or closer to a very worthy novel-to-screen like Blade Runner.
Blade Runner is a pretty loose adaptation of Philip K. Dick's novel. It's more like general-concept-to-screen than anything else.
Correct. The book was short. The world of the movie was really filled in by Ridley Scott, Syd Mead and the art director & production designer team.
And Hampton Fancher, the writer of the screenplay.
Of course. His inventions in the script are some of the most creative ideas. The Esper machine and its realization predated popular notions of the Internet and hinted at a sort of ether in which the police could tap into to derive previously invisible information.
Didn't David Peoples also have a lot to do with the fine-tuning of the screenplay?
The movie is one of my favourites and, unlike a certain beloved sci-fi trilogy's fate, the director's Final Cut of Blade Runner is my favourite version.
Which version of the Director's Cut? This is the collection I bought years ago:
Never read Asimov’s Foundation series, my father did though. I was more of an Arthur C. Clarke fan...I’ve read nearly all his work.
Do it now. Old Tyme SF. They are short, won't take long.
LOL. What are you talking about? The Foundation books are massive.
First one lists on amazon as a mass market paperback at 296 pages. That's massive? The last Harry Potter book weighs in at 784.
How about word density? They're not exactly breezy reading. Try reading "Human Action" if you want a real challenge. Eleven-hundred+ pages of extremely dense information about economics.
We obviously disagree and that's fine. I actually do think they are breezy reading. My dad was a big SF fan. I think he gave me the first one when I was 12 or so. I do agree they are well crafted and edited novels, and you have to pay attention. I also agree they are page turners.
On a different note, I gave up on Altered Carbon. Got halfway through, and never picked it back up. I see there is now a Netflix treatment of it. Maybe it is better.
Never read Asimov’s Foundation series, my father did though. I was more of an Arthur C. Clarke fan...I’ve read nearly all his work.
Do it now. Old Tyme SF. They are short, won't take long.
LOL. What are you talking about? The Foundation books are massive.
First one lists on amazon as a mass market paperback at 296 pages. That's massive? The last Harry Potter book weighs in at 784.
Shameful in how duplicitous your comment is.
Confession: I've not read Harry Potter. I assume this is a reference, so I'm sad to report it is lost on me. They just seem so...massive.
You picked the last book in the series which is over 3x the length of the original Potter novels. The last Potter book was even split into 2 full length films. The first Foundation novel is longer than the first Potter novel. By the end of the Foundation series those books were nearly double the length of the original, but if if that wasn't the case I don't think it's fair to pull out any other novel that's longer as proof that something else isn't also long.
For example, while Deathly Hallows is is 759 pages (US version, but only 607 pages for the UK version), it would disengenuous for someone to suggest it's a short novel because War & Peace is 1,225 pages (Russian version), or that War & Peace is practically a fortune cookie compared to the French novel Artamène ou le Grand Cyrus coming in at over 13,000 pages.
Between all the Foundation novels, including the prequels, there is a huge amount of material in which to pull from. But let's also keep in mind that the number of pages or how well a novel has aged ultimately mean nothing as I previously mentioned about Crichton'sWestworld. Or we can look to some of the best feature films ever made that are based on short stories from Stephen King. And how many of those short, Grimm fairytales (and other short stories passed down through legend) have been made into a major motion pictures, usually by Disney?
Never read Asimov’s Foundation series, my father did though. I was more of an Arthur C. Clarke fan...I’ve read nearly all his work.
Do it now. Old Tyme SF. They are short, won't take long.
LOL. What are you talking about? The Foundation books are massive.
First one lists on amazon as a mass market paperback at 296 pages. That's massive? The last Harry Potter book weighs in at 784.
Shameful in how duplicitous your comment is.
Confession: I've not read Harry Potter. I assume this is a reference, so I'm sad to report it is lost on me. They just seem so...massive.
You picked the last book in the series which is over 3x the length of the original Potter novels. The last Potter book was even split into 2 full length films. The first Foundation novel is longer than the first Potter novel. By the end of the Foundation series those books were nearly double the length of the original, but if if that wasn't the case I don't think it's fair to pull out any other novel that's longer as proof that something else isn't also long.
For example, while Deathly Hallows is is 759 pages (US version, but only 607 pages for the UK version), it would disengenuous for someone to suggest it's a short novel because War & Peace is 1,225 pages (Russian version), or that War & Peace is practically a fortune cookie compared to the French novel Artamène ou le Grand Cyrus coming in at over 13,000 pages.
Between all the Foundation novels, including the prequels, there is a huge amount of material in which to pull from. But let's also keep in mind that the number of pages or how well a novel has aged ultimately mean nothing as I previously mentioned about Crichton's Westworld. Or we can look to some of the best feature films ever made that are based on short stories from Stephen King. And how many of those short, Grimm fairytales (and other short stories passed down through legend) have been made into a major motion pictures, usually by Disney?
Well, I stand corrected. I saw kids walking around with largish volumes, and I simply went to Amazon to look one up at random. In my mind, Foundation is a kid's story, so I picked something I thought was familiar to others. Guess I made a mistake.
"Foundation" to me is the first 3 written in the 50s. I know there were follow ons, and my recollection of them is that they were awful. I never re-read them. But I pull out the originals now and then. Really fun.
or closer to a very worthy novel-to-screen like Blade Runner.
Blade Runner is a pretty loose adaptation of Philip K. Dick's novel. It's more like general-concept-to-screen than anything else.
Correct. The book was short. The world of the movie was really filled in by Ridley Scott, Syd Mead and the art director & production designer team.
And Hampton Fancher, the writer of the screenplay.
Of course. His inventions in the script are some of the most creative ideas. The Esper machine and its realization predated popular notions of the Internet and hinted at a sort of ether in which the police could tap into to derive previously invisible information.
Didn't David Peoples also have a lot to do with the fine-tuning of the screenplay?
The movie is one of my favourites and, unlike a certain beloved sci-fi trilogy's fate, the director's Final Cut of Blade Runner is my favourite version.
Which version of the Director's Cut? This is the collection I bought years ago:
Yup, that's the same one I had and I specified the version I liked best - The Final Cut. I think that was Disc 1 in this set.
In fact, last year I bought the stand-alone 5 disc Blu-ray set and put it into my Deckard Briefcase, replacing the DVD set I first bought!
Foundation is one of those futuristic books that ages very poorly as real technology develops. Its like the book branched off one way and reality branches off the other way.
Not sure about "aged poorly", but having a necklace that runs on atomics and creates a shield is an exciting tech that is light years ahead of what we have, is it not? So, how is it "aged poorly"?
The more I think about it, there is plenty of source material in Isaac's catalog. There's mysteries of a sort in Tales of the Black Widowers that would make an easy series. Heck, even his non-fiction could be turned over to a Bill Nye the Science Guy/ Professor Proton and made educational. Tie it into iPad textbooks and their educational products line. Jeebz, outfit a lab with Apple products and use it as a recurring set. Parade in famous scientists as guest stars.
That would be great, except that much of it has aged terribly IIRC and is simply outdated.
I can't see how they'll be able to make a good show out of Foundation though without some major liberties being taken, the book just doesn't suit a screen format at all.
If Apple can pull a GOT and grab scenes and storylines from multiple books at one time (or at least foreshadow multiple storylines) this could be a great series. I'd be fine with a Westworld "inspired-by" feel. It's been so long since reading Foundation that I'm inspired to read them again. (It will take a couple years or more for a series to materialize if ever.)
Comments
On a different note, I gave up on Altered Carbon. Got halfway through, and never picked it back up. I see there is now a Netflix treatment of it. Maybe it is better.
Confession: I've not read Harry Potter. I assume this is a reference, so I'm sad to report it is lost on me. They just seem so...massive.
For example, while Deathly Hallows is is 759 pages (US version, but only 607 pages for the UK version), it would disengenuous for someone to suggest it's a short novel because War & Peace is 1,225 pages (Russian version), or that War & Peace is practically a fortune cookie compared to the French novel Artamène ou le Grand Cyrus coming in at over 13,000 pages.
Between all the Foundation novels, including the prequels, there is a huge amount of material in which to pull from. But let's also keep in mind that the number of pages or how well a novel has aged ultimately mean nothing as I previously mentioned about Crichton's Westworld. Or we can look to some of the best feature films ever made that are based on short stories from Stephen King. And how many of those short, Grimm fairytales (and other short stories passed down through legend) have been made into a major motion pictures, usually by Disney?
"Foundation" to me is the first 3 written in the 50s. I know there were follow ons, and my recollection of them is that they were awful. I never re-read them. But I pull out the originals now and then. Really fun.
Yup, that's the same one I had and I specified the version I liked best - The Final Cut. I think that was Disc 1 in this set.
In fact, last year I bought the stand-alone 5 disc Blu-ray set and put it into my Deckard Briefcase, replacing the DVD set I first bought!