original did, then the criticisms are but minor quibbles. I can't wait until March 16 to see episode 2.
As for this one? I thought it was stunning. It's simply gorgeous to look at and I even learned something (I hadn't known much about Giordano Bruno before). And Alan Silvestri's score is suitably epic. This has the potential to catch the interest of a whole new generation, and I cannot wait to see my 7-year-old's reaction when I show it to her next week.
That said, there are some differences and criticisms. The episode is framed by Sagan's voice - his original intro to the series, as a matter of fact. And, in particular, it honors Sagan's legacy. But this isn't Sagan's series. It lacks his poetic and personal flare. Tyson is good - but he's not Sagan (the most compelling moment was toward the end, when Tyson shared a personal anecdote about Sagan). That's not necessarily a bad thing, but for me at least, it'll take some getting used to.
My only real criticism is that the episode seems too quickly paced. Part of what made Cosmos so elegant is that its deliberate pace made it immersive. It allowed you the time and space (pun intended) to absorb the knowledge and beauty of the universe. This version (aside from its historical anecdote) seems to rush from one (albeit visually stunning, musically soaring, and informative) segment to the next. Perhaps that'll also take some getting used to - and perhaps it's what will help drive modern audiences to the show and to science.
All told, though, I'm thrilled that the series is back on the air, that it's being made with such a dedicated attempt to pay homage to Sagan and update its look and approach to, hopefully, inspire others as I (and so many) have been inspired. And if it accomplishes even a fraction of what the original did, then the criticisms are but minor quibbles. I can't wait until March 16 to see episode 2.
