Atlas Shrugged

[Funkmasterr]

I had no idea anyone was even planning on making this movie, but it looks like it's coming out in some areas in like a week. I want to see it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W07bFa4TzM

[Kluden]

Wow...the person who made that trailer should be shot. I'm betting that trailer is a gross misrepresentation of the film

[masteen]

How in the fuck did this piece of shit book manage to get turned into a movie? Right up there with Battlefield Earf.

[Funkmasterr]

Wow...the person who made that trailer should be shot. I'm betting that trailer is a gross misrepresentation of the film

Yeah I'm hoping it is a misrepresentation. It makes it look like a action movie, which it shouldn't be. Either way I want to see it.

[Xatrei]

Fuck Ayn Rand and her crazy, deluded notions. Fuck the dumbshits that think her ravings represent the pinnacle of wisdom twice.

In the ass.

With a giant, rusty cast iron cock.




No lube.

[Ashur]

This should have been a period piece from when steel mills and railroads mattered... I'm disappointed to see this set in the present day.

Anyway, industrialism/capitalism makes for better boardgames than movies!

[Fairweather Pure]

Ebert's review: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... /110419990

I highlighted all the part that I either agree strongly with, or had already figured out from the previews, or conjectured from reading the book.

I feel like my arm is all warmed up and I don’t have a game to pitch. I was primed to review "Atlas Shrugged." I figured it might provide a parable of Ayn Rand’s philosophy that I could discuss. For me, that philosophy reduces itself to: "I’m on board; pull up the lifeline." There are however people who take Ayn Rand even more seriously than comic-book fans take "Watchmen." I expect to receive learned and sarcastic lectures on the pathetic failings of my review.

And now I am faced with this movie, the most anticlimactic non-event since Geraldo Rivera broke into Al Capone’s vault. I suspect only someone very familiar with Rand’s 1957 novel could understand the film at all, and I doubt they will be happy with it. For the rest of us, it involves a series of business meetings in luxurious retro leather-and-brass board rooms and offices, and restaurants and bedrooms that look borrowed from a hotel no doubt known as the Robber Baron Arms.

During these meetings, everybody drinks. More wine is poured and sipped in this film than at a convention of oenophiliacs. There are conversations in English after which I sometimes found myself asking, "What did they just say?" The dialogue seems to have been ripped throbbing with passion from the pages of Investors’ Business Daily. Much of the excitement centers on the tensile strength of steel.

The story involves Dagny Taggart (Taylor Schilling), a young woman who controls a railroad company named Taggart Transcontinental (its motto: "Ocean to Ocean"). She is a fearless and visionary entrepreneur, who is determined to use a revolutionary new steel to repair her train tracks. Vast forces seem to conspire against her.

It’s a few years in the future. America has become a state in which mediocrity is the goal, and high-achieving individuals the enemy. Laws have been passed prohibiting companies from owning other companies. Dagny’s new steel, which is produced by her sometime lover, Hank Rearden (Grant Bowler), has been legislated against because it’s better than other steels. The Union of Railroad Engineers has decided it will not operate Dagny’s trains. Just to show you how bad things have become, a government minister announces "a tax will be applied to the state of Colorado, in order to equalize our national economy." So you see how governments and unions are the enemy of visionary entrepreneurs.

But you’re thinking, railroads? Yes, although airplanes exist in this future, trains are where it’s at. When I was 6, my Aunt Martha brought me to Chicago to attend the great Railroad Fair of 1948, at which the nation’s rail companies celebrated the wonders that were on the way. They didn’t quite foresee mass air transportation. "Atlas Shrugged" seems to buy into the fair’s glowing vision of the future of trains. Rarely, perhaps never, has television news covered the laying of new railroad track with the breathless urgency of the news channels shown in this movie.

So OK. Let’s say you know the novel, you agree with Ayn Rand, you’re an objectivist or a libertarian, and you’ve been waiting eagerly for this movie. Man, are you going to get a letdown. It’s not enough that a movie agree with you, in however an incoherent and murky fashion. It would help if it were like, you know, entertaining?

The movie is constructed of a few kinds of scenes: (1) People sipping their drinks in clubby surroundings and exchanging dialogue that sounds like corporate lingo; (2) railroads, and lots of ’em; (3) limousines driving through cities in ruin and arriving at ornate buildings; (4) city skylines; (5) the beauties of Colorado. There is also a love scene, which is shown not merely from the waist up but from the ears up. The man keeps his shirt on. This may be disappointing for libertarians, who I believe enjoy rumpy-pumpy as much as anyone.

Oh, and there is Wisconsin. Dagny and Hank ride blissfully in Taggart’s new high-speed train, and then Hank suggests they take a trip to Wisconsin, where the state’s policies caused the suppression of an engine that runs on the ozone in the air, or something (the film’s detailed explanation won’t clear this up). They decide to drive there. That’s when you’ll enjoy the beautiful landscape photography of the deserts of Wisconsin. My advice to the filmmakers: If you want to use a desert, why not just refer to Wisconsin as "New Mexico"?

"Atlas Shrugged" closes with a title card saying, "End of Part 1." Frequently throughout the film, characters repeat the phrase, "Who is John Galt?" Well they might ask. A man in black, always shot in shadow, is apparently John Galt. If you want to get a good look at him and find out why everybody is asking, I hope you can find out in Part 2. I don’t think you can hold out for Part 3

It opened at #14 this weekend on only 300 screens (making it's per screen average not bad at all) and making 1.6 million of it's 5 million budget. I do hope they are able to make the other movie(s).

[Funkmasterr]

I've been reading reviews, and while critics don't like it, the viewer reviews I've read have been favorable for the most part. I'll be seeing it sometime soon.

[miir]

I've been reading reviews, and while critics like it

The reviews have been universally bad.

The acting is so poor and the story so badly told

This movie is crushingly ordinary in every way

Who's the idiot responsible for this fiasco?

The film is curiously sterile and lifeless

Oh here's something complimentary:

As a cinematic effort, Atlas Shrugged: Part I is competent

[Funkmasterr]

To be perfectly honest, I couldn't be less interested in what critics think - that was a typo. Nor am I interested in the opinion of anyone who disagrees with the ideals, because it's pretty obvious going into it what they are going to say. On Rotten Tomatoes, it's 85% liked by viewers.

[Fairweather Pure]

To be perfectly honest, I couldn't be less interested in what critics think - that was a typo. Nor am I interested in the opinion of anyone who disagrees with the ideals, because it's pretty obvious going into it what they are going to say. On Rotten Tomatoes, it's 85% liked by viewers.

It's comparable to how critics hated Twilight, but all the women that saw it liked it. Some people are going to like it no matter what. If you are going to like Atlas Shrugged: The Movie, then by all means go see it and enjoy yourself.

[miir]

I'm just not sure how it could be a 'good' movie.
Regardless of your opinion of the book, splitting it into 3 parts, having a miniscule budget and hiring no-name producer/director/actors is not a recipe for a good film.

The theme of society rewarding mediocrity one of Rand's main points in Atlas Shrugged.
If you pay to see this movie, you are essentially shitting on her grave.
Ayn Rand would not want you to see this movie.

It's comparable to how critics hated Twilight

No, it's not at all.
All the Twilight films received a very even spread of good and bad reviews.
They are not great films by any stretch of the imagination but as basic entertainment, they are exceptional.

[Funkmasterr]

I'm just not sure how it could be a 'good' movie.
Regardless of your opinion of the book, splitting it into 3 parts, having a miniscule budget and hiring no-name producer/director/actors is not a recipe for a good film.

The theme of society rewarding mediocrity one of Rand's main points in Atlas Shrugged.
If you pay to see this movie, you are essentially shitting on her grave.
Ayn Rand would not want you to see this movie.

It's comparable to how critics hated Twilight

No, it's not at all.
All the Twilight films received a very even spread of good and bad reviews.
They are not great films by any stretch of the imagination but as basic entertainment, they are exceptional.

I get the point you're trying to make, but no name producer/director/actors != mediocrity. I'd much rather I hadn't heard of all or most people involved than they cast Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. Budget isn't a concern either, there isn't much of anything in the story that requires special effects or anything else costly.

My point is, there are a lot of people that are criticizing this movie for seemingly valid reasons (the ones you listed being up there), but in all reality I'd guess probably 90% of them just hate Rand's ideas and went out of their way to find reasons to not like the film so they don't come off as petty.

[miir]

Anonymous viewer reviews on the internet have no bias, right?

[Fairweather Pure]

No, it's not at all.
All the Twilight films received a very even spread of good and bad reviews.
They are not great films by any stretch of the imagination but as basic entertainment, they are exceptional.

Yes, that is exactley what it is comparable to. The first movie, Twilight, is at 50% on Rotten Tomatoes while audience reviews are at 89%. Notice I said "Twilight", not the "Twilight movies".

[miir]

Twilight, is at 50% on Rotten Tomatoes

Atlas Shrugged at at 8%... TWO of the reviews are favorable.
This is generally the sign on a FUCKING TERRIBLE movie...
It's 'The Postman' bad....
It's bordering on Battlefield Earth bad.



Twilight is at 50%... half of the reviews are favorable.
That's generally the sign of a movie with some redeeming qualities.


I just signed into Rotten Tomatoes and rated Atlas Shrugged (3 times) a 5/5

[Fairweather Pure]

This tanked so bad over the weekend that it doesn't even look like they'll be making the sequels.

[miir]

Awwww...

Why should I put up all of that money if the critics are coming in like lemmings? I'll make my money back and I'll make a profit, but do I wanna go and do two? Maybe I just wanna see my grandkids and go on strike.

I wish Michael Bay would have that sort of reaction when his movies get panned by critics.

[Sueven]

OH NO HE'S GOING GALT. HOW WILL OUR SOCIETY SURVIVE WITHOUT THE BRAVE CAPITALISTS WHO BROUGHT US THE ATLAS SHRUGGED FILM.

[Zaelath]

Aww, I thought I might sneak this in before y'all... well, here's a link for your amusement:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/ ... ts/page/2/

[Sueven]

One thing I like about Atlas Shrugged (the book): It proves that people can be moved en masse by literature. Now let's see some literature that moves people in a more productive direction...

[Zaelath]

teehee

[Leonaerd]

Ha! Still a great book. Becomes increasingly relevant.

[Sylvus]

teehee

Don't forget the alt text to that image:
'I had a hard time with Ayn Rand because I found myself enthusiastically agreeing with the first 90% of every sentence, but getting lost at "therefore, be a huge asshole to everyone."'

[masteen]

There are only 2 possible ways to deal with the massive population of stupid people:
Bring slavery back
or
Educate ALL the childrens, even the brown ones.

This book takes neither path, and thus is self-indulgent trash that becomes LESS relevant as time goes on.

[Leonaerd]

wat