It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

For what is a promising title with a multitude of episodes spanning so many seasons I found myself cringing at how incredibly "dumbed down" the content was.Analogy has a place for getting across "out of this world" concepts but this is ridiculous! This series says more about the USA and American culture than it informs about the title matter. I mean really, how many melodramatic and inept analogies using guns, speeding bullets or that standard international unit of the "football field" need to be employed.The failure ultimately lies with the editors/producers whose expertise evidently only extends as far as "what sells" as there is no sense that they have any real appreciation for the subject matter.It is possible to make a documentary such that the "ordinary man" can understand it and yet not avoid using words with more than 3 syllables and resorting to cheap and inappropriate attention grabbers. Set the bar higher people...

My views are already well presented in the first review of this title. But what I will say to those of you who argue that it really is a great show for those who are not familiar with astronomy and physics, it's not. And I want to warn off 12 year old kids as well, more than others, they might be watching it thinking this comet with 99.9% chance of NOT crashing into earth is something worth worrying about. As others also have written, this series rely more on sensationalism than actual science, and I find it hard to believe these educated astronomers would actually have anything to do with this War of the Worlds fiction. As they spit out random theory after theory, I find myself with my palm to my forehead more often than I'm actually intrigued.If the argument for watching this is that it's supposedly easy and understandable to "beginners of astronomy", then I strongly recommend watching Wonders of the Solar System in stead. It's a BBC production with professor Brian Cox as the presenter. Note that although he actually is a professor in particle physics, he still explains everything in simple terms without sounding like the voice-over for action trailers. Also, the imagery and animations in this series are beautiful, not like The Universe's cheap Hollywood production.

If you agree with the first reviewer's comments, then I guess I'm a 12 year old. I do not believe this series was geared toward the "professors" of the world but average normal people who can relate to terms like "super sonic speed".The CG visuals are awesome and give you a real image of what they are trying to explain more than any 2d pictures taken by HST could ever help. The scientist an people involved in the show have a real love and passion for what they are saying and make the show genuine and very appealing.All in all I love this show and think it is worth watching when ever it's on, but I'm no professor emeritus and I'm not cool enough to have a "power off switch" on my T.V.So if your a 12 year old at heart like me, then you will really like this show!

First a disclaimer. I could only tolerate watching two episodes: Life and Death of a Star, and Saturn. My 16 year old son was turned-off following only one episode.We found this introduction to astronomy and cosmology not only disappointing, but just plain irritating; not so much for the information it presents which is quite broad and at times fascinating, but for the presentation itself.I couldn't help but come away from each episode feeling that I had been insulted. It was as if the producers had instructed most of the scientists - and in particular the narrator - to speak as if they were addressing an audience of children. The information is presented in a dumbed-down manner, with the presumption that the audience isn't particularly bright or sophisticated, and has a short attention span.CGI is used far too lavishly, replacing much more fascinating astronomical images and intelligent discourse. The sensational and dangerous is emphasized rather than the awe and mystery of our universe. What I found very exasperating was the manner in which ideas were presented in a silly and unscientific manner. For example, one section described a hypothetical collision between our sun and a white dwarf. The narrator breathlessly said that the white dwarf would strike the sun at "supersonic speed". What? Does that mean we'd hear a sonic boom through the vacuum of space? It was this sort of laughable dialog that made me want to reach for the power-off switch.I couldn't help but draw comparisons between The Universe, and Carl Sagan's Cosmos and current BBC productions. Despite being somewhat dated now, Cosmos is a far superior production. I remember watching it spellbound in the early 1980s, and I believe it was responsible for arousing my interest in cosmology which lasts to this day. Similarly, BBC productions on cosmology, indeed virtually any BBC documentary, stands head and shoulders above The Universe. Watch Planet Earth, for example, and you'll see what I mean.So in summary if you are under the age of 12 The Universe might be your cup of tea. But if you are looking for an intelligent and thought provoking series, you might be disappointed.