Geheimnisse des Universums

This series is obviously a serious winner. It makes you think and although it merely touches on different subjects rather than going into heavy depth the explanations are enough to get the point across. Each interview with each astronomer and scientist is short and attention-getting. The proofs for different theories are shown in non-mathematical terms - except for the "billions of billions" thing which can get on your nerves a little because without math then you almost have to take their word for things. Even the scientists make a few blunders by confusing exponential with geometric or the classic confusing literal with figurative which every journalist does all the time but those are small items.

One interesting item from this series is the constant use of the term "global warming" which even taken in the context of this great series is laughable because in the same sentence a liberal scientist brings it up he explains that the sun has far more influence on the weather than the mere pittance man contributes as they obviously mean man-made global warming as opposed to what nature does. So obviously the makers of this series have bought into this bizarre hoax that makes a few people rich at the American tax payers' expense. That's the reason I can't give it a 10/10.

Otherwise I highly recommend this series. Again, it's superb.

History Channel's "The Universe" is a documentary series that fuels its somewhat empty content with blazingly beautiful CGI of the most spectacular sights in the universe. The series covers stars, planets, cosmic weather (!), terra-formation, dark matter and the aggressive nature of the cosmos in hour-long episodes of visual effect candy.

The hook of the series is that you get to take a look at what Venus, Neptune or a nebula or a meteoroid strike on Earth would look like up- close, while the narrator explains the "science" behind it. I say "the science" because very little science is usually covered. Any complicated phenomena is usually explained through real-life analogies. A meteorite crashing the Earth is like shooting a ball with a rifle. The crater can be measured by drawing an analogy of throwing a weight plate on sand and measuring the width of the bump on the beach. And so on.

Then again, this series is not aiming to educate the experts or even science enthusiasts. It's written for the laymen, who just want to see what Venus looks like if you were standing on its ground. On high definition, those images are quite impressive and grab your attention.

Unfortunately, those images are continuously recycled, for probably no other than budgetary reasons. But images aren't the only reused on the show. Every time the show goes on a short commercial break, the narrator insists on recapping what happened just before the break. As if no one could remember the very easily comprehensible bits they had just been told a few minutes ago. In many ways, the series undermines the audience's intelligence and even memory by recapping and reusing its material over and over.

In fact, every season of the series contains at least one episode dedicating to apocalyptic events that wreak havoc on Earth, recycling the same scenarios over and over while adding a few new ones, even going as far as reusing the same narrations!

Regardless, while the Universe is admittedly a little dumb and condescendingly so, the imagery is sometimes truly astonishing. The CGI, of course, is nowhere near what many modern films, such as "2012" or even the "new" Star Wars films have accomplished, but for the small screen on high definition, it's pretty impressive.

And on the bright side, it is really exciting to see what Venus or a pulsar looks like, even if you get to see the same image about a hundred times. Its greatest virtue is its entertainment value. While its greatest vice is the lack of science, the series does introduce the audience to the basic ideas of the newest and hottest theories of contemporary astrophysics and related sciences and find out more by hitting the nearest university library.

Okay, first of all, after reading all these reviews I could't help myself but to write something as well.

So...some people say it's good for kids and unintelligent and uneducated people. I must say...throw that comments in to garbage! Why? Because even if I'm not to physics I can certainly see that this is not too much filled with scientific terms and ways of explanation. That is a fact and that is on spot, but...let me say one more thing. This series are made for wide range of people, not for astronomers and physicists to learn something new or to improve their research. It's meant to show us random people some interesting facts, about astronomy and universe overall and potentially get some of us in to the world of science.

I, for example am a 3D & visual effects specialist and I could easily say, that the visual effects here are mediocre and not something special at all, because that is my profession and I see it. But okay, that goes for me and other VE experts, but random people who are not in to computer graphics will say..."wooow what a stunning graphics and visuals, mind blowing animation and effects, i'm totally blown away." while I'll sit there mumbling "damn, they could've done this a lot better". That's okay, that does not mean they're blind for esthetics and dumb not to make a difference between good and mediocre when they see it. It's just that CG is not their field of interests and they're not learning and researching that field such as us CG (computer graphics) artists do, so they can't tell about processes of creating CG, how it's done, how it could've been done, what could be made better, etc.

Same goes for other people who are saying that this is dumb. Dear people, not all of us here are scientists. If you are a physicists and find it dumb...not all of us will think the same. If you want to discover something new, go do a research, make a discovery for yourself instead of making one-sided comments.

Assuming you've never done CG before. Would you understand me if I start explaining it to you now and immediately start with: mental ray renderer, rendering algorithms, global illumination, final-gathering setup, FG points cashing, reactor scripting, mesh exporting, material map ID setting, channel setting, texture scaling, keying, camera tracking, 3D tracking, setting up key velocity, curve editing, animation controllers, etc, etc, etc, etc.....and you've never even heard for any of the CG making softwares. I doubt it, no matter how intelligent you might be.

So for the conclusion and for recommendations...Do watch this show if you're into something new, if you want to find out interesting and fun stuff about cosmos and astronomy and ignore those who are saying that this is for lowbrainers. You're not dumb if you like to watch this. I'm 26 years old, a member of MENSA with an IQ of 148, and I find this show fun and interesting a lot ;-)

So cheers and enjoy :-)

This program must have been made for the Joe Bloe uneducated TV viewer. Most of the time, the information being presented is not new or interesting, and it feels as if the writers & producers of the show had to fill up a large time slot with very little source material. So what you get is a bunch of information repetitively going on and on about how "dangerous" gamma ray bursts are, or how imminent asteroid collisions are, blah blah blah. Yes, we all know about these things, but the way the program makes you sit through an hour meagerly trying to make you sit on the edge of your seat for a statistic of like 1 in a billion billion (as seen with the gamma ray bursts) that the Earth will be destroyed by some calamity. Yes, we know already! They could have been done with it in 5 minutes, but no, it's stretched to an hour long program! The sensationalism of this program is just too over-the-top, from the drawn-out "fear factor" bits, to the announcer's XTREME TRUCKS style voice. They obviously should have saved him for the Monster Truck series...

Another thing that bothered me were all the "analogies" that took away from the true dynamics of how certain things in the universe work. For example, dropping a Yogurt container to show how a death star works... or a sprinkler for showing how a spiral star is. While these are "cute" they are indeed more annoying than useful, and assumes a real lack of intelligence of the viewer. Just tell us the science behind it without treating us like 5 year olds.

It really is a shame. This program could have been so much more informative and hosted by a much better narrator (writers are to blame too, of course). There are indeed moments where I laughed out loud because of how dumb the narrator's comments were.

On the bright side, however, the computer effects were done well enough. It is an interesting subject, so that's why I gave it a 5. But all in all, terribly done for such a great topic.

It's the perfect type of documentary series that you could explain even with very limited personal knowledge of science to a kid. And at the same time for people with basic to medium knowledge of science it's still a incredibly well done and informative series. I was 20 when this series started. And it really broke apart the terrible experiences I had at highschool with learning the science/astronomy/physics. A really great piece of material.