Cosmos Remake Coming To Fox In 2014 193
TheSync writes "The long-awaited remake of Carl Sagan's amazing Cosmos series, Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey, will be coming to Fox television next year. It will star astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. Surprisingly, Seth MacFarlane of Family Guy fame is an executive producer. MacFarlane was introduced to Carl Sagan's widow Ann Druyan by deGrasse Tyson, and MacFarlane helped them pitch the show to Fox executives."
Let me guess (Score:5, Funny)
In the Fox version the Universe is 6000 years old and the Earth is at the center of the Universe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And run back to back with moon landing conspiracy shows...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html [badastronomy.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There is no way Fox is cancelling COPS and launching Cosmos. Expect the execs there to come to their senses pretty quickly and replace this with a reality show following the lives of transsexual meth-addicted circus performers.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no way Fox is cancelling COPS and launching Cosmos. Expect the execs there to come to their senses pretty quickly and replace this with a reality show following the lives of transsexual meth-addicted circus performers.
Sadly, I'm inclined to agree with you. Anything that is smart and geeky, even if it dressed up with the wit and style of deGrasse Tyson, will be deemed too cerebral by Fox execs. They will move the show to an odd timeslot, the ratings will summarily drop, and then they will cancel the show, citing low ratings.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here's an early preview... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v91m_F2NhfU [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't confuse Fox News with the Fox Network. I think the two exist so that they can make their own news stories on slow news days.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
As opposed to the other mainstream media, who merely assume that the climate of a 5-billion-year-old planet will be catastrophically ruined by driving SUVs, and that the root of every bad thing that's happened in history can be pinned to blame some white guy, somewhere (after 1776, it would be an AMERICAN white guy).
Hey, we all have our preconceptions, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I don't like postmodernism either. But your critique of climate science is just as bad as postmodernism.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I presume you are referring to "Dancing with the Stars" with the latter. That is an ABC show, and even having Woz on it wouldn't get me to watch it. (Though I actually don't mean that to be as negative as it sounds. I definitely watch some reality shows, and hate the "all reality TV is bad" mindset.. though admittedly, FF and being able to play-faster-t
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's cheaper to remake than to rerun?
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe it's cheaper to remake than to rerun?
That's silly. My guess?- they want to make use of today's CGI capabilities. All the cosmology based shows these days are CGI heavy, partly to aid in illustrating the concepts, I'm sure, but also to grab the attention of the young crowd and pique their interest in the field.
Re:Let me guess (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let me guess (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Let me guess (Score:5, Insightful)
The original show is far out of date. I watched a couple of episodes a few years ago. The visual effects were dated of course, but a lot of the science had gaps as well. When the original Cosmos was produced, the Hubble Space Telescope had not been launched. Exoplanets had not been discovered. The universe was known to be expanding but its rate of expansion was presumed to be decreasing, not increasing. The source of gamma-ray bursts had not been identified. We knew a lot less about black holes. I don't think dark matter was considered important. And, back then, Pluto was a planet. ;-) (Sorry, couldn't resist!)
All that is just off the top of my head. Astrophysics has really advanced since 1980.
Re:Let me guess (Score:4, Informative)
Astrophysics has really advanced since 1980.
True, and the show also covered much more than Astrophysics. For example its claims that the brain operates using symbolic logic seem dated, since these days we would say the brain is more about statistics. It also covered evolutionary biology and microbiology, fields which have progressed tremendously in recent decades.
I suppose that's the problem when one tries to cover such a broad subject as the Cosmos ;)
Re:Let me guess (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Let me guess (Score:5, Insightful)
Think of it as a Neil deGrasse Tyson show done a bit in the style of Carl Sagan's Cosmos.
The guy is so enthusiastic and charasmatic that he's a regular vistor on the late-night talk show circuit, and I believe currently holds the record for the most guest appearances on Colbert. He has 1.2 million followers on twitter. I think he's got what it takes to pull this off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Brian Cox. (Score:3)
The physicist, not the actor.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Let me guess (Score:4, Insightful)
Kaku doesn't really strike me as credible. I'm sure he's a good scientist, but he does too many "time travel wormhole star trek is cool!" pop-sci things to really let me trust him. Tyson reminds me of Sagan, smart and doesn't feel the need to dress things up to sell to the lay audience. Kaku is like Bill Nye, science for people who hate science. Tyson is Mr. Wizard, science for people who just didn't go to school for it but find it cool just because science is cool in-itself.
I suppose thats main difference in how people teach science; one group thinks to be interesting science must DO something. The other school think that the intrinsic "aha" of science is enough to make it interesting. I find the former group to be annoying, and more destructive than useful.
Tyson is willing to let the science talk for itself, without dressing it up. Which makes him Sagan-y enough to reboot something as venerable as Cosmos. He's more likely to let the sheer beauty of the universe talk for itself, without forcing wormholes and time-travel down our throats.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably to update all the outdated and wrong information.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the T-Rex is a Jesus-o-saurus
don't be silly hes riding a t-rex
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No being fox it will go 9 shows they will cancel it and then there will be a 'cult following' and petitions to bring it back.
You mean like Futurama :-(
Halle-bloody-luia (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe that's what we need to pull this society's collective head out of its ass: A Steve Jobs of Science!
A SCIENCE GUY (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With Seth MacFarlane as executive producer, of course it will be.
This has made my day. (Score:2, Insightful)
There's no more Carl Sagan, no more Bill Nye on television, nothing except Mythbusters to inspire future generations of engineers and scientific thinkers. This has made my day, there may just be hope for the future yet.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
And then I saw that Seth MacFarlane is involved. And I lost all hope.
Re: (Score:2)
Except it won't be on public television, it'll be on Fox. There's a good chance any principle will be sacrificed before the first season is finished filming for spectacle. Gotta sell those commercial time slots.
Re: (Score:3)
And Mythbusters has taken to either blowing shit up or shooting guns at something almost every single episode. Hardly the stuff of inspiration.
Re:This has made my day. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
There's no more Carl Sagan, no more Bill Nye on television, nothing except Mythbusters to inspire future generations of engineers and scientific thinkers. This has made my day, there may just be hope for the future yet.
Perhaps the young generation isn't looking to TV for inspiration?
If you can't find what you're looking for ,,,, (Score:2)
There's no more Carl Sagan, no more Bill Nye on television, nothing except Mythbusters to inspire future generations of engineers and scientific thinkers.
PBS is the obvious response.
But there are others and there is more to science and to scientific thinking than engineering.
National Geographic Channel [nationalgeographic.com]
Smithsonian Channel [smithsonianchannel.com]
Science Channel [discovery.com]
The Discovery Channel --- in its many incarnations --- has a lot to offer if you are willing to poke around a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, National Geographic Channel is a joint venture of National Geographic Television & Film and Fox Cable Networks.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the Discovery channels and NatGeo have declined since they where launched. They are not yet as bad as Discovery proper, TLC, or the History Channel, but they are sliding that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, at least Mythbusters is like watching to the letter all the equations of the theory of relativity compared with the "scientific" shows of the history channel. Or anything science related that shows Fox News.
In the other hand, even What-If [xkcd.com] try to explore ideas till [xkcd.com] something [xkcd.com] big [xkcd.com] happens [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Bill Nye is still around. He is all over the Planetary Society, for instance, and does a lot of science advocacy through them.
Carl Sagan was the fucking Man. But I for one am glad to have both Bill Nye (on DVDs) and Neil Degrasse Tyson (sp?) around.
Re: (Score:2)
Narrated by Peter Griffin? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What? (Score:2)
Nah, only Sagan could do it. There's nobody around these days that could possibly....
It will star astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson
Uhm..nevermind.
Re: (Score:3)
I was hoping for Amy Mainzer!
Re: (Score:2)
I was hoping for Amy Mainzer!
To do what?
Re: (Score:2)
Help repopulate Mars?
We leave Saturn for the deeper regions of the (Score:5, Funny)
cosmos and come upon Uranus...
*giggity giggity goo*
Re: (Score:2)
The one day I don't have mod points.
Carl Sagan (Score:2)
Carl Sagan - the Billy Mays of Science.
Better than The Elegant Universe? (Score:2)
Neil deGrasse Tyson will be an excellent show host. I'm looking forward to it, although it will be hard to beat The Elegant Universe series [pbs.org] offered on PBS.
Will (Score:2)
Will it have billions and billions of Hollywood stars? Was Fox thinking of billions and billions of dollars?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As Carl once said... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Surprisingly, Seth MacFarlane of Family Guy fame" (Score:2)
Those ones with Stewie and the nerdy stuff like Star Trek and Star Wars are actually the writings of Seth Green who's known for his Phd. in Astrophysics and action figure collection.
Re: (Score:2)
Green strikes me as a pretty smart guy, but I don't think he has a PhD. I don't believe he even went to college.
Perhaps you're thinking of Brian May, the Queen guitarist who got a PhD in astrophysics.
sorry (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Neil you killed Pluto
Come on. Walking around flashing that highly eliptical orbit [wikipedia.org] far outside the plane the rest of the respectible planets oribit in, acting all chaoitc like a common comet, Pluto was clearly asking for it. I mean, its sad it happened and all, but hardly suprising. Someone was bound to attack Pluto sonner or later.
Re: (Score:2)
Captain Hindsight says:
If you wanted Pluto to remain a planet you shouldn't have insisted we explore the solar system to find out why it behaves so weird.
Would have been Genius (Score:2)
They should have cast William Atherton
Since it's Fox and involves science and space... (Score:2)
Seth McFarlane? (Score:2)
... Don't be glib about this stuff, Dad. It's a legitimate show and they beat you to the punch.
... You know, Dad, You're a real jerk!
Re: (Score:2)
Hypnotic Voice... (Score:3)
Re:Hypnotic Voice... (Score:2)
Mike Tyson is an astrophysicist? (Score:2)
Taking bets on when this Fox show is cancelled (Score:3)
choices are:
1) after first episode
2) after third episode
3) after 10 episodes, remaining episodes only on DVD
4) after 22 episodes, wait a few years, then brought back for another 11 only to be cancelled again after 8 are aired
5) after 25 years and counting.
Also taking bets on when this show is aired:
1) Sundays
2) Fridays
3) Every other Friday
4) Randomly so nobody knows the show exists( i.e. Firefly scheduling).
5) Sometime after baseball ends
Well at least if Seth McFarlane is producing it, the amount of schedule fuckery Fox will do to the show will be far less than if Joss Whedon was producing it.
Why is it surprising... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
to be fair to PBS, Cosmos was "first broadcast by the Public Broadcasting Service in 1980 and was the most widely watched series in the history of American public television until The Civil War (1990)."
Re: (Score:2)
hm... (Score:2)
YESSS!
Cosmos Can't Be Cloned (Score:3, Interesting)
Cosmos was unique. 33 years ago an astronomer / story teller with a luminous passion for the past, present, and future of science stepped into the vacuum of imagination that followed Star Trek, bewitching and enthralling a generation of scientist wanna-bes. Sagan thrilled us largely because the world revealed by Cosmos was a joyous surprise.
But rather than inventing a new series with fresh ideas, Cosmos II is just an attempt to reanimate dead flesh. It's a frankensteinian monster pieced together from someone else's long dead body of work. Magic can't be cloned,
Fox is not PBS. Tyson is not Sagan. Cosmos should be allowed to rest in peace.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. There's a lot of neat stuff we've discovered since 1980, particularly with Hubble.
Re:*sigh* (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I understand, if something is even tangentially related to astronomy, and it's possible to bring him in.. people will want to do that, because he's a likeable guy, he's smart and blunt but not demeaning or haughty, he's passionate but relatable, and he's smart AND cool.
Honestly I'd much rather hear his opinion on non-science matters rather than celebrity opinions on anything that isn't acting or singing or sex tapes or whatever else got them famous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't cross the canons!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The news is that FOX announced this will actually air in the 2013-2014 season at their upfronts on Monday. Before that, it was unclear as to when it would air.
Re:I made an account after 10+ years just to say.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Heh, funny. I can't stand Brian Cox. I just find his manner irritating, and as a result I don't watch any of the shows he is on.
Just goes to show the variety in peoples tastes, eh? :)
I've not imagined Neil DeGrasse Tyson as a host, but I am willing to give it a shot and see how it goes. Who knows, he might actually be good at it.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't have to imagine. Take a look at his hosting on Nova Science Now. That's essentially what the new program will be like.
Re: (Score:2)
Neil deGrasse Tyson comes off as a bit arrogant to me,
Indeed.
I completely understand his "I shall suffer no fools any longer" attitude, but he does put a barrier where there shouldn't be any.
Also, he seems to be aware that he is often rather negative in his approach to explanation, with his tendency to end his talks and discussions with a joke.
Brian Cox on the other hand seems much more opened, approachable and optimistically enthusiastic.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm right there with you, but don't hold your breath. It's appropriate that he's going to be doing this show. He's precisely this generation's equivalent of Sagan: a scientist who did good work in his field early on but who has since coasted on a public image as the Voice Of Science, with his most mundane statements breathlessly repeated as though they were great wisdom. [shrug] I guess it's better for people to choose a scientist to worship than an actor, musician, athlete, politician, or preacher, bu
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the minority of scientists that do really good scientific work ever do it early on in their career and coast from there on; moving on to be an effective popularizer of science that gets more people interested has at least as much social utility as most other courses that fo
Re: (Score:2)
You left off the rest: "with his most mundane statements breathlessly repeated as though they were great wisdom." It's not Tyson's being an effective science popularizer that bugs me--I'm all for that--but the cult-of-personality aspect which seems to follow. Again, this is very much as it was with Sagan.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Worst disaster since the Tunguska Incident (Score:5, Funny)
With so many people spinning in their graves, you'd think free energy would be reality by now.