Discussion:
Two scifis compared:
Add Reply
RichA
2021-10-10 01:28:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
Your Name
2021-10-10 04:23:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
You can't really compare them. One is proper sci-fi with spaceships,
etc. while the other is more fantasy lost world stuff. You may as well
compare Star Wars to Downton Abbey, or Superman to The Smurfs.
Ian J. Ball
2021-10-10 04:49:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Your Name
Post by RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
You can't really compare them. One is proper sci-fi with spaceships,
etc. while the other is more fantasy lost world stuff. You may as well
compare Star Wars to Downton Abbey, or Superman to The Smurfs.
Yeah, this would be kind of like comparing something like "Babylon 5"
and "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's The Lost World"!!
--
"Who would ever do this to him!?" - HottCiara on DOOL (04-27-2020), asking
who would stab Victor Kirakis... How about ANYONE WHO'S EVER MET HIM??!!
anim8rfsk
2021-10-10 05:29:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by Your Name
Post by RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
You can't really compare them. One is proper sci-fi with spaceships,
etc. while the other is more fantasy lost world stuff. You may as well
compare Star Wars to Downton Abbey, or Superman to The Smurfs.
Yeah, this would be kind of like comparing something like "Babylon 5"
and "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's The Lost World"!!
Something that sucks by a sick lying pervert and something that was good
goofy fun?


“The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it’s still on my list.”
moviePig
2021-10-10 15:02:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Your Name
Foundation:  Very good
La Brea:   Trash.
You can't really compare them. One is proper sci-fi with spaceships,
etc. while the other is more fantasy lost world stuff. You may as well
compare Star Wars to Downton Abbey, or Superman to The Smurfs.
True, though I might suggest "sci-fi with proper spaceships"...
moviePig
2021-10-10 18:24:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Your Name
Foundation:  Very good
La Brea:   Trash.
You can't really compare them. One is proper sci-fi with spaceships,
etc. while the other is more fantasy lost world stuff. You may as well
compare Star Wars to Downton Abbey, or Superman to The Smurfs.
Now I need to see a Superman versus Smurfs movie.
I take it you mean this:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044091
trotsky
2021-10-10 08:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On 10/9/2021 8:28 PM, RichA wrote


Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Ed Stasiak
2021-10-10 12:36:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.

I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.

"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
anim8rfsk
2021-10-10 13:58:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
Because if it was called “sniff-pimples empire” we wouldn’t be talking
about it.


“The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it’s still on my list.”
moviePig
2021-10-10 15:09:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
It's true that no one watching 'Foundation' should feel they've read
Asimov. But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Attempts at
serious sci-fi, even when they baldly displace other serious (not to
mention, classic) sci-fi are always cause for celebration in TV land.
RichA
2021-10-11 01:16:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by moviePig
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
It's true that no one watching 'Foundation' should feel they've read
Asimov. But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Attempts at
serious sci-fi, even when they baldly displace other serious (not to
mention, classic) sci-fi are always cause for celebration in TV land.
I never read the Asimov book, which is likely dated as far as technology goes as it is very old. So I'd expect changes.
moviePig
2021-10-11 02:35:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RichA
Post by moviePig
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
It's true that no one watching 'Foundation' should feel they've read
Asimov. But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Attempts at
serious sci-fi, even when they baldly displace other serious (not to
mention, classic) sci-fi are always cause for celebration in TV land.
I never read the Asimov book, which is likely dated as far as technology goes as it is very old. So I'd expect changes.
Distant-future sciFi should never need to get much obviously wrong.
trotsky
2021-10-11 08:23:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RichA
Post by moviePig
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
It's true that no one watching 'Foundation' should feel they've read
Asimov. But don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Attempts at
serious sci-fi, even when they baldly displace other serious (not to
mention, classic) sci-fi are always cause for celebration in TV land.
I never read the Asimov book,
Wow, there's a huge fucking surprise. As ignorant as the day is long.
David Johnston
2021-10-14 08:39:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
Question: Does the Foundation TV series, have a mathematician who
predicts the fall of the Empire, and proposes that a bunch of people be
shipped off to the ass-end of the Galaxy to preserve civilization and
build a new Empire later? Because if that happened then they are not
completely disregarding the original story.

Also, since you say "now" please tell me what time it was when Hollywood
could be relied upon to tell a story exactly the way the source material
had it when adapting it from another medium.
Adam H. Kerman
2021-10-14 14:47:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Johnston
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
Question: Does the Foundation TV series, have a mathematician who
predicts the fall of the Empire, and proposes that a bunch of people be
shipped off to the ass-end of the Galaxy to preserve civilization and
build a new Empire later? Because if that happened then they are not
completely disregarding the original story.
Also, since you say "now" please tell me what time it was when Hollywood
could be relied upon to tell a story exactly the way the source material
had it when adapting it from another medium.
The Manchurian Candidate (1962) is as ideal a movie adaptation as Hollywood
ever produced. There were plot changes and there was a major change to
the ending, however. A significant aspect of backstory in the novel was
implied but not stated overtly in the movie.

So even the best adaptation ever done still gets changed a bit from the
source material, but I'd argue it's faithful.

That you don't believe it's possible to do a high-quality faithful
adaptation doesn't mean it's impossible, Johnston.

The Foundation stories were going to require major changes in adaptation
anyway. Asimov never wrote with ease of adaptation in mind, and he was
also a better nonfiction writer than he was a fiction writer.
David Johnston
2021-10-15 04:08:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by David Johnston
Post by Ed Stasiak
RichA
Foundation: Very good
La Brea: Trash.
They're both trash.
I think everybody expected "La Brea" to be garbage, as the premiss is dumb
and its a broadcast tv show but "Foundation" maybe coulda been decent but
as is apparently now standard procedure with Hollywood, they bought the
rights to the books only to shitcan the story and make up their own retarded
plot.
"Foundation" is a nice looking show and the acting is good and the cloned
emperors is a neato idea (even though it never happened in the books) but
they're completely disregarding the original story, so why spend the money
picking up the tv rights to the books?
Question: Does the Foundation TV series, have a mathematician who
predicts the fall of the Empire, and proposes that a bunch of people be
shipped off to the ass-end of the Galaxy to preserve civilization and
build a new Empire later? Because if that happened then they are not
completely disregarding the original story.
Also, since you say "now" please tell me what time it was when Hollywood
could be relied upon to tell a story exactly the way the source material
had it when adapting it from another medium.
The Manchurian Candidate (1962) is as ideal a movie adaptation as Hollywood
ever produced. There were plot changes and there was a major change to
the ending, however. A significant aspect of backstory in the novel was
implied but not stated overtly in the movie.
So even the best adaptation ever done still gets changed a bit from the
source material, but I'd argue it's faithful.
That you don't believe it's possible to do a high-quality faithful
adaptation doesn't mean it's impossible, Johnston.
Oh I believe it's possible..at least with the right starting story. The
most impressively faithful adaptation I ever saw was the Hunger Games
movie. The biggest difference was the loss of Katniss's internal
monologue, which honestly only helped the story because her internal
monologue made her seem like kind of a dumbass. I also believe there
never was a time when most adaptations were that faithful and I'm
slightly irritated when people pretend that frequent alterations in
adaptation are something that only started happening recently and
Hollywood did a "better" job of such things in the past.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
The Foundation stories were going to require major changes in adaptation
anyway. Asimov never wrote with ease of adaptation in mind, and he was
also a better nonfiction writer than he was a fiction writer.
Nightfall was pretty good. But nobody will ever do a good adaptation of
it. It's impossible. You can describe how horrifying stars are to a
people who have never seen them, but you can't show it.

Your Name
2021-10-10 22:08:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Your Name
Foundation:  Very good
La Brea:   Trash.
You can't really compare them. One is proper sci-fi with spaceships,
etc. while the other is more fantasy lost world stuff. You may as well
compare Star Wars to Downton Abbey, or Superman to The Smurfs.
Now I need to see a Superman versus Smurfs movie.
The Smurfs would win ... The Smurfs always win in the end. ;-)

Superman did battle The Smurfs (sort-of, they're called "The Dorfs")
and other cartoon rip-offs in The Adventures Of Superman #441.
<http://bluebuddies.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001859;p=0>
Loading...