TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

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

227 点作者 DLay超过 3 年前

59 条评论

burlesona超过 3 年前
There are a lot of people really hating on the TV show here, so I’ll offer a slightly contrarian take:<p>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.<p>That said: the books are fascinating, but they are almost more like historical documentaries then narrative fiction. It works well because they are _short_ stories, and following the span of history, frequently jumping ahead a generation, is cool. But it would’ve been very difficult to render that as-is for television and have much of an audience. Also, the original stories were written in the 1940s and some parts feel quite dated (everyone is smoking all the time, the hyper focus on nuclear power, the relative role of women). So whoever picked the stories up, they were going to make a lot of changes.<p>If you think of the series merely as “inspired by” them not “based on them,” then the show isn’t <i>bad</i>. It has some corny flaws like most TV (the combat, just terrible), but they’ve developed a few good characters, added some new mysteries, and the order in which they’re unfolding events over time is interesting.<p>So, is it a classic? No. Is it faithful to the books? Not at all. But IMO it’s decent sci-fi, and interesting enough to watch if you’re bored :)
评论 #29080163 未加载
评论 #29080195 未加载
评论 #29082540 未加载
评论 #29080261 未加载
评论 #29081322 未加载
评论 #29081270 未加载
评论 #29080510 未加载
评论 #29083826 未加载
评论 #29080278 未加载
评论 #29084047 未加载
评论 #29082571 未加载
评论 #29081919 未加载
评论 #29082107 未加载
评论 #29084221 未加载
评论 #29080168 未加载
评论 #29082454 未加载
评论 #29080814 未加载
评论 #29087661 未加载
评论 #29081755 未加载
评论 #29084993 未加载
评论 #29082528 未加载
评论 #29083722 未加载
评论 #29082279 未加载
评论 #29082025 未加载
评论 #29081605 未加载
评论 #29080308 未加载
评论 #29080754 未加载
评论 #29083710 未加载
评论 #29080651 未加载
throw0101a超过 3 年前
The economist Paul Krugman of all people wrote a &#x27;review&#x27; of <i>Foundation</i> versus <i>Dune</i>:<p>&gt; <i>“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. But after each crisis, Seldon’s prerecorded hologram appears to explain to everyone what just happened and why the successful resolution was inevitable given the laws of history.</i><p>&gt; <i>So how does the Apple TV series turn this into a visually compelling tale? It doesn’t. What it does instead is remake “Star Wars” under another name. There are indispensable heroes, mystical powers, even a Death Star. These aren’t necessarily bad things to include in a TV series, but they’re completely antithetical to the spirit of Asimov’s writing. Pretending that this series has anything to do with the “Foundation” novels is fraudulent marketing, and I’ve stopped watching.</i><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2021&#x2F;10&#x2F;26&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;dune-movie-foundation-series.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2021&#x2F;10&#x2F;26&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;dune-movie-founda...</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.md&#x2F;YFxVi" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.md&#x2F;YFxVi</a>
评论 #29080959 未加载
评论 #29080761 未加载
评论 #29084346 未加载
评论 #29080328 未加载
light_hue_1超过 3 年前
No one learned anything from Game of Thrones.<p>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&#x27;t easily extrapolate from the books the show fell apart completely. The showrunners and writes for the show weren&#x27;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.<p>There&#x27;s a reason why people love the Foundation. Why we read the books almost 80 years later. And it&#x27;s not because of the title or character names (which is all the Apple show keeps).<p>The creators of this show are extremely arrogant. They think they could have done better than Asimov given the setting. So they threw away the thing people loved and replaced Asimov&#x27;s work with their own. Well, clearly they couldn&#x27;t do better. The show is a boring disjointed mess of random scifi tropes.<p>Hardin is now a &quot;warden&quot;!? Literally, the character with one of the most memorable sayings in all of literature &quot;violence is the last refuge of the incompetent&quot; is now all about violence. That&#x27;s nothing less than a betrayal of the source material.
评论 #29082163 未加载
评论 #29079859 未加载
评论 #29083910 未加载
评论 #29082819 未加载
评论 #29080613 未加载
评论 #29080132 未加载
mihaic超过 3 年前
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.<p>I can only wish that the writer&#x27;s room of Futurama could have had a go at this. Writers today seem to not understand anymore how reality works, so they aren&#x27;t able to extrapolate from it.
评论 #29080555 未加载
评论 #29080082 未加载
评论 #29082067 未加载
评论 #29080108 未加载
评论 #29082562 未加载
hardwaregeek超过 3 年前
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.<p>I&#x27;m not far into the show, so perhaps they address this, but I&#x27;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&#x27;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.<p>I also don&#x27;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&#x27;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.
评论 #29078699 未加载
评论 #29079639 未加载
评论 #29080381 未加载
评论 #29077011 未加载
评论 #29077503 未加载
RHSeeger超过 3 年前
Man, reading through this thread, I feel like such an odd man out. I&#x27;m enjoying Foundation. Sure, it&#x27;s not amazingly intellectually stimulating, and it&#x27;s not really based on the books, but I find it fun to watch. As it&#x27;s own thing, it&#x27;s entertaining to me.<p>I also really enjoyed The Flash (up until season 6 or so when it just got too repetitive). It seems like there&#x27;s a lot of people that can&#x27;t seem to enjoy things &quot;just for the fun&quot; that I don&#x27;t get.
评论 #29080526 未加载
评论 #29082938 未加载
评论 #29084279 未加载
评论 #29081752 未加载
评论 #29086610 未加载
评论 #29082704 未加载
评论 #29082730 未加载
sersi超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve been rather impressed with Villeneuve&#x27;s Dune. It&#x27;s not perfect, I feel that there&#x27;s not enough backstory and context for those not familiar with the novel (not explaining CHOAM and the landsraad makes the emperor&#x27;s actions confusing), Jessica is a bit too wimpy for a Bene Geserit who is supposed to be in control and I reserve judgement about the changes with Lyet Kynes. That said as someone who loved the books, it feels mostly faithful and was very enjoyable.<p>Not so for Foundation, there are some interesting ideas, I actually like the idea of the Cleon&#x27;s genetic dynasty but overall it feels like a second rate star trek show where regularly I have to suspense my disbelief at how unbelievably stupid some of the plot points or character decisions are. It&#x27;s nice eye candy and not awful. I&#x27;ll watch it while doing something else and try to ignore the fact that it carries and betray the name of novels I revered in my childhood. But it&#x27;s not a great show and it doesn&#x27;t even compare to The Expanse, For all mankind and any number of nice Sci Fi shows.
评论 #29082568 未加载
评论 #29080021 未加载
评论 #29079981 未加载
samplatt超过 3 年前
&quot;Asimov&#x27;s Vision&quot;. The guy himself has said in interviews that it was entirely inspired by gas&#x2F;fluid dynamics theory, where you could predict the motion of the whole but individual molecules would be random, and then &quot;what if that could be applied to people&quot;. Everything else is just exploring and extrapolating.<p>It&#x27;s far from perfect but I feel that if it was a new IP work the reaction to it would be very different.<p>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&#x27;s going to be the case?
评论 #29076995 未加载
评论 #29077105 未加载
评论 #29076953 未加载
评论 #29077880 未加载
评论 #29081345 未加载
评论 #29080578 未加载
评论 #29078170 未加载
simmons超过 3 年前
The TV show is actually better than I expected, although after watching the trailers I had low expectations. I was totally prepared for the major surgery required to adapt a work like Foundation to the screen. However, I think my biggest problem with the show is a complete lack of subtlety that was present in the books.<p>In the books, the significance of the Vault is purely about ideas -- what its revelations mean for civilization. Whereas the showrunners needed to exaggerate its spectacle -- &quot;You dumb TV watchers aren&#x27;t going to get how important this is, so we have to shove it in your face. See? Giant floaty alien-looking thing? Must be important, right?&quot;<p>Another example is how the decline of civilization isn&#x27;t supposed to be obvious to the people living through it. At the time of the events of the first episode, the decline is supposed to be manifesting itself in extremely minor ways -- an extremely subtle &quot;atmosphere of decay&quot;. Expressways aren&#x27;t being maintained as well as they once were, and deployment of new elevator technology is held back by pessimism. People wouldn&#x27;t have noticed these things any more than a Roman in 200 AD would have seen a crumbling road and caught a glimpse of the fall of Rome. But instead of showing the elevator industry resting on their laurels, the showrunners have to show a spectacular terrorist attack on a space elevator that kills 100 million people. &quot;See! The empire is falling apart. Get it?&quot;<p>The showrunners are trying to paint a picture with a paint sprayer instead of using fine brush strokes.
malermeister超过 3 年前
This sums up my feelings about the show pretty well. Loved the books, hated the show. It gets rid of everything that was interesting about the books - the high level narrative about civilization and power projection mechanisms and replaces it with generic Hollywood sci-fi tropes, with cringy romance subplots thrown in. The second episode was so bad I stopped watching.
评论 #29077126 未加载
评论 #29079642 未加载
评论 #29076723 未加载
评论 #29077134 未加载
rbanffy超过 3 年前
Unpopular opinion: Foundation, as written, would probably be very niche TV. A straightforward adaptation would be terrible, albeit interesting if seasons were launched in the order of the books the way Asimov fused his Robots, Empire, and Foundation series. Even then, you can get away with a lot less detail in a book than you can with a TV series - you need to flesh out cultures and characters that, in a book, you can leave shallow.<p>I’d say this is Foundation, but for TV. It’s a different beast and I’m curious how much it will deviate from the books big picture (which, in total, span a couple dozen millennia.
评论 #29079973 未加载
评论 #29079757 未加载
评论 #29080630 未加载
评论 #29080454 未加载
elil17超过 3 年前
I think the show does plenty of focusing on “power and precarity.” It obvious to me that it works with a very different definition of psychohistory, one which is more accessible to viewers but is, in my opinion, much less neat.<p>Beyond that, though, the differences between the books and the show seem to be done with the intention of coming up with a new and interesting narrative. I don’t have a problem with that.<p>Also, I think it’s important to note that the show is produced by his daughter and that she wanted to take things in a different direction. Most of these changes were made with deep knowledge of the books and the authors vision.
评论 #29077182 未加载
sandworm101超过 3 年前
They lost me in the trailer. Foundation is a story across centuries about elderly and ossified leadership structures, not attractive young people in spandex. It is about one faction rebelling against another, not kids trying to get out from under their parents. And I really don&#x27;t mind changing the genders of characters but please don&#x27;t do so just to create eye candy.<p>Dune did this too. I think making Kynes female was interesting, although it certainly changes the male&#x2F;female dynamics that are the core of the story. But making the character young and attractive is just pandering to male gaze.
评论 #29081258 未加载
评论 #29077111 未加载
yodon超过 3 年前
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.
评论 #29077172 未加载
评论 #29076817 未加载
评论 #29078212 未加载
评论 #29077037 未加载
ddoran超过 3 年前
I&#x27;m sticking with the show but as a huge Foundation fan, it&#x27;s bitterly disappointing so far. For me the reason comes clear in the accompanying (official) podcasts. The writers are so enamored with their own smarts, that the story takes second place to literary navel gazing. Rock bottom for me was when Brother Day - a supposedly omnipotent figure - travels across the galaxy to quell a religious uprising but just stands silent as a new leader takes up the mantle with an overwrought speech, one of many in the show. The taking of terminus was another example of characters that speak with great intelligence and then act dumb. Ugh. I&#x27;m only hoping the writers take the feedback from Season 1 and change course.
kaczordon超过 3 年前
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.
评论 #29076787 未加载
评论 #29076898 未加载
评论 #29077001 未加载
评论 #29076921 未加载
jimbob45超过 3 年前
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.<p>That said, I’m guessing the estate knows that public interest in Asimov is dwindling by the year and that either <i>something</i> gets made now or nothing gets made ever. Recall that 2001 LOTR was originally supposed to be Foundation before things fell through - it’s <i>that</i> difficult to produce.
评论 #29076844 未加载
whatever1超过 3 年前
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.
评论 #29076853 未加载
评论 #29076854 未加载
pathxs超过 3 年前
The first few episodes were a bit slow, but I like the Robot enamoured with Religion concept and the out of their depth Cleons.<p>It reminds me of our present day leaders and the way they react with their subservient robot underlings to all events.
SavantIdiot超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve sat through some bad film translations of books before, but Foundation is worse than any Stephen King treadmill. I think maybe Lawnmower Man was probably a bigger delta between book and movie than Foundation (a short story about a satyr who eats grass naked vs. virtual reality!)
BurningFrog超过 3 年前
After giving up 2.5 episodes in, the only thing I can compare this show to is Battlefield Earth.<p>It&#x27;s incredibly, spectacularly bad!
评论 #29080832 未加载
Apocryphon超过 3 年前
Breaking news: <i>Hyperion</i> by Dan Simmons will be adapted courtesy of Bradley Cooper:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;deadline.com&#x2F;2021&#x2F;11&#x2F;bradley-cooper-set-hyperion-at-warner-bros-with-graham-king-1234865881&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;deadline.com&#x2F;2021&#x2F;11&#x2F;bradley-cooper-set-hyperion-at-...</a>
评论 #29080369 未加载
评论 #29080423 未加载
评论 #29082392 未加载
jjk166超过 3 年前
Foundation is the most confusing show for me. Somehow it&#x27;s telling a story which is completely unrelated to the books, while also faithfully recreating certain key moments from the books pretty much exactly as I imagined them; it manages to completely ignore all of the themes and indeed the core thesis of the books, but somehow still feels respectful in how it presents the universe; I feel bad that some of my favorite parts of the original story are all but certainly written out, but I love that I have no idea where this is going.<p>It feels a lot like the 1997 Starship Troopers movie where it was initially supposed to be an original work, but the studio said &quot;hmm that&#x27;s kinda like this classic story, can you turn this into an adaptation?&quot; and the writer said yes but their fingers were crossed.
elzbardico超过 3 年前
It was a great disappointment for someone who spent hours during my teenage years reading and re-reading it. Not to mention the terrible, terrible acting.
Afforess超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve read the books and watched the show as far as it&#x27;s aired. I agree, but I almost think it&#x27;s good that Asimov&#x27;s vision is getting smoothed out a bit. After &quot;second foundation&quot; in the book series, the books go in a very different, unscientific &quot;woo&quot; direction. The end of the entire series is bizarre and controversial. I&#x27;m not all that convinced I want the original ending to be preserved - it wasn&#x27;t that good anyway.<p>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.
评论 #29076800 未加载
评论 #29076884 未加载
评论 #29077174 未加载
Justsignedup超过 3 年前
My #1 gripe with foundation has been the &quot;lost&quot; style of storytelling. A non coherent time line with multiple flashbacks and cutaway whenever anything interesting happens.<p>Most the darn episodes feel like the who is cartmans mom part 2 episode.
andrew_超过 3 年前
While the first episode had me hooked, I&#x27;ve found it very hard to sit through the subsequent episodes. I find them dragging, future-past bouncing isn&#x27;t congruent, and I&#x27;m often distracted while the show is running, coming back to it 20 or so minutes later feeling like I haven&#x27;t missed anything important.<p>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&#x27;ll clamor to watch, but rather something I&#x27;ll likely keep on for background noise after the entire season airs.
aspaviento超过 3 年前
I don&#x27;t know why people keep saying that, since the books were narrated as a documentary, it&#x27;s impossible to do a decent show about it. That&#x27;s lack of imagination in my opinion. It would have been easily adapted with mini stories that develop based on previous stories. Yes, you won&#x27;t have a main character for people to feel attached to, but you&#x27;ll have the option to tell different stories by different directors like Dr. Who and create something more unique.
clarge1120超过 3 年前
While lots of people are disappointed (to say the least) in the rendering of the books into a TV show, citing unfaithfulness to the source material and the spirit of the books, there are also a number of people who praise the representation of gender, approach to things like smoking, race relations, and other modern ideals.<p>I see it differently. The Fallout video games put an interesting spin on the &quot;future&quot; by showing that what was once considered fashionable can become distasteful due to catastrophic events. With Foundation, it would have been more interesting to show how different events lead to the current state of society. The Battlestar Galactica TV series made a point to showing how society turned decidedly against digital communications because of how vulnerable it was to AI.<p>Much like with A Handmaid&#x27;s Tale, I wish they would have tried a little harder to bridge the gap between how we see things today, and how we could see them under different circumstances. 12,000+ years from now could be quite different from now in a lot of ways.
OnlyMortal超过 3 年前
I’m a big fan of the books. Probably the most well written sci-fi I’ve encountered.<p>The TV series is, of course, quite different. It had to be really as viewers expect continuity of characters and an obligatory love-scene. It’s a reflection of our current TV viewing.<p>I’m hoping they’ll take it new directions where the book doesn’t go and, after the first season, it’ll pick up like many other series have done over the years.
评论 #29083124 未加载
dtx1超过 3 年前
Having read foundation and seen the show so far they are two very different stories and the show is mostly just off hand references to the ideas of the books. That doesn&#x27;t necessarily make it a bad show though, because there&#x27;s a lot of potential of cool stories to be told in the foundation universe.<p>What does make it a bad show is that they writers fell into the Star Trek Discovery Trap of making it about not one but two diverse female space jesuses that save everyone. Arguably their depiction of woman in the show is just as superficial as asimovs depiction of them in the books, just the flipside of the coin.<p>However, they sometimes have hints of the really interesting parts of foundation, which, in my opinion, is the thinking and planning on large time scales. Only the Empire Storyline has that kind of thinking truly ingrained and subsequently is the only interesting part about the show. I can&#x27;t even remember diverse female space jesus 1&amp;2s names.
squarefoot超过 3 年前
I like it, mostly, though it&#x27;s probably because I <i>didn&#x27;t</i> like the only one Foundation book I managed to finish some 30 years back. At that time I had already consumed a lot of SF books by well known authors and although I loved Asimov in his short novels, non sci fi novels and science books, found his longer works very hard to digest. My approach to this series is therefore sort of clean, I didn&#x27;t even remember what the main plot was about, so to me is just a new series, and producers doing the usual Hollywood treatment by rewriting characters with gender, sexual orientation and ethnic differences in mind looks pretty normal to me; I don&#x27;t expect studios to produce in the future anything inspired by old novels without this treatment.
nottorp超过 3 年前
So why is that surprising? There are few or no quality scifi&#x2F;fantasy movies if you actually read scifi&#x2F;fantasy books.<p>Villeneuve did something competent-ish with Dune. Altered Carbon season one was decent. I couldn&#x27;t watch the second season because they really went off the rails with it. That&#x27;s about all lately.<p>Funny enough, I think the best sf movies are the one that ignore the source material and do ... something else. Blade Runner for example. Or Tarkovski&#x27;s Stalker. Note that they aren&#x27;t named as the books that inspired them.<p>As for Foundation, I haven&#x27;t seen it and don&#x27;t intend to. But judging by people&#x27;s opinions it looks to me that not only it has no connection with the book. It&#x27;s also a bad movie taken as a standalone movie?
评论 #29081493 未加载
geenew超过 3 年前
There&#x27;s an old BBC radio adaptation of the books that people here might want to check out:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.org&#x2F;details&#x2F;foundationtrilogythe--bbc1973radiodrama8hours" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.org&#x2F;details&#x2F;foundationtrilogythe--bbc1973rad...</a>
m0zg超过 3 年前
I&#x27;m now glad Amazon decided not to do a show based on the Culture series by Iain Banks. I can only imagine how horrible that&#x27;d be, since they have even less taste than Apple or Netflix. Sci-fi is better for it, just read the books, they&#x27;re excellent.
评论 #29077145 未加载
评论 #29077099 未加载
评论 #29077160 未加载
jessaustin超过 3 年前
<i>It’s an approach that would have appealed to Asimov’s Lord Dorwin, a dilettantish dignitary obsessed with identifying humanity’s original solar system. Rather than search for it himself, though, Dorwin relies on the findings of long-dead archeologists. When Salvor suggests that he do his own field work, Dorwin is incredulous: Why blunder about in far-flung solar systems when the old masters have covered the ground so much better than we could ever hope to?</i><p>In this case, surely Asimov better fills the role of &quot;old master&quot; than the anonymous screenwriters of various lasers-and-robots movies? Thus this conclusion somewhat undercuts the ostensible thesis of TFA.
dekhn超过 3 年前
I dunno about anybody else but what really kills me is the combination of very poor scripting with very poor acting, and a total lack of perspective on the empire (1 trillion people, you basically never see anything about the empire).
HouseOfBagels超过 3 年前
Renewed my Apple TV+ subscription specifically for this show and waited for a whole year -- I&#x27;m in the camp that thinks no series or film is ever going to be better than the actual books, but in terms of what&#x27;s playing and in production these days, I&#x27;ve been immersed in the series from the start as well as the Foundation podcast that dives deeper into every episode with some of the shows producers, it&#x27;s similar to hearing the director&#x27;s cut of a film.
GeekyBear超过 3 年前
If you&#x27;re interested in the original works, IO9 did a deep dive into the Foundation series.<p>&gt;The books that came to be called the original Foundation Trilogy (Foundation, Foundation and Empire, and Second Foundation) were not written as novels; they&#x27;re the collected Foundation stories Asimov wrote between 1941 and 1950.<p>Asimov wrote the first Foundation story when he was 21.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gizmodo.com&#x2F;isaac-asimovs-foundation-the-little-idea-that-became-s-5799655" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gizmodo.com&#x2F;isaac-asimovs-foundation-the-little-idea...</a>
nabla9超过 3 年前
There are many good sci-fi books that transfer into good TV-series. Only reason Foudation was used was because you can use famous name to trick people into watching it. It&#x27;s a dark patter of entertainment industry.<p>Another problem is that the ideas in the book are completely opposite to what the mainstream viewers want to see and are used to consume. The writers killed those ideas and tell the more familiar story of a prophet and chosen ones, where individuals are making the difference.
globular-toast超过 3 年前
They&#x27;re scraping the barrel now for literature to adapt. The studios desperately want another <i>Harry Potter</i> or <i>Lord of the Rings</i>. I feel like <i>Foundation</i> and even <i>Dune</i> are just not fit for being adapted. <i>Foundation</i> is so easy to read that people should really just read it.<p>It&#x27;s such a shame that <i>His Dark Materials</i> failed as that would make an excellent adaptation and the source material is far superior to <i>Harry Potter</i>.
评论 #29082394 未加载
gameswithgo超过 3 年前
I love the show but apart from the premise of long term mathematical predictions of civilization it has no relation to the book. Shouldn’t be called Foundation.
评论 #29079604 未加载
sonicanatidae超过 3 年前
I watched the first 5 episodes. Looks great, but pacing sucked and the story deviated quite rapidly. I hope others enjoy it, but it&#x27;s not for me.
novalis78超过 3 年前
Very true. Dune was a fantastic take on the motives and inspiration that Dune evokes. The Foundation needs another attempt. One day.
TinkersW超过 3 年前
The show is bad, and aimed at the recent Star Wars crowd, but thankfully Dune is great, so go see that instead.
CodeGlitch超过 3 年前
Anyone else struggle to read Foundation? I&#x27;m a massive scifi reader, but have never made it through 50% of Foundation (1st book). I don&#x27;t know if it&#x27;s the style of the writing, or the lack of action, but it sends me to sleep.<p>Dune of the other hand...is amazing.
magoghm超过 3 年前
I had very low expectations for this TV show, so when I saw the first episode I felt it was better than what I had expected. But when I tried to watch the second episode, it was so bad that I couldn&#x27;t even bring myself to finish it (I saw less than half of the episode).
hintymad超过 3 年前
I just don&#x27;t understand why the screenwriters thought they could create a better story than Asimov. And why is it so important to have a side story about some people&#x27;s boring feeling towards each other?<p>What&#x27;s wrong with simply telling the story as told by Asimov?
photochemsyn超过 3 年前
There&#x27;s a fundamental problem with the Foundation series - it&#x27;s based on obsolete scientific thinking about predictability. The concept of &#x27;engineers of history&#x27; that the Foundation series is based on - i.e. that these white-robed geniuses could steer the course of future events, hundreds or thousands of years later, by making small key changes to the present - relies on a lack of knowledge of chaos and sensitive dependence on initial conditions (which to be fair only really came with the widespread use of computers, i.e. Lorenz 1963):<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.astro.puc.cl&#x2F;~rparra&#x2F;tools&#x2F;PAPERS&#x2F;lorenz1962.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.astro.puc.cl&#x2F;~rparra&#x2F;tools&#x2F;PAPERS&#x2F;lorenz1962.pdf</a><p>However, the general concept was already known:<p>&gt; Poincaré, 1903: “A very small cause which escapes our notice determines a considerable effect that we cannot fail to see, and then we say that the effect is due to chance. If we knew exactly the laws of nature and the situation of the universe at the initial moment, we could predict exactly the situation of that same universe at a succeeding moment. But even if it were the case that the natural laws had no longer any secret for us, we could still only know the initial situation approximately. If that enabled us to predict the succeeding situation with the same approximation, that is all we require, and we should say that the phenomenon had been predicted, that it is governed by laws. But it is not always so; it may happen that small differences in the initial conditions produce very great ones in the final phenomena. A small error in the former will produce an enormous error in the latter. Prediction becomes impossible, and we have the fortuitous phenomenon.”<p>Thus &#x27;Seldon&#x27;s equations of psychohistory&#x27; would almost certainly be subject to sensitive dependence on initial conditions, and would be no more useful than algorithms claiming to predict future financial market behavior, or the specific weather at a certain location on a year from now.<p>It&#x27;s not really Asimov&#x27;s fault - this was also an era when people believed they could learn how to steer hurricanes with minor energy inputs, another topic where chaos demonstrated why that would be impossible to do with any confidence.<p>However, it&#x27;s also kind of hilarious that Seldon failed to predict fundamental changes in society (like women in leading academic or political positions), Asimov&#x27;s vision is basically 1950s society projected into the future. I suppose some people have wistful longings for that era, but not me.
评论 #29090639 未加载
satya71超过 3 年前
I&#x27;m all for changing the &quot;Vision&quot;, for the book is not easily amenable to a show adaptation. But this new version is just turning out to be trite lately.
jordanmorgan10超过 3 年前
Tangentially related, it always seems that for me if I read the book first, I like it more than the movie&#x2F;series.<p>And vice-versa. Every time.
haspoken超过 3 年前
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.md&#x2F;oKdBC" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.md&#x2F;oKdBC</a>
wellthisisgreat超过 3 年前
The show is just plain bad. It looks like a collection of tropes with thick layers of social justice agenda between. I am unpleasantly surprised that the idea of STEM = good can be discredited. I always assumed that in any movie &#x2F; book I will sympathize with pro-science guys but Jesus this tv series demonstrated you can ruin anything if you lean onto it enough
hdctambien超过 3 年前
I think I would have rather seen a version of Foundation written by Aaron Sorkin.
maxcan超过 3 年前
One highlight for me - Hari Seldon being played by the same actor as Valery Legasov.
m3kw9超过 3 年前
Hopefully Netflix learn from Apples mistakes when doing the 3 Body Problem series
jccalhoun超过 3 年前
I read the first Foundation book years ago. Some good ideas but meh on it overall. I haven&#x27;t seen the latest episode of the tv show but the best parts of the show by far as the parts about the empire and the most boring are the parts about the foundation.
sam0x17超过 3 年前
Dune notably doesn&#x27;t seem to have suffered this fate
mrfusion超过 3 年前
So I have to subscribe to Apple plus to watch this?