3 ms·

I'm not, after what they did to Foundation.

by raylad 4y ago

Apocryphon 4y ago
I’ve been slowly watching it, and while the actual Foundation aspects are lackluster (the alien Vault feels gratuitous), it surprised me by how compelling the Cleon genetic dynasty was. Of course, Lee Pace is an amazing actor, and having more of him is a real force multiplier.
- EdwardDiego 4y ago
  I agree, thought that was the best bit.
brookst 4y ago
I think these are different “theys”. Foundation was Skydance TV, this looks to be Apple directly. Or at least no production company is named in the article.
megablast 4y ago
Foundation is good. It just ain’t foundation the book. But it is probably impossible to film anyway. But Asimov himself ruined foundation in the 80s with the awful sequels and prequels. Nothing like the original.
- nindalf 4y ago
  Disagree. Asimov himself matured as he grew older and that improved his writing. In the original Foundation trilogy women are mere props. Things happen to them, they don’t make things happen. In his later years he was capable of writing a strong female character that actually did something. She’s easily my favourite character by Asimov. The 2 prequels are fascinating to me also because they explain why the creator of the Foundation did what he did and how he managed it. For example it’s taken for granted that the galactic empire was declining. But how, and why? It adds richness to the story by exploring this dimension. But I suppose that’s not for everyone.
  - tehnub 4y ago
    What thoughtless slander. There are two strong female characters I recall: Bayta and Arkady Darell. They do plenty by their own volition and are central movers of the plot. You also imply that the empire's decline must be taken for granted, but that is explored at least in the Bel Riose story, and probably other places too. You might be due for a reread (assuming you even read them in the first place).
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  Too much retcons, and shoehorning his three+ laws robots in it was beyong meh.
- theshrike79 4y ago
  Exactly. The first Foundation books were mostly men in rooms drinking whiskey, smoking cigars and congratulating themselves on how perfectly all their plans went. Then we get a time skip and GOTO 10, with some of the men now dead and new ones added. The YA-Terminus and over the top ST:Discovery-style cry-acting is a bit off-putting, but Lee Pace is so good it doesn't matter.
hindsightbias 4y ago
Apple should just bring in Ben Stiller to do weird out like he did with Severence.
Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
Foundation was actually great if you just skip all young-adult Terminus crap and watch the space soap opera about genetic dynasty family issues. I could watch cloned Cleons all day. (I'm rooting for them and I hope they'll crush those terminus rebels and keep the empire from falling)
- yashap 4y ago
  Agreed, it’s not perfect but has plenty of good parts, and Lee Pace is excellent in it.
- raylad 4y ago
  Sure, it was an interesting series but it had almost nothing to do with Asimov's Foundation. The same thing is likely to happen to Neuromancer.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
    Everything that had something to do with Asimov's Foundation was terrible. Empire stuff was great.
simonh 4y ago
I liked it. I thought the different interweaving stories, all revolving about how the characters very different social contexts still directed and constrained their choices, was an interesting illustration of the idea behind psychohistory. That’s something the novels never even attempted.
- piva00 4y ago
  Same impression I had. I really enjoyed Asimov's Foundation but yearned for a bit more of exposé on the psychohistory concept. The TV series is a very different adaptation but I feel it can stand on its own, the development of characters instead of the arc feels like a good approach for the medium. I don't think that a faithful adaptation would work so well on the screen, it spans centuries and centuries of history in the books, the revolving doors of character would just make the audience not care at all about any of them in the end, given that most would be dead by the next episode/chapter because a century or two has passed. Or just confused with many characters appearing for a brief part of the arc.

I'm not, after what they did to Foundation.

by raylad 4y ago

I'm not, after what they did to Foundation.

I’ve been slowly watching it, and while the actual Foundation aspects are lackluster (the alien Vault feels gratuitous), it surprised me by how compelling the Cleon genetic dynasty was. Of course, Lee Pace is an amazing actor, and having more of him is a real force multiplier.

EdwardDiego 4y ago
I agree, thought that was the best bit.

brookst 4y ago

I think these are different “theys”. Foundation was Skydance TV, this looks to be Apple directly. Or at least no production company is named in the article.

megablast 4y ago

Foundation is good. It just ain’t foundation the book. But it is probably impossible to film anyway. But Asimov himself ruined foundation in the 80s with the awful sequels and prequels. Nothing like the original.

nindalf 4y ago
Disagree. Asimov himself matured as he grew older and that improved his writing. In the original Foundation trilogy women are mere props. Things happen to them, they don’t make things happen. In his later years he was capable of writing a strong female character that actually did something. She’s easily my favourite character by Asimov. The 2 prequels are fascinating to me also because they explain why the creator of the Foundation did what he did and how he managed it. For example it’s taken for granted that the galactic empire was declining. But how, and why? It adds richness to the story by exploring this dimension. But I suppose that’s not for everyone.
- tehnub 4y ago
  What thoughtless slander. There are two strong female characters I recall: Bayta and Arkady Darell. They do plenty by their own volition and are central movers of the plot. You also imply that the empire's decline must be taken for granted, but that is explored at least in the Bel Riose story, and probably other places too. You might be due for a reread (assuming you even read them in the first place).
Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
Too much retcons, and shoehorning his three+ laws robots in it was beyong meh.
theshrike79 4y ago
Exactly. The first Foundation books were mostly men in rooms drinking whiskey, smoking cigars and congratulating themselves on how perfectly all their plans went. Then we get a time skip and GOTO 10, with some of the men now dead and new ones added. The YA-Terminus and over the top ST:Discovery-style cry-acting is a bit off-putting, but Lee Pace is so good it doesn't matter.

hindsightbias 4y ago

Apple should just bring in Ben Stiller to do weird out like he did with Severence.

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago

Foundation was actually great if you just skip all young-adult Terminus crap and watch the space soap opera about genetic dynasty family issues. I could watch cloned Cleons all day. (I'm rooting for them and I hope they'll crush those terminus rebels and keep the empire from falling)

yashap 4y ago
Agreed, it’s not perfect but has plenty of good parts, and Lee Pace is excellent in it.
raylad 4y ago
Sure, it was an interesting series but it had almost nothing to do with Asimov's Foundation. The same thing is likely to happen to Neuromancer.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  Everything that had something to do with Asimov's Foundation was terrible. Empire stuff was great.

simonh 4y ago

I liked it. I thought the different interweaving stories, all revolving about how the characters very different social contexts still directed and constrained their choices, was an interesting illustration of the idea behind psychohistory. That’s something the novels never even attempted.

piva00 4y ago
Same impression I had. I really enjoyed Asimov's Foundation but yearned for a bit more of exposé on the psychohistory concept. The TV series is a very different adaptation but I feel it can stand on its own, the development of characters instead of the arc feels like a good approach for the medium. I don't think that a faithful adaptation would work so well on the screen, it spans centuries and centuries of history in the books, the revolving doors of character would just make the audience not care at all about any of them in the end, given that most would be dead by the next episode/chapter because a century or two has passed. Or just confused with many characters appearing for a brief part of the arc.