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

21–30 of 498 posts

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

#21

Post by ddoolin »

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…

I only read "Foundation and Earth" before the show began (that's what was on hand where I was, I had little choice, as much as I hate starting in the middle of a series), and that book is VERY different from what I'm reading in the first book and what's in the TV series, and would indeed make for a pretty interesting show or at least a movie.

It's literally about three people's journey across the cosmos to discover the origin of humanity and really, very little of the original story re: Seldon comes into it. It makes me wonder what happens in between.

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

#22

Post by wyager »

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.

Dune wasn't exactly untouched by Hollywood politics. They completely eliminated the themes of European/Arabic cultural conflict (replacing everyone except the bad guys with a generic box-ticking multi-ethnic cast) and they completely nuked Kynes' character to replace him with a forgettable "generic strong woman" character.

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

#23

Post by jimbob45 »

echelon wrote: post #15
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.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_series

It’s under the heading “Film”.

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

#24

Post by samplatt »

"Asimov's Vision". The guy himself has said in interviews that it was entirely inspired by gas/fluid dynamics theory, where you could predict the motion of the whole but individual molecules would be random, and then "what if that could be applied to people". Everything else is just exploring and extrapolating.

It's far from perfect but I feel that if it was a new IP work the reaction to it would be very different.

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, both Foundation and Dune are almost impossible to translate to screen faithfully and still appeal to enough people to have a decent budget. Why should we judge the show by the book at all, if that's going to be the case?

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

#25

Post by chrisfosterelli »

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…

On the other hand... Dune had also been widely considered 'unfilmable' in the industry and that same thing had been said about it: https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/why-denis-villeneuve...

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

#26

Post by jlawson »

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.

Dune explicitly was adapted to satisfy PC morality. Villneuve said so (using other words of course).

They made Jessica into a physical fighter, converted Liet Kynes into a black lady, excised the distinctive word 'jihad' to refer to Paul's vision of war. They removed the Baron's homosexuality and sexual perversion and changed his servant boys into (bald) servant girls, etc.

The damage wasn't too bad all things considered, but in Dune 2021's case the source book was not the Bible and it was definitely messed with.

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

#27

Post by Jtsummers »

weikju wrote: post #19
Jtsummers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 G…

I'll grant you, Salvor is definitely turning into a false Chosen One (also, this would be the first Seldon Crisis which they weren't even supposed to know of until after the first one, and she's already name dropped the term). She's got an idiot ball grafted onto her somewhere that she just can't shed.

However, Seldon, to Raych, tells him that his decision with respect to Gaal will determine the fate of the galaxy. That's way too much weight for Seldon to place on one person in the context of the series, especially at this point unless he already knows about people like The Mule (which would be unfortunate, that'd be something best explored as it throws a wrench in your plans, not from the beginning of the series).

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

#28

Post by ddoolin »

samplatt wrote: post #24

"Asimov's Vision". The guy himself has said in interviews that it was entirely inspired by gas/fluid dynamics theory, where you could predict the motion of the whole but individual molecules would be random, and then "what if that could be applied to people". Everything else is just exploring and extrapolating. It's far from perfect but I feel that if it was a new IP work the reaction to it would be very different. A…

Just my guess, the folks creating the show probably do not care too much. The vast majority of people are going to be happy with the production while the hardcore fans, or those with fond memories who've spent a lifetime waiting, are going to be disappointed a la Star Wars sequels.

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

#29

Post by jrmg »

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…

Disclaimer: though I think they _would_ be something I’d enjoy, I’ve for some reason never read the books.

I’m pretty sure Seldon being wrong about the smaller things is going to be a recurring thing in the series. People just _think_ he can predict them. He seems to too, despite knowing rationally that he cannot (he’s stated that numerous times).

The theme of the Seldon plot seems to be: is Seldon predicting things, or causing them? Are his actions choices that are driving events, is he being forced into his role by fate (or math), or is everything he does irrelevant? Is the very fact that he, and we, are confused about this proof that the questions don’t even make sense? Can some of all these contradicting things be true at the same time?

Might it be true that he is _both_ predicting events and driving them? Wouldn’t that mean that one of these ideas is false?

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

#30

Post by shirro »

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 don't know if it is documented or not but I would swear Asimov had aphantasia. When I was younger reading him was a revelation after getting bogged down in long winded books full of visual description which just felt like needless baggage to me.

There isn't a lot of imagery described in his books (not that I would see it anyway) but that doesn't mean it couldn't be presented visually while keeping to the spirit, just that Asimov probably couldn't have done it. Good writers and directors could.

If given the Villeneuve or Kubrick treatment it might be very different.

Post reply on HN