1 Because it sucked Horribly?

2 I saw it and liked it.  I had low expectations and they were more than met. 

My wife (and two kids) went with me.  My wife liked the movie and has now decided to read the book.  My twelve-year-old is already halfway through the book and loved the movie.  My seven year old? No so much.

3 From what I have read it is doing pretty good for a small budget movie of this type. There are two things that concern me:

1) Does it follow the book to a large degree and only deviate where it is a must

2) They are doing this in multiple parts. Will it be like some movies in the past that did this and then never came out with the end?

4 Ace,

I saw it opening night and did not like it. And I'm very predisposed to liking anything by Ayn Rand. Here's my review from Saturday:

http://babalublog.com/2011/04/read-the-book/

5 vic, see the update; part ii has been shot and presumably only needs effects and editing, so that should come out, either way. Part III is in doubt, and only a profit on the first two parts will get that a greenlight.

6 Vic at April 18, 2011 12:37 PM (M9Ie6)

1) Yes. 

2) Depends on revenue, I would think.  The plan is for parts 2 and 3 to come out on Tax Day 2012 and 2013.

7 I watched it and enjoyed it. But, I havenÂ’t read the book. Yet; I expect I will now. Part II already shot? I hope they did something about Mr. Mysterious. He had bad lines for a movie (maybe they worked well in the book, I donÂ’t know) and he delivered them poorly. In Part I, he only shows up a handful of times for a few seconds each, so itÂ’s not a problem. Everyone else was great.

8 Saw it Saturday afternoon here in San Antonio. Not bad.

9 Wanted to like it but couldn't. I was expecting TV movie quality but this was more Lifetime than HBO. If they've already shot part II I have no hopes for it. The only thing that could save it is a better director. Maybe. So much for that.

10 thanks, George... I'm not going to link that though since I haven't seen it and wouldn't feel right linking a pan of a movie that I'd *like* to support, without confirming the pan myself.

11 I think it was pretty good. I had heard the dialogue was a little stilted, and it was. There is some melodrama, especially from the actress playing Dagny, but considering that it mostly a movie about two people trying to build train tracks (if you ignore the politics) they kept you fairly engaged.

We also had some leftie heckler in our theater though, who would laugh loudly and obnoxiously and make comments at certain parts, so perhaps I liked it just to spite him.

12 Interesting factoid: the guy who plays Francisco D'Aconia is Manolo from the 1985 movie, Gotcha!

13

I saw it with some Seattle morons and liked it a lot.

I have to admit I got misty eyed when the high speed train took it's first run on Reardon Steel tracks through Colorado.

All privately financed of course.

14 Ace, you tell me. I'd love to read your take on it. It was akin to finally going out on a date with your dream girl and discovering the plumbing was not what you expected...

15 The movie isn't about making train tracks. It about the struggle the protagonists must go through to keep their businesses going against government and political forces out to destroy their way of business and living. The train tracks are simply an element.

16 I saw the pron version:  Atlas Tugged

17 I know we're all supposed to rally around this movie because Hollywood will hate it, but I seriously don't see how you could adapt the novel into a good movie without making HUGE changes to streamline it.  They might have been able to make a really good 13- or 15-episode mini-series version (I'm thinking on AMC).

Even the book is tough to read at times.  Some of the monologues go on for several pages and become tedious and repetitive. 

18 I'll be trying to see it in an evening or two, my original 'Friday Night Movies' plan got scuttled in favor of 'Friday Night Take Cover From Killer Storms'.

On a tangent, I do hope my fellows in the path of that killer from OK to the Atlantic came out in decent shape...

19

I saw it and essentially hated it.

 

However, having given it more thought, it was an impossible task. turning some 300-400 pages into a two hours.

They cut out too much important dialogue and put in to many wasted setting shots.

As i said in the ONT on friday, at least 5-10 minutes of the film is shots of trains and scenic helicopter shots of colorado forest.

Several important speeches/dialogue are left out or mutilated beyond recognition. The discussion between D'Anconia and Rearden at the Anniversary party the foremost among them. 

The scene with Dr.Faris and the one with Hugh Akston are forced and unrecognizable.

The production value was clearly cheap. Maybe a level above a lifetime movie. However some of the acting and actors were very good. The woman who played Lillian Rearden was spot on. I thought the guy playing Henry Reardon was perfect. If this had been a 100 million dollar production, he would have been a good pick for that role.

I thought the guy who played Ellis Wyatt was also a good choice., as was Wesley Mouch.

I am still not sure how I feel about the woman who played Dagny. It wasn't bad, but also wasn't what I expected.

Actors I thought did poorly were the people who played Jim Taggart, Hugh Akston, John Galt(who PJ Rourke pointed out is played ably by a Trenchcoat and fedora), and a few other minor players.

 

They ruined the ending of book 1 by adding something to one of the most powerful scenes in book 1. Specifically the note left by Ellis Wyatt.

It felt disjointed and stilted, as though one seen didn't follow the other. Not a seemless transition between scenes would be the best way to phrase it.

Overall I think the director and writer are to blame. The cast did fairly well.

 

20

Yeah, my wife and I saw it Saturday night. It inspired me to buy the book, but beyond that, it seemed like it was all intro and no plot. I'm hoping that this wasn't the whole story as it had a very awkward ending. There had better be a Part 2.  

 

The basic idea is that people in smoke filled rooms plot use the heavy handed hammer of government to enrich themselves at the publicÂ’s expense.  This is news?

 

That said, I’m guessing this is one of those stories you’ve had to read before you see the movie. The audience, sparse though it was, maybe only 1/4 to 1/3 of the theatre was filled, and at 39, my wife and I were by far the youngest in the audience, did clap at the end, if that means anything. I was left mostly with the feeling of, “huh?”

 

Having started the book, I did notice that thereÂ’s a heck of a lot of material to cover in a two hour movie. The book that I bought has over 1,000 pages in what appears to be a size 4 fontÂ… Is reading this book going to make me want to vote for Ron Paul and bury guns, ammo, and MREÂ’s in my back yard?

21 @13 Me too! Even though it was CGI'd it was still nicely shot. Not on par with the cavalry charge in LOTR: ROTK but had the same feel to me.

22 I went to a local mega-theater Sun. at 1:30 pm where most times there's hardly a crowd.  Very few seats left at 1:15.

It was great! At the end, as the credits started rolling, almost everyone started applauding. Makes the heart feel good!

TennDon
in Nashville, TN

23

Part II already shot? I hope they did something about Mr. Mysterious. He had bad lines for a movie (maybe they worked well in the book, I donÂ’t know) and he delivered them poorly. In Part I, he only shows up a handful of times for a few seconds each, so itÂ’s not a problem. Everyone else was great.

i think the guy playing galt is the director. That's always a bad move.

And Galt's lines don't sound as stupid in the book as they do in the movie.

24

25 Saw it. Liked it (and have read the book.)  Not perfect but theater 2/3 full and applause at the end.  'Tis a start.

26 It was jaw-droppingly bad.

27 The wife and I went Friday night.
Maybe 50 people in attendance.
We both liked it, and neither of us have read the book.
In fact Saturday she ordered the book, not knowing that I had ordered the audio version of it, so we are set in case they never make the whole thing.

28 going out on a date with your dream girl and discovering the plumbing was not what you expected...

I wouldn't say it was that bad.  I do agree that your expectations going in have a lot to do with things.

I was not overly-impressed with the photography, the music, the sound, or even the acting, for that matter.  It simply does not compare well side-by-side with big-budget films on these scores.

I supposed what I liked most about the film was its sincere effort to put a fairly complicated philosophy on screen in a manner that was entertaining.  It was refreshing (actually, sort of astonishing) to see those ideas played out on a big screen, and for that, I appreciated the movie.  It was nice to see a conservative point of view expressed so unambiguously and enthusiastically in a major film. 

29 Like I said, not bad. You could spend your money on another Disney-esque animated mish-mash you've already seen a hundred times...

30 We also had some leftie heckler in our theater though, who would laugh loudly and obnoxiously and make comments at certain parts, so perhaps I liked it just to spite him.

This is why I do not go to theaters anymore, among many other reasons. In the 50s audiences were polite. By the 80s and 90s they were a bunch of assholes for the most part and the theaters would not kick them out.

And Ace & Angle, thanks for the update on part II.

31

Yeah, my wife and I saw it Saturday night. It inspired me to buy the book, but beyond that, it seemed like it was all intro and no plot. I'm hoping that this wasn't the whole story as it had a very awkward ending

The ending is very powerful in the book. It is similar.

The point was that Ellis Wyatt was essentially the last producer of fuel in America, and he was being screwed by the government and corrupt companies.

However the movie decided to add two extremely stupid things in the ending that didn't fit at all

32 I'll watch it on video. Some books are  meant to be serialized. I have never understood why the British get all these great one off series based on books and we get squat. Instead they get made into films which are too short to ever do the book justice simply so directors can change it to what they like.

33 Ben@23: i think the guy playing galt is the director. That's always a bad move. Heh. I wonder who was directing him, then.

34 Is it a good flick?

That's all I want to know...

This was funny!

"I am the agenda!"

Keynes vs. Hayek.

35 About 3/4 of the theater full, big applause at the end. The quality is about that of a TV miniseries - IOWs not bad at all for a low budget movie. Glad I went since it's pretty rare that pro freedom arguments actually make their way into a movie these days.

36 From everything I've read and heard about AS, I'll wait until it comes out on DVD to watch it.

As for the quality of the film, there isn't much you do with "only" 10 million setting-wise, and I think we've been a bit spoiled over the past decade with CGI and other "special" effects (I don't find them "special" anymore when they are showing up in virtually all films these days).  

37

Ace, you've made the point before that movies are almost never as good as books, because books are esstentially scripts that we turn into self directed movies in our imagination.

Taking that into account, I came into the film wanting it to be good, willing to give it the benefit of the doubt, however I couldn't recommend it to anyone.

If it gets people to read the book, then great, but that's about the only good thing that could come out of it.

This story have been waiting 50+ years to be made into a movie and it didn't deserve this slapdash half assed effort.

38

Went Friday at 11:45am in San Diego...theater was 3/4s full, applause at the end.

Of course most of us who were there likely went to that showing to support the producers.  I'd be curious as to how full the theater was for the Sunday 8pm showing.

Hollywood's political atmosphere aside, Atlas Shrugged has got to be one bitch of a book to bring to film.  Ayn Rand really wasn't as much of a writer as she was a thinker.  Too much Tolstoy-esque infusion I think.  I don't need four pages to describe what a character is thinking...

 

39 >>There is some melodrama, especially from the actress playing Dagny, but considering that it mostly a movie about two people trying to build train tracks (if you ignore the politics) they kept you fairly engaged. My view is that this is exactly backwards. The story is really an overtly political message loosely wrapped in a story or more accurately a series of metaphors. Most books/movies are stories with an underlying political message but this has never been the case with Atlas Shrugged. This was a political manifesto. The language was always stilted and a tad preachy, the story chock full of magic ( a perpetual motion machine, a hidden valley in Colorado, etc.) but they didn't matter because they were really props to support the political message. I plan on going to see it, this week if I can get my shit together, but I anticipate more of political documentary wrapped in a transparent story so I doubt I will be disappointed. Fountainhead was always a better story and probably (we'll see) movie but I still love Atlas Shrugged for what it is.

40

Haven't seen it, but will this week.  Rotton Tomotoes has 85% viewer positives.  Critics virtually all panned it.

41

Fountainhead was always a better story and probably (we'll see) movie but I still love Atlas Shrugged for what it is.

The Fountainhead movie was pretty bad to. I'm coming to the realization that maybe Ayn Rand novels shouldn't be turned into movies.

42 'Didn't see it (or read it), but I found that clip of Bill Buckley talking about Rand and the book quite entertaining. 

43 I will say that if I'd seen it on TV I might feel differently. Shelling out $21 for two tickets and sitting through what it was... Feelin a bit ripped off actually.

44 I liked the movie a lot. 

The next night I was delivering pizza, and this 20-something  kid in a wife beater says "Don't work too hard, maaan." 

That was the only tip he gave me.

Don't work too hard. Seems like he'd internalized his own advice.

45 Saw it on Friday.  Theater was very full, there was clapping at the end.  There are some funny lines in there, but they are only funny if you're not a looter, which makes the lines even funnier.  It's hard to understand what the looters are up to at times, if you hadn't read the book it is even more difficult.  I saw the movie mainly through the lens of "if I haven't read the book, and I am a mind-numbed 'independent' voter, will I get anything out of this movie?"  I think the answer to that is 'no'.  The movie is mainly for the fans.  But there are enough people who have read the book (what, it's something like the 2nd most popular book in circulation, behind the Bible, right?) that I can't imagine that a low-budget film like this won't make a profit.

46 How bad was it? It was so bad that I didn't even go see it.

47

This story have been waiting 50+ years to be made into a movie and it didn't deserve this slapdash half assed effort.

Posted by: Ben at April 18, 2011 12:54 PM (wuv1c)

Ben, you keep complaining that this wasn't a $200 Million hollywood production. You seem to be forgetting one fact.

The only one's who would make this movie are people that actually expect to make money on it.

48 One scene which I thought was WAY underplayed was the first running of the John Galt Line, which is my favorite scene in the book-- made me misty.  I wish more had been made of that, the images of all the people cheering the train as it went by.

I thought the scenic shots were to reinforce the idea of freedom/openness, as opposed to the closeness and darkness of the lib-ruined cities.  If you notice in the scenes in Reardon's office, it's sleek BUT also wide open.

Then again I am deeply in the tank for Colorado in general and those images almost brought me to tears, so....

49 Going to see it today.  Might suck, might not.

50 Ace, you've made the point before that movies are almost never as good as books, because books are esstentially scripts that we turn into self directed movies in our imagination.

The ONLY time I have liked a movie better than the book is "Forrest Gump."

I include "Gone with the Wind" and "Apollo 13/Lost Moon" in this statement.

51

I'd like to see the story arc from Atlas Shrugged to Planet of the Apes (the good version). 

AS the novel is less of a compelling novel than it's a philosophical treatise.  To me, the story was incidental to the very real (too real) circumstance of a great culture in decline due to intellectual depravity.  I think the plot device (spoiler alert) of wisking everyone away to a hideout in Colorado would cause even Hillary Clinton to suspend disbelief. 

52

robtr. I never said it should be a 200 million production.

This movie could have been made fairly well on the cheap, I think. It is hard to bring 1200 page novels to film, but i think the director and writer did a poor job.

I honestly think HBO or Showtime could have done a better job and made it a ten part series.

It's gonna make money either way. There are devoted fans and sympathizers out there.

I don't think it would have been any better had it cost a billion to make it.

If it isn't well directed or well written, then it can't be good no matter the investment.

53 I include "Gone with the Wind" and "Apollo 13/Lost Moon" in this statement.

Posted by: Filly at April 18, 2011 01:02 PM (0TlXf)

I liked the first Willie Wonka movie better than the book. Shrek was definitely better than the book.

54 That this movie hits the theaters now is enough for me to go see it.  I would have trouble finding anything more uncanny, imo.

55 I thought the filmmakers did a pretty nice job considering the resources at hand and all the obstacles in their way.  Stossel has been following this for awhile and it's been in production for some time, apparently.

My favorite RT critic quote?  "It's too bad this movie seems made only for profit."  On a review.  For ATLAS SHRUGGED.

56 I went on Saturday afternoon in the Dallas area, it was 1/2-3/4s full. It got applause at the end.

I enjoyed it, though you could tell it was not a big budget movie. Can't wait for part II and hopefully part III

57 18 I'll be trying to see it in an evening or two, my original 'Friday Night Movies' plan got scuttled in favor of 'Friday Night Take Cover From Killer Storms'.

On a tangent, I do hope my fellows in the path of that killer from OK to the Atlantic came out in decent shape...

Posted by: AoSHQ's worst commenter, DarkLord© at April 18, 2011 12:45 PM (GBXon)

Has Dear Leader offered condolences or prayers yet? 

Hope to catch the film this week.

58 I just started reading the book last week. Better late than never I guess.

59 That this movie hits the theaters now is enough for me to go see it.  I would have trouble finding anything more uncanny, imo.

The first five minutes are downright chilling in their prescience.

60

 And I'm very predisposed to liking anything by Ayn Rand

That's quite an odd statement. Why would you have this predisposition? You shouldn't have it unless you had read something by her previously and not liked it. But, by your statement one would necessarily have to infer that you were including the first work of hers that you had read, and that you would not have liked it before you read it.

Are some people more influenced by outside, and especially opposing ideological stances, to conform?

...and the movie wasn't by Ayn Rand.

61

I just started reading the book last week. Better late than never I guess.

indeed, i just picked it up on my kindle for a good re-read.

62

I liked the movie.  The way it was shot was nice and the feeling of it all was very much in line with Rand.  The only problem I had with the movie was that they didn't get enough background in to really let the audience (those who hadn't read the book) know what was going on or why individualism was the major force of advancement.  The movie was more of a highlight reel of the first part of the book.  Itappeared as if they just hit every tenth page, and kept true to it, but too much meat was missing.

Even so, it was a good movie and a valiant effort.  I recommend people see it.

63 Went with my wife on Saturday. Very good movie for what it was. As long as you know you're getting just a skim of a sliver of the story then you shouldn't be disappointed. Plenty of cool sets, scenery to occupy your eyeballs between bursts of exposition. The actress who plays Dagny is fantastic (except for one of the earliest scenes with her brother where they both look like they're reading from a 'prompter), and the skeevy politicians are also very well cast.

64 The train is a symbol of the movement of market forces. Seriously, did no one ever take an english lit class? Thought they were required, at least in 8th grade.

65

Saw a Sunday matinee, mostly empty theater on a beautiful San Diego afternoon. I've read the book so I found it hard to judge since I literally saw everything coming. My mom was with me and she hasn't read it; she found it slow at first but absorbing as it went along.

Big problem: the book is great sermonizing but lousy literature, and non-visual at that. Most of the plot moves in conversations.

Movie needs a better script and a better director, but at least it's all watchable. Loved Taylor Schilling.

I posted my review at my much-neglected blog.

66 I saw it. Laughably shitty. My hunch is that more "liberals" than knuckleheads will actually see the film. It's just got everything a liberal would want for a multimillion budget parody of conservative worldviews, spoken in robotic dialogue by actors who are more like anthropomorphic teletype machine-androids programmed with a 1970s Atari game chip and fed heaping amounts of methamphetamine for labor reproduction.

Fucking stupid knuckleheads. Isn't there a new planet of the apes movie coming out?

67 Is the Henry/Dagny sex hot? I wanted to see it this weekend but hubby wants to see it too and the fucking hockey interfered.

68 I'm getting tired of people saying, "Well, It was good CONSIDERING blah blah blah" It wasn't the budget, it wasn't the source material, it wasn't the hostility of Hollywood to the project that made it a bad movie. It was a lack of TALENT on the part of the writers, director, and many actors. Rand of all people would have hated that.

69

The Fountainhead movie was pretty bad to. I'm coming to the realization that maybe Ayn Rand novels shouldn't be turned into movies.

It's more because Rand had strict stipulations about what could and couldn't be cut from the films, for ex. Roark's speech in The Fountainhead, was good yet too long, as she insisted on its entirety.

70 I read the book over 30 years ago and loved it. Whether or not the movie is 'great', by seeing it you are making a philosophical statement (via movie rankings) that this message has a large following. I saw somewhere recently that this book has sold more copies worldwide than any other (I'm guessing that the Bible & the Koran weren't counted).
 
The looters and moochers are already amply covered in filmography as some sort of heroes. Time to give the producers some equal time.

71

Fucking stupid knuckleheads

Sense?

72 I read the book last year.  A screenwriter would have to be pretty slick to catch the true essence of the book.  I'll wait for it to come to the movie list on cable.  Like I said.  I just can't quite imagine this as a movie.

73 I saw it yesterday with my GF, who never even so much as heard of Ayn Rand or her philosophy.  She loved it and could immediately relate the story to today's events.

As for me, I really enjoyed it as a mostly true-to-the-book adaptation, but that is also my main criticism. A really good director, screenwriter, and director of photography could have done wonders to raise the movie experience a few notches. 

I wonder how the hell they're going to pull off Galt's speech.

74 spoken in robotic dialogue by actors who are more like anthropomorphic teletype machine-androids programmed with a 1970s Atari game chip and fed heaping amounts of methamphetamine for labor reproduction.

Fucking stupid knuckleheads. Isn't there a new planet of the apes movie coming out?

Posted by: Charles Fourier at April 18, 2011 01:12 PM (5PiVP)

Kind of like your President Stumblefuck speaking with his 'prompters?

75 spoken in robotic dialogue by actors who are more like anthropomorphic teletype machine-androids programmed with a 1970s Atari game chip and fed heaping amounts of methamphetamine for labor reproduction.

Posted by: Charles Fourier at April 18, 2011 01:12 PM (5PiVP)

Actually, the dialogue was very Mamet-like, as Mamet never lets two people talk over each other.  In Mamet films, all speakers wait their turn to speak. I don't like that, but I've never seen anyone complain about such stypized dialogue mechanics with Mamet, so I figure most people would have little problem with that in Atlas Shrugged (even though it annoyed me a bit).

76

 Is the Henry/Dagny sex hot? I wanted to see it this weekend but hubby wants to see it too and the fucking hockey interfered.

It was very PG, you barely see any thrusting or things like that, however I thought it served its purpose. It would have seemed very out of place for it to be a quasi hardcore sex scene like the type in modern hollywood movies.

77 I'm looking forward to seeing it, just to support the cause if nothing else.  I'm hoping for more, mixed reviews notwithstanding.  I can't help but think it will suffer at least somewhat from the inherent inability of a director to communicate stuff going on behind the scenes.  For example, in the book there is a great description of several on the people on the train, and how their presence there is illustrative of just what's gone wrong in the world.  I can't be sure having not yet seen the movie, but I'm guessing it's impossible to communicate that metaphor?  Still, that's not really a shortcoming, but rather something that just comes with the territory when you reduce a book that grand to film.

Also worth mentioning ... that the picture of Michelle B. on Drudge this morning is certainly MILF-iliscious.  Like Palin, she's really photogenic sometimes given her age.

78 erg is watching something other than tranny porn?  I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not.

79
I'm coming to the realization that maybe Ayn Rand novels shouldn't be turned into movies.
Posted by: Ben at April 18, 2011 12:57 PM

The Ayn Rand philosophy shouldn't be turned into novels -- at least not by Ayn Rand, who is no Dickens. Take it from an English major. Her fiction and even her prose lack artistry.

80 I've been part of the speculation over AS as a movie since I started college, when Robert Redford and Jane Fonda were spoken of seriously for Galt and Dagny. What I have learned is that, had The Three Musketeers not already been done,(in 1921, '33,'42,'48...) its fans would say it could not be. You know, when you read it, it's mostly just people talking. And Victor Hugo? Valjean, please. 1280 pages.

Leave the speeches in, and you're just like Rand. Cut them down, and you're a looter. Include all the subplots, and you're ponderous. Leave out just one, and you've destroyed the true meaning. Forever!

Objectivists being the world's most glorious herd of cats, I can understand and accept this, up to a point. But calling AS "a difficult story with no action"? Someone needs to take either more or less drugs. If you don't see the "action" in that novel, you have a dead soul.

Jesus Christ (OK, she wrote him out at the last minute), there's multiple near-forced zegsual encoonters--postmodern leftists have the exact count!--earth-shattering kabooms galore, the secret X-weapon going off like FuckyouSheema, locomotives flying through the air, a steel mill melting down in mid-pour, a plane crash, pirate raids, death-ray-wielding guerrillas and the half-mythical 1957 female orgasm. That's not counting the flashbacks! Had we but world enough, and time, it would make a hell of a graphic novel comic book. 

Class, did we all read the same book? Yeah, it's about trains, and War and Peace is about Russia. What actually happens in Gatsby, anyway? Coupla parties, mehsex, car crash, only two killings. Dull.

 

81 5 Part III is in doubt, and only a profit on the first two parts will get that a greenlight.
_________

Perhaps they can get that FedEx commercial guy to read John Galt's speech to shorten part 3 up a bit.

82

It would have seemed very out of place for it to be a quasi hardcore sex scene like the type in modern hollywood movies.

Good. I don't like that anyway. The hottest thing Hollywood ever filmed was the Captain touching Maria's face in the gazebo or Rhett carrying Scarlett up the stairs.

83 Is the Henry/Dagny sex hot? I wanted to see it this weekend but hubby wants to see it too and the fucking hockey interfered.

Posted by: dagny at April 18, 2011 01:12 PM (i5MDY)

 

Most importantly.  Do they show Dagny's tits? 

84 After all these years eggmcmuffin still manages to get AoS'ers to dance.

85
Is the Henry/Dagny sex hot? I wanted to see it this weekend but hubby wants to see it too and the fucking hockey interfered.

The hockey was probably hotter. The Henry/Dagny relationship itself was pretty cold.

86 As I understand it, it does not follow the arc of the book: Dagny flashes back to rough jailbait sex with D'Anconia Dagny had rough extramarital sex with Reardon Dagny has rough sex with Galt If there isn't a scene where Reardon donkey-punches Dagny and stubs out a lit Chesterfield on her ass, while Dagny waxes rhapsodic for five minutes about being swept away by his powerful, animalistic monkey-sex needs, then this isn't Ayn Rand's vision. Fuckin' PASS.

87

I'm coming to the realization that maybe Ayn Rand novels shouldn't be turned into movies.
Posted by: Ben at April 18, 2011 12:57 PM

The Ayn Rand philosophy shouldn't be turned into novels -- at least not by Ayn Rand, who is no Dickens. Take it from an English major. Her fiction and even her prose lack artistry.

Yeah, but books like Atlas Shrugged or Thus Spoke Zarathustra aren't meant to be simply stand alone stories, but rather vehicles used to teach philosophy to people that otherwise can't or don't want to read boring philosophical tracts.

Also, English was her second language and she was a russian. Russians all tend to write in a similar fashion in terms of prose.

88 Fucking stupid knuckleheads.

Ahhh. I remember way back when watching a politically charged indie flick made on a shoestring budget was considered cultured, nuanced, and highbrowed. How the critics would rave, overlooking a few flaws unavoidable due to the nature of the production, and express how brave and effective the film was in conveying a message! O' for the good old days of March.

89 Loved it, the faults are fairly minor, well except for Dagny's Darth Vader moment.  The GF who has never heard of Ayn Rand loved the movie too.

90 16 I saw the pron version: Atlas Tugged
______

I saw the informercial for footwear: At last, Ugged!

91
A screenwriter would have to be pretty slick to catch the true essence of the book. 
Posted by: Soona at April 18, 2011 01:13 PM

Yes, and that's not too much to ask.

92 Further, this is $10 million pissed away while we're losing the Porn Race to the Chinese, who just released the world's first 3D fuck-flick. This IS a third-world shithole.

93

Loved it, the faults are fairly minor, well except for Dagny's Darth Vader moment.  The GF who has never heard of Ayn Rand loved the movie too.

Yeah, i mentioned this on friday's ont. I couldn't help but think of the ending of Star Wars Episode III.

94 I think AS is transformative. It's not meant to be "art", thank God.  It's a warning. Her characters are well developed and her story here is epic. I knew the libtards would miss the point but it's unfortunate that others will too out of some misplaced sense of their own superiority. I would imagine that a film cannot do it justice but if it succeeds at all in imparting only part of the warning, then it has done it's job.

95
Yeah, but books like Atlas Shrugged or Thus Spoke Zarathustra aren't meant to be simply stand alone stories, but rather vehicles used to teach philosophy to people that otherwise can't or don't want to read boring philosophical tracts.

Pretty much my point. Message-first fiction always suffers artistically, whether it's lefty or righty or otherwisey.

96 I saw Atlas Shrugged Sunday and it was good. Much of the dialogue is pulled word for word from the book. I found the audio cds posted on this new website called "Youtube"? I never listen to other peoples opinions of movies, as the entirety of mankinds opinions suck nearly as bad as their taste in music and their driving skills.

97 That Zarathustra book stank on ice, though.

98

I never listen to other peoples opinions of movies, as the entirety of mankinds opinions suck nearly as bad as their taste in music and their driving skills.

excellent

99 I'm coming to the realization that maybe Ayn Rand novels shouldn't be turned into movies.

You know what would be a HUGE hit?  The movie version of "Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology"

100 'hooley, you mean it was cold in the book? That would be an interesting perception. They moved it out of the diesel engine, which is, more or less, a fundamental change, in sex anyway. When you say "the tunnel scene," some people think of the munitions train. There's another one. Sorry, that comes later.

I missed the flashbacks of Dagny and Eddie Willers growing up together. Given the eensy-weensy spin they put on Eddie's visuals, that could have been a lot of fun. The kind of fun I know Rand would have enjoyed, too.

She never ate the damn hamburger sandwich, and I can't forgive that. 

Cars, so far, lame Lincolns, though there's a foreshadowing when Akston asks about the mileage. Not a Hammond to be seen, which is going to spoil Hank's famous Philadelphia drive, perhaps my favorite passage. 

101 Class, did we all read the same book? Yeah, it's about trains, and War and Peace is about Russia. What actually happens in Gatsby, anyway? Coupla parties, mehsex, car crash, only two killings. Dull.

 

Posted by: comatus at April 18, 2011 01:18 PM (W5ilH)

 

The movie Giant was from basically the same line as AS.  It was well done and entertaining, even for a ten year old kid (me).  I'm hoping that the beginning credits give ample exposure to the book.  Perhaps the movie will generate more readers of the book since the name is well-known, even for lefties.

102 People actually made those "Girl who bit a hornet's ass" or whatever best sellers. They sucked floppy donkey dick, which most people will admit, if you say it first.

103 Haven't seen it yet.. are there any Colorado morons itching to go?

104

 but considering that it mostly a movie about two people trying to build train tracks .

...and the Seventh Seal was just about some dude playing chess against some other dude wearing a black hoodie.

jeebus....this guy is taking the "moron" title quite literally

105 Remember older moron/ettes, Ben is young and doesn't believe B& W movies are worth watching (gives you an idea of his film appreciation background).  So take his advice for whatever it's worth.  When you grow up with CGI effects and Stars Wars type imagery you can't appreciate a different type of film.  For Gawd's sake they only had $20 million to make it of PRIVATE money.

Don't get me wrong, I like Ben but with this review not so much.

106 There was a movie once about a boat sinking that won best picture.

107 Saw it yesterday in Omaha, theater half-full, applause at the end.....for what they had to spend, I liked it.

Theater manager said the response had been quite a bit better than expected, and short of political interference from upstairs, they would likely be expanding its stay at the theater.

108 I will wait for the DVD. I have read the book 3x in my life (yes, I am older than dirt). First in high school, then 20 years later, then after that socialist douchebag won the election in '08.

109 I've only read part of the book, but I thought the movie was pretty good. Since I haven't read the whole thing I don't know where they differed from the book, but the thing that I thought comes across is that the govt. that wants to control everything and put the productive people out of business are a bunch of irredeemable idiots.

110 I can't that HA Ed liked it. I rarely agree with him.

111 We have two AS videos posted now on Common Cents...

Steve
Common Cents
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

112 From the box office report (per box office mojo) it looks like it did really well... it was only in 300 theaters and had a per screen average of over $5,500, which puts in third place for the weekend in those terms (behind Rio and Scream.) Not that deadline hollywood or Variety, etc., is talking about it... they must have an entertain-o-list agreement to ignore it.

113 Other Ayn Rand films you may not have seen yet:

Love Letters (Joseph Cotten, Jennifer Jones). The Elvis song came from that one. And my favorite Scotch.
You Came Along (Robert Cummings, Lizabeth Scott). Another great entry in The American Songbook! Maybe Pt III should be a musical!
We, The Living (Rossano Brazzi). Made without her permission in Italy. Later, paid for the famous mink coat. Kicks Zhivago's ass.

Her play knocked them dead on B'way, too. That's Earl, brother.
Alisa Rosenbaum was a screenwriter, a good one, in demand despite her annoying demands. AS is without a doubt the most visual, filmatically-conceived novel you will ever read. It's just that she liked very long speeches. yYess! She vas a Roosian!

Incidentally, I've timed the "interminable" defense speech in Fountainhead. It's less than five minutes. Jeff Bridges talks longer in Tucker.

114 Better question is, did anyone watch the Game of Thrones?

115 Saw it Saturday. Big theater, about 1/3 to 1/2 full. The only laughter that would have irritated the filmakers (there were a few intentionally funny bits) was at the crackpot-science explanation of the magic engine. A lot of applause when the movie ended. Me, I liked it. It was fun to see lots of good scenes from the book come to life. The actors nailed it. I was wondering how they would handle the loooooooong speeches in the book. They cleverly skipped those completely*. But they made their points. I enjoyed the background details. For example, there was a truck with a bread line. The sign on the truck said "Department of Redistribution". (that was one of the bits that got a few laughs). I was discussing the movie with a friend and he kept asking my the govt. guys did this or that since it was stupid and would hurt the economy. I kept explaining that they were looters and didn't give a damn if their laws and regulations hurt the economy so long as it helped themselves and their cronies. He finally got it. And that's the main relevance of the movie to today. *another example. The decline and fall of 20th century motors is a big chapter in the book. That got summarized to about 30 seconds of exposition in the movie... and it worked!

116 We really has a chance to see a good story that turns out the objectiveist philosophy in the Sword of Truth series. But they turned it into a sword and tit extravaganza that totally left out ALL of the theory.

I have noting against tits on screen or sword fighting, but porn is better for tits and old Errol Flynn movies are better for sword fighting.

As far as I was concerned they totally ruined that series.

117 Also, ref the reviews. It's amazing to see the reviews on the compilation sites. The professional critics are overwhelmingly negative, the viewers LOVE it.

118 Fountainhead was always a better story and probably (we'll see) movie but I still love Atlas Shrugged for what it is.

The Fountainhead was a horrendous movie... over the hill Gary Cooper, playing a young Howard Roark... a bizarre casting it's an epically bad movie.

119

I saw it Friday night with some of the local Morons.  We were in a Seattle suburb as we could not get the needed permits to all be inside the Seattle city limits at the same time.  Quotas and all.

I took the kid, 11 who made the comment, is this the movie about making money as we entered the theater.  He also commented this does not appear to be a kid movie as he saw there were no other kids in the theater. 

All and all, I enjoyed it, recognizing it was not a big budget flick and having fairly low expectations walking in.  Loved the Reardon character, thought the Dagney character was lacking.

120 @122, Don't leave us hanging. How did the 11-yr-old like it?

As we've all been told for 54 years, the 11 year old mind is the key to Objectivism.

121 My wife and I saw it Saturday, have both read the book, and liked it. Theater most full I've seen in a long time. Clapping at end. Can't wait for Part II. I usually don't give a shit about movie reviewers opinions. I go to movies once in a while for my entertainment not theirs. I wouldn't recommend it for people that don't believe in the message...you know... capitalism, individualism, limited government and freedom. There's a reason the left hates this movie.

122 According to Big Hollywood, Atlas Shrugged part 1 has made $1.7 million over the weekend on just 300 screens, mostly indie moviehouses. It only cost $10 million to make so it should make that up pretty easily in its theatrical release.

123 "94 Further, this is $10 million pissed away while we're losing the Porn Race to the Chinese, who just released the world's first 3D fuck-flick. This IS a third-world shithole. Posted by: Empire of Jeff at April 18, 2011 01:24 PM (FI38b)" We must not tolerate the existence of a porn gap!

124 @117, Comrade, I'm going to very respectfully disagree with you on a point, and that's out of character for me. "looters ...didn't give a damn if their laws and regulations hurt the economy so long as it helped themselves and their cronies" is not the point. You make them sound like mere Machine Democrats. Or the Honey Badger.

The depravity that Rand found sickening was selflessness, altruism. She'd be willing to stipulate that every bad-actor thought they were following the very highest principles, not just gaming the system. It was that desire to equalize that she said was the ultimate sin against the human character. And, I will admit, this film was a little soft on that message. Or maybe we're all 50-some years more cynical now.

125
'hooley, you mean it was cold in the book?
------------

No, the movie. I wasn't dying for them to get in bed, the way I was Lizzie Bennett and Mr. Darcy in the BBC's Pride and Prejudice.

126

Remember older moron/ettes, Ben is young and doesn't believe B& W movies are worth watching (gives you an idea of his film appreciation background).  So take his advice for whatever it's worth.  When you grow up with CGI effects and Stars Wars type imagery you can't appreciate a different type of film.  For Gawd's sake they only had $20 million to make it of PRIVATE money.

Don't get me wrong, I like Ben but with this review not so much

You like me? Excellent.

I don't intend my review to be anything other than that, my review.

I can't suggest people see it because I thought it was bad.

Also, I didn't say I hated Black and White films, I just said I'm not big on pre 1950 films with a few notable exceptions.

I don't care about CGI either.It's not an argument i made against the film.

I've seen low budget films that have better production value, it just takes a good director to squeeze the most out of it. The person who directed this, and cast himself as the most powerful character, isn't that guy.

My main criticism has nothing to do with the money spent, but the director and writers.

I said above, it could have been made for a billion dollars and still been bad.

They simply cut too much and dumbed it down too much. There were too many scenes that did not follow one another as well as they did in the book.

The acting was decent, as i said above, but that was the only redeeming quality.

I wanted this movie to be good, it's not my fault I thought that it wasn't.

127 The movie was a lot better than I thought it would be. I enjoyed it a lot. I had a few quibbles with directorial choices, one conversation Dagney had just felt off. Also, maybe the writers could have taken advantage of exposition of the books and just include characters to make a point, like the friendship between Wyatt and the other railroad could have been done with actual actors and a scene. Get out there and see it, people.

128 I saw it Friday night in San Antonio.  The event was truly unique.  The crowd was mostly aged from their 40's -60's with a smattering of younger viewers.  At least one person came in wearing a t-shirt with "Who id John Gault?" written upon it.  How cool is that?

It was almost like a family gathering before the movie with groups of people talking both about the book, what they hoped the move to be, and politics in general.  IT was pretty cool.

The movie was far better than I expected.  I would give it a B+.  The producer did a great job in displaying in actions what was only thoughts in the book at times.

FANTASTIC JOB!!!  I can't wait for the DVD and part 2.

129 Beedubya, I've read almost all of Rand's published works and I can say I am a fan of her work and of her philosophy. That's why I said I'm "predisposed" to liking anything by Rand. When I watch a movie adapted from an existing literary work, I assume that the author's vision should be on the screen, (good) directors and screenwriters notwithstanding. Not all filmmakers respect the original author's work. One has only to watch Bonfire of the Vanities to see what a charlie foxtrot DePalma and the studio made from a great novel.

130 Yeah, Fountainhead may be epically bad, but it had them rutting in the seats back in '49. That movie broke up marriages -- including Cooper's.

Ben WTF with the scream thing? I thought all you kids loved movie screams. Have you seen King Kong (or more accurately, heard Fay Wray?) That was a hell of a scream right there. And, as I've had to point out to you before, it's note for note from page 339. Did you want them to change it? I found it one of her better lines. Shorter, longer, what?

131 16 I saw the pron version: Atlas Tugged
______

I saw the informercial for footwear: At last, Ugged!

I  saw the recovering liberal version: Alas, mugged.

132 Not enough RINO heroes or bath house scenes.

133 Good God NO, I won't be seeing this adaptation of the turgid, steaming pile of pseudo-literary bilge of a book. Randroids can worship her all they like (and I may even agree with some of the notions she cared enough about to pound out a 1000+ page "novel" about them), but I found the Atlas Shrugged book so dreadful that I packed it in about a third of the way through -- and I really wanted to finish the damn thing, if for no other reason than to say I plowed through it all, but ultimately I just couldn't hack it. If the film is anywhere near as starkly horrid, I plan on staying far away from it.

134 I really liked it -- but my favorite movies are Scrooged, The Thing, Airplane, Alien, and Three Amigos, so I'm not exactly an expert in high drama. Of the negative criticism I've read, the most constructive is a post from today at filmschoolrejects.com, arguing the movie could and should have followed the book more closely. Worth a read.

135 Saw it with a friend who thinks O is basically a good man but just having a bit of trouble right now - whatever that means. She's never read the book so she had no idea what was going to happen. She saw it more as a movie - a strong, good looking man in a crappy marriage and Dagny as his mistress. I went to see the book come alive and it kinda did. I did not expect great cinema and wasn't disappointed. I did not want to see big name stars, I did not want to see a love story. I went to see Atlas Shrugged and I saw it. I will go to see Atlas Shrugged pt 2 and expect the same.

136 I'm stuck on the vision of our commenter Dagny taking her husband to see a movie where her idol, Dagny T., humps the crap out of another woman's husband.

Sounds like the setup for a cuckolding porn story, probably ending with hubby forced into a new life as a tranny hooker. Which would probably delight erg, but gross out everyone else.

137

The 11 year old liked it fine although he expressed it was not his first choice of movies to see when we got there.

His mom, the ex, is a public school teacher, so it was important to me that he went.  We had previously listened to the book on CD during car trips so he was aware of the story.

138

I loved it. And I'm not even a big fan of movies; they usually bore me within 5 minutes and I go do something else. In fact, this is the first time I've been to a theater in 10 years.

I know some people thought it was melodramatic and hokey but I found it moving. I identified with the protagonists. I even got choked up at the end and felt the pain of loss at seeing somebody's life's work destroyed. I felt the same way I did at the end of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. I thought it was a very...human movie.

139

Ben WTF with the scream thing? I thought all you kids loved movie screams. Have you seen King Kong (or more accurately, heard Fay Wray?) That was a hell of a scream right there. And, as I've had to point out to you before, it's note for note from page 339. Did you want them to change it? I found it one of her better lines. Shorter, longer, what?


no, i understand it was in the book, but I can't help the fact that my mind immediately went to the ending of Star War III when Vader screams NOOOO.

I don't know. There were laughs in the theater at that part.  Maybe I'm being too harsh, which is entirely possible. To be honest, it wasn't as bad as the phone message recording. That killed the vibe at the end of the movie. The sign left by Ellis was enough

It wasn't my biggest complaint, but since we're having a discussion i thought i would bring it up.

140 I liked it for the most part. The critics are being unduly harsh, IMO. Part II has *not* been filmed. Producer John Aglialoro says he will see how Part I does and then make a decision about continuing. His expectations seem a tad high - in one interview he speculated that the movie just might outgross The Passion of the Christ. (!) But it doesn't have to do all that well to turn a profit. Far from being melodramatic, I thought the movie toned down the novel's melodrama and dialogue considerably. I would have preferred a little more emotion, especially in the early scenes. But the maiden run of the John Galt Line was terrific, and the movie builds to a strong climax. And I had no problem with Dagny's scream.

141 I wouldn't support Hollywood by watching this in any case, but I definitely would not otherwise get hooked into the video version until or unless I am absolutely assured that the final part is not some queer-bait musical!

142 The bottom line is that people should go see this to both enjoy the delicious collectivist take-downs and to encourage the making of movies that are not essentially marxist propaganda. There are issues that can be brought up, as far as how well it was done in various respects, but it's really quite watchable dispite those things - they're not that big a deal.

143 Lemme help you out:

Theatre = not me.  no.

DVD on bargain rack?  maybe.

Ayn Rand?  Not a fracking chance.  The first two pages of the book are enough to put one in a sound sleep for a thousand years.

John Galt?  Yep.  Let's all do the Galt. But don't ask me to torture myself.

144

I saw it in Albany NY yesterday at 5PM.  The place was 50% full and there was applause at the end.  This in the blue blue blue capitol of New York State.  I enjoyed it and would love to see part two.  Went with a friend who has no political leanings. She didn't hate it but didn't understand it.  I explained it and she liked it better.  Still amazes me how people ignore what this government is doing.  They will wake up, but not in a good way.

145 Well, I never saw Star Wars III so the scream didn't bother me at all. I'm sure I've seen other movies where a character screamed "NOOOO!" I thought it fit the scene and the actress did it well.

146 I missed the Friday ONT where the movie was discussed, so I put my review in the Saturday ONT (#411). Later I saw that some more reviews had been added to the Friday ONT, so I reposted it there (#57 . Now that there's a dedicated Atlas Shrugged thread, I feel the need to post it yet again. This is the last time, I promise. I'm not spamming, honest! --- I missed last night's thread where Atlas Shrugged was discussed, and was distressed by Ben's negative reaction, so I'll offer my rebuttal here. I've seen it twice and I loved it. (I decided to do that a while ago if I liked it, in order to give it a big opening weekend.) If anything, I liked it more the second time. On Friday night the theater was 1/3 full, which was disappointing. Tonight there were even fewer people, but there was a raging downpour going on which might have depressed turnout. Both nights, the audience applauded at the end. I read Atlas Shrugged in 1997 and I've read almost everything Rand published, including her philosophical essays. I first discovered her when I was almost 40, so her ideas were not an adolescent infatuation in my case. In fact, I didn't get around to reading AS until after I'd already read most of her other stuff. For a long time I couldn't imagine how a movie could be made from that book, it was so densely packed with characters, plot, and ideas. In addition, the book was published in 1957 when railroads were still a major form of transportation. They were soon surpassed by trucks and airlines, and most of the old railroads went out of business. So I was puzzled about how they were going to handle the time frame. If it was set in 1957, many younger people would regard it as a period piece with little relevance for today. If it was set in the present day, then how could a railroad be depicted as a vitally important industry? The filmmakers solved that problem by tacking on a beginning that explained that the Middle East had melted down, causing oil prices to skyrocket and making trains once again the most cost-effective means of transportation. Then they dove straight into the book. I thought that was a stroke of genius which was elegant in its simplicity. The filmmakers ruthlessly pared the book down to its essentials. It's only an hour and 40 minutes long, which I thought was shockingly brief. Yes, I would have preferred it to be about 3 hours, but who else other than Rand fans would have gone to see it? A 9-part TV miniseries would have been even better, but there was only so much money available. The point is to get as many eyeballs in the theater as possible. You're not going to do that with long, intricate philosophical discussions. That's what books are for. Movies are for telling entertaining stories. I was initially skeptical when I first heard about this project, but I am very pleased with the result. I think they did about as good a job as could be done. This movie must succeed. Our country needs for it to succeed. The timing of its release could not be better. It's--dare I say--Providential. These kinds of ideas must be spread to as many people as possible. Lots of people have heard of Atlas Shrugged but have never read it. If this movie sparks interest in some of those people to investigate Ayn Rand further, it will have done its job. This movie will be a hit if I have to drive the damn thing myself.

147 Ben, maybe the difference is that you went in with high expectations while I went in with low expectations, although the two scenes I saw online beforehand made me think that it might be better than I feared. I was feeling pretty optimistic by the time I got to the theater. I just think that it's more important that the movie be seen by people who have never read Rand than appeal to those who are already die-hard Rand fans.

148 I actually loved the film.  The acting was so-so, except for Reardon who was brilliant.  Of course, I loved the book and am a true believer in the individual and of smaller government.  We went to an afternoon matinee.  The theater was 1/2 full but did draw applause at the end.  Sadly, few young people were in the audience.  They really need to hear this message.  I look forward to Part II and plan on re-reading the book prior to its showing.

149 Saw AS opening night. Loved it. Will go again. Audience was enthusiastic and applauded at the end.

150 I wish it was longer. They tried to jam too much into 103 minutes.

151 Some very negative reviews here Friday nearly kept me away. My wife and I went to the Sunday matinee (small crowd) and we loved it. They actually made a film of Atlas Shrugged!  It moves fast and has mystery and suspense.  I got misty-eyed at the scream of "Nooo!" 

152 I thought it was a good movie.

I will now be using this as a reference to check out movie critics.  I will never look at the tomato meter again.  Movie critics are even more liberal than average for the msm.  Avoid the critics with the sploded head.

153 Sockpuppet reset