Because Asimov really wanted it to be an action film. In 3-D. :eek:
aaaauuuuugghhhhh
Foundation should have been televised during the '50s. I have always imagined it as Asimov wrote it, a series of short stories. Tightly framed interiors, few characters, not really much room for spectacle – somehow, I keep thinking of 12 Angry Men.
This thing is going to be a disaster.
3D and CGI are just tools, it’s what he does with them that matters. I don’t exactly know what sort of action they have in mind though… 
But New York doesn’t even appear in the trilogy! How can Emmerich destroy it?
Gods, that’s depressing. Please let it die in pre-production.
This is going to be a travesty. It’s too episodic, especially in the first book, to be a movie. It doesn’t even have the same characters from chapter to chapter. Like I, Robot, this is going to end up being some bullshit actioner with no relationship to the source material. It will probably even star Will Smith again, as an action hero fabricated entirely for the movie, fighting a space war that has nothing to do with the books.
I’ve always thought that Foundation could only be done justice as a television mini-series – preferably a sunday night HBO series. In my perfect vision, Morgan Freeman would play Hari Seldon.
I think you’re right. However I’d pick Kevin Spacey.
It’s been a while since I’ve read it, but I don’t remember much in the way of “special effects” scenes from the book. Like most Asimov, it’s almost all talking!..TRM (who will nevertheless take a wait-and-see attitude)
Exactly. You could film a completely convincing Foundation trilogy with 1977 movie tech.
It’s not about action either. A lot of it is about politicking and maneuvering, and problem solving. The “Seldon crises” are seldom resolved by space battles, or anything approaching traditional sci-fi “action.” They’re resolved by cleverness and wits, and tactical manipulation (like presenting “atomic” technology as magic, and contriving religious trappings to sell it to more “primitive” planets).
That’s the kind of thing I fear will be lost. They’ll probably even have explosions in space.
And they will make loud booms. At which point dear Isaac will start turning over in his grave so fast, they’ll have to change the headstone to “Pinwheel Asimov.”
Seriously, I agree with the consensus here. This work just does not lend itself to being an action flick. I fear it will not go well.
I think the dinamo in Asimov’s grave is providing energy to all the east coast since “I Robot”, perhaps they want to cover the west coast too?
Maybe someone can convince Roland to switch to the Lensman Series? I always thought that would make a great space opera film series. Brendan Fraser could play Kimball Kinnison.
If you’d asked me which director I’d least like to see try this adaptation only McG might have been lower on the list.
Let Nora Ephron do it, at least she’s ok with talking characters.
Seriously, David Mamet could handle the subtleties of the conversation, and maybe add in some refreshing sexual subtext along with the Machiavellian machinations.
I mentioned this on SFF.net, where a lot of SF writers hang out, and they’re all appalled.
Asimov was one of the least action-oriented authors out there. He wrote about ideas, not action.
There are also big problems with turning it into a coherent narrative; it’s really just a collection of short stories based up the Foundation. No character from the first book is alive by the third (or even by the second, IIRC).
And Asimov started spinning with “The Bicentennial Man.”
That was just the proof of concept.
I heard the Chinese are contacting Uwe Boll to adapt “The Ancient Art Of War” and thus end their dependence on foreign oil…
That’s actually a good idea.
That’s the way I remember it too, most of the “action” taking place mentally. It might be time to re-read the trilogy, how many books is it up to now?