गेलेक्टिक साम्राज्य के शासन में रहने वाले सभी आकाशगंगाओं में ग्रहों पर बिखरे हुए मनुष्यों की एक जटिल गाथा को दर्शाया गया है.गेलेक्टिक साम्राज्य के शासन में रहने वाले सभी आकाशगंगाओं में ग्रहों पर बिखरे हुए मनुष्यों की एक जटिल गाथा को दर्शाया गया है.गेलेक्टिक साम्राज्य के शासन में रहने वाले सभी आकाशगंगाओं में ग्रहों पर बिखरे हुए मनुष्यों की एक जटिल गाथा को दर्शाया गया है.
- 2 प्राइमटाइम एमी के लिए नामांकित
- 3 जीत और कुल 29 नामांकन
एपिसोड ब्राउज़ करें
सारांश
Reviewers say 'Foundation' is a visually impressive sci-fi series with strong performances, especially from Lee Pace and Jared Harris. However, it faces criticism for significant deviations from Isaac Asimov's original books, including changes in character genders and storylines. Some viewers appreciate the modernization, while others feel it loses Asimov's essence. The series is lauded for its production values and epic scope but faulted for inconsistent writing and pacing. Non-book readers tend to enjoy it more, while original fans express disappointment.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
... Its name didn't need to be Foundation. Imo, it's about 50% Asimov and the rest is a combo of soap opera, sc-fi-imperial politics, CGI explosions and Webb-esque space vistas. Heck, you could claim several other writers' materials were influences. Lots of this series is purely mainstream, outer space SF.
But it's excellent SF! Captivating sub-plots, likable characters and gorgeous images are extremely entertaining! In its own right, it is a superb show. Aye, and there's the rub... A "show" isn't necessarily literature. Michael Crichton and James Patterson were/are graphic oriented writers, evoking a "screenplay" feel in their fiction, which isn't meant as a detraction. Excellent easy read authors! Asimov isn't as frugal a wordsmith, however, and there are probably as many different visual interpretations of scenes in his books, as there are readers of his books. But then again, this is series is just loosely "based" on his work, whether it is expressly acknowledged or not.
But it's excellent SF! Captivating sub-plots, likable characters and gorgeous images are extremely entertaining! In its own right, it is a superb show. Aye, and there's the rub... A "show" isn't necessarily literature. Michael Crichton and James Patterson were/are graphic oriented writers, evoking a "screenplay" feel in their fiction, which isn't meant as a detraction. Excellent easy read authors! Asimov isn't as frugal a wordsmith, however, and there are probably as many different visual interpretations of scenes in his books, as there are readers of his books. But then again, this is series is just loosely "based" on his work, whether it is expressly acknowledged or not.
I remember watching the first couple episodes and not being very impressed. Not necessarily hating it, but not intrigued. It felt like a very traditional sci-fi series, akin to dune or star wars. A year or two later, i tried watching again... and now i'm somehow roped in and invested and binged most of the show well into 4 in the morning.
Great visual effects, music, vfx, product and costume design, even acting. Really intriguing clone concept (and a very obvious anagram for Cleon). Fantastic world building and i appreciated the non-linear storytelling. Interested to see where this series will take us!
Great visual effects, music, vfx, product and costume design, even acting. Really intriguing clone concept (and a very obvious anagram for Cleon). Fantastic world building and i appreciated the non-linear storytelling. Interested to see where this series will take us!
Magnificent bouts of rich storytelling often feel diluted by cheap and pointless moments of juvenile entertainment. While the core of this series held the potential to become an ode to the greatest science-fiction writer of all times, it would appear that Apple couldn't keep itself from interfering in their typical (biased) politically correct, family friendly fashion. You stand on the shoulders of a giant, and behind that giant stand millions of minds inspired by a vision of the future the whole of humanity can rally behind. The implications of the existential questions raised by Asimov are not PG-rated, this shouldn't be either.
When I read Asimov's 'Foundation' novels I was somewhere in my middle teenage years, more than 50 years ago. What I remembered was the central idea of psychohistory, but not much else.
When the first season of 'Foundation' screened in the Fall of 2021 I was deeply committed to the HBO series by Ridley Scott, 'Raised By Wolves' and the ambitious character driven political allegory 'The Expanse' airing on Prime. Both were challenging explorations into deeply complex ideas living up to the best that literary science fiction is known for.
Whatever my mood at the time, I found the first couple of episodes meeting most of my expectations, but then I seemed to loose the thread of the show as it left a central character behind and seemed to veer into a good guys versus bad guys realm of conventional space opera. I wrote a rather sour critique at the time that expressed my disappointment.
However, I started watching season two and decided to go back and review the first season. This time I was able to not only stay with the plot, but its choices made much more sense to me. I was newly impressed, to say the least, and could barely remember my specific criticisms on the first go-round.
Now I have a taste for what so many critics felt years after they first panned films like 'Blade Runner' and '2001:A Space Odyssey' before they recognized them as pioneering accomplishments. I wouldn't necessarily place 'Foundation' at the level of those films, but as an extended series it successfully tackles some profound questions about time and history and human behavior that are becoming ever more pertinent in today's climate of ongoing political crises.
The show runners project a run of 8 seasons to complete a narrative that even Asimov failed to finish. It'll be a remarkable achievement if all of the necessary factors, corporate, financial and otherwise hold up to make it to the end. Here's hoping.
When the first season of 'Foundation' screened in the Fall of 2021 I was deeply committed to the HBO series by Ridley Scott, 'Raised By Wolves' and the ambitious character driven political allegory 'The Expanse' airing on Prime. Both were challenging explorations into deeply complex ideas living up to the best that literary science fiction is known for.
Whatever my mood at the time, I found the first couple of episodes meeting most of my expectations, but then I seemed to loose the thread of the show as it left a central character behind and seemed to veer into a good guys versus bad guys realm of conventional space opera. I wrote a rather sour critique at the time that expressed my disappointment.
However, I started watching season two and decided to go back and review the first season. This time I was able to not only stay with the plot, but its choices made much more sense to me. I was newly impressed, to say the least, and could barely remember my specific criticisms on the first go-round.
Now I have a taste for what so many critics felt years after they first panned films like 'Blade Runner' and '2001:A Space Odyssey' before they recognized them as pioneering accomplishments. I wouldn't necessarily place 'Foundation' at the level of those films, but as an extended series it successfully tackles some profound questions about time and history and human behavior that are becoming ever more pertinent in today's climate of ongoing political crises.
The show runners project a run of 8 seasons to complete a narrative that even Asimov failed to finish. It'll be a remarkable achievement if all of the necessary factors, corporate, financial and otherwise hold up to make it to the end. Here's hoping.
I'm a sci-fi fan since the late 60's. I have read every thing Asimov ever wrote and the foundation series was always my favorite! I don't recognize this show...4 stars out of 10.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाAsimov's Foundation was originally published as a short story series in Astounding Magazine between May 1942 and January 1950, based on ideas in Edward Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThe opening titles is a montage of radiant energy particles forming various shapes.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Late Night with Seth Meyers: Paul Rudd/Jared Harris/Nate Smith (2021)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.00 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें