Foundation trilogy on the big screen

[Stofsk]

Link and quoted for your convenience:

ROLAND EMMERICH CATCHES THE 'AVATAR' BUG, PLANS 'FOUNDATION' TRILOGY IN 3D

2012 director Roland Emmerich discusses his plans to use 3D and mo-cap technology for his film adaptation of Isaac Asimov's FOUNDATION series

By JASON SWEARINGEN, News Editor
Published 2/15/2010



LOCATION: The Galactic Empire

THE SKINNY: It's quickly becoming a necessity these days for all big budget, SFX-heavy films to be in 3D. Often times, the addition seems extraneous, but when adapting a universe as expansive as the one presented in Isaac Asimov's FOUNDATION series, it would be criminal not to approach it with the most cutting-edge technology available.

After seeing James Cameron's AVATAR, director Roland Emmerich realized just this, and has decided to push the envelope with his planned three-picture adaptation of Asimov's FOUNDATION using similar 3D and motion capture technology.

"The AVATAR technology applies to FOUNDATION," Emmerich told MTV. "It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real."

When asked if he also plans to utilize technology similar to AVATAR's motion capture process, the director said "Yes."

"I was on the set of AVATAR and I saw how it worked and I really thought, 'That's the ultimate way of making movies,'" Emmerich added.

FOUNDATION takes place thousands of years in the future and deals with mankind's struggle to preserve knowledge amidst the collapse of a 12,000-year-old Galactic Empire.

Roland Emmerich is famous for bringing us end-of-the-world style disaster movies. At first I wasn't sure if he would be the best choice of directors, that said, there is scope in Asimov's novels to depict a cataclysmic collapse of a Galactic Empire in such a way that would be appropriate. Trantor itself is something of an inspiration for Coruscant, and showing its collapse would be something worth to see on the big screen (something which even Asimov IIRC didn't go into, we simply see Trantor at the start of the series, then later on its referred to as having been sacked).

Anyway, commence the gnashing of teeth and nerdrage wails of the damned!

[Shroom Man 777]

Look, Jesus Christ, FOUNDATION never even had a single fucking action scene in it - at least the decent first books before Isaac Asimov started going on about space babe tits and hermaphrodites with both testicles and vaginas, goddamn it! FOUNDATION's goodness was that things were so fucking understated, with goddamn ground cars and amazing pocket calculators. Having Emmerich, of all people, direct this is going to be utter CRAP!

BUT! The only redeeming thing I think is that if he uses those nifty effects to make all sorts of awesome spectacle sights! Like, Jodorowsky's Dune or something. He'll most definitely fuck the story up with his bullshit, we'll probably see those Space Barbarian cruisers getting space tidal waved into Terminus or a tidal wave picking up Salvador Hardin and throwing him at Hari Seldon before the time vault itself gets picked up by a hurricane and gets thrown at Trantor, which gets swept away and picked up by the pyroclastic cloud and thrown at the Second Foundation or Gaia, but fuck it. At least it'll look pretty.

God. Damn. It.

[Batman]

The problem I see is that the demise of the Galactic Empire and the defilement of Trantor WEREN'T cataclysmic events, at least not in the way Emmerich is justly famous for depicting. Both were pretty GRADUAL events taking centuries (possibly millenia in case of the Empire which was breaking apart long before Seldon ever established the Foundations). Indeed by the time of Bel Riose the Empire still NOMINALLY existed and was marginally functional if a shadow of its former self. Most of the falling apart seems to have gone mostly peacefully with the provinces one by one stopping to pay taxes etc and minding their own business and the Empire being unwilling/unable to do something about it.
Likewise, the technological decline other than in the Foundation was not the result of natural disasters or large-scale warfare but again a gradual loss over centuries. I don't see this translating well onto the silver screen, with or without 3D VFX.
Indeed, as Shroom mentioned, the one area where 3D VFX excel, gratuitious action, is completely ABSENT from the Foundation trilogy. What little space battles there were were glossed over in a few sentences if they ever happened on-page to begin with.
Add to that the fact that the Foundation Trilogy is mostly a collection of short stories instead of one continuous narrative and I don't see how ANYBODY could put that on the Silver Screen without it either sucking donkey balls or having very little bearing on the source material.
The Foundation Trilogy is something that would probably work best as a miniseries on the History Channel with lots of expository voiceovers (ignoring for the moment that it's fiction).

[Ryan Thunder]

Well, we saw what they did with I, Robot. It's entirely possible that they're just using some random script, with the material actually drawn from Asimov's works being limited to mere names, places, and organizations. Again.

[Zixinus]

In other words, a director sees the success of a film and tries to ape its genre and use of 3D with a big-name material in that genre.

I hope the project dies. Then again, I rarely watch movies.

I think the Foundation would be better as a TV series. It would have more time to expand itself and the switching between characters wouldn't be that big of an issue (if you can somehow manage to make the legacy of the Empire a constant character itself).

[Simon_Jester]

I agree with Zixinus; I hope the project dies in a fire.

The only way it will be good is if the director surpasses himself to a degree that is very rare. And it would still be better as a TV series. With reason, it's like the decline and fall of the Roman Empire- you can't compress it into a two hour movie.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm just pissed that everyone sees the need now to have 3-D all the time. I hope this fad dies fast. 3-D is to me a gimmick and a distracting one at that.

As for Foundation, while a film adaptation might be nice, I'll agree with what everyone seems to be saying thus far: Emmerich's probably not the right man for the job. Then again, who knows? Maybe he'll surprise us.

That said, this bit frankly disgusted me:

"The AVATAR technology applies to FOUNDATION," Emmerich told MTV. "It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real."

When asked if he also plans to utilize technology similar to AVATAR's motion capture process, the director said "Yes."

"I was on the set of AVATAR and I saw how it worked and I really thought, 'That's the ultimate way of making movies,'" Emmerich added.

I have no objection to CGI when it serves a legitimate purpose. There are some things that just can't be done effectively without it. But I can't imagine what the application of Avatar-style motion capture would be in Foundation (a series with no aliens), unless, as the above seems to imply, they're going to make it a completely CGI movie. In which case, why use CGI for things that can be done perfectly well without it? It sounds like using the technology for the sake of using it, rather than for any benefit to the film that may be derived from it, and all of the above makes me question Emmerich's skill and competency as a director.

[Stark]

The CGI on the Foundation guys listening to Seldon's messages explaining what just happened to them will be AWESOME.

It really isn't a story that needs much; the Trantor segments are just a lead-in cutscene. If the movie has a giant sequence about that 'fall of Trantor' (ps not a sudden disaster, more like a collapse over time) it's missed the point.

[Batman]

The only way it will be good is if the director surpasses himself to a degree that is very rare

That depends on your definition of 'good'. I can absolutely see this turning out to be a thoroughly entertaining SciFi action flic-as long as you don't mind it having practically nothing to do with the source material it is allegedly based on (ref the 'Starship Troopers' movie, which was apparently not inconsiderably popular). A true to the source material movie even if possible (which I too doubt) would probably sink like a stone at the box office.

[Stofsk]

There's no reason a big screen adaptation couldn't succeed. Foundation is a grand story, but it's told entirely in a limited way. The backdrop is of the gradual decline and collapse of the Galactic Empire and the resulting interregnum period, and the efforts of the Foundation to mitigate the damage. Almost all of the action is heavily implied - the first few crises the Foundation faces, General Bel Riose fighting the Foundation, Trantor's fall and so on. I don't disagree with others here who are concerned about Roland Emmerich's track record - I frankly think it sucks - but I'm curious at what could be done with the source material. A straight adaptation wouldn't work, that's for sure. It would need to tell the story in a different way than how it's told in the books, but I think it could be done.

[thegreatpl]

i dont think it would work either.

i have never managed to finish the book series itself; i just got too bored with the lack of action, so i dont actually know how the series ends, but there is incredibly little action anywhere in the 1st book. a movie that sticks to the source material would just not be able to work, since there isnt anything exciting enough to actually capture the audiences attention. the entire book series is about morals, and not action. about people and their thoughts.

i have to wonder if the director/writer/studio/whoever thought this idiotic idea up has actually read the trilogy or if he has just gone; oh, look. a really popular sci-fi series that hasnt been adapted for the big screen. lets do that and make money.

[The Romulan Republic]

The CGI on the Foundation guys listening to Seldon's messages explaining what just happened to them will be AWESOME.

It really isn't a story that needs much; the Trantor segments are just a lead-in cutscene. If the movie has a giant sequence about that 'fall of Trantor' (ps not a sudden disaster, more like a collapse over time) it's missed the point.

While the decline was gradual, it did end, if I recall correctly, with an orbital bombardment of Trantor that left much of the city in ruins. Then again, in the books, none of the characters actually see it happen.

[Batman]

While the decline was gradual, it did end, if I recall correctly, with an orbital bombardment of Trantor that left much of the city in ruins. Then again, in the books, none of the characters actually see it happen.

I don't recall any of that from either the original nor the expanded Foundation trilogy (which doesn't mean it didn't happen as it's been a good while since I read any of the books, mind you). Do you have a quote?

[The Romulan Republic]

No, sadly. I don't own the books, I got them from my high school library. To the best of my recollection, this is dealt with late in Foundation and Empire, when the protagonists visit Trantor and find that it is an underpopulated ruin. The actual bombardment occurs during the gap (of decades or centuries) between two different parts of the story.

It is possible, however, that my memory is in error. Next time I'm at the library, I'll look it up.

[Stofsk]

I'll try and look it up now, but my recollection echoes TRR's.

[Batman]

As I said, I'm working from memory here and might thus be 100% wrong, but I don't recall any mention of Trantor being bombarded as opposed to its metal surface being scavenged bit by bit over the centuries. I'll try to verify one way or the other myself.

[Bakustra]

There's no reason a big screen adaptation couldn't succeed. Foundation is a grand story, but it's told entirely in a limited way. The backdrop is of the gradual decline and collapse of the Galactic Empire and the resulting interregnum period, and the efforts of the Foundation to mitigate the damage. Almost all of the action is heavily implied - the first few crises the Foundation faces, General Bel Riose fighting the Foundation, Trantor's fall and so on. I don't disagree with others here who are concerned about Roland Emmerich's track record - I frankly think it sucks - but I'm curious at what could be done with the source material. A straight adaptation wouldn't work, that's for sure. It would need to tell the story in a different way than how it's told in the books, but I think it could be done.

Well, a straight adaptation wouldn't work too well for Foundation, but you could link "The Merchant Princes" and "The General" and "The Mule" and "Search by the Mule" well together. The first few stories are fairly disjointed, though, so an adaptation would potentially require four films; the first four stories in an initial anthology film, perhaps linked together or dropping "The Traders"; the second film focusing on the final fall of the Empire, the third on the Mule, and the four fleshing "Search by the Foundation" out to a full-length movie. Adding action would be counterproductive if we could convince the studios to sell it as a drama, which Foundation essentially is. All the books have action as it is, but it's fairly understated and mostly off-screen. Bringing it into a little more prominence would be okay, but adding too much action and you detract from the core of Foundation. Maybe sell it as a historical drama in the future?

EDIT: All I can recall is a mention of the "Sack of Trantor" which is inconclusive either way, but leans more towards the "single catastrophe" explanation. It couldn't have been a gigantic bombardment, but it probably caused a mass exodus of people from Trantor, leaving behind the Second Foundation and not many others.

[Stofsk]

As I said, I'm working from memory here and might thus be 100% wrong, but I don't recall any mention of Trantor being bombarded as opposed to its metal surface being scavenged bit by bit over the centuries. I'll try to verify one way or the other myself.

Don't bother, you're wrong. Trantor was bombarded, I checked my copy of Foundation and Empire just now. Page 194, the first page of chapter 22. It states quite clearly that the fall of Trantor took place in a month, the entire surface of the planet is littered with ruins that were caused by blasts, the death toll was catastrophic - from forty billion down to maybe a hundred million - and the event was referred to in the history books as the Great Sack.

[Stofsk]

There's no reason a big screen adaptation couldn't succeed. Foundation is a grand story, but it's told entirely in a limited way. The backdrop is of the gradual decline and collapse of the Galactic Empire and the resulting interregnum period, and the efforts of the Foundation to mitigate the damage. Almost all of the action is heavily implied - the first few crises the Foundation faces, General Bel Riose fighting the Foundation, Trantor's fall and so on. I don't disagree with others here who are concerned about Roland Emmerich's track record - I frankly think it sucks - but I'm curious at what could be done with the source material. A straight adaptation wouldn't work, that's for sure. It would need to tell the story in a different way than how it's told in the books, but I think it could be done.

Well, a straight adaptation wouldn't work too well for Foundation, but you could link "The Merchant Princes" and "The General" and "The Mule" and "Search by the Mule" well together. The first few stories are fairly disjointed, though, so an adaptation would potentially require four films; the first four stories in an initial anthology film, perhaps linked together or dropping "The Traders"; the second film focusing on the final fall of the Empire, the third on the Mule, and the four fleshing "Search by the Foundation" out to a full-length movie. Adding action would be counterproductive if we could convince the studios to sell it as a drama, which Foundation essentially is. All the books have action as it is, but it's fairly understated and mostly off-screen. Bringing it into a little more prominence would be okay, but adding too much action and you detract from the core of Foundation. Maybe sell it as a historical drama in the future?

I don't disagree with you, I just think there is scope to tell the story of ships battling each other and the breakdown of a galactic empire which wouldn't be painless.

EDIT: All I can recall is a mention of the "Sack of Trantor" which is inconclusive either way, but leans more towards the "single catastrophe" explanation. It couldn't have been a gigantic bombardment, but it probably caused a mass exodus of people from Trantor, leaving behind the Second Foundation and not many others.

See my previous post about the Great Sack. Could easily be depicted as a monumentally destructive event.

[Batman]

My copy of Foundation and Empire agrees, so I was clearly wrong.

[Bakustra]

There's no reason a big screen adaptation couldn't succeed. Foundation is a grand story, but it's told entirely in a limited way. The backdrop is of the gradual decline and collapse of the Galactic Empire and the resulting interregnum period, and the efforts of the Foundation to mitigate the damage. Almost all of the action is heavily implied - the first few crises the Foundation faces, General Bel Riose fighting the Foundation, Trantor's fall and so on. I don't disagree with others here who are concerned about Roland Emmerich's track record - I frankly think it sucks - but I'm curious at what could be done with the source material. A straight adaptation wouldn't work, that's for sure. It would need to tell the story in a different way than how it's told in the books, but I think it could be done.

Well, a straight adaptation wouldn't work too well for Foundation, but you could link "The Merchant Princes" and "The General" and "The Mule" and "Search by the Mule" well together. The first few stories are fairly disjointed, though, so an adaptation would potentially require four films; the first four stories in an initial anthology film, perhaps linked together or dropping "The Traders"; the second film focusing on the final fall of the Empire, the third on the Mule, and the four fleshing "Search by the Foundation" out to a full-length movie. Adding action would be counterproductive if we could convince the studios to sell it as a drama, which Foundation essentially is. All the books have action as it is, but it's fairly understated and mostly off-screen. Bringing it into a little more prominence would be okay, but adding too much action and you detract from the core of Foundation. Maybe sell it as a historical drama in the future?

I don't disagree with you, I just think there is scope to tell the story of ships battling each other and the breakdown of a galactic empire which wouldn't be painless.

I think so too, but I worry that in doing so the core aspects of the series will be lost. On the other hand, there are things like Bel Riose fighting the Foundation, the opening battles of the Korell war, and the fight against the Mule that could easily be expanded from background. My preference for depicting the decay would be to show it almost entirely in the background, unless we significantly expand our view of Imperial society before we arrive on Terminus, since we don't get to see the Zeonian kingdoms before the revolt and collapse of infrastructure (that will have to be updated, I think, from having coal-powered spaceships) and after that, everything has undergone some decay.

EDIT: All I can recall is a mention of the "Sack of Trantor" which is inconclusive either way, but leans more towards the "single catastrophe" explanation. It couldn't have been a gigantic bombardment, but it probably caused a mass exodus of people from Trantor, leaving behind the Second Foundation and not many others.

See my previous post about the Great Sack. Could easily be depicted as a monumentally destructive event.

I didn't remember it being that destructive! I wonder how the Second Foundation survived the Sack.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

That does happen in the background though; one war that definitely doesn't is Riose's war- that is very definitely fought, and some of it over the shoulders of the characters - the book mentions news reports on the fighting.

The Kalganian conflict- managed for the foundation by Hober Mallow- was 'almost certainly the most unfought war on record', though. Still, there are any number of incidents during the Traders Period that coudl look fizz-flash-zappy-bang.

Although- that said, Emmerich is definitely the wrong entity for the job. His style is just totally out of place for the story of death and rebirth, a phoenix rising from the ashes of a dying civilisation, that the early Foundation books are.

The Encyclopedia Foundation on Terminus was never about mitigating the damage; the story does not deal with preserving knowledge- that was the excuse Seldon sold the Empire's chief justice on to have an exuse for going out there in the first place, and dragging all the personnel of the project along with him.

It was about the inevitable death of the Empire, and the socioengineering of something new to come after it. Applications, not theory.

Is there any detail on why Emmerich wants to do it? Has he even read the source material? There are other series and other stories that would fit his approach far better, and other directors- actually, that's a point. Who would you trust with directing a Foundation trilogy?

[Stofsk]

I think so too, but I worry that in doing so the core aspects of the series will be lost. On the other hand, there are things like Bel Riose fighting the Foundation, the opening battles of the Korell war, and the fight against the Mule that could easily be expanded from background. My preference for depicting the decay would be to show it almost entirely in the background, unless we significantly expand our view of Imperial society before we arrive on Terminus, since we don't get to see the Zeonian kingdoms before the revolt and collapse of infrastructure (that will have to be updated, I think, from having coal-powered spaceships) and after that, everything has undergone some decay.

Agreed, and lol at the coal-powered starships bit.

I, too, am concerned a big screen adaptation might sacrifice the core story of Foundation. Its hard to read the books and think you could distill it down into a two hour (or more) movie, or even a trilogy (though a trilogy would fare better IMO). A lot of the tension in the books are about the crisis facing the Foundation, and how things seem overwhelming and bleak, until a surprising solution manifests itself (I really liked how Bel Riose for instance, was recalled to Trantor and executed due to trumped up charges of treason - not because he was losing, but because he was winning, and a strong General is a threat to a strong Emperor of a weak or declining Empire). A lot of the action takes place in settings where it's a couple of guys talking shit, smoking a cigar or something, and talking some more - not exactly gripping stuff from a big screen, blockbuster film perspective, but you can work in those scenes in addition to scenes that show (as opposed to Asimov telling) the crises the Foundation and the Empire are facing.

EDIT: All I can recall is a mention of the "Sack of Trantor" which is inconclusive either way, but leans more towards the "single catastrophe" explanation. It couldn't have been a gigantic bombardment, but it probably caused a mass exodus of people from Trantor, leaving behind the Second Foundation and not many others.

See my previous post about the Great Sack. Could easily be depicted as a monumentally destructive event.

I didn't remember it being that destructive! I wonder how the Second Foundation survived the Sack.[/quote]
Maybe they used their incredible psychic powers to GTFO before things went to hell.

Seriously, maybe they left, came back afterwards? Or had hidden underground bunkers?

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

That story is in one of the co/ghost written prequels (under the circumstances, ?), so to spare you from having to read it- basically, yes. The University of Trantor is the only major part of the old city to survive intact, largely due to mindbuggery by the second Foundation convincing the usurper of the day to bomb around them, crown himself in the central hall of the University Library and take it as his palace.

They made themselves the prize, the last remaining bit of Imperial Glory, too important for his claim to the throne to be blown up, then when he had left to fight a colonial campaign, quietly engineered his death and a succession struggle that prevented anyone else coming to bother them. As far as I recall. There's no way I'm re-reading that pile of drivel to check.

[Stofsk]

That story is in one of the co/ghost written prequels (under the circumstances, ?), so to spare you from having to read it- basically, yes. The University of Trantor is the only major part of the old city to survive intact, largely due to mindbuggery by the second Foundation convincing the usurper of the day to bomb around them, crown himself in the central hall of the University Library and take it as his palace.

Ah cool. That actually makes a bit of sense considering their powers.

They made themselves the prize, the last remaining bit of Imperial Glory, too important for his claim to the throne to be blown up, then when he had left to fight a colonial campaign, quietly engineered his death and a succession struggle that prevented anyone else coming to bother them. As far as I recall. There's no way I'm re-reading that pile of drivel to check.

Were they that bad?