If The Coboy Bebop News Made You Upset...

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ahtman**

you are probably going to love this. Then again we are talking about books (that aren't Harry Potter) instead of a TV show so I suppose we are cutting the angry mob down by about 75%. Still, that last 25% probably isn't going to be none to happy.

Director lined up to ruin Asimov's Foundation
by Keith Phipps

Roland Emmerich, the man behind Stargate, Godzilla (the crappy U.S. version), Independence Day, last year's 10,000 B.C. and much, much more will be directing film versions of Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy, Variety is reporting. A beloved and highly influential series set in the far-future, Asimov's series is driven by complex ideas of the kind Emmerich—whose Columbia-backed bid trumped offers by Sony and an Alex Proyas-attached bid from Warner Bros.—has proven himself completely unwilling or unable to bring to the screen.

Of course, it could be fantastic. Who knows?

**dietrich**

I think he did Frequency, which I enjoyed and thought was a good film. Stargate is okay, not grand, but I'll watch it.

It's better than Tim Burton is all I can say.

**BloodofOrks**

I heard Emmerich was trying to get the rights to make another Stargate movie, but wanted to make it a direct sequel to the first as though the television show had never happened. Seriously, the best thing this guy ever did was make a mediocre Sci-fi film which was later adapted into a much better television show, and he wants to disown it? This does not bode well. I think Asimov must be spinning in his grave.

**ShumaGorath**

Asimovs novels are too wordy to be made into functional films, made worse if multiple books are compounded into a single one. It's rare that a sci fi film is capable of having any depth at all, and when that happens people usually don't go out and see them.

**Phoenix**

ShumaGorath wrote:Asimovs novels are too wordy to be made into functional films, made worse if multiple books are compounded into a single one. It's rare that a sci fi film is capable of having any depth at all, and when that happens people usually don't go out and see them.

Very true. Most sci-fi movies spend way too much time showing off flashy special effects and cool backdrops rather than focusing on interesting storyline or character development. And then of course, you always have the problem of book to movie conversion never working out very well. I wish they would just take the fiction created from books and then expand on them with moves rather than try to recreate the whole book in film format.

**dogma**

Phoenix wrote:
Very true. Most sci-fi movies spend way too much time showing off flashy special effects and cool backdrops rather than focusing on interesting storyline or character development.

Most sci-fi books have the same problem.

**Polonius**

I'll go see it, although with absolutely no hope or confidence that the movie will be any good. Not only are the Foundation books wordy, the first one is almost literally a future history. There is little plot, and the whole point of the first book is

Spoiler:

Of course, the first half of Foundation and Empire could make a stylish sci-fi film. Take as main characters members of the foundation navy, waging a hopeless, and eventually futile war against Bel Riose. You could have action, battle scenes, love interests, and still put the entire novella (Foundation and Empire is essentially two novellas) on screen.

**warpcrafter**

If he tries to make it faithful to the books, he'll lose people in that whole part at the beginning where all of the old men are arguing about what planet Humans originally came from.

**sebster**

It's a shame Proyas' bid lost. I think he could have done something very interesting, but then I'm that weirdo guy that liked I, Robot.

**groz**

dietrich wrote:It's better than Tim Burton is all I can say.

Amen to that.

**chaplaingrabthar**

Should have been McG

**Ghetto_Fight**

I doubt I Robot resembles the original novel much...

!?

This has something to do with Cowboy Bebop?

I didn;t like the foundation series, too old and complicated.
Like trying to read the original Dune - the prelude made sense though.

**dogma**

Ghetto_Fight wrote:I doubt I Robot resembles the original novel much...

Not really. But abstraction is a beautiful thing.

**Ghetto_Fight**

!? wrote:This has something to do with Cowboy Bebop?

I didn;t like the foundation series, too old and complicated.
Like trying to read the original Dune - the prelude made sense though.

Cause they are for sophisticated people

**Kilkrazy**

Ghetto_Fight wrote:I doubt I Robot resembles the original novel much...

It certainly doesn't. The original I Robot was a collection of short stories rather than a novel. The film is based on the basic idea of one of those stories, with a lot of extra stuff added to make it last 90 minutes.

**Hordini**

Wait, what's the Cowboy Bebop news?

Linkz please.

**Ahtman**

Hordini wrote:Wait, what's the Cowboy Bebop news?

Linkz please.

No linkz for you. A few weeks ago it was announced that Keanu Reeves will be in the live action Cowboy Bebop movie and that was not news people in OT took well, generally.

**chaplaingrabthar**

The "I, Robot" movie was originally a scrpt called "Hard-Wired" with no connection to Aasimov until some suit noticed enough similarities to be actionable, so they bough the rights to I, Robot and re-named a few characters.

It's a good movie, but has nothing to do with Aasimov, so view it in that vein.

**Ozymandias**

Asimov didn't like "Frankenstein" style robot movies. But if he did write one, I do believe it would be like I, Robot. The only true way to protect humans is to take away all of their freedom and ability to harm themselves.

Seemed to fit how Asimov viewed robots IMO.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

!?

Keanu Reeves...fail.

**Hordini**

I didn't even know there was going to be a Cowboy Bebop movie. I like Cowboy Bebop, so that part is good news. The part about Keanu Reeves, however...

Well, we'll see.

So I, Robot the movie was originally a script called Hard-Wired? Sort of like how the Starship Troopers film had a working title of "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine" and most of the writers weren't even aware of the book until later in pre-production. Supposedly the director, Paul Verhoeven, never even finished the book.

!?

Sorta like how they turned the story of Benjamin Button upside down in the movie, or how nothing from the Beowulf novel ever actually happened in the movie.

**biztheclown**

I love Keanu! He should only play cartoon characters, they are within his range.

Point Break rules...

**Nofasse 'Eadhunta**

biztheclown wrote:I love Keanu! He should only play cartoon characters, they are within his range.

You mean as a voice actor? Maybe then I could tolerate him.

**Platuan4th**

!? wrote:Sorta like how they turned the story of Benjamin Button upside down in the movie, or how nothing from the Beowulf novel ever actually happened in the movie.

You mean you missed the part in the Saga when Beowulf gets freaky with Grendel's mom?

**groz**

If Reeves plays Ein, what's the problem?