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

261–270 of 498 posts

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

#261

Post by ivankirigin »

burlesona wrote: post #159

There are a lot of people really hating on the TV show here, so I’ll offer a slightly contrarian take: I would say the biggest problem is the marketing that implies they faithfully are telling the books, when they’re not. The TV show is not faithful to the books. That said: the books are fascinating, but they are almost more like historical documentaries then narrative fiction. It works well because they are _short_…

I don't understand why more "unfilmable" books don't get launched as an animated series. Maybe execs think adults wouldn't watch it?

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

#262

Post by rsynnott »

mihaic wrote: post #143

My greatest gripe with the show is that none of the writers seem to have any understanding of science, technology and have only a vague understanding of sociology, pretty much all of the main themes of the books. I actually liked the imperial cloning elements, as they fleshed out well an ossified society, but every other plotline seems to just happen because of pseudo-magic. I can only wish that the writer's room of…

> My greatest gripe with the show is that none of the writers seem to have any understanding of science, technology and have only a vague understanding of sociology

> but every other plotline seems to just happen because of pseudo-magic.

I mean, you could say the same of the original books! Asimov obviously did have a good understanding of science, but it is not meaningfully on display in Foundation; psychohistory is _nonsense_, and that's before you get to the 'atomics'. Foundation wasn't (and wasn't intended to be) rock-hard sci-fi, and that's okay.

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

#263

Post by goatlover »

ourlordcaffeine wrote: post #247
burlesona wrote: post #159

There are a lot of people really hating on the TV show here, so I’ll offer a slightly contrarian take: I would say the biggest problem is the marketing that implies they faithfully are telling the books, when they’re not. The TV show is not faithful to the books. That said: the books are fascinating, but they are almost more like historical documentaries then narrative fiction. It works well because they are _short_…

>IMO it’s decent sci-fi, and interesting enough to watch if you’re bored :) Is it still a somewhat hard sci-fi or has it been turned into a fantasy flick?

Would an entirely new branch of mathematics that predicts the future count as hard science fiction?

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

#264

Post by karaterobot »

burlesona wrote: post #159

There are a lot of people really hating on the TV show here, so I’ll offer a slightly contrarian take: I would say the biggest problem is the marketing that implies they faithfully are telling the books, when they’re not. The TV show is not faithful to the books. That said: the books are fascinating, but they are almost more like historical documentaries then narrative fiction. It works well because they are _short_…

If you proceed from the assumption that they had to adapt the Foundation novels into a serialized streaming show, then I guess I agree with you. Is there some new law that says you can't make up your own story anymore? You can even steal the things you like about Foundation, that's fine. It's not like all adaptations succeed, and all original IP fails, so I have no idea why they keep pretending that step 1 must be to buy the rights to something that already exists, even if it is structurally unfeasible to adapt.

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

#265

Post by andrew_ »

While the first episode had me hooked, I've found it very hard to sit through the subsequent episodes. I find them dragging, future-past bouncing isn't congruent, and I'm often distracted while the show is running, coming back to it 20 or so minutes later feeling like I haven't missed anything important.

I read the books when I was in my late teens and thought they were interesting, they kept my attention at the least. The show is, unfortunately, not something I'll clamor to watch, but rather something I'll likely keep on for background noise after the entire season airs.

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

#266

Post by rsynnott »

tarsinge wrote: post #188
hardwaregeek wrote: post #13

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 basi…

> The show feels like the creators read the back of the book and nothing else. To me it looks like the creators have a pretty deep understanding of the book. I have a good memory of the book and there are a lot of subtle references. What is frustrating is the choices and twist they make. Like presenting everything as pseudo magical and religious. My hope is that they are bold in the narration and mixing elements from…

> Like presenting everything as pseudo magical and religious.

That doesn't seem all that inconsistent with the source material; Seldon _is_ effectively treated as a religious figure almost from the start (and of course the psychohistory _is_ on the face of it more magic than science).

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

#267

Post by treis »

wccrawford wrote: post #180
burlesona wrote: post #159

There are a lot of people really hating on the TV show here, so I’ll offer a slightly contrarian take: I would say the biggest problem is the marketing that implies they faithfully are telling the books, when they’re not. The TV show is not faithful to the books. That said: the books are fascinating, but they are almost more like historical documentaries then narrative fiction. It works well because they are _short_…

I don't even remember the original books, other than that I liked them. I do not like the show. It's a decent scifi environment , but the actual storytelling is pretty awful, IMO. The only thing I like is the mysteries. I'm not very far in, but they're few and far between, and wading through all the crap to learn about them is tiring. I keep trying to force myself to watch the next episode, but it doesn't happen.

>I do not like the show. It's a decent scifi environment, but the actual storytelling is pretty awful, IMO.

IMHO, that matches the books.

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

#268

Post by mordymoop »

light_hue_1 wrote: post #86

No one learned anything from Game of Thrones. The show was absolutely amazing when it could follow the books. The definitive show everyone talked about. The moment the books ran out it started to go downhill. And when they couldn't easily extrapolate from the books the show fell apart completely. The showrunners and writes for the show weren't good enough to make Game of Thrones on their own. No offence, but that tak…

>> The show was absolutely amazing when it could follow the books. The definitive show everyone talked about. The moment the books ran out it started to go downhill. And when they couldn't easily extrapolate from the books the show fell apart completely. The showrunners and writes for the show weren't good enough to make Game of Thrones on their own. No offence, but that takes a lot of skill and luck. They were good enough to adapt it though.

George R.R. Martin is still underrated, even given his success. He wrote for television for a long time and structured his novels more like seasons of TV, with each chapter serving as an episode. This is part of the reason for their popularity. Martin is also a once-in-a-generation genius of character, structure, and plot - a self-evident truth that is rarely spoken aloud because genre fiction is "not literature."

The creators of the GOT show really never even realized that they were adapting something carefully, painstakingly honed by a genius craftsman. They really figured they could just keep throwing in dramatic, violent twists and we wouldn't know the difference. In that light, it's shocking that they even made the first seasons as competently as they did.

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

#269

Post by goatlover »

mdtancsa wrote: post #162
mihaic wrote: post #143

My greatest gripe with the show is that none of the writers seem to have any understanding of science, technology and have only a vague understanding of sociology, pretty much all of the main themes of the books. I actually liked the imperial cloning elements, as they fleshed out well an ossified society, but every other plotline seems to just happen because of pseudo-magic. I can only wish that the writer's room of…

I can usually forgive some tech contradiction details, but its really annoying when there is faster than light travel... But to create contrived suspense because no technology exists to make a flashlight strong enough to illuminate a cave for 10m ??!?!

>> but its really annoying when there is faster than light travel.

Almost all space scifi has FTL, wormholes, warp drive or jump drive out of necessity, otherwise you're rather limited in travel. Even the Expanse allows for it at some point, after allowing for the super high efficiency fusion drive just to make travel around the Solar System reasonably fast enough. It's a necessary plot device, unless you're doing a generational ship or staying close to home.

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

#270

Post by seanalltogether »

scotty79 wrote: post #197
mihaic wrote: post #143

My greatest gripe with the show is that none of the writers seem to have any understanding of science, technology and have only a vague understanding of sociology, pretty much all of the main themes of the books. I actually liked the imperial cloning elements, as they fleshed out well an ossified society, but every other plotline seems to just happen because of pseudo-magic. I can only wish that the writer's room of…

> Writers today seem to not understand anymore how reality works, so they aren't able to extrapolate from it. That's a quite accurate observation. Even for the largest budgets people tasked with story telling are almost always the weakest element. Who makes them? What kind of education do they undergo to be this wrong about reality and storytelling? Are they such small and in-bred group that they are all so wrong in…

Because writers don't fund movies and tv shows, and are almost always left out of the decision making process for what elements need to appear in the story.
Post reply on HN