Apple Shares Teaser for Upcoming Apple TV+ Series 'Foundation'

[MacRumors]

Apple today during its WWDC keynote shared a trailer for the upcoming Apple TV+ series "Foundation," a sci-fi series that's based on the award-winning novels by Isaac Asimov, and the company has now shared a longer teaser on its Apple TV YouTube channel.

The show will be produced by Skydance Television and is set to debut on Apple TV+ in 2021.

Foundation chronicles a band of exiles on their monumental journey to save humanity and rebuild civilization amid the fall of the Galactic Empire.

"Foundation" will join other ‌Apple TV‌+ shows like "The Morning Show," "Little America," "See," "For All Mankind," "Defending Jacob," and more. A full list of ‌Apple TV‌+ shows both released and in the works are available in our Apple TV+ content guide.

Article Link: Apple Shares Teaser for Upcoming Apple TV+ Series 'Foundation'

 

[farewelwilliams]

totally relevant at a developer conference

 

[AngerDanger]

Honestly, this is the first series I haven't been cautiously optimistic at best about; it looks amazing.

 

[Mr_Brightside_@]

Cool!

 

[bviktor]

Can't wait.

 

[Sasparilla]

This looks great, cannot wait.

 

[posguy99]

"Band of exiles"? Is there more than one Foundation series by Asimov?

Watched the teaser. No, sorry, that's not going to get me to subscribe to ATV+ either.

 

[mazz0]

Anyone else think it had a slight kid’s show vibe? Dunno if it was the bright coloured clothes, or the focus on the main child character, or something else. Anyone know what the books are like?

 

[unobtainium]

The Foundation novels are interesting, and they certainly had a big impact on science fiction as a genre, but they seem totally un-adaptable to me. Not only that, they didn't age very well. Many of Asimov's predictions seem insanely bad now. He had no idea the internet was coming (of course), but the books revolve around a bunch of scientists making an encyclopedic book containing all of mankind's knowledge. All of these people are male, and all are scientists (arts have no place in an encyclopedia I guess?), and further, there's no concept that knowledge could be preserved or disseminated in any form other than a physical book. The total lack of women in the novels, the shortsightedness of his future predictions, the silliness and naivety of psychohistory as a concept, all make these books hard to read in retrospect.

All this to say that any successful TV adaptation will have to dramatically alter the novels in order to make them interesting and relevant for modern audiences.

 

[Freedom1]

Foundation was/is great. However, a novel that came out in the same era, "The Stars My Destination" by Alfred Bester, is even greater, as was acknowledged at the time. Both excellent though. Long live Gully Foyle.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Anyone else think it had a slight kid’s show vibe? Dunno if it was the bright coloured clothes, or the focus on the main child character, or something else. Anyone know what the books are like?

The books can be read by a 10yo and a 99yo alike. Asimov's greatness resides in how his texts flow, you never feel that there is an unnecessary word. Anything that your imagination can imagine while reading his Foundation series (or the Robot series) will work wonders.

 

[tevion5]

This is the first Apple TV+ one I'm going to bother watching. This trailer looks amazing.

 

[yaxomoxay]

there's no concept that knowledge could be preserved or disseminated in any form other than a physical book.

Well, we don't know what will happen between now and 30,000+ years from now. Anything could happen, including the loss of distributed knowledge through electronic means. Or, as it happens in the universe of Frank Herbert's Dune, you might even have a future in which travel in space happens but without any electronics.

 

[MOFS]

The Foundation novels are interesting, and they certainly had a big impact on science fiction as a genre, but they seem totally un-adaptable to me. Not only that, they didn't age very well. Many of Asimov's predictions seem insanely bad now. He had no idea the internet was coming (of course), but the books revolve around a bunch of scientists making an encyclopedic book containing all of mankind's knowledge. All of these people are male, and all are scientists (arts have no place in an encyclopedia I guess?), and further, there's no concept that knowledge could be preserved or disseminated in any form other than a physical book. The total lack of women in the novels, the shortsightedness of his future predictions, the silliness and naivety of psychohistory as a concept, all make these books hard to read in retrospect.

All this to say that any successful TV adaptation will have to dramatically alter the novels in order to make them interesting and relevant for modern audiences.

Ya what??? Foundation was based on a fall of Rome analogy, with the creation of the science “psychohistory” which essentially predicted the future in general to reduce the fall and help the rise, with all the expected trimmings of people trying to scupper and support these plans. It could be adapted, though some elements do get very Basil Exposition-y, with the better stories IMHO being the more dynamic ones.

 

[tevion5]

The Foundation novels are interesting, and they certainly had a big impact on science fiction as a genre, but they seem totally un-adaptable to me. Not only that, they didn't age very well. Many of Asimov's predictions seem insanely bad now. He had no idea the internet was coming (of course), but the books revolve around a bunch of scientists making an encyclopedic book containing all of mankind's knowledge. All of these people are male, and all are scientists (arts have no place in an encyclopedia I guess?), and further, there's no concept that knowledge could be preserved or disseminated in any form other than a physical book. The total lack of women in the novels, the shortsightedness of his future predictions, the silliness and naivety of psychohistory as a concept, all make these books hard to read in retrospect.

As someone who has not read the novels but heard people discuss them many times I was awarenesses they are hard to adapt and have not aged well in some respects.

If that is the case it might be a good idea for them to deviate from the source material with creative licence to recast certain characters or change elects of the plot while keeping the overall plot or messages on point.

I think the LOTR movies made big changes to the books for the better (scouring of the shire for example), faced the a similar task of filming a big culturally important story with a barrier of being incredibly old. I would expect some similar alterations here.

 

[E.Lizardo]

Foundation was/is great. However, a novel that came out in the same era, "The Stars My Destination" by Alfred Bester, is even greater, as was acknowledged at the time. Both excellent though. Long live Gully Foyle.

Thanks for the tip,I loved the Foundation books so I will check out the Bester book.

 

[Nordichund]

I have a free year of Apple TV. I have watched a few things, but I certainly wouldn't pay for it. It's getting ridiculous now with all these subscription channels and Netflix is losing its mojo. But I do enjoy reading Asimov.

 

[apolkowski]

The Foundation novels are interesting, and they certainly had a big impact on science fiction as a genre, but they seem totally un-adaptable to me. Not only that, they didn't age very well. Many of Asimov's predictions seem insanely bad now. He had no idea the internet was coming (of course), but the books revolve around a bunch of scientists making an encyclopedic book containing all of mankind's knowledge. All of these people are male, and all are scientists (arts have no place in an encyclopedia I guess?), and further, there's no concept that knowledge could be preserved or disseminated in any form other than a physical book. The total lack of women in the novels, the shortsightedness of his future predictions, the silliness and naivety of psychohistory as a concept, all make these books hard to read in retrospect.

All this to say that any successful TV adaptation will have to dramatically alter the novels in order to make them interesting and relevant for modern audiences.

it seems that I read different Foundation. In the book I know women play very important role. And for me sf is not about predicting future. It is a way to open mind to create worlds that do not have to exist but are like sandbox for ideas. I am sorry to say but I did not see any of “my“ Foundation in this trailer. But I will definitely wait with great interest.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

This is going to be freaking incredible.

If you’re bothered by the lack of women in the original, & how hard it would be to adapt, looks like Apple’s taken care of that for you. ...but if that’s your main interest in a sci-fi story, you might be missing the larger ideas. At any rate, it’s not like they’re making Stranger In A Strange Land true to the book or something.

 

[posguy99]

At any rate, it’s not like they’re making Stranger In A Strange Land true to the book or something.

Even in this century, that'd still be an R rating at least.

 

[tillsbury]

Ummm, his wife plays some pretty critical roles in the story...

It'll be interesting whether they make this truly a full-length set of series covering the entire storyline, although the mention in the trailer above that it "covers 1000 years" makes it look like it would only deal with a small part of it. Perhaps that's the plan... then future series to continue the rest of it.

I really hope it's worth watching, and isn't just full of special effects and action sequences like the trailer. Asimov stories are about conversation and thought.

 

[hellopupy]

The Foundation novels are interesting, and they certainly had a big impact on science fiction as a genre, but they seem totally un-adaptable to me. Not only that, they didn't age very well. Many of Asimov's predictions seem insanely bad now. He had no idea the internet was coming (of course), but the books revolve around a bunch of scientists making an encyclopedic book containing all of mankind's knowledge. All of these people are male, and all are scientists (arts have no place in an encyclopedia I guess?), and further, there's no concept that knowledge could be preserved or disseminated in any form other than a physical book. The total lack of women in the novels, the shortsightedness of his future predictions, the silliness and naivety of psychohistory as a concept, all make these books hard to read in retrospect.

All this to say that any successful TV adaptation will have to dramatically alter the novels in order to make them interesting and relevant for modern audiences.

Why does everything have to be about PC culture? If all the scientists are males in this SCIENCE FICTION NOVEL, then so be it. With every company clamoring to virtue signal as the next biggest social justice warrior, novel/shows like this would be a breath of fresh air. You underestimate counter cultural trends and the need for fantasy that is not a mirror reflection of our own reality.

 

[MilesAhead]

This will be a neat trick to adapt, as the novels contain a rotating cast of characters and cover a period of hundreds of years. In the main three books (the original trilogy), Hari Seldon (the bearded older man) is a driving force but physically present only a short time. Salvor Hardin (the young man) is a major character in the first and second books but long dead by the third.

There are elements that haven't aged well (atomic power is the pinnacle of technology in this future world) but these seem fixable.

 

[tillsbury]

There are elements that haven't aged well (atomic power is the pinnacle of technology in this future world) but these seem fixable.

There are already positronic robots at the time Hari Seldon is alive, during the first part of the story there's already genetically-engineered mind-control. By the end there's planetary consciousness. Pretty sure most of those are still comfortably in the future.

 

[soyazul]

This is the first Apple series that I really want to watch