Atlas Shrugged: The Movie

Just got back from the movie. It was ok, but not great. You really need to read the book to follow the movie.

 

AS (and Fountainhead) tend to be "idea stories" in the russian tradition, rather than the "character stories" more common in western literature. (Rand was born and educated in Russia.)

The characters aren't three dimensional characters in the western sense as much as personifications of different ideologies. The story is the interaction of ideologies rather than the relationships between people.
Only with the female characters is there any personal relationship elements.

As to Rand's objectivism in those stories, I find her observations to be accurate, but her conclusions to be overly simplistic.

That's why my favorite Rand novel is her first: "We the Living" -- a story that works far better as a character story.

 

I have heard her books described as "Philosophical Fiction". It still seems accurate.

 

I am a fan of the book and just got to see the movie. My advice?

You can skip it.

Terribly written, terribly acted. BIG dissapointment.

It should have been made into a TV mini-series. They had to leave so much out of the story to cram 1/2 the book into 90 minutes, it is hard to follow the story or care about the characters.

 

Interesting NPR did a spot about Rand this morning.

What is interesting is some audio from an interview of her in the late 1950s;

http://www.npr.org/2011/11/14/142245517/on-capitol-hill-rands-atlas-cant-be-shrugged-off

 

Out at redbox on 12/6. Cheap way to check it out.

Part 2 out late 2012
http://www.atlasshruggedpart2.com/

 

I was struck by the level of intelligence they presumed of their audience for a national network show (ABC); not these days .

 

Read the book. The books are almost without exception better than the movie.

CW

 

I didn't even know their was a book, which by the comments here sounds like a good read.
From someone who just watched the movie without any background knowlege I was certainly not enjoying it. From the story summary I was excited to watch it, however I was very disapointed. The acting wasn't very good, more like a low budget made for tv movie, the story line was draggggging and was predictable.
Now that I know about the book, which I will read, I have a funny feeling that what I was watching was a made for tv movie taken directly from the book and not rewritten. This explains alot.

 

book: 10/10, Movie: 2/10 (sorry to say, I was rooting for it)

 

In video rental stores now.

 

One thing I did like about the movie was how it was set in modern (five years future actually) times. You can see in 2016 if things deteriorate quickly, their dystopian future might not be too far off. There were very few haves and many have-nots.

I enjoyed aspects of the movie, although the "news report voiceovers" required to move the plot along got tiresome after awhile. I thought the actress playing Dagny did a good job, as did Hank Rearden (although he seems to be channeling Gary Cooper in The Fountainhead). But the characters I think I enjoyed the most were Rearden's parasite family. All three were just detestable, especially his wife.

Hopefully Parts 2 & 3 are made with a larger budget. The first part of a trilogy is almost always the hardest to do right.

 

You guys are brutal in movie reviews.

I've only seen two movies in the last 10 years (Hollywood bores me). "Atlas Shrugged" and "Senna" entertained me.

You'd have to pay me to waste time seeing anything else.

 

I have a crush on Dagny Taggart.

And enjoyed the movie very much.

 

Funny blog about Rand. Warning: some language.
http://paulbibeau.blogspot.com/2012/01/i-was-****ting-you-people-message-from.html

 

no doubt......

 

http://www.atlasshruggedmovie.com/?gclid=CImwgciMpbICFYJOTAodpE0AhA

Going by the trailer, I think this one looks better. I know in the book the second act is better than the first.

 

Thanks for the reminder and trailer. I am looking forward to seeing it.

 

I'll see it fo sho

 

Geez, I still haven't seen Part 1 yet, maybe this weekend.

 

I read The Fountainhead many years ago because it was about an architect, entertaining book.

The movie came out on VHS in the mid '80s, saw it then. Cooper was ridiculously miscast as Howard Roark - I pictured David Bowie when I read the book. diCap would have to lose a few pounds and he'd be good.

 

If all Hollywood cared about was making money, then a work of literature with ever-growing sales for ~55 years and a massive fan base should garner the attention of Hollywood.

Yet it hasn't and probably won't for decades.

Clearly, Hollywood's collectivist ethics are at least part of the reason why this story has never enjoyed a major release (how many times has any studio said no to a project Brangelina were interested in? Who is John Salt? Really?!) I admire the LA powers that be for sticking to their ethics on this one even though, at a minimum, it costs me a well-made movie of one of the greatest stories ever put on paper. (Reading the book a second time is a master class in story telling.)

 

In the Hollywood version Rearden is actually a retired CIA operative who is just trying to live a normal life but gets the call for "one more job". The energy machine transforms into a wise-cracking talking robot named Atlas that tells about an atmosphere machine deep underground on Mars. Then it is revealed that all members of Galt's Gulch are really an immortal race of alien beings who will fight at the end to see who will win the prize once society crumbles. Finally, we see that all of this is actually just in the imagination of an autistic boy named John staring into a snow globe which contains a train locomotive.

(and if you can identify all of the references in this preceding paragraph, you like me have watched way too much TV/movies)

 

All I know is that Sue Ellen did it . . .

The Passion of the Christ was guaranteed to make a ton of money with no need for a Hollywood edit. Yet, no one would distribute it, though after it made billions at the box office one of the execs that turned it down was interested in the DVD rights -- Gibson passed . . .

No way they'd touch Atlas, even though it's a good bet that it would make a great deal of money, both in theaters and on DVD.

 

Reminds me...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXGWZxI9lAs[/ame]