ATLAS SHRUGGED movie (part 1) Premiers April 15, 2011!

This took me by surprise. I 'd heard rumors about it for a while, but apparently the movie (at least part one) has been made. No major studios involved, it had a $10 million dollar budget paid for by John Aglialoro. No major actors involved either, as far as I know. So far, the reviews are excellent. Barbara Brandon (author of a biography of Ayn Rand) said:

I am delighted, overwhelmed, and stunned.

Yesterday, I saw Atlas Shrugged Part I, the movie. In advance, I was tense and worried. What if it was terrible? In that case, no one would consider a remake for years, if ever. I didn’t think it would be terrible, especially after I saw a clip from the film : the scene where Rearden comes home to his family after the first pouring of Rearden Metal. The scene was very good indeed. But….

The movie is not so-so, it is not OK, it is not rather good — it is spectacularly good. ​

All the other reviews I've seen so far are equally glowing. Check out the trailer:
http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/atlas-shrugged-movie-trailer
And here's another scene from the movie:
http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/atlas-shrugged-movie-scene-henry-rearden-comes-home

For the first time ever, I'm actually looking forward to April 15th!

http://www.AtlasShruggedPart1.com​

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Before you finish spurting in your jeans, let me say that I found the production clips hurried, trite, and boring. The interiors are of a dreary mausoleum. Rearden is the rearend. Atlas Shreked.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

:bugeye:

Well THAT one way to put it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

As for me, I'm greatly looking forward to seeing the movie

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'd be amazed if the depth and the sub-plots translate to film properly. Too much material to do justice to...

 

I'll give it a look see when it comes out but as randwolf said the book is going to very hard to beat.

 

Mark my words: It will suck (at least in comparison to the book). There's no way a two or three hour movie could do justice to that book.

If someone wants to make Atlas Shrugged, it needs to be a 12 part mini-series or something.

 

Randian philosophy aside. I found the book to be one of my favorites. I loved Dagny's story and I found the whole "alternate universe" thing to be compelling. Hopefully the movie won't destroy the image.

~String

 

Nope. Just saw the preview. Stupid.

Half of the power of Dagny is lost in the fact that it takes place in modern times. Today, it's no big deal for a female to run a major industrial conglomerate. Back in the early 50's it was. Also, railroads don't have the same power as they did in the 40's and 50's. Yes, they are a big deal, but the romantic imagery they possessed doesn't exist in modern times. Plus, some of the imagery Rand created just doesn't translate into anything that exists in our era. It should have been done as a throwback piece to an alternate 1950's. Besides! This sort of thing works great on film.

FAIL!

Ugh.

~String

 

Was Zac Efron in it?

And I didn't know that they weren't doing it as a throwback. The idea of a hidden town doesn't really work in an age when you can turn on your computer and go to Google Earth and look at what your neighbors have in their backyards.

 

this seems like a poor idea. in my opinion the book wasn't very good( everyone that I have seen applaud the book is idealogically sympathatic toward the philsophy espoused in it) it was long overly windy, and kind of preachy to me.

also movies based on books are rarely as good as the book. many a movie based on a good strong book have done poorly so a bad book pretty much dooms it. atlas shrugged not that great of a book. yes movie based on bad books have done well( twilight cough) but outside of ideological sympathitics seeing over and over like the nutters over twilight its probably going to tank.

 

true the longer a book is the harder it is to turn to a movie as you have to cut more out.

 

Maybe you should read some reviews by people other than committed Objectivists:

http://www.slate.com/id/2287075/

Also, they're making, what, three of these things? Good luck with that - there's very little plot action in the novel to begin with, so unless audiences want to sit through entire movies of ideological diatribe I can't see it working.

 

The book is fucking terrible. It's a bad romance novel with several hundred pages of heavy-handed ideological lecturing shoehorned in every possible place. Basically what you'd expect from an bourgeoise Russian emigre who fled the Bolsheviks to take up a career writing shlock romance films in the USA.

 

Also, if we accept Rand's idea that profit is the true measure of value, and these movies fail - what does that say about Atlas Shrugged? Or will it just be the fault of the movie producers? Or of the public at large?

 

don't i know it I consider rand's books to be worse than some of the worst crap out there.

 

the greatest quote about the book atlas shrugged

 

just watched the trailer and all I can say is crap.


it either a piss poor attempt to turn a dry and preachy book into something interesting or just a glossing of the most amoral and repungnent ideology ever made.

 

You just referred to Objectivism as "the most amoral and repungnent ideology ever made". Most of the people I've seen who've truly hated the book were ideologically opposed toward the philosophy of freedom and individual rights espoused in it.

I largely agree with Rand's philosophy and I thought the book was outstanding from a "message" point of view, but average from a strictly entertainment point of view. She could have cut out about 25% of the content and still conveyed her message with a book that was much easier to read. I've always thought her non-fiction was much better than her fiction.

 

personal freedom and indivual rights. no matter how many times I hear a libertarian say them it stillmakes me laugh. objectivism like libertarianism in general is all about the removal of obsticles for power. what ever it may be in theory in practice it is about the denial of those rights which is what makes it so amoral. I as a social democrat espouse freedom for all by preventing anyone from being able to deny people their rights. objectivism is just in the end power porn.


in the end is a crappy ideology espoused in even crappier book. no amount of glitz and glamour is going to turn it into a decent movie.

than you don't have a clue what good writing is. berating those that disagree with you isn't a good way to deliver a message.


rands writing is close to that of coulter's in form. preachy, only good tho those sympathic to the viewpoints with in, and generally sloppily written.

 

This is one of my three favourite fiction books and has been for four decades. I am virulently opposed to Rand's philosophy, but it does not prevent me from recognising a work of genius.