Atlas Shrugged a HUGE Letdown

[JsJs24]

TweetI hate to say it but I feel the movie was terrible. It didn't show Ayn Ran's objectivist philosophy at all. The acting was okay at best, and not convincing at all. I would not have chosen the lead actors for the characters they played. The movie theater was almost full, and the audience did clap at the end, but I don't see how anyone who has read the book could say this was a good movie at all.

Keep in mind that I am a HUGE Ayn Rand fan, and Atlas Shrugged is by far my favorite book. That should tell you how much I wanted this to be a good movie, but it fell way short. I am actually going to recommend to my friends to not see it and instead read the book. The book is a must read, but Trip is right about it being a tough one to bring to the screen. The right producer with the right budget and actors could have pulled it off I imagine, but it would have to be shot in either a 10 hour miniseries, or 3 or 4 three hour movies. I would say they made it to about page 800 in 1 hour and 42 minutes. Needless to say they missed a lot of important parts. And there is not one articulate conversation in the entire movie. In the book, a character doesn't speak without being extremely articulate.

[FUZO]

TweetThat sucks but I'll still go see it

[JsJs24]

Tweet

That sucks but I'll still go see it

That's cool but make sure you get the book and read it. This movie is in no way a good depiction of the book. The book can be life changing for many, but this movie will not have any impact on one's views at all.

[daved150]

Tweetmovies, in my experience, are NEVER close to being as good as the book. i know what your saying and i bet, becouse of your fondness for the book, you were not going to be satisfied regardless.....its like me with tom clancy books/movies. just as an example, i actually picture harrison ford as jack ryan!! i was so pumped when i reaad cear and presant danger was coming out and they actually casted harrison ford!! i was disappointed BIG TIME!! but...i learned i hjave to lower my expectations for the movie adaption of books.... sorry it sucked for you bro. i know you were looking forward to it

[trip]

Tweetsorry man, it's a sucky feeling when that happens

you noticed articulation, my thoughts were in the book stuff is big, grand, always mission critical, and it would be hard too show both of those and keep the theme

i haven't seen the social network, but it 's probably closer and timely too the point

[Dzone]

TweetThanks for sharing your experience JSJS. Its good to hear about it before I see the movie so I am not super let down. Maybe the low budget was just too constrictive.
Some of the scenes in that movie were filmed just 10 minutes from my house. So, even if it is just to see those scenes, I will go and see it later today.

I'm reading the book right now for the first time. So far it is good.

[JsJs24]

Tweet

Thanks for sharing your experience JSJS. Its good to hear about it before I see the movie so I am not super let down. Maybe the low budget was just too constrictive.
Some of the scenes in that movie were filmed just 10 minutes from my house. So, even if it is just to see those scenes, I will go and see it later today.

I'm reading the book right now for the first time. So far it is good.

Continue reading and enjoy it. The problem with the movie is too low budget, crammed too many scened into a short time frame, and no articulation among the characters. The reason Rand is able to convince the reader so much is due to her brilliant writing style. Her characters all come across as intelligent and well spoken. Not so in the movie.

[JsJs24]

Tweet

movies, in my experience, are NEVER close to being as good as the book. i know what your saying and i bet, becouse of your fondness for the book, you were not going to be satisfied regardless.....its like me with tom clancy books/movies. just as an example, i actually picture harrison ford as jack ryan!! i was so pumped when i reaad cear and presant danger was coming out and they actually casted harrison ford!! i was disappointed BIG TIME!! but...i learned i hjave to lower my expectations for the movie adaption of books.... sorry it sucked for you bro. i know you were looking forward to it

Actually it really is as bad as I am saying it is. I'm pretty fair when it comes to judging a movie. For what it's worth, 1984 the movie, is excellent, and just like the book. This was no 1984.

[JsJs24]

Tweet

sorry man, it's a sucky feeling when that happens

you noticed articulation, my thoughts were in the book stuff is big, grand, always mission critical, and it would be hard too show both of those and keep the theme

i haven't seen the social network, but it 's probably closer and timely too the point

The articulation is quite necessary in Atlas imo. Btw, The Social Network is excellent. One of best of the year. I have to give The King's Last Speech the top spot though.

[ROAD WARRIOR]

TweetSucks to hear, Js. Hearing this from you is very valid to me, as I know you are a huge A Rand fan like myself. Guess I'll wait for the video.

[trip]

Tweet

The articulation is quite necessary in Atlas imo. Btw, The Social Network is excellent. One of best of the year. I have to give The King's Last Speech the top spot though.

my point was how two people who have read the book see it differently, you're big on articulation, for me that is one of those things i guess i don't even notice cause i read so many books my expectation is to be articulate, especially when u have passionate smart characters

like i said, taking the style and mood of the book and making it visual, cause in the book imho her writing presents a very specific visual at least too me, the contrast of the verbal articulation into contrast to how she presents the visual imho enhances the theme and point of her book

internet = railroad, so it's more a background of the story

i bet u could come up with 3 present day scenarios for a john galt in today's socieity, they might have been better going that route, making it contenporary but all true to the books ideals

gosh u just had the biggest financial crisis in history, there has to be a john galt somehwere in all that fiasco

[JsJs24]

Tweet

my point was how two people who have read the book see it differently, you're big on articulation, for me that is one of those things i guess i don't even notice cause i read so many books my expectation is to be articulate, especially when u have passionate smart characters

like i said, taking the style and mood of the book and making it visual, cause in the book imho her writing presents a very specific visual at least too me, the contrast of the verbal articulation into contrast to how she presents the visual imho enhances the theme and point of her book

internet = railroad, so it's more a background of the story

i bet u could come up with 3 present day scenarios for a john galt in today's socieity, they might have been better going that route, making it contenporary but all true to the books ideals

gosh u just had the biggest financial crisis in history, there has to be a john galt somehwere in all that fiasco

I think intellectual would have been a better word to describe what it lacks. I just finished reading the article about the movie in Reason Magazine (a Libertarian mag I subscribe to). The author of the article felt the same way as far as lacking the emotional and intellectual aspects of the characters. However, he didn't go as far as to say it was not going to be a good movie. He sat in on some of the filming and got to meet the actors, but listed some of the positives and negatives of what he witnessed. I feel it wasn't a terrible movie by any means, but did not do any justice in presenting Rand's objectivist ideology.

As for the setting of the movie, I would have kept if to the book with the date around the 1940s. The railroad and steel industry posing as the key industries of the time does not go well in the the year 2016, which the movie is cast in.

I can't think of any John Galts today. However, I believe Ron Paul is today's Thomas Jefferson.

[JsJs24]

Tweet

Sucks to hear, Js. Hearing this from you is very valid to me, as I know you are a huge A Rand fan like myself. Guess I'll wait for the video.

I would like to think my review of the movie would not be too far off from what any other Rand fans and readers of her books would feel. However, I shouldn't recommend not seeing it to be fair. I want the movie to succeed, but my hope is that it gets people to read the book that haven't. For those of us who have I feel the movie is a fun way to see the characters brought to life, but at the same time I believe they failed short in doing so. Maybe my expectations were set too high. Maybe the movie wasn't that bad. It did get applause from the audience at the end. And though I felt it rushed through too much too fast, according to the article I read, it ended precisely where part 1 in the book ended. Now that I think about it that is correct. It's just such a long book that an hour and forty minutes seemed way to short to cover that amount of the story. But the worst part of it for me was the actors didn't live up to their part, at least most of them didn't. I feel Rearden was played well, though he didn't have the look I expected. I wasn't at all impressed with Dagny, though the actress did do a pretty good job. I would have liked Angelina Jolie to play it as was discussed in 2007. The Rearden family was portrayed well, and so were the politicians. However, the actor for James Taggart was a horrible pick. It's a tossup between d'Anconia and James Taggart for the worst chosen actors. D' Anconia didn't even have an accent.

It feels weird talking up a movie so much and then giving it a bad review. In that sense I would recommend seeing it just in case I am being too critical. I do hold that book in high regard, and without the intellectual build up of the characters it could not impress me too much. I have seen plenty of good movies that were based on books. 1984 was excellent and just like the book. Thus, I felt it was possible to do so with Atlas. But in defense of the film they had a strict timeline to stick to or they would lose the rights to the movie; production had to start by June 15, 2010. It was shot in 27 days on a budget of $10 million dollars not including advertising costs, at the complete expense of the father of the movie, John Aglialoro, CEO of Cybex exercise equipment, and a fan of Atlas Shrugged.

[horsepwr]

Tweetdamn! 27 days! that's screamin, isn't it? Movies usually take a few months to shoot, right?

I haven't even read Atlas Shrugged, but Ayn Rand's objectivism is a very strict, straight & simple philosophy. Again. Me no read any of Rand's fiction. I've only got bits & small pieces of her philosophy while at the Book store with the wife.
Objectivism though. You have subjective, & objective. I love her & her philosophy because of what it is. Objectivism. Can't argue with that. You must agree. and understand. I love the simplicity. Objective. Only what is. Reality. Truth. But...there's that action, thought or idea that could change the objective future. But, future is subjective. isn't it? It's not real. Yet. Or, even set in stone. The word 'future' has an objective definition. But the actual future is very subjective.

[horsepwr]

TweetI'd sure like to get Shrugged on CD. or CDs. uh-hmm...or jump drive.???
someone was talking about sending me....who was that?...