Science Fiction

This was my first thought. The TV adaptation at least. I’ve watch the first few episodes a few times and never feel the draw to keep going. Just kind of forget I started.

I agree with this one too. I watched the first episode years ago and simply never carried on to the second. Then a year or so later people told me it was amazing so I persevered to the end of the first season, then drifted off again. Then I later picked it up again, then dropped it, then picked it up again - and think I'm now early in the third season, but again haven't actually watched an episode in about a year.

I keep trying because people who have similar taste to me tell me I will like it, but I just keep finding it a bit lukewarm - I'll finish watching an episode once I've started, but I almost always have to force myself to carry on to the next episode. It seems to have all the components of a good sci-fi political thriller / space opera, but those components feel like they're assembled so coldly that some magic is missing.

I haven't tried the books so maybe they succeed where the show hasn't yet for me.

Not sure whether to upvote because you're faithfully answering the question or downvote in furious rage at your answer.

Have you read the Burning Chrome collection and Johnny Mnemonic?

yeah tried that several times, just gave up.

The original Foundation is a product of its time. It is amazing when read in the context of the 1950s, but tricky today. Try Caves of Steel to further the I Robot read. Asimov built an entire future history spanning 10s of thousands of years.

Foundation is probably the best harder scifi going right now, just the idea of the clone kings dawn dusk and day is worth it let alone the prime radiant and foundation itself.

Raised by wolves is a good one in a similar style, but it got cancelled before it was able to answer the bigger questions of the world building which is frustrating

never really liked any Asimov - bu i did quit quite early on foundation.
i guess im more of a Dick.

This is me. And speaking as someone who tends to love his writing otherwise. It took me several tries to get through Foundation and once I finally finished it I was left with zero desire to read any other books in that series.

Anything by Matt Groening is always the same. He's always trying to make fun of TV tropes and subvert them but at the same time he's stuck with the restrictions of commercial, ad-compatible mainstream TV.

The Orville is just Star Trek fan show with sex and poop jokes (and one that doesn't take itself serioisly, sometimes to a fault). It's enjoyable but it just doesn't try to be anything more than "funny Trek". Fun, but too derivative.

I tried Dune a few times, I just can't do it. Not the books, not the miniseries, not the new movie. In theory it sounds great, but... It's not gripping me at all for some reason.

Dune is one of my favorite series, but I can totally see why it would be jarring. Unfortunately there are a couple of major tonal shifts throughout the series. Heck.... there's a couple just in the first book. It is definitely a very dense read. Lots going on and a lot of moving parts to track. There's even a glossary in the back to keep track of it with maps heh.

It's a really interesting universe. Herbert was really into philosophy and lead a really interesting life (his biography written by his son is an interesting read as well). It doesn't get any less dense and layered unfortunately, if that is what is keeping you out of it.

The Sci-fi mini-series was good and hit most of the major points pretty well, if you just can't deal with the books themselves. It might bring you back with some renewed interest. The new movies are interesting as a fan, but don't really tell the story fully, IMHO.

Banks is my favourite sci fi author, but I to struggled with Consider Phlebas. Consider reading Player of Games. The culture books can be read as stand alone books without missing to much. I think Banks found his stride with Player of Games.

I think Use of Weapons is the best Culture novel so I'd recommend giving it a shot. Having said that, i just loved Consider Phlebas pretty much from page one. Banks always had trouble writing compelling plots. The main attraction to me is the imaginative scope of the worlds he created.

The Player of Games is a far easier book to start with - partly because so much of it takes place away from the Culture. I originally did the same as you and started with Consider Phlebas, failed, switched to Player of Games and loved it, then went back and read Consider Phlebas and enjoyed it too. Then I read Use of Weapons which is phenomenal.

I think Player of Games is not a good starter book, but I can't understand what I ever saw in Banks. The Culture is cool, but it's all a bit underwhelming on a second read

I don't think Crusade clicked for anyone. Hence Crusade getting cancelled midway through its first season.

To be honest, all of the 'post-B5' B5 has been difficult. JMS apparently literally thought up the gist of the five season plot (which ended up being condensed into seasons 1-4 of the show as they were unsure if they would get cancelled - hence so much happening in s4) while he was in the shower, and it was one of the best sci-fi stories ever told. But it's seemed clear to me that everything he's done since B5 s4 has not reached anything like the same levels.

He told a great story, and he created a great universe, but I think he doesn't really know how to tell other great stories in that universe.

I could not get I to BSG! I tried. No one was relatable or sympathetic.

I don't think you're alone on the Southern Reach books by Vandermeer. I did read them, but holy moly it was a slog towards the end. It's a trippy slow psychological descent. Without any concrete aspects for the reader to hang their hat on, it's exceedingly difficult (for me at least) to get a picture of what's going on, what's really happening. I think they're well written, but they are not really my thing.

Same here. I feel the same way about a lot of New Wave SF from that era. I like J.G. Ballard because he’s such a strong writer that he can pull off that sort of plotless “experimental” stuff, but the rest of them don’t do it for me. Why would I want to read an SF writer trying to write like William S. Burroughs when I can just read William S. Burroughs?