I have to say, Im not so impressed by Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey. I liked it at first, but Ive been going back and watching the old show and this doesnt come remotely close. This is like that empty-headed Disney drivel, designed for scientific illiterates. There is an emphasis on political correctness, to pacify the objections of non-scientist ignorami. Its insane to think that this is even closely related to the old show, let alone that it is produced by some of the same people and heavily inspired by it, supposedly. It is not created for education, but for entertainment. And even in that area, its very much lacking. As for the soundtrack, I thought so much that I was going to like it after seeing the trailer and hearing the new theme song. It is strongly inspired by the Contact theme, and composed by the same person (Alan Silvestri). The sound of it nearly brings tears to my eyes each time, simply because that theme has become a sort of resounding theme in my mind, of science itself. But the actual soundtrack to the rest of the show is just... generic. Even for orchestral standards, its generic. Its all strings, with a couple flutes thrown in. Extremely obvious chords and intervals, and thrown so over-the-top. I might even call it elitist, if still ultra-cliche... Not even a taste of something else. No hint of subtlety or any sort of down-to-Earth moments. No solos. No dynamic tempo changes. Its all huge full-orchestra swells and crescendos, all the time. And the old show had VANGELIS, among many others of many different genres. Not just one composer the entire time. And not with music 100% of the time. The old show had moments of silence, where Carl would simply talk to the camera, or walk through a field or something. Which brings me to the directing. I have almost no compliments in this area. Its one thing to woo us with a bunch of really awesome graphics and art work. Its another to do that constantly, even while the educator is talking. I am so distracted by all the crazy things happening all over the screen that I find it hard to really focus on what Neil is saying. Sure, I hear it. But its nothing like the deeply resonating MESSAGES brought forth by Carl Sagan in the original - in EVERY SINGLE EPISODE... Carl spoke directly to his audience, almost in a personal manner. He told us stories. He told us the truth and nothing more or less, and what he said seemed to come from the deepest parts of his mind. Neil recites his generic and obligatory pieces like hes rehearsing for some sort of school presentation. He doesnt speak stories to us. He simply narrates, and throws around a barrage of random facts. Is he trying to impress us with his knowledge, or enlighten us? But back to the cinematography. The new show is almost entirely filmed in a green room. There are rare instances where youll see Tyson walking down some alleyway or standing on a natural precipice, but they seem to serve no purpose, and theyre very short. In the old Cosmos, each episode took place in at least 4 different main locations, each being integral to the story telling. Rarely does the camera just humbly sit still and let his MESSAGE do the wooing. No, it has to be slowly revolving around his head while he majestically stares off into space and his equally majestic voice is dubbed over. I will digress a bit; they do have shots which are more focused on the pure education than the cliche style, but theyre few and far between. And the cartoons... Coming somewhat from Seth MacFarlane, I might understand. And to be honest, theyre actually alright. Do I think they really belong in this show? Not really. They dont perfectly match the rest of the show, and having been thrown in with the live scenes without any sort of transition is a bit troubling. However I think those little details can be overlooked. Theyre not badly drawn or anything, they flow well, and they add to the plot. The problem is, there are too many of them. When I first saw the show and the cartoon within it, I thought to myself that the show was going to be having many different styles of cinema... Three episodes in now, I was wrong. There are only 2 styles: Neil DeGrasse Tyson narrating with CGI, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson narrating with cartoons. Thats... pretty much it. And I take strong note of the fact that Tyson is literally the only live actor in the entire show. Second to that are the sort of awful voice actors for the cartoons, who have sort of awful dialogue. Whereas, the old show actually made tremendous efforts to re-create these scenes with actual actors and extras and actual sets and settings. In comparison, it makes it seem like the new show could have been entirely created in some Hollywood studio somewhere. And it most certainly was. They only fly Tyson out to Paris and Egypt and Vatican City for his 15-second appearances in front of some well-known but COMPLETELY irrelevant landmark. Like the Eiffel Tower in Episode 3. What the hell was that all about? The story took place entirely in England... All-in-all, if I gave Cosmos: A Personal Voyage a 10/10, and I would, then I would give Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey a 6/10. I think the main ingredient we all know Cosmos is now missing is the one thing it can never again have: Carl Sagan. Without him, function is corrupted into form, and education is replaced by amusement. A show designed for stupid people is designed to keep people stupid. A show that makes people think is designed to change the world. This is of the former.
Posted on: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:42:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015