The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Let's Watch [Cosmos: A Personal Voyage]

The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
Once upon a time, in an era some people used to call, 'The 1970s', there was a lot of demand for atomic weaponry. People wanted bazookas that could shoot fission rockets, cannons that could shoot fission shells, and not only long-range fission missiles or aircraft carried bombs, but the biggest possible bombs ever.

This great period of time, today often called, 'The Good 'Ol Days', saw a lot of technical innovation as a result of science & engineering osmosis out of the military sector - especially in the United States. A few persons, likely of the treasonous / communist sort, saw this golden age of booming industry and thought, "This seems grossly negligent & dangerous. Most of the public, and even most of the state, doesn't understand any of this technology or the processes that went into creating it, and how could we expect them to give it the respect it deserves when they don't even understand it?"

One of those upstarts was named Carl Sagan, and he wrote some crappy television series named Cosmos in an effort to try and 'educate' people.

...Uh. Are you sure it was just some crappy show?

As long as the definition of 'crappy' includes the best fucking documentary ever put on television, I stand by my statement.


If you didn't know, Cosmos is being rebooted sometime this year on Fox. It'll be narrated by Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and co-written / co-produced by Ann Druyan (Sagan's widow, and co-creator of the original series) & Steven Soter (a colleague of Sagan, and another co-creator of the original series). I'm pretty excited by the news.


'Cosmos' sounds like some pretentious 70s shit. I have never even heard of--

...You haven't already watched this series at least 5 times? My above use of the word 'crappy' did not cause you to destroy your keyboard with bile?

That's the line. Go pop yourself some fucking popcorn with the microwave that nuclear science provided you with, sit your ass down and get ready for 13 episodes of the best fucking documentary ever put on television.

We start here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClPShKs9Kr0


Take notes. We'll be engaging in sophisticated commentary & critique here, and you don't want to be found lacking.
Episode 1 is the weakest part of Cosmos, for me.

Astrophysics has come a long way since the documentary was aired, and a lot of what once must've seemed awesome in this part seems mundane to me now. The artistic impressions of pulsars & nebulae don't quite manage to capture the majesty of those things in the same way that Hubble has managed to.

The production values are still fantastic for a show put on PBS in 1979, though, even in this 'weak' segment.

With Love and Courage

Posts

  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    I found it rough trying to get through the first episode with its sci fi production insertions.

    So much so that I couldn't bring myself to watch the next. Does it stay as bad? If were going to go through the episodes together in the thread, I'll try to give it a shot.

    steam_sig.png
  • Silas BrownSilas Brown That's hobo style. Registered User regular
    Well shit, I wish I had noticed this thread yesterday. I love Cosmos, but it's been too long since I've seen it. I'll catch what you posted after work and this shit will be rad as fuuuuck

  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    I found it rough trying to get through the first episode with its sci fi production insertions.

    So much so that I couldn't bring myself to watch the next. Does it stay as bad? If were going to go through the episodes together in the thread, I'll try to give it a shot.

    I had the same problem. I like my documentaries filled with charts and old guys talking, instead of re-enactments and shots of Sagan traveling through space.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    I guess you are being facecious? I sit in the politcal threads too much. I am refering to the weird space ship set they built and pretended to fly through space.

    I found every one of his scenes on the beach, at ruins, or inside that house to be just fine. He could of done any of the space scenes from inside an observatory or planetarium. They didn't recreate a bullshit 'I,Claudius' style ancient setting when he talked about how we figured out the circumference of the planet.

    steam_sig.png
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    It's also on netflix instant, BTW.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • PLAPLA The process.Registered User regular
    Kepler is adorable.

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    I found it rough trying to get through the first episode with its sci fi production insertions.

    So much so that I couldn't bring myself to watch the next. Does it stay as bad? If were going to go through the episodes together in the thread, I'll try to give it a shot.

    Yes, the sci fi inserts will be a constant fixture. The quality of them varies; as I said before, the first episode (in my opinion) is the weakest.

    Episode 2

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

    I find this episode engaging because it's so outdated, actually. Watching what they were onto in the early 80s as far as biology is concerned vs what we know now is stunning. Also, Sagan foreshadows the 'intelligent design' debate we're now trying to drag people through.

    With Love and Courage
  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    I keep hearing you and other people talk about it being outdated. I thought this series was heralded for being constructed so well that it hasn't become out dated except for a few small things(and depending on the edition you have, they caveat/edit the episode).

    steam_sig.png
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Most of the information isn't 'outdated'; Sagan is, mostly, describing well established (and timeless) scientific principles. But some of the specifics are outdated, and if we're totally honest, Sagan's expertise was astronomy. His history is a bit... off (and some of it is embarrassingly wrong. I'm not sure how well he did with Japanese history in episode 2, as I'm not familiar with medieval Japan, but his Greek history is way off base for the most part).

    With Love and Courage
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    I keep hearing you and other people talk about it being outdated. I thought this series was heralded for being constructed so well that it hasn't become out dated except for a few small things(and depending on the edition you have, they caveat/edit the episode).

    Don't take this as gospel:

    but as far as I can tell the show doesn't say anything that is untrue, there are simply gaps in knowledge that Sagan mentions that have since been filled. For example, he talks about DNA in the episode Ender linked but doesn't go into the importance of RNA (which we learned a lot about in the 1980s).
    We've also developed more sophisticated understanding of quasars and black holes since then.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    I've watched this repeatedly, and I cannot wait for the sequel in 2014 (I think that's when it's supposed to release).

    As others have mentioned, there are a few little mistakes, but they don't really detract--for instance, Sagan keeps presenting an artist's rendition of the Milky Way which depicts it as a grand design spiral, when we now know that it's actually a barred spiral. That's something we only just figured out, though, and it's really only a background detail. Most of the "errors" are minor stuff like that, since most of the documentary is about the principles, scale, and history of science.

    Parts of it are corny, but I find myself not giving a fuck. It's a nice break from the cynicism and "irony" of modern TV.

  • GnomeTankGnomeTank What the what? Portland, OregonRegistered User regular
    edited February 2013
    I love Cosmos, I really do...but every time I watch it now, I yell at the screen "CARL, WE KNOW MORE THAN THAT NOW GOD DAMN IT".

    It's not outdated, so much as much of what it calls "hypothesis" is way beyond that now. Things like dark matter, dark energy and dark flow that it barely touches on are serious theories now and important. It basically glosses over black holes because knowledge of them then was pretty thin compared to now.

    It's still AWESOME, and nothing in it is wrong, but if you watch a lot of this stuff as a matter of course (which I do), it will feel dated. To someone who just knows dick all about the universe, it's still the best primer aside from reading Hawking's A Brief History.

    GnomeTank on
    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh SFV: Brainling
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    I mean, back when this was aired, we didn't even have a firm understanding of how / why the KT-boundary extinction (the one that killed every large, non-theropod dinosaur) happened. In the 'Update' segment, Sagan notes the cometary impact hypothesis - but now we now it was an asteroid.

    Moments like that just add to the experience, for me. Little snapshots of how knowledge has advanced.

    With Love and Courage
  • GnomeTankGnomeTank What the what? Portland, OregonRegistered User regular
    Like I said, I love Cosmos, and if anyone who knows dick all about the universe asks me "hey, what should I wa...", I will blurt out "Cosmos" faster than a pressed nickle shot out of a gorilla's asscheeks.

    As someone who has a beyond basic street level knowledge of this stuff, it has glaring omissions (for obvious temporal reasons). Carl Sagan is still a boss of all bosses.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh SFV: Brainling
  • BursarBursar Hee Noooo! PDX areaRegistered User regular
    As a slight comment on The Ender's discussion of the second ep., the "watchmaker" bit isn't Sagan pre-rebutting (prebutting?) Intelligent Design. The Watchmaker analogy was being used a good 50 years before Darwin even wrote Origin of Species.

    GNU Terry Pratchett
    PSN: Wstfgl | GamerTag: An Evil Plan | Battle.net: FallenIdle#1970
    Hit me up on BoardGameArena! User: Loaded D1
    Spoilered until images are unborked. egc6gp2emz1v.png
Sign In or Register to comment.