• Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    What are they ignoring in your view?

    I have read the Foundation series many times.

    The first three books are fantastic ideas but, honestly, the format of small vignettes spanning centuries with no recurring characters works in a novel but is terrible to adapt to the screen.

    When I first heard of this adaptation, my reaction was “How are they going to make an engaging story for a TV audience out of them?”

    While not perfect, after the first series I am impressed with what they have done.

    The inclusion of following the emperors was a good idea that fleshes out the story, universe and gives a good counterpoint to the foundation.

    A page perfect adaptation of the books would be visually boring to most people.

    Avid fans of the novels must also realise that the show was made to draw in people who have never read the books. If they were to only attract people who have read the books, the show would be a failure as they would never have been able to justify the budget.

    • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The whole notion of having short stories spanning centuries with the only common thread or character being the Seldon recordings is the entire point.

      Having a revolving cast of characters isn’t a problem, Walking Dead has done it for years.

      • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        is the entire point.

        And it would be uninteresting to most people.

        They did not make the show for you, me or other Asimov fans. They made it for a general audience who will only know the adaptation. A hologram that arrives at the end of each storyline with a deus ex machina to solve all the problems will not be engaging to the genera public.

        Walking Dead has done it for years.

        And the show, to me, was terrible. Slow, formulaic and boring once the first season ended. So it is not something I would use as an example.

          • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I stopped watching mid-season 2 and haven’t thought much about the show in the following decade.

            What I like is not the same for everyone.

            Now adopt that thought to what you are saying about the TV show. You don’t like that it is not word-perfect with the books. I am glad it isn’t.

            If you don’t like where the show is going, stop watching as I did with the boring dead. The books still exist, and you can reread them anytime.

    • 🦘min0nim🦘@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I thought the Foundation books were conceited and trite - I know that’s not going to make me popular here. The first ATV season was pretty damn good, building on the main themes that made the books so seminal, but adding a human dimension which helps to make the story feel as epic as people make it out to be.

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        My main problem with them is how the politics just drag on and on and how long winded some of the descriptions are.

        I never made it through them reading them, it wasn’t until I went audiobook and just accepted that my brain would fall asleep for stretches of it that I made it through.

        There’s some genius in there but it really takes some wading through the mud to get there.

        The TV series is showing some promise that they will be able to wrangle this sprawling spaghetti into some sort of form that’s fit for TV. I will be very impressed if they pull it off.