1

Sounds interesting

Cody on Jan 16, 2009

2

So it'll look awesome and be dumb as sediment. Nice.

Fuelbot on Jan 16, 2009

3

There are lots of problems inherent with adapting this wonderful saga to film. The biggest for me is the length and breadth of the story, which just couldn't be contained in one film, it wouldn't be possible.

If they could get this right I would be very excited, but I doubt it's possible. It's not like Asimov is even popular these days, who would go as far as to make a trilogy.

I hope they do, it was one of the stories that amazed me as a kid.

nemof on Jan 16, 2009

4

I loved the original trilogy, as well, and don't see it being easily adapted to film. Maybe. Slan would be much a much better choice.

RandyG on Jan 16, 2009

5

Foundation is an example of a great book that you really cant see as a film (or a good film).

Its argubaly the best sci-fi book ever written and dubbed as the Lord of the Rings for Sci-fi, however it looks as if it wont be treated the same with this lame director.

Beetle on Jan 16, 2009

6

He makes a fairly good disaster film, but he will fail at this. The breadth of this film really is epic, knowing Hollywood they'll reduce it down to it's most basic elements. Scratch that, they'll dumb it down.

DK on Jan 16, 2009

7

Although Foundation is considered one of the most important and influential science fiction sagas ever written, oft compared to LoTR, aside from the sheer breadth of the film, Asimov is the kind of author that relies exclusively on his grand concepts. Asimov does not know how to write character, therefore what must drive a feature film, the characters, are usually silhouettes at best in the source material. This is what concerns me most when following this particular adaptation process.

Brandon Lee Tenney on Jan 16, 2009

8

Not knowing the story behind the trilogy and after reading Brandon's^ post, it would be cool if the movie(s) could be done without little character development and make the story/visuals the main "character" of the film. Kind of like 2001 where, in the movie, the characters were not well developed. We'll have to wait and see. But I'm excited. I just hope it doesnt turn into an independence day type movie. I'd like it to be a more thought provoking movie. However I am not familiar with the story.

Dan W on Jan 16, 2009

9

yeah no faith whatsoever in the director. this guy has shown time and time again that he doesn't care about crafting a decent story or characters. he's all about the spectacle. if a talented filmmaker like alex proyas can't properly adapt an asimov story, how is a hack like emmerich going to do it correctly. plus studios would not properly adapt the book because of the scope of the story and the complexity of the ideas. it would be too much of a risk for the studio. not looking forward to this at all. i'll just go back to reading the novels.

andrew on Jan 16, 2009

10

Roland Emmerich? Are you serious? First of all, this is a practically unfilmable set of novels — and secondly… Roland Emmerich?? Could you pick a worse director for this project?

DogChasingCars on Jan 16, 2009

11

Awww fuck…

Why, why WHYY!!!??

Redge on Jan 16, 2009

12

Emmerich has proven that he can film a good opening, but his films run out of steam very quickly. And most (if not all) Hollywood studios wouldn't bother themselves to get a proper feel for Asimov's work. Thumbs down on this.

Setebos on Jan 16, 2009

13

#2 is right.

J.White on Jan 17, 2009

14

can someone tell me why Hollowood doesn't make a movie from Dan Simmons Hyperion saga?

avi on Jan 17, 2009

15

i mean Hollywood of course!

avi on Jan 17, 2009

16

Ender's Game got put into turnaround, it wouldn't surprise me if this one doesn't make it any further. I just don't see this working out.

Lady Aerin on Jan 17, 2009

17

why couldn't WB have gotten their hands on it? I bet they'd at least do justice to this series. i personally never was able to finish it (too detailed and lacking in characters for me), but i still respect it as an amazing series. too bad Mr. Emmerich won't be able to do that.

dave13 on Jan 17, 2009

18

This is going to crash and burn extravagantly and expensively. Roland Emmerich has never tackled real Science Fiction in his life and has never shown any desire to do so.

Emmerich also doesn't know how to sustain a movie (12 is right). He comes up with an eye candy concept for one particular shot or two (This massive ring of stone is really a Stargate! This massive saucer is right over the White House and blows it up! And the massive Mothership is even MORE massive and IT blows up! This massive dinosaur invades New York! These spiders grow to a massive size! This massive flood drowns New York and then becomes a massive icepack! This massive mastodon runs amuck! The world comes to a massive end!) and gets the greenlight.

One of the best, and one of the most hardcore science fiction trilogys ever written (in later years Asimov wrote additions to the trilogy but those really just started an entire new ark.), Roland is taking on something he has neither the intelligence or imagination to handle. I'm not saying this to insult the man, though I know it might sound like it. I haven't the capacity to be President of the United States (and neither have some of our presidents), but at least I know my limitations.

I also have to agree with 17 on WB. If anyone was going to do this series justice it would be them.

Feo Amante on Jan 17, 2009

19

Ever since 10,000 BC I have no respect for Roland as a movie director or producer whatsoever

Scott McHenry on Jan 17, 2009

20

Emmerich will never make a good movie. He's a big budget Uwe Boll. There, I said it.

DinoChow on Jan 17, 2009

21

Emmerich can be fun, but this film would be practically impossible in the first place (unless it was sort of like 2001: A Space Odyssey) and will almost certainly be bad.

Hmm…maybe if they could do a really high-budget, high-production values HBO miniseries, it might work…but probably not.

scm1000 on Jan 17, 2009

22

Someone needs to do for Asimov what Kubrick did for Clarke. Emmerich as far from Kubrick as you can come.

shige on Jan 17, 2009

23

Darn. Why did they have to put such a piss-poor director at the helm of a potentially awesome film??

Ajax on Jan 17, 2009

24

Disaster.

avoidz on Jan 18, 2009

25

Oh God no.
Oh God no.
Oh God no.
Og Hod no.

Emmerich on the Foundation trilogy?

*clutches "Prelude to Foundation" tightly and cries in a corner*

Ganaesh D. on Jan 19, 2009

26

Terrible choice: Foundation is such a complex book… a director like Emmerich will ruin Asimov's legacy!
Please join our group on facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=57522728336

Aldo Iannotti on Jan 21, 2009

27

Emmerich is not a "master of disaster." He is a disaster.

This is an insanely bad idea. Let's take a man who gave us such breaindead creations as Godzilla, 10,000 BC, or Independence Day, and put him at the helm of the greatest epic in the history of science fiction. This is an undertaking that requires talent, subtlety, and intelligence. Putting Emmerich in charge is akin to having a butcher perform plastic surgery. No offense to the butchers, of course.

The Reader on Feb 25, 2009

28

More like having a garbage truck driver perform plastic surgery. No offense to the garbage truck drivers, of course.
I imagine Roland Emmerich in future interviews saying things like, "Der audience is going to luff der spaceships. Vhere der special effects und explosions are concerned, ve spared no expense. Der dogfights in space vill be huge also mit der THX sounds. Der money shot, uff course, vill be when der giant spaceship crashes righten tru der planet and comes outten der other side. It vill be cinematic majesty! Dis is vat der pipple vant!"
Yeah, I expect Roland Emmerich's FANTASTIC VOYAGE and FOUNDATION TRILOGY to be two expensive mouthfuls of "Der"!

Feo Amante on Feb 25, 2009

29

I don't think we should be so quick to judge what Emmerich will do here … meanwhile, here's a podcast that discusses how the Foundation trilogy responds to Laplace's Demon, or the proposition that, given sufficient knowledge of all conditions, we can know everything about the future…

Paul Levinson on Mar 15, 2009