Support NeoGAF

[Hale-XF11]

Yeah I have TWC and they blocked all regular access a while back. I just picked up an antenna from the dollar store and I'm able to get all over the stuff like FOX.

I thought tv antennae signals were no longer a thing because of tv going digital. I'm confused about how this stuff works. What kind of antennae do I need to get exactly? What does it look like? How much should I expect to pay for one?

edit: just looking online, I see there's so many different kinds of antennas on walmart.com alone that it's making my head spin.

Weird. Go here: http://www.silicondust.com/support/channels/ and enter your zip. It should bring up a list of channels that are free and over the air. It might help to look up your Fox's channel number of their site (for example my area's affiliate is Fox 25).

Maybe they switched their channel number and you need to rescan your channel list in your TV. Worth a shot, at least.

Oh cool, didn't know this was a thing. It comes up with a whole list of channels I didn't know even existed here. I'm gonna have to try re-scanning later today and see what I pick up.

 

[Trouble]

My celestial body is ready.

If the trailers are anything to go by, the reboot will be a massive love letter to Carl.

As soon as I saw footage of Neil standing on the same windswept coastal cliffs that Carl did over 30 years ago, I knew they were doing this right.

Not at all surprising if you know Tyson's history with Sagan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeqrN3Bfro8

 

[morningbus]

I thought tv antennae signals were no longer a thing because of tv going digital. I'm confused about how this stuff works. What kind of antennae do I need to get exactly? What does it look like? How much should I expect to pay for one?


Oh cool, didn't know this was a thing. It comes up with a whole list of channels I didn't know even existed here. I'm gonna have to try re-scanning later today and see what I pick up.

That's if your TV already has a digital antenna, of course. If it doesn't, you can always consider grabbing an antenna off Amazon. I don't have experience with them personally, but I've heard good things about the Leaf: http://www.amazon.com/mohu

 

[gutshot]

Will this be streaming anywhere? Hulu? Fox.com?

 

[Mengy]

I thought tv antennae signals were no longer a thing because of tv going digital. I'm confused about how this stuff works. What kind of antennae do I need to get exactly? What does it look like? How much should I expect to pay for one?

No, you are wrong. I do not have cable nor satellite, I only have an antennae on my roof and I only receive digital broadcast signals to watch on my HDTV. Any kind of antennae works, but I have a $120 dollar huge antennae that is optimized for weak signal reception.

 

[fifasnipe2224]

Will watch. Trying to get as much family & friends as possible to see it also. No one should miss out on this.

 

[Vanillalite]

 

[Stinkles]

Looks like a Russian wedding photo.

 

[Hale-XF11]

That's if your TV already has a digital antenna, of course. If it doesn't, you can always consider grabbing an antenna off Amazon. I don't have experience with them personally, but I've heard good things about the Leaf: http://www.amazon.com/mohu

OK, cool I'm gonna have to consider whether or not I should get one of those soon. I assume my tv has a built in antenna already since I'm getting other channels in, but doing some research online, I see now that the signal may be too weak to reach Fox's signal. I live in a very rural area and according to this website, I'm in the violet zone, which apparently requires a really strong rooftop antenna in order for me to receive their station.

No, you are wrong. I do not have cable nor satellite, I only have an antennae on my roof and I only receive digital broadcast signals to watch on my HDTV. Any kind of antennae works, but I have a $120 dollar huge antennae that is optimized for weak signal reception.

I wonder if I can get away without having to install something on my roof. Hopefully one of the stronger mohu antennas that morningbus pointed me to will suffice. Seems worth a shot anyways.

 

[Vanillalite]

Countdown

PS: You can add it to the OP if you want!

 

[fluffydelusions]

I thought tv antennae signals were no longer a thing because of tv going digital. I'm confused about how this stuff works. What kind of antennae do I need to get exactly? What does it look like? How much should I expect to pay for one?

I just picked up some 99 cent rabbit ears...works fine

 

[abstract alien]

This is going to be the high point of my year.

 

[UrbanRats]

The weird shopping in the OP's photo is freking me out.

 

[Clydefrog]

DVR is SET! can't wait

 

[RatskyWatsky]

I've never seen the original...can I watch it online anywhere?

 

[KingGondo]

I've never seen the original...can I watch it online anywhere?

It was on Netflix at one point. Not sure if it still is.

 

[Amir0x]

I am glad this is made, and I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but I still can't shake the feeling he is the wrong person to be the 'face' of this version. Carl Sagan was almost a scientist philosopher in the way he described the amazing facts of natural wonders, his voice was unique and substantial, the way he carried words flowed and captured viewers imagination in a way few others have in modern times.

Neil deGrasse Tyson does not even come close to having the same way with words (he often makes fun of himself about it, actually, even mentioning in a discussion with Richard Dawkins that he wished he had his gift of language). His voice also does not have the iconic range and character that Carl Sagan's had. Carl's emphasis and pronunciation as well as the way he married his delivery with the near poetry of the script is second to none, and there's basically no way for Neil to come close to that aspect because he physically does not have those same talents.


I am glad it's being made, but I am definitely setting my expectations for it being a good general science program, not a good follow up to Cosmos.

 

[Clydefrog]

you know what really grinded my gears the other day? I was watching a hockey game on TV with some friends and we saw a commercial for Cosmos. It mentioned Carl Sagan and my friend blurted out: "Who's Carl Sa.. Sahgan?" I yelled at him He's 29 years old.

 

[speculawyer]

Huge props to Seth MacFarlane for helping get this done. I don't think it would have happened without him. Not bad for a wise-crackin potty-humor TV guy.

 

[speculawyer]

This GIF is awesome.

 

[Mrs. Manky]

I am glad this is made, and I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but I still can't shake the feeling he is the wrong person to be the 'face' of this version.

wegotabadassoverhere.gif

Tyson is exactly the right person for this show, and I'm looking forward to it.

 

[speculawyer]

I thought tv antennae signals were no longer a thing because of tv going digital. I'm confused about how this stuff works. What kind of antennae do I need to get exactly? What does it look like? How much should I expect to pay for one?

Go Back to the Future with a TV antenna. The local broadcasts these days have great HD and they have lots of simulcast channels. However, how good your reception is depends on how far from the broadcast you are, how high your antenna is and whether there are any other blocking things (buildings, hills, etc.)

Go here to help pick & align your antenna:
http://www.antennaweb.org/

 

[GungHo]

Looking forward to this. Subscribed. Hope he piledrives Michio Kaku.

 

[Sutton Dagger]

It's fantastic that they are in a way continuing the vision of the great Carl Sagan.

Check out these amazing tributes at Sagan Series . I can't help but get misty eyed.

 

[Dai101]

I've never seen the original and I was certain it was on Netflix so I was planning on marathoning it but it was pulled in September.

Guess I'll just watch the new one.

I've never seen the original...can I watch it online anywhere?

I can't believe there are people who hasn't seen the original COSMOS. Now, do yourselves a favor and go watch it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dADUBcoEEHw&list=PLBA8DC67D52968201

It's safe and legal.

Huge props to Seth MacFarlane for helping get this done. I don't think it would have happened without him. Not bad for a wise-crackin potty-humor TV guy.

Yup. Without him this would never been possible. He also made this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_m...tion_of_the_Carl_Sagan_and_Ann_Druyan_Archive

MacFarlane donated money to create The Seth MacFarlane Collection of the Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan Archive at the Library of Congress. MacFarlane said, "The work of Carl Sagan has been a profound influence in my life, and the life of every individual who recognizes the importance of humanity's ongoing commitment to the exploration of our universe," He also, said, "The continuance of our journey outward into space should always occupy some part of our collective attention, regardless of whatever Snooki did last week.

BASSED SETH.

 

[Amir0x]

wegotabadassoverhere.gif

Tyson is exactly the right person for this show, and I'm looking forward to it.

I'm glad you are, but I think this is a rather silly way to dismiss the effort I went into explaining my issues. If you do not think those issues exist, it would be better for you to try to explain clearly why my concerns are unfounded (despite my clear and concise explanations).

I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but just because I like someone does not mean I think they are right for every project. There is a character and personality to Carl Sagan's body of work and language that simply doesn't exist in ANY of Neil's work, and I've read basically everything from both of them and watched pretty much everything from both of them.

 

[RaikuHebi]

I've waited a long time for this!

It was my first viewing of the original Cosmos in 2009 a few months before my 18th birthday, that put me on the fence about God, and then it was Dawkins' The God Delusion that made me fully embrace Atheism. I can't believe it's been 5 years, time sure flies!

I hope the sequel will give me the same feeling. I want to call it a religious feeling, about the universe.

 

[RatskyWatsky]

I can't believe there are people who hasn't seen the original COSMOS. Now, do yourselves a favor and go watch it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dADUBcoEEHw&list=PLBA8DC67D52968201

It's safe and legal.

:O

Thanks!

 

[Sutton Dagger]

I'm glad you are, but I think this is a rather silly way to dismiss the effort I went into explaining my issues. If you do not think those issues exist, it would be better for you to try to explain clearly why my concerns are unfounded (despite my clear and concise explanations).

I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but just because I like someone does not mean I think they are right for every project. There is a character and personality to Carl Sagan's body of work and language that simply doesn't exist in ANY of Neil's work, and I've read basically everything from both of them and watched pretty much everything from both of them.

I agree, to be honest I don't think any public scientists at this time are as eloquent, optimistic or can evoke emotion like Carl Sagan (as evidenced by my link above), so it's kind of a tough gig for anyone. I still think I'll enjoy the new series immensely, it just won't have the same impact on me.

 

[GungHo]

I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but just because I like someone does not mean I think they are right for every project. There is a character and personality to Carl Sagan's body of work and language that simply doesn't exist in ANY of Neil's work, and I've read basically everything from both of them and watched pretty much everything from both of them.

There's no one that I know of that would provide the "Sagan package" you're looking for beyond Sagan.

 

[Hale-XF11]

I am glad this is made, and I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but I still can't shake the feeling he is the wrong person to be the 'face' of this version. Carl Sagan was almost a scientist philosopher in the way he described the amazing facts of natural wonders, his voice was unique and substantial, the way he carried words flowed and captured viewers imagination in a way few others have in modern times.

Neil deGrasse Tyson does not even come close to having the same way with words (he often makes fun of himself about it, actually, even mentioning in a discussion with Richard Dawkins that he wished he had his gift of language). His voice also does not have the iconic range and character that Carl Sagan's had. Carl's emphasis and pronunciation as well as the way he married his delivery with the near poetry of the script is second to none, and there's basically no way for Neil to come close to that aspect because he physically does not have those same talents.


I am glad it's being made, but I am definitely setting my expectations for it being a good general science program, not a good follow up to Cosmos.

I feel what you're saying. Carl was incredibly unique in his delivery, choice of words and mix of philosophy and science. The thing that gives me hope however, is that Carl's widow is responsible for writing most, if not all, of the new Cosmos. I read somewhere that Neil cites her unique ability to rekindle and implement the essence and beauty of the original series. I'd trust her to help get it right and for Neil to deliver it to the best of his ability. It won't be like when Carl did it. It will feel different. Nobody will ever be Carl, but Neil is pretty darn good in his own right and probably the best man for the job today.

I just picked up some 99 cent rabbit ears...works fine

Go Back to the Future with a TV antenna. The local broadcasts these days have great HD and they have lots of simulcast channels. However, how good your reception is depends on how far from the broadcast you are, how high your antenna is and whether there are any other blocking things (buildings, hills, etc.)

Go here to help pick & align your antenna:
http://www.antennaweb.org/

Yeah, looks like I'm about 30 miles from the nearest broadcast towers, so I'm gonna have to pick up something with a strong signal, it seems. I'll probably end up getting something like a mohu.

 

[Spinluck]

wish i had time to watch the original again before this airs.

HYPED

 

[Nokterian]

subbed! I am excited how this is going to be

 

[Josh7289]

bam. hype max. Sunday.

I just finished the first Cosmos this year. I expect a different style from Neil, but that's good too.

 

[RaikuHebi]

I feel what you're saying. Carl was incredibly unique in his delivery, choice of words and mix of philosophy and science. The thing that gives me hope however, is that Carl's widow is responsible for writing most, if not all, of the new Cosmos. I read somewhere that Neil cites her unique ability to rekindle and implement the essence and beauty of the original series. I'd trust her to help get it right and for Neil to deliver it to the best of his ability. It won't be like when Carl did it. It will feel different. Nobody will ever be Carl, but Neil is pretty darn good in his own right and probably the best man for the job today.

Your reply is brilliant. We usually see Neil in live settings, but in this case he'll have pre-written material to work with which will be geared towards reflecting Carl's spirit as much as possible.

 

[fluffydelusions]

I feel what you're saying. Carl was incredibly unique in his delivery, choice of words and mix of philosophy and science. The thing that gives me hope however, is that Carl's widow is responsible for writing most, if not all, of the new Cosmos. I read somewhere that Neil cites her unique ability to rekindle and implement the essence and beauty of the original series. I'd trust her to help get it right and for Neil to deliver it to the best of his ability. It won't be like when Carl did it. It will feel different. Nobody will ever be Carl, but Neil is pretty darn good in his own right and probably the best man for the job today.

The thing I love about Neil is he is super passionate like Carl. I'm sure he will deliver.

 

[Ovid]

I can't believe there are people who hasn't seen the original COSMOS. Now, do yourselves a favor and go watch it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dADUBcoEEHw&list=PLBA8DC67D52968201

It's safe and legal.



Yup. Without him this would never been possible. He also made this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_m...tion_of_the_Carl_Sagan_and_Ann_Druyan_Archive



BASSED SETH.

It's blocked in the U.S. apparently.

 

[RatskyWatsky]

It's blocked in the U.S. apparently.

I'm in the US and it works for me.

 

[Dai101]

It's blocked in the U.S. apparently.

It is? Weaird. Anyway, here's another sauce: https://www.youtube.com/user/TomKNJ?feature=watch

 

[Amir0x]

There's no one that I know of that would provide the "Sagan package" you're looking for beyond Sagan.

I don't think that's necessarily true. For example, David Attenborough is an example of someone who has a distinct style from Sagan, but ends up in with a style that serves many of the same ends. He has a fantastic speaking voice, which I don't really feel Neil has.

I don't want to derail the topic, i didn't expect so many people to respond to my points. And I don't want anyone to think I am sad this exists or don't want to watch it. I do. I just am setting my expectations for a good science program in Neil's style, just not a good update to the Cosmos style of film. But if it exceeds that expectation, believe me I'll be dancing in the streets

I feel what you're saying. Carl was incredibly unique in his delivery, choice of words and mix of philosophy and science. The thing that gives me hope however, is that Carl's widow is responsible for writing most, if not all, of the new Cosmos. I read somewhere that Neil cites her unique ability to rekindle and implement the essence and beauty of the original series. I'd trust her to help get it right and for Neil to deliver it to the best of his ability. It won't be like when Carl did it. It will feel different. Nobody will ever be Carl, but Neil is pretty darn good in his own right and probably the best man for the job today.

Yeah, I don't think it will be bad at all. I guess maybe I didn't make the nuance of my point clear enough, so I apologize for that. If you read the second to last sentence of my response to GungHo, that's my feelings in a nutshell

 

[Mengy]

I've never seen the original...can I watch it online anywhere?

The entire series is free to watch on Youtube. You have no excuse not to watch it. I watch it at least once a year.

I am glad this is made, and I like Neil deGrasse Tyson, but I still can't shake the feeling he is the wrong person to be the 'face' of this version. Carl Sagan was almost a scientist philosopher in the way he described the amazing facts of natural wonders, his voice was unique and substantial, the way he carried words flowed and captured viewers imagination in a way few others have in modern times.

Neil deGrasse Tyson does not even come close to having the same way with words (he often makes fun of himself about it, actually, even mentioning in a discussion with Richard Dawkins that he wished he had his gift of language). His voice also does not have the iconic range and character that Carl Sagan's had. Carl's emphasis and pronunciation as well as the way he married his delivery with the near poetry of the script is second to none, and there's basically no way for Neil to come close to that aspect because he physically does not have those same talents.

I disagree 100%. Name one other scientist who could do a better job. Name one other scientist that the majority of the public is even aware of.

Neil is the perfect choice for this IMHO.


Edit: Okay David Attenborough was a good example, LOL.

 

[the_log_ride]

Subscribing for awesomeness.

Glad to know there's a Q&A tomorrow, too!

 

[Hale-XF11]

Your reply is brilliant. We usually see Neil in live settings, but in this case he'll have pre-written material to work with which will be geared towards reflecting Carl's spirit as much as possible.

I think/hope his spirit will indeed live on in the new series as reflected in Ann's writing. She has that same connection to the universe that Carl had. She even speaks a lot like he did.

The thing I love about Neil is he is super passionate like Carl. I'm sure he will deliver.

For sure, his passion for the cosmos is unequaled by anyone else alive today. I'm sure his enthusiasm will be infectious and drive the whole series.

Yeah, I don't think it will be bad at all. I guess maybe I didn't make the nuance of my point clear enough, so I apologize for that. If you read the second to last sentence of my response to GungHo, that's my feelings in a nutshell

I'm hoping it will be more than just another scientific exposition. Neil is a fairly passionate guy and is capable of speaking dynamically. Hopefully that will be reflected in this new series. Some of that lies on him. Some of that on the writing and also some of that on the director of the series to make sure he actually performs properly. Keeping my fingers crossed, but I think/hope it'll be fun, awe inspiring and keep us all wanting more.

 

[Kimawolf]

So with Through the Wormhole's shaky schedule, think this could take that audience since after all, this is basically the "child" of the original series? And will this put Morgan Freeman out of a job?

 

[Buckethead]

I'm going to the early screening tomorrow.

I can't wait.

 

[Babalu.]

cant wait cant wait cant wait cant wait!

 

[Amir0x]

Do we know what the opening credits track will be for this version of Cosmos? Will it be Vangelis again? 'Cause that shit is so engrained in my mind from watching the series now that it'd be awesome to hear it return

 

[fluffydelusions]

I'm going to the early screening tomorrow.

I can't wait.

What is this sorcery?

 

[666]

Do we know what the opening credits track will be for this version of Cosmos? Will it be Vangelis again? 'Cause that shit is so engrained in my mind from watching the series now that it'd be awesome to hear it return

Vangelis or death.

 

[Insane Metal]

OMG 5 days '-'

Also, new video: first look http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GZ2ul4E7Go