Dirtylogy
It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.
Janae Milner
Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.
Paynbob
It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.
rkz-53105
Is basically Black Holes Feminist Fantasy addition.
Lee Eisenberg
A previous reviewer accused "Nova" of dumbing down science. I disagree. The PBS series looks at almost ever scientific topic, breaking it down so that everyone can understand it. The series shows us that there is so much to learn about the universe, and even our own world. Whether it's environmental issues, reproduction, or invention, there's so much to learn. Anyone hoping to know more about anything should definitely watch it.I understand that creator Michael Ambrosino based "Nova" on the BBC's "Horizon". I've never seen that one, so I can only take this one at face value. The conclusion is that it's one of the best shows out there. I recommend it.
asweeney33483
I remember meeting Ray Loring while I was purchasing a Yamaha Digital Piano at Scotti Piano & Music Company in Peabody, MA.. Mr. Loring played the Piano for me. Ray told me that purchasing a piano was a good choice over a Guitar for our family. Ray told me that the Scotti family had been selling pianos for many years and that he purchased all of his instruments from the owner. Bill Scotti Jr. who gave me a sweet deal on a Yamaha Clavinova. I never dreamed that Ray Orchestrated all of the Nova shows, choreographing all of the back ground music, until listening, I did not recognize how intricate this process is, Ray will be missed by those who appreciated his art and dedication to his trade.
jcook56050
As a young person, Nova provided me with a means of easily understanding subjects of science which the average person found difficult to grasp. The program provided a nicely balanced version of popular science - not to difficult - not too easy. Each subject was carefully worked by the producers into a visually pleasing presentation that imparted a passable understanding. Then, I went to college again in mid-life to study engineering, science, and mathematics. As my understanding of the basics of physics and math began to grow, Nova began to reveal its weaknesses more and more. Rather than go into great detail about how this program is worked and simplified to ninth grade levels, I'll simply make a few observations. First it is science popularized and approved by an establishment that has in many respects perverted the very meaning of what science is supposed to represent. For a strong example of this problem, research the issue of fluoridation, and you will see how science can be manipulated by money and politics until a policy no longer services the best interests of the public it is supposed to protect. You'll find very limited or meaningless arguments and alternative explanations in a Nova presentation. Real science is not clean and simple like this program. It is complex and full of doubts and debate. You will never see any meaningful mathematical explanations either, but simple graphics repeated over and over in a beautiful pattern with a droning voice that teaches us very little. We are never challenged to think for ourselves. Controversial theories that could be presented by their most ardent proponents are very rare. Nothing brought this fact home to me more strongly than when Nova attempted to demonstrate the collapse theory of the World Trade Center from 9/11. The computer graphics were extremely simplified, and there was absolutely no doubt presented that the government's extremely flawed report had holes in it that were large enough to navigate a supernova through. Very little information was presented that made good, logical engineering sense when compared to the known facts. And, when I checked the source of the digital graphics from the program, the source turned out to be funded by an organization with an agenda that was far too closely attached to the Bush administration. This is not science. There was no mention of the alternative theory that the building exhibited every aspect known to occur when a structure is deliberately brought down by controlled demolition. Nothing was mentioned about the puzzling mystery of Building 7. I could present many other brazen examples of how Nova is edited into brutish simplicity by the selective hand of its editors and the National Science Foundation. But, I think you get the picture. So, before you give these programs a nine or ten rating, go do some deeper research concerning their subject matter, and make up your own theories concerning their cut and dried conclusions. Express doubt, consider the alternatives. Debate. This is what true science is about. Nova is good brain food for those who want everything explained to them with no doubts or challenge.I'm proud to see that the majority who have read my review do not think it useful. Thank you for at least taking the time to read it. Now think about the science instead of your emotions. It's time to challenge NOVA to do a better job. And, I've noted of late that they seem to be doing a little better this year. Think. Challenge. Learn.
