On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote:
> Credit where credit is due, the third installment is the best one so far, > so much so that I feel it would've made a stronger pilot and it only serves > to highlight the weaknesses of the first two episodes. > > It did what I remember the original Cosmos doing: It told a story of > science, took us to places, introduced us to people, and told us why they > mattered. > > Six or seven years ago, the BBC radio series "In Our Time" devoted four > episodes to the history of the Royal Society. It probed in extensive detail > the days of Hooke, Haley, and Newton. Cosmos was never going to do in an > hour what In Our Time did in four hours, but it did more in this episode > than the other two combined. I still felt the wonder that the series seems > desperate to convey, but this time there was a story beyond the wonder. > > One thing I need to nit-pick about: Tyson's billions and billions of years > that the universe has been in existence (I'm paraphrasing and borrowing > from the classic line) still hasn't been proven on the series. He keeps > tossing it out there as if it's a given, this time only briefly before > launching into the tale that would consume most of the episode. However, if > my science-minded friends are honest about the flaws in this series, he > still needs to put forth some of the facts and evidence to support the > theory. To borrow a phrase from this episode, he needs to put up or shut > up. Because nothing in science is a given without proof. > I still am a bit bothered by the way they bring narrative to a halt to show scenes full of special effects. As with the movies, I understand that visuals are preferred for overseas audiences. And I got a little more insight today while listening to an Inquiring Minds interview with Carolyn Porco, a planetary scientist who is in charge of imaging for the Cassini space probe. Most of the images they use in Cosmos come from recent probes and telescope images and they are a lot more accurate than was available a few years ago. I assume that they are making their assertions about the cosmos in the early episodes and they will back them up in later episodes when they get a chance to introduce more information that will help the viewer understand the support for the early assertions. We will see if that's true. One thing that bothered me was the story they presented about Hooke, Newton, and Halley. Even though Tyson mentioned how important Hooke was to the history of science, he was represented as the villain of the story while Newton was portrayed as a generally nice guy. What I have got from reading the history of science and listening to In Our Time is that Newton was very difficult to get along with. Tyson mentioned that when Halley went to Cambridge to ask Newton's help in explaining planetary motion, Newton was a recluse there. The unspoken reason was that Newton was an unfair victim of Hooke's scheming, and while that happened, the reason Newton was a recluse was because nobody wanted to have anything to do with him. In attitude and demeanor he was probably much more like Hooke than was portrayed. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/inquiring-minds-carolyn-porco-saturn-cassini-enceladus -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
