But they didn't come up with new IP.

Instead, they hand picked 'oh, neat!' things they were told about, then just filled in all the missing bits with weird, unrelated, drama.

EG, non-story related character confict.

That's not content, but filler, designed to extend screen time.

To actors, drama is the only important part of the role, and thus to many in hollywood.

(One can have plot twists, action, suspense, without teenage drama...)

So it isn't new IP, that would require original thought, and 99% of modern hollywood is rehash. All the marvel/dc stuff, remakes of older movies, series, cartoons, the best stuff is old, but new.

Modern Hollywood can't do new.

Modern Hollywood can't even do remakes without bombs!

So it'd be hard to get buy in for new, and as this series sold loads of books...

Well, pick the juice IP bits, lather teen style drama (eg, noise), and...

Think about Why do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, an amazing sci-fi novel, and Bladerunner, an amazing sci-fi movie loosely based on it. Now, granted, maybe the book title was rejected for the movie based on marketing concerns, but it also established distinct identities for the two.

They should be brave enough to do their own take on the concept without using the title and clout of the original author. It would allow them more freedom in rewriting the parts that they need to and would transform the whiplash felt by readers of the previous work into possible delight at seeing a new story with new characters riffing on the original concept.

Selling your product to a network, and later to the audience, must be dramatically simpler when you have existing IP to build upon.

We almost certainly wouldn’t be talking about it on HN if it weren’t Foundation.

You don't think we would be talking about Apple's flagship science fiction show?

I've not seen many front page discussions of modern movies or TV shows here, no. Sometimes a retrospective on older art, but I don't remember any of those either for the visual media.