Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 498 posts

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#11

Post by natechols »

smnrchrds wrote: post #9
kaczordon wrote: post #6

This is also what happens when you re-write the core story to match a Political Correctness agenda. The producers should’ve taken a note from Denis Villeneuve’s treatment of Dune, the source book should be the Bible and you don’t mess with it.

Foundation, as written, does not lend itself to any medium other than text. Dune had already been adapted to films, TV shows, and games multiple times before Villeneuve's film. Yet, despite its popularity, Foundation had never been adapted into another medium before the current TV show. I agree that the Apple TV series does not capture the essence of the books, but no series or film possibly can. Best we can hope is…

I still think "The Mule", AKA the second half of "Foundation and Empire", could make an excellent standalone - still one of the best sci-fi thrillers IMHO, and much more interesting characters than most of Asimov. But otherwise, there are so many better choices for translating to screen...

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#12

Post by jimbob45 »

IIRC the foreword to Asimov’s unproduced “I, Robot” script (vastly different from the released movie) was a recollection of his grievances in getting the movie made. He made mention of “eye-fi”, where the science and the social effects of the theoretical science take a backseat to the effects. I left feeling that he wasn’t a fan of modern Hollywood.

That said, I’m guessing the estate knows that public interest in Asimov is dwindling by the year and that either something gets made now or nothing gets made ever. Recall that 2001 LOTR was originally supposed to be Foundation before things fell through - it’s that difficult to produce.

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#13

Post by hardwaregeek »

The show feels like the creators read the back of the book and nothing else. Adaptation is never a one-to-one translation but you need to keep the spirit of the show. Also the whole emperor lineage stuff feels like an attempt to add a Game of Thrones type plot to the show.

I'm not far into the show, so perhaps they address this, but I'd love a more modern commentary on how the whole ideology of the Foundation is basically colonialism and manifest destiny. Having a civilization that is predestined to be the chosen holy empire is a common justification for invading and oppressing other civilizations. It'd be an interesting twist to argue against the Second Empire, in line with the modern re-evaluation of the so-called Dark Ages as not being so dark necessarily.

I also don't get why the stories are intertwined and so stretched out. Well, I guess I do know why in that Apple probably wanted a prestige TV show that'd last 5-6 seasons. The adaptation would work better with 1 hour to 1.5 hour episodes, each adapting one section of the book.

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#14

Post by LegitShady »

yodon wrote: post #8

The army combat sequences are inconceivably stupid. Dozens of soldiers firing sci-fi machine guns at unprotected opponents at close range and everyone magically avoids injury. It makes one wonder if Apple applied some sort of violence limiting clause to the production with absurd results.

only stormtroopers are so precise.

Personally these days when I hear they're making a book or book series I like into movies/tv I wait for the inevitable disappointment.

I hear they're ruining Robert Jordan's books next, something I plan to skip entirely and just re-read the books instead.

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#15

Post by echelon »

jimbob45 wrote: post #12

IIRC the foreword to Asimov’s unproduced “I, Robot” script (vastly different from the released movie) was a recollection of his grievances in getting the movie made. He made mention of “eye-fi”, where the science and the social effects of the theoretical science take a backseat to the effects. I left feeling that he wasn’t a fan of modern Hollywood. That said, I’m guessing the estate knows that public interest in Asi…

> 2001 LOTR was originally supposed to be Foundation before things fell through

Could you expand on this? I've never heard this before.

I'm glad we got the Lord of the Rings adaptation as it was truly a mastercraft, but I'd have loved to see the same talent do Foundation.

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#16

Post by smnrchrds »

whatever1 wrote: post #2

The writing and directing are at times very sloppy. To the point that you lose the illusion that you are in a movie and you can clearly see the actors acting. Cannot exactly pinpoint why though.

> Cannot exactly pinpoint why though.

That's because there are so many examples it's hard to choose one. The population of planets shift by orders of magnitude between episodes; the spaceship apparently has a 'fifth quadrant [1]; the zephyr acts too melodramatically, even when she is supposed to be having an honest conversation in private, she sounds like she is speaking to the cameras at a political rally; etc. etc.

It feels like they spent their entire budget on special effects and had to hire interns and volunteers for story and directing.

[1] If it were fifth third, it could have been a nudge to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, but fifth quadrant has to be an error.

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#17

Post by weikju »

whatever1 wrote: post #2

The writing and directing are at times very sloppy. To the point that you lose the illusion that you are in a movie and you can clearly see the actors acting. Cannot exactly pinpoint why though.

I agree, especially the directing, and the over-reliance on end of episode cliffhangers, which are often not revisited until 2, 3 episodes later.

I do like how the story is developing though, and I know that often it takes a show one season, one and a half, to really get into its groove.

3 more episodes to go before I can have a more full opinion...

All in all so far though it really does seem like just one long drawn-out introduction, with the juicy stuff really starts in season 2 (as teased by Goyer in a reddit AMA - Hober Mallow, Church of the Galactic Spirit, a strong general and a weak emperor)

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#18

Post by 01100011 »

LegitShady wrote: post #14
yodon wrote: post #8

The army combat sequences are inconceivably stupid. Dozens of soldiers firing sci-fi machine guns at unprotected opponents at close range and everyone magically avoids injury. It makes one wonder if Apple applied some sort of violence limiting clause to the production with absurd results.

only stormtroopers are so precise. Personally these days when I hear they're making a book or book series I like into movies/tv I wait for the inevitable disappointment. I hear they're ruining Robert Jordan's books next, something I plan to skip entirely and just re-read the books instead.

I'm looking forward to the day when we can just feed books to a DL network and have it spit out a rendered movie.

I'd love to train it on the LotR movies and spit out a book-accurate rendition of the story with those graphics.

Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost

#19

Post by weikju »

Jtsummers wrote: post #10
Afforess wrote: post #7

I've read the books and watched the show as far as it's aired. I agree, but I almost think it's good that Asimov's vision is getting smoothed out a bit. After "second foundation" in the book series, the books go in a very different, unscientific "woo" direction. The end of the entire series is bizarre and controversial. I'm not all that convinced I want the original ending to be preserved - it wasn't that good anyway…

> The powerful bit about foundation was always the ability to predict larger events better than smaller ones, as well as criticism of empire and overdependence on interconnectedness. In that, the TV show preserves the themes very well. I can't see how you'd think this, with respect to the show. Seldon literally tells another character that that character's decision (on that day, apparently) will shape the fate of the…

"presented as Chosen Ones" -- from the Goyer AMA, he said the show explores when believe think they are Chosen Ones, but that there are no Chosen Ones.

In fact, the whole thing about Salvor believing she's a Chosen One is falling apart, as every one of her schemes (involving violence as well) are falling apart.. and it seems like she's where Gaal was supposed to be, therefore she's being mistaken as the leader that Gaal was supposed to be, and things are going off the rails as a result...

What's sad is it took an AMA to fully understand this, rather than being understood via watching the show, at least in the first 7 episodes...

Post reply on HN