Atlas Shrugged

[Valandil]

I had heard something a few years ago - then didn't hear any more. But I just saw this about a week ago (article with trailer):

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...-target-175724

Apparently, they've turned Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged into a movie! It is indie produced, with no big stars and done for under $10 million. It's actually the first part of an intended trilogy. If this one doesn't make money, they won't make the others. This one opens tomorrow - April 15. I recognize some Chicago scenes in the trailer, so I suspect some of the filming was done here.

I read the book about 10 years ago. It's a biggie - almost 1200 pages.

Anyone else read the book? Anyone planning to see it?

[GrayMouser]

Yeah, when I was about 19 or 20 i went through an anarcho-capitalist phase- went so far left I came out right, as I joked at the time- and read most of her stuff.

I think I've posted this before, but:

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

--Kung Fu Monkey

So far the reviews have been less than kind. It got a wopping 6% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Here's a sampling of commentary:

Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer: "Atlas Shrugged. I arched eyebrow, scrunched forehead, yawned."

Roger Ebert: "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."

Joe Morgenstern, Wall Street Journal: "The book was published in 1957, yet the clumsiness of this production makes it seem antediluvian."

Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic: "It has taken decades to bring Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" to the big screen.They should have waited longer."

Kurt Loder, the former Rolling Stone writer, for the Libertarian site, Reason Online: "The new, long-awaited film version of Atlas Shrugged is a mess, full of embalmed talk, enervated performances, impoverished effects, and cinematography that would barely pass muster in a TV show. Sitting through this picture is like watching early rehearsals of a stage play that's clearly doomed."

Peter Dubruge, Variety: "Part one of a trilogy that may never see completion, this hasty, low-budget adaptation would have Ayn Rand spinning in her grave."

Loren King, Boston Globe: "Even fans of Rand's 1957 antigovernment manifesto may balk at having to endure dialogue that would be banal on the Lifetime channel, along with wooden performances..."

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by GrayMouser

So far the reviews have been less than kind. It got a wopping 6% on Rotten Tomatoes.

. . . Wow. Catwoman got 10%.

I've always had a distaste for writing novels to disseminate politico-philosophical ideas. Of course, having a distaste for the politico-philosophical ideas doesn't help.

[Valandil]

Yes - I saw some early reviews that were very harsh. But many of those zeroed in on Rand's ideas themselves. I saw a few blogs by conservative bloggers who seemed happy that the film was good - much better than they had feared it would be. But those could be plants.

I might watch it - out of curiosity. I've read the book, so I will be able to follow it. Also - I first read it when I was in my late 30's - not 14 (when I was reading LOTR), so I think I can avoid the 'Kung Fu Monkey' results.

Frankly, I think there IS a kernel of truth in Rand's ideas. But she sure pounds away at it. And she takes things to a great extreme. Obviously, I'm not in complete agreement with her. Far from it. I just did some reading on her the other day, and found something ironic. She considered herself a 'free thinker' of course. She had a number of followers who would gather around her to meet and discuss things (one of whom was Alan Greenspan!). The ironic part is - she seemed to have been quite tyrannical about the other 'free thinkers' falling in step with her ideas 100%!

Still - it's interesting to me that this movie was made at all. I figure I don't have a lot of time to see it.

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

:
:
I've always had a distaste for writing novels to disseminate politico-philosophical ideas. Of course, having a distaste for the politico-philosophical ideas doesn't help.

Actually - even JRRT wrote about the use of fiction (or 'fairy tales') as a means of revealing truth. I think that's why a lot of fiction gets written.

[brownjenkins]

I forced myself to read the book years ago, but wasn't all that impressed. A very simplistic and self-centered view of existence. One could make the argument that there is a certain truth to her views, since many people seem to espouse them, but they aren't generally the positive people in our society.

[GrayMouser]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

. . . Wow. Catwoman got 10%.

I've always had a distaste for writing novels to disseminate politico-philosophical ideas. Of course, having a distaste for the politico-philosophical ideas doesn't help.

Yeah, the negative ones seem to be better- Candide, 1984, Animal Farm, Brave New World.

One of my favorite SF authors has, Ursula LeGuin has a strong tendency to the didactic which sometimes overwhelms.

Rand is much better in her shorter fictions- Anthem, or We the Living- even The Fountainhead, which was turned into a not bad film.