When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
481–490 of 498 posts
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#482The economist Paul Krugman of all people wrote a 'review' of Foundation versus Dune : > “Foundation” might seem unfilmable. It mostly involves people talking, and its narrative inverts the hero-saves-the-universe theme that burns many acres of CGI every year. The story spans centuries; in each episode everything appears to be on the brink, and it seems as if only desperate efforts by the protagonists can save the day…
Krugman is just too emotionally invested in the book, so nothing comparable to the book. If the show is not called foundation, he will probably enjoy it.
> If the show is not called foundation, he will probably enjoy it
I don't think so. If it wasn't called Foundation, or if I, Robot wasn't referencing Asimov's stories, or if Brave New World was called something different, they would all be lost in the quagmire of new 'blockbuster' TV shows that all the streaming networks are pushing hard. Because they're all very formulaic, optimized things where they took inspiration from endless A/B testing online, doing everything by the book, as in, there's probably a book / guide out there on how to make a TV show.
Without the name, they are bland and anonymous shows.
Meanwhile there are plenty of shows that stand on their own - this year there was Queen's Gambit, the book on which it was based on never showed up on my radar so (anecdotally) it's not carried by having a Name / Reputation. That one has been nearly 20 years in the making, too.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#483Earlier quoted context omitted.
> setting out to shorten the Dark Ages after the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, is great. If you haven’t already, I recommend reading “A Canticle for Leibowitz”
An awesome book but can you imagine what it would get turned into these days?!
An excellent Babylon 5 episode!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Deconstruction_of_Fallin...
(For very fuzzy definitions of “these days”)
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
Contact and Dune 2021, mostly. For tv, the Expanse books are adapted very well.
The Expanse has its own problems, though. Namely, that a lot of the acting is terrible . Foundation at least, to me, has some strong acting and interesting character relationships.
I’m watching The Expanse now for the first time and I love it. Some characters are 2-dimensional and have childish motivations sure.
But there was a scene in which Chrisjen Avasarala gives an “imminent war” speech extremely sarcastically, like Homer to Marge in the bedroom.
I figured they’d address in the episode what her secret plan was for that speech.
Turns out: no plan, the actress wasn’t being sarcastic. She was going for strength and gravitas.
It makes no sense to me how an otherwise high quality show has those scenes. Surely the director could have gotten a non-sarcastic take. And if not, they’d have to minimize the actress’s role.
As it is, every scene with her in it breaks the fourth wall and reminds me I’m watching actors acting in front of cameras, rather than a visual narrative.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#485Anyone else struggle to read Foundation? I'm a massive scifi reader, but have never made it through 50% of Foundation (1st book). I don't know if it's the style of the writing, or the lack of action, but it sends me to sleep.
Dune of the other hand...is amazing.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#486Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those movies are outstanding on multiple axes, but in terms of story I hate what they did to the source. Yes you need to mess with it to make a movie that works as a movie, no that doesn't mean your Aragorn can murder an emissary on a parley. These changes aren't just unfaithful, they're standard modern Hollywood tropes, subtracting rather than adding interest.
The movies seemed to try to make Aragorn a lot more relatable than the books do.
If people see a war criminal as more relatable...
Killing an ambassador makes it harder to stop the fighting. That's bad for your own people, for a start.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#487Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree as well. I loved the premise of the books, but I just couldn't find myself to care about any of the actual characters. I think the same story, but where at least some of the characters are truly immortal (reasonable for far future sci-fi), would be better. Basically a mashup between Peter Hamilton and Foundation would be cool, his work does a good job of showing "far future technologies".
I would love to see someone take a stab at the Night's Dawn trilogy. The world building for the Confederation and the Adamist and Edenist societies as well as the various alien races was very well done. They might want to rethink the choice of Al Capone, which seems a bit over the top.
Re-characterising Al leaves quite the role to complete. You can't leave us hanging without suggesting what other /newly/ historical figure could replace them.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
Asimov's first real published story was in 1939 (his high school "published" a story earlier). The Foundation stories were written in 1941-1950. In 1951 Asimov stopped writing fiction for thirty years. So it's not "early Asimov" by any means. When he came back to write Foundation sequels his characters and dialog hadn't improved. Asimov was always an author only of ideas. His best dialog was the terrible and delibera…
> it's not "early Asimov" by any means He wrote the first Foundation story when he was only 21. That certainly qualifies.
I think the OP would agree that it was "early Asimov" but you can't blame the writing on that. The OP was making the point that his writing never improved.
Having said that there were cringeworthy aspects of the first Foundation book that improved over the subsequent books. I recently reread the series and came to the shocking conclusion that he must have been a virgin (or at least not exposed to women) in the first book.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they trace their line to the ancient greek Adreides which fought in the siege of Troy. So their origin would be Greek, whatever mixed in over the millenia.
Genetically it doesn't make sense to privilege one ancestor or ancestral line as 'their origin', over others that are merely 'mixed in'. They're all just ancestors. Take Paul for example, is his ancestry Atreides, or whatever Jessica's background is*? He's just as much her son as he is Leto's. * spoiler alert
That is of course correct. Isn't it even so that every 4th man in Asia can name Genghis Khan as his ancestor?
I think in general, making large assumptions how humanity looks even very few generations in the future is pure speculation with the current speed of globalization and mobility.
Re: When “Foundation” Gets the Blockbuster Treatment, Asimov’s Vision Gets Lost
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is a very outdated view of the way series and streaming platform have evolved. There’s no “slot” to fill. There’s no need for universal appeal. “The Crown” is a good example. This would never have been made into a show before streaming. The Foundation could have been a intellectually stimulating sci-fi show that appealed a lot to a smaller audience and it still would have been successful.
> There’s no “slot” to fill. There’s no need for universal appeal. That’s true, but, depending on your budget, you’ll need a large audience to justify the investment.
As opposed to the traditional networks the time you have to build that "large" audience is insanely higher. Who knows how long streaming services will be around for.
People are still watching Friends for instance.