Directed by: Paul Johansson
Starring: Taylor Schilling, Grant Bowler, Matthew Marsden, Jsu Garcia, Paul Johansson
Let’s get the obvious out of the way. I find the philosophy expressed in Atlas Shrugged—both Ayn Rand’s book and this film—poorly reasoned and morally repugnant. The idea that one can approach the book or the film made from it without tussling with that philosophy is absurd, since the raison d’etre in both cases is to promote that philosophy. And, yes, I actually have read the book. I neither buy into, nor do I like the source material, and I feel the same about the movie. But here’s the catch: However much I dislike Rand’s philosophy, I think both she and her book deserve better than this wretched bottom-of-the-barrel movie.
The movie was rushed into production by first-time producer John Aglialoro so he wouldn’t lose the rights to the book. So he then became a first-time screenwriter with the aid of Brian Patrick O’Toole (best known for writing direct-to-video horror movies), and signed a cast of no-names. Then he brought in One Tree Hill actor and sometime director Paul Johansson to helm the movie. Uwe Boll would have been a better choice. This is a conspicuous comedown for a project that once supposedly had the attention of folks like Clint Eastwood and Angelina Jolie. It also delivers exactly what its credentials suggest—a clunky, frequently silly, dubiously acted, barely directed TV movie. Or more correctly one-third of one, since this is only part one of a proposed trilogy.
The movie more or less does follow the first third of the book—albeit in simplified form and without much regard for narrative or character consistency. Anyway, the year in the film is 2016 and the U.S. is in a dystopian shambles (a very economical shambles, mind), owing to government interference and the apparent insistence of workers demanding a living wage. (One assumes the film is predicting a second term for Obama.) The Middle East is unstable, the seas are unsafe because of someone called Ragnar the Pirate (who unfortunately doesn’t appear in the movie), gas is $37.50 a gallon, and the railroad is once again king of transport and travel. Most of this is the movie trying to explain—not very convincingly—why it’s about something as old-fashioned as railroads.
Anyway, railroads are where it’s at in Atlasland, especially Taggart Transcontinental, a once mighty giant of the rails, now reduced to a shabby shadow of itself by evil government machinations and the spineless inheritor of the line, James Taggart (Matthew Marsden). But his hard-as-nails sister Dagny Taggart (Taylor Schilling), with the help of stand-up industrialist Henry Reardon, are determined to save the day—despite that darn government and the fact that the world’s great minds (like bankers) keep disappearing leaving us all flopping around like landed fish in our collective mediocrity, while everyone helplessly asks, “Who is John Galt?” Of course, these movers and shakers are being wooed away by the not-quite mythical Galt (played by the director), who dresses like McGruff the Crime Dog and stands in the shadows trying to sound like Clint Eastwood as he offers to take them where they’ll be appreciated.
Yes, it’s that silly and that subtle. Of course, there’s a lot—I mean a whole lot—of railroad-building footage that might as well have been lifted from an educational film. There’s also a perpetual motion engine (just lying around in a secret room—with windows, no less—at an abandoned factory), some tepid (even for PG-13) sex, and scads of bad dialogue just waiting to be immortalized on bumper stickers, and all of it delivered by actors who are incapable of seeing the absurdity of lines like, “Why these stupid altruistic urges?” In 1949, King Vidor and his actors dealt with this sort of thing in the film of Rand’s The Fountainhead by acknowledging the improbability of real people saying stuff like, “I play the stock market of the soul—and I sell short,” and making them ridiculously theatrical. Of course, Vidor was a real filmmaker with capable actors and a real screenplay by—oh, my God!—Ayn Rand. His movie was preposterous and entertaining. This is just preposterous. Rand is many things, but making her boring is a first.
Yes, this will please the converted—who don’t seem to care what Rand would have felt about the blatant courting of the Tea Party demographic, the shabby production values, or what that fiercely atheistic woman would have said about her work being distributed by an outfit known mostly for faith-based movies. There may even be some who don’t burst out laughing at the movie’s cheesy final proclamation. But will there be enough to see parts two and three get made? Time will tell, but its consistently dropping box office over the weekend tends to bode ill for that. Rated PG-13 for some sexuality.
Commenters email addresses are never displayed. Do not insert HTML code.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (without http://) and it will be active.
|
the seas are unsafe because of someone called Ragnar the Pirate (who unfortunately doesn’t appear in the movie) |
 Apr 19, 2011 at 6:21 PM |
|
“Atlas Shrugged,” the Movie: Why Ayn Rand is More Relevant Than Ever |
 Apr 20, 2011 at 6:30 AM |
|
Despite detractors, Ayn Rand’s ideas called foundational Ayn Rand’s Objectivism is a comprehensive, organic and consistent philosophical system exemplified in artistic form in her famous ‘magnum opus’ “Atlas Shrugged” – published in 1957 and a best-seller today with 7 million copies sold. Now, a new and eagerly-awaited movie based on the book will receive a showing in the Asheville area, and around the country, this month, opening on Tax Day. It is Part One of a proposed three-part movie series and promises to bring renewed interest to the authors controversial views, which are gaining in popularity even without the film’s assistance. The film will approximate the novel somewhat faithfully, as all such earnest projects do (the filmmaker spent 20 years and $20M of his own money). And by all accounts from devotees, this first installment is not altogether bad; which was the main fear. Seeing it, you will learn something about the characters, the story and the philosophical ideas embedded in the “plot-theme.” The screenplay and production quality are quite good and the performers are unknown to the big screen (also good, in my opinion). All in all, I suggest it will be a worthwhile viewing for those interested in an improved understanding of the author’s great contribution to literature, philosophy and human understanding. To be sure, many remain hostile to Ayn Rand and her ideas. Some because of her devotion to the absolute primacy of reason and science over belief and dogma. Others because she unequivocally champions individual rights, rational self-interest and a thoroughly ‘laizzez-faire’ political-economy. And others still because they are simply unfamiliar with the foundational material and rely on biased vilification to draw undigested conclusions. I would urge those few genuinely interested in clarifying their impressions of Rand to simply go and see the movie and enjoy. Better yet, go and read the number two best-selling book in the world and discover why it’s appeal is quickening, why the fable told there grows less fictional every day and why Rand called hers “a philosophy for living on Earth.” http://is.gd/GwzWEK |
Apr 20, 2011 at 6:34 AM |
|
Well, that didn’t take long, did it? |
Apr 20, 2011 |
|
“Ayn Rand’s ideas called foundational” Yes, and her ‘ideas’ are called many, many other things as well. |
 Apr 20, 2011 at 7:09 AM |
|
I kind of want to watch “Atlas Shrugged” just to see how bad it is, but I also don’t want to help fund parts II and III. |
Apr 20, 2011 |
|
I kind of want to watch “Atlas Shrugged” just to see how bad it is, but I also don’t want to help fund parts II and III. I sympathize with your quandary. I could suggest some not entirely ethical ways around it (let’s just say one buys a ticket to a movie, but one does not necessarily end up in the movie for which the ticket was bought). The thing is there are several actually good movies out there, and I cannot imagine this one being of any interest to anyone who isn’t already keen on the gospel of Rand. |
Apr 20, 2011 |
|
I wouldn’t call her ideas “foundational” so much as “base.” Yes, plenty of people misunderstand her philosophy—but then, there are plenty of people who understand it and just find it juvenile, simplistic, and odious. I believe I fall into the latter category. In any case, I won’t go see outright propaganda even when it’s well-done and I agree with it; my leisure time is too valuable for that. Lousy offensive propaganda? No thanks. |
Daniel Withrow Apr 20, 2011 |
|
“I wouldn’t call her ideas “foundational” so much as “base.” An excellent point. The word ‘foundational’ seems better suited to describe, say, women’s undergarments. |
Apr 20, 2011 at 12:50 PM |
|
I believe I fall into the latter category. I know I do. What I find intriguing about the Rand adherents is that they always seem to believe that they are going to be part of that super elitist society that would result from adopting her philosophy. I see no evidence of this eventuality as a probable outcome. In any case, I won’t go see outright propaganda even when it’s well-done and I agree with it That’s reasonable enough, but to some degree every movie with an agenda of any kind—and that’s a lot of movies—can be called propaganda. This one has the distinction of being comically inept about it. |
Apr 20, 2011 |
|
An excellent point. The word ‘foundational’ seems better suited to describe, say, women’s undergarments. Considering the “treat me rough” sexual fantasies evidenced in her books (depicted in the rape fantasy of the film of The Fountainhead, but scrupulously missing from this film), a case could be made… |
Apr 20, 2011 |
|
Despite its “awful” marketing plan, as one distribution exec calls it, the movie earned a $5,640 per-theater average opening: “Things have turned for us,” producer Harmon Kaslow tells THR. |
Apr 20, 2011 at 7:33 PM |
|
Tim, a serious query for you: What is your stance on term limits? I think everyone in Congress should be limited to, at most, six years. |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Despite its “awful” marketing plan, as one distribution exec calls it, the movie earned a $5,640 per-theater average opening: “Things have turned for us,” producer Harmon Kaslow tells THR. And despite that PR handout for the distributors, it remains to be seen whether this has legs. The fact that attendance dropped on Saturday and then took a 43% nosedive on Sunday suggests otherwise. |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Tim, a serious query for you: What is your stance on term limits? I think everyone in Congress should be limited to, at most, six years. I’d really rather this didn’t turn into a column about Mr. Peck’s political views. |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Ken, R.Bernier |
R.Bernier Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Well, I don’t agree with your sound clip’s philosophy any more than I agree with that of Ayn Rand—whose philosophy the movie tones down in order to make it more palatable to religious conservatives of the Tea Party persuasion. However the clip does acknowledge that and it acknowledges (albeit without seeing the movie) that the movie is said to be poorly made (which, having seen it, it is). |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
http://www.themidnightdiner.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/atlass.gif |
 Apr 21, 2011 at 4:56 AM |
|
I’d really rather this didn’t turn into a column about Mr. Peck’s political views. You knew that as soon as your review was posted, it would. |
 Apr 21, 2011 at 6:52 AM |
|
You knew that as soon as your review was posted, it would. I knew he would swoop down it, yes. In fact, I was surprised it took as long at it did. I am hoping it will not become a platform for him. |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Subtle and even hit-you-over-the-head propagandistic overtones I can take and enjoy. China Mieville, that socialist labor rabble-rouser from the UK, is one of my favorite authors, despite (or perhaps because) of the fact that his water-sculpting frog-creatures are willing to go on strike against the evil capitalist captains of industry. But when an artist is mostly interested in persuading me, and regards the art itself as nothing more than a vehicle through which to recruit me to their cause, I’ll take a pass. Personal taste, and I have nothing against people who watch Michael Moore’s latest, but it’s not for me. |
Daniel Withrow Apr 21, 2011 |
|
“And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Now, as we all know, this image is subject to interpretation. In Ms. Rand’s case, she says what Jesus really meant was “Eat The Poor.” |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
I agree with what other reviewers have said—that a documentary about Ayn Rand herself would be much more interesting, given what we now know about her early life, her semi-hidden affair with Nathaniel Branden, her journal, and her progressively quick temper, which was quite evident during the Phil Donahue interview. But we also need to see her influence on the national scene, including Alan Greenspan and the end of the military draft. The movie is simplistic on many counts. Even the most ardent of government and union haters wouldn’t want a train (laden with fuel) traveling across a high bridge on a new metal that hadn’t been properly tested under less environmentally dangerous conditions (think BP oil spill). It was the film’s most dramatic moment, but its point couldn’t be celebrated because of the sheer abdication of responsibility. Requiring innovators to act responsibly (don’t tread on me!) doesn’t stifle innovation. We’re all soooo over that. In the movie even the American corporate system with its pesky corporate boards are fair target. Dagny makes an enormous metal purchase without consulting the corporate board. In the real world, boards serve the interest of the stockholders by making sure rogue elements don’t ruin an entire corporation with risky behavior overnight. If there were a “new metal” that were strongere than steel and 10 times as light, every industry in the world would quickly move to get there. The movie’s premise is quite imaginary, and it’s hard to learn any sort of lesson from it, even if you already know the book. After writing fiction, Rand found it easier to state her points outright without having to work them into narrative. Go figure. Having to make up science fiction to match her constant doomsday assumptions must have been tiresome. That said, I totally agree with some of Rand’s points about pursuing your pleasures and goals, accepting man’s ability to discover truth through reason (apart from religion and non-reasonable philosophies), and the immorality of a government or other person to expect sacrifice from another (particularly the draft). |
Rob Apr 21, 2011 |
|
While I’ve no reason to question that Ayn Rand was against the draft, I do not believe that’s really the point of her attack on altruism, nor do I think she’s the driving force behind ending the draft. |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Go see the movie Ken Hanke does not want you to see. Held over for another week, and probably another. “Atlas Shrugged” box office success stuns liberal Hollywood |
Apr 21, 2011 at 1:26 PM |
|
Complete with the anticipated link to a right wing columnist spinning things his way! |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
It is funny that folks like Rush Limbaugh extoll Atlas Shrugged when Rand was an atheist… having said that, the basic philosophy behind Atlas Shrugged - the book, anyway - is quite valid. I’m married and i have one kid. That’s all I can afford. I’d like to have more kids but I can’t afford them. Why should my tax dollars go to people who are not only not married, but also have five or six kids and have no qualms about having more - after all, the government will reward them for every kid they produce. More than 50% of Americans pay no income tax. The wealthy pay a great deal…even if not as much as the Dems would like. Who deserves to have the money they earn - the wealthy who earned it, or the poor who’ve done nothing to earn it but are entitled to it because they’re poor? |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Rand was a white supremacist who died collecting Social Security and medicaid. Is it any surprise that she’s a Teabagger hero? |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
““Atlas Shrugged” box office success stuns liberal Hollywood.” Ummm….not so much. http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/16/box-office-rio-scream-4/ |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
“Atlas Shrugged” box office success stuns liberal Hollywood (http://is.gd/nuB6jU) Hmmmm. I wonder how many of those 7,000,000 people who bought copies of the book have actually read it (rather than the Cliff Notes); how many students have passively succumbed to university requirements across the nation from way back in the 1960s to now—as when WCU and numerous others recently mandated Rand as a curriculum requirement to get big grants for endowed chairs from BB&T; how many thousands of free copies have been distributed in wealthy fundamentalist mega-churches along with Ann Coulter’s books; and how many people will see the movie in order to avoid reading the book. Who amongst us has actually bought a copy of the book Atlas Shrugged simply in order to read it, all other extraneous enticements aside? http://www.mountainx.com/news/2008/122308capitalism_on_campus http://www.smokymountainnews.com/news/item/3483-who-is-ayn-rand |
 Apr 21, 2011 at 4:56 PM |
|
<<as when WCU and numerous others recently mandated Rand as a curriculum requirement to get big grants for endowed chairs from BB&T>> Things did not quite turn out that way: http://www.smokymountainnews.com/index.php/news/item/3488 As for its box office “success” this was originally posted at boxofficemojo.com a site that, until recently, ran movie reviews written by Ayn Rand worshiper Scott Holleran whose reviews were always filtered through his objectivist world view: http://movisnmore.blogspot.com/2011/04/atlas-shrugged-derails.html |
RHS Apr 21, 2011 |
|
As for its box office “success” this was originally posted at boxofficemojo.com No, that was from the Hollywood Reporter. The “Atlas Shrugged Derails” piece was orgiginally on boxofficemojo.com What I have yet to discover from a single Rand fanatic—I mean the ones encountered in everyday life—is just exactly where they expect they’d land in the elite hierarchy in the event that the U.S. became a Randocracy. What exactly do they produce that makes them likely to benefit from this “I’ve-got-mine-screw-you” mindset? |
Apr 21, 2011 |
|
Ken, scroll up and click on the link I gave you. They can’t refute that comic. They can’t and they won’t even try. All they will say is, “We have the path to freedom and with that, anyone can become an innovator and leader”. Which means that everyone can rise to the top of the pyramid and succeed. Which is absolute lunacy to anyone who has even the slightest concept of pyramids. They certainly aren’t for rational self-interest, which might change the pyramid to a line but even that requires some obviation of some pretty basic issues with self-sufficiency in the modern age. |
Apr 21, 2011 at 7:52 PM |
|
They can’t refute that comic. They can’t and they won’t even try. All they will say is, “We have the path to freedom and with that, anyone can become an innovator and leader”. Oh, I understand that (and I did look at the link), but what puzzles me is that individually they all seem to think they’ll be one of the extraordinary ones. But I’ve yet to see any evidence why they believe that—apart perhaps from ego. |
Apr 22, 2011 |
|
PG-13? So none of the rape-porn fantasies from the book? |
 Apr 22, 2011 at 8:28 PM |
|
I’m sure they have some sort box of arbitrary crayons that demarcate the lines of their beliefs. We all do. Some of us just use better colors. |
Apr 22, 2011 at 8:59 PM |
|
Propaganda + Greed = Sheeple Syndrome |
Apr 22, 2011 at 10:55 PM |
|
For an actual review of the movie Atlas Shrugged: Part One, pick up a copy of this week’s Asheville Tribune. You won’t find any ideologically-motivated manipulation. |
Apr 22, 2011 at 2:19 AM |
|
For an actual review of the movie….. Good idea, sheeple. Just read the reviews. Then you’ll be able to discuss the actual philosophy without having to actually read the book or watch the actual movie. |
Apr 22, 2011 at 4:46 AM |
|
PG-13? So none of the rape-porn fantasies from the book? Oh, goodness me, no. This is the Tea Party version. |
Apr 22, 2011 |
|
For an actual review of the movie Atlas Shrugged: Part One, pick up a copy of this week’s Asheville Tribune. You won’t find any ideologically-motivated manipulation. Written by whom? |
Apr 22, 2011 |
|
Ken: what do you make of reports that it was made primarily to retain the option, like Roger Corman’s hastily-shot and unreleased Fantastic Four movie? |
luther blissett Apr 22, 2011 |
|
Ayn Rand was a drug-addicted sociopath who worshiped serial killers; she was not a sane person. Seriously people…there is no “philosophy” here to debate. Those who admire her are as delusional as the followers of any other would-be cult figure selling psychosis as a way of life. |
Apr 22, 2011 |
|
Ayn Rand was required reading for elitist college students back in the 1960s, but now, a half-century later, the way she’s being reinterpreted, selectively repackaged, and marketed to the masses is hardly recognizable. Sort of a Nostradamus effect, I suppose. Actually, even back then, in the 60s, while slinging hash in a Sambo’s Pancake House to pay college expenses, my friends and I preferred the less-elitist-but-more-intellectually-stimulating writings of Eric Hoffer, a philosopher who worked as a laborer in shipyards and lived simply so he would have time to, gasp, think for himself. Perhaps the timing is right for caring individuals to rediscover Eric Hoffer as a counterpoint to the cultish Randian Tea Partiers, which (albeit seemingly paradoxical) would be entirely in keeping with Hoffer’s ideas and observations regarding the whys and wherefores of all kinds of historical mass movements. So, either consider reading some Eric Hoffer or pay some serious attention to Bill Maher, who exhibits a latter-day sensibility akin to Hoffer’s individualist thinking—thoughtfully loaded for bear but in an easy-to-digest humorous vein. |
Apr 22, 2011 at 12:39 PM |
|
Ken: what do you make of reports that it was made primarily to retain the option, like Roger Corman’s hastily-shot and unreleased Fantastic Four movie? Well, it seems pretty indisputable that that’s what happened, especially with the last minute rush to get the movie into production—something that happened within three days of the producer losing the rights. |
Apr 22, 2011 |
|
Here is another negative review I liked even better: http://www.alternet.org/media/150646/yes,_the_latest_right-wing_paean_to_sociopath_ayn_rand_is_really,_really_awful/ |
 Apr 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM |
|
My prediction about the comments for this movie equaling or surpassing EXPELLED are coming true! I am SO delighted! |
Robin Raianiemi Apr 22, 2011 |
|
My prediction about the comments for this movie equaling or surpassing EXPELLED are coming true! I am SO delighted! Well, it’s got a way to go. I don’t think this has quite the hot-button quality of a movie supporting creationism. I am, however, pleased that Atlas Smug was tagged “The movie Ken Hanke doesn’t want you to see!” I find that very chic, and suggestive that I have far more influence than I do. I do think there’s a serious reality issue going on here about the importance of this movie. By the end of October 2004 Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 had grossed over $119 million dollars in the U.S.—and did that impressive gross alter the outcome of the 2004 presidential election? No. And Atlas has a lot of shruggin’ to do to get to that kind of gross. Really, isn’t this whole thing a pretty minor tempest in a tea party? |
Apr 23, 2011 |
|
I prefer the sequel, “Atlas Swallowed.” |
Apr 23, 2011 |
|
OK, I gotta chime in on this one. Ayn Rand’s philosphy is provably wrong, and her works are a detriment to liberty. But there is an accusation above which comes from misunderstanding. Ayn Rand was not the elitist that a naive reading of Atlas Shrugged would indicate. On this matter, she is clearly on the left, in the tabula rasa tradition which includes Karl Marx. The elitism portrayed in Atlas Shrugged was an artifact of bad philosophy. The few who counted were those who believed in the power of logic and opted to use it. Atlas Shrugged was intentionally cartoonish (i.e., “romantic”) to make this point. Still, the silliness of the scenario exposes a flaw in her theory of psychology: we aren’t nearly as integrated as Rand believed. We can hold one philosophy for home and another for office, etc. Once can build bridges that work and still ponder wacky philosophies on weekends which contradict building bridges that work. The mere existence of Bill Clinton disproves Objectivist psychology. |
Carl Milsted Apr 23, 2011 |
|
“The Move That Ken Hanke Doesn’t Want You to See!” I think that should be the money quote on the deeveedee. |
Robin Raianiemi Apr 23, 2011 |
|
The infantilism of the thinking of this reviewer is revealed by comparing this review to that of The Incredibles. In cartoon form, the same ideology gets four stars. Nice work. |
Eddie Willers Apr 23, 2011 |
|
I think that should be the money quote on the deeveedee. I would be very proud. |
Apr 23, 2011 |
|
The infantilism of the thinking of this reviewer is revealed by comparing this review to that of The Incredibles. In cartoon form, the same ideology gets four stars. Nice work. The completely blinkered thinking of the poster presupposes that this movie gets a half-star based entirely on its so-called philosophy. It gets a half-star mostly because it’s a lousy movie. If I were to review King Vidor’s The Fountainhead, it would get four stars. It contains the same philosophy. I am fully aware that The Incredibles can be subjected to an objectivist reading—and has been co-opted by certain adherents of Rand’s ideas, some of whom are currently trying to do the same with How to Train Your Dragon. I don’t see more than a very surface connection between either movie and the ideology. I see a lot more gay subtext in both actually, but anything worth interpreting is capable of being interpreted more than one way. |
Apr 23, 2011 |
|
anything worth interpreting is capable of being interpreted more than one way. I hope you meant this to be as funny as it is, taken in the context of the underlying ideas talked about here. |
Apr 23, 2011 at 11:17 AM |
|
I hope you meant this to be as funny as it is, taken in the context of the underlying ideas talked about here. Well, in that context, yes, but broadly-speaking (and in terms of art, which I should have specified), I think it’s largely true. That doesn’t mean all interpretations are equal. I’ve seen some pretty silly ones. And I’ve seen some that are happy to ignore key elements to make their case. |
Apr 23, 2011 |
|
The Asheville Tribune’s actual review of Atlas Shrugged: Part One is now online. |
Apr 24, 2011 at 6:19 AM |
|
If, as some philosophers contend, process matters, then “Atlas Shrugged, Part 1” will surely change the world ... for the better. Yes, that certainly sounds like a case for, “You won’t find any ideologically-motivated manipulation.” For 29 other non-glowing (30, if you count mine) reviews out of a total of 32, go to: www.rottentomatoes.com/m/atlas_shrugged_part_i/ |
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
So Atlas Shrugged expanded by 166 theaters this weekend and its take dropped from last weekend’s $1,686,347.00 to $879,000 this week. It dropped from 14th to 18th place and its average per theater take of $1890 is certainly down from its opening week of $5640 per theater average. |
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
Ken, Great review. I won’t help fund Parts 2 and 3, but I expect the Koch brothers or their ilk will. I’m surprised (and glad) that they didn’t fund a professionally-produced version of Part 1. I read Atlas Shrugged in the late 60’s, and must admit it had some influence at the time. It was short-lived, I was young and impressionable at the time, and soon learned to think logically and not fall into the trap of grasping at simplistic solutions to complex problems. The reason Rand has so many followers is summed up on a bumper sticker I’ve seen around town: “Critical Thinking, American’s Other National Deficit.” For those interested, Thom Hartmann’s take on the movie and Rand’s philosophy is available at
|
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
Will it make back its 10 million dollar budget? |
Apr 24, 2011 at 9:33 AM |
|
I’d just like to point out that it really is unfair if people perceive this film one way or the other based solely on its underlying philosophy. After all, Lord of the Rings was given completely non-philosophical reviews despite clearly being an anti-industrialization film with heavily spiritual/Christian overtones. |
Apr 24, 2011 at 10:18 AM |
|
Will it make back its 10 million dollar budget? Well, look at it realistically. It cost $10 million with supposedly another $10 million in advertising and other expenses. That puts the realistic figure at $20 million. So far it’s grossed about $3 million. About half of that goes to theaters, making it $1.5 million for the producer and distrubutor. That leaves it a long way off from recouping its costs. It might do it, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. DVD sales and possibly the world market may push it past the mark. Still if there is $20 million in it, it has to gross about $40 million to break even. |
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
I’d just like to point out that it really is unfair if people perceive this film one way or the other based solely on its underlying philosophy To me that’s a yes-and-no proposition, simply because its underlying philosophy is the reason for its existence. That said, I’d say there’s a far higher percentage of people on the pro-side of the philosophy judging it entirely on that score. After all, Lord of the Rings was given completely non-philosophical reviews despite clearly being an anti-industrialization film with heavily spiritual/Christian overtones. But is the film driven by those agendas? And are those what viewers responded to? I’d put this more on the level of those faith-based films from that Sherwood Baptist Church—Facing the Giants and Fireproof—where the appeal is geared to the already converted. |
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
Actually got to see the movie last night. Definitely in the league of Facing the Giants. Devout Objectivists should be bummed out. Ayn Rand would have disowned the movie and written up some scathing polemics about why it is so bad. Rand conflated love and esteem, and this movie isn’t worthy of esteem. And what’s the deal with the heroes downing the booze? They should be chugging coffee and puffing cigarettes. Rand liked uppers, not mind numbing depressants. Then again, the movie wasn’t as bad as Avatar or The Avengers. Why didn’t they get half a star? Could it be…liberal bias? ;-Þ |
Carl Milsted Apr 24, 2011 |
|
Then again, the movie wasn’t as bad as Avatar or The Avengers. Why didn’t they get half a star? Could it be…liberal bias? ;-Þ I’ll give Atlas this much—it’s shorter than Avatar. As for The Avengers, Atlas Shrugged would have been vastly improved if the people in board rooms had worn bear suits. |
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
Oh, goodness me, no. This is the Tea Party version. No rape pron? Well, then it aint Atlas Shrugged. Ayn believed a good woman’s place was taking it against her will. |
Apr 24, 2011 at 12:01 PM |
|
No rape pron? Well, then it aint Atlas Shrugged. Ayn believed a good woman’s place was taking it against her will. The 1949 Fountainhead managed to incorporate it during one of the most restrictive eras in censorship. |
Apr 24, 2011 |
|
I was being silly. But you are still correct. Also, the films neutered much of the theme of the book by not correctly having the ending happen. |
Apr 24, 2011 at 7:10 PM |
|
I’ve never been in such discord with the critics over a movie. I was very surprised to find the massive dislike for the movie among most critics. I found this movie to be well acted and very enjoyable. I thought I had found a jewel. However, I wouldn’t recommend it to the weekend movie goer. I don’t agree with the economic philosophy and find it antiquated and absurd. I have never read the book, so it does have a new and mysterious aspect to it for me. If you put political bias aside you will find yourself liking this film. |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
Also, the films neutered much of the theme of the book by not correctly having the ending happen. Hey, I like the idea of Atlas Shrugged ending with the Scourging of Galt’s Gulch! |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
If you put political bias aside you will find yourself liking this film. You say that with all the assurance of one who felt compelled to open an account today and post that. |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
I’m sorry sir, but that makes no sense. Unless your reaching for some kind of connection between opening an account and having political bias. I opened an account so that I could post a comment. My comment spurs from reading reviews and seeing people have problems with the political aspects. All i’m saying is that it was an entertaining film. What is your point sir? |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
I’m sorry sir, but that makes no sense. Unless your reaching for some kind of connection between opening an account and having political bias. You will pardon me if my assumption was wrong, though it had nothing to do with political bias. I am perhaps overreacting to your certainty that one will find one’s self liking the movie. I apologize if I have done that, but don’t you think “will” is rather emphatic? |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
Ayn Rand believed in the supremacy of the will. Just want to clarify something mentioned above. Slate recently had an article suggesting that Rand idolized a serial killer, and much as I dislike Rand, the accusation surprised me, and I asked some educated Rand fans about it. The truth is still icky, but not as. The serial killer in question, once caught, mocked the media and the public, and this (coupled with his hideous crimes) infuriated the public. Rand focused on how pissed off society was at being mocked and wrote extensively about how the worst thing you can do to a society is to hold its rules in disdain—and that doing so is also the sign of the Triumphant Ubermensch or whatever. She acknowledged that the dude was a terrible deviant and she was disappointed in that, but she also wrote an (unpublished) story whose protagonist was modeled after the killer, minus the, y’know, killing part. |
Daniel Withrow Apr 25, 2011 |
|
The Radicalness of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” If you’ve seen the new “Atlas Shrugged” movie but haven’t yet read the book, you may be wondering what the novel itself has to offer. For most people, reading “Atlas Shrugged” is an unforgettable experience. The story is gripping, involving numerous mysteries and unexpected but logical plot twists. The characters are unique—what other book features a philosopher turned pirate? And the writing is that rarest of combinations: at once clear and deep. But for many readers, “Atlas” is even more: it’s life-changing. http://is.gd/HrLosW |
Apr 25, 2011 at 12:32 PM |
|
Yes, yes. This has what to do with the movie? This is not the section for spam from Fox News. |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
The pursuit of profit is not rational. The economic collapse of 2008 was enabled by a short-sighted policy of free market economics that, time and again, has failed to produce the results that it purports to achieve. The end result is always the same, a concentration of wealth at the top with nothing falling down to the bottom. Every. Single. Time. The free market economic policy is a dangerous myth and no matter how some people want to play it up, it is as dead and discredited as Stalinism. Let’s return to the model that made America prosperous throughout most of the twentieth century: intelligent regulation of finance, and progressive taxation of the upper echelons of wealth. And let’s finally bury the bugaboo of Ayn Rand with this horrid movie that by the grace of investors did not go straight to DVD. |
Apr 25, 2011 at 12:40 PM |
|
And let’s finally bury the bugaboo of Ayn Rand with this horrid movie that by the grace of investors did not go straight to DVD. Mine… it will soon be mine… |
Apr 25, 2011 at 1:07 PM |
|
Mine… it will soon be mine… You’re probably correct. It’s sticking around town another week even though it took a pretty big tumble here this past weekend. All the same, according to todays altfilm.guide news on the weekend’s winners and losers: “Faring much worse was Paul Johansson’s Atlas Shrugged: Part I, which lost 48% of its business from last weekend even though it’s screening at 55% more theaters. Starring Taylor Schilling as Ayn Rand’s independent-minded heroine Dagny Taggart, Atlas Shrugged, despite its popularity among the Tea Party crowd, took in only $879k at 465 locations, averaging a meager $1,890 per site on its second week out. “In all likelihood, Atlas Shrugged will disappear fast — without managing to either recover its low $10m budget or lead to parts II and III. Total after ten days: $3.09m. “Atlas Shrugged’s overseas box-office prospects are all but nil, considering that the popularity of Ayn Rand, her philosophy, and the anti-government Tea Party movement are intrinsically American cultural phenomena.” |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
My experience is slinging a tall glass of ice water (aimed at certain vulnerable parts) is less messy than grits, and pretty effective. |
 Apr 25, 2011 at 2:22 PM |
|
IMHO, either one is good, Davyne, politics aside, depending on the occasion and the hotness of the grits or the coldness of the water. And whether ice cubes are involved. It’s all about supremacy of the will. |
Apr 25, 2011 at 2:30 PM |
|
Oops, over to the “Medea” thread….. We need to coordinate our sassiness a little better, Davyne, in keeping with Medea’s slinging of grits. |
Apr 25, 2011 at 2:38 PM |
|
Grits are taking over the whole Xpress! |
Apr 25, 2011 at 3:07 PM |
|
Which was, once upon a time, long ago, the mission of Mountain Xpress. |
Apr 25, 2011 at 3:20 PM |
|
Well, you’ve managed to get me confused. |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
This movie has pirates but lacks ninjas Nevertheless there is a lot of shiny trains. As for the book’s epistemological waffle of a |
OhNoes!!1 Apr 25, 2011 |
|
TimPeck-After reading your review, I can’t help but wonder if you actually viewed the movie. It would appear your review is entirely ideological, and could have easily been written without actually watching the movie. To be sure, many remain hostile to Ayn Rand and her ideas. Some because of her devotion to the absolute primacy of reason and science over belief and dogma. Others because she unequivocally champions individual rights, rational self-interest and a thoroughly ‘laizzez-faire’ political-economy. And others still because they are simply unfamiliar with the foundational material and rely on biased vilification to draw undigested conclusions. Right. No one who has read Ayn and merely seen through her facade. We’re all just jealous of, er… what are we jealous of? |
Apr 25, 2011 at 4:48 PM |
|
All we need now is Natalie Portman. /anyone who gets that one (without googling) needs help |
Apr 25, 2011 at 6:02 PM |
|
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Plugging-the-Gulf-oil-leak-with-the-works-of-Ayn-Rand/125031037519289?ref=ts&sk=wall |
Apr 25, 2011 |
|
That is almost enough to get me to join facebook. |
Apr 26, 2011 at 8:48 PM |
|
And not a single zombie in sight. Taylor Schilling comes mighty close. |
Apr 26, 2011 |
|
“To be sure, many remain hostile to Ayn Rand and her ideas. Some because of her devotion to the absolute primacy of reason and science over belief and dogma.” Ayn Rand may have been an atheist, but she was as dogmatic in her beliefs as any of the people of faith she held in such contempt. |
RHS Apr 26, 2011 |
|
You think one on four is a dogfall? |
Apr 26, 2011 at 3:39 PM |
|
Non sequitur. One-love. |
Apr 26, 2011 at 6:12 PM |
|
Play no trump. Your lead. |
Apr 26, 2011 |
|
Check. |
Apr 26, 2011 at 7:51 PM |
|
And mate. |
Apr 27, 2011 |
|
A slightly more honest conservative review which emphasizes both that the movie is not good but that the themes make it worthwhile to people who would agree with them. Which is an incredibly non-Objectivist thing to say. http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/atlas-shrugged-champions-capitalism-denounces-corporatism-and-exposes-hypocrisy/Content?oid=3295867 |
Apr 27, 2011 at 9:10 AM |
|
not good but that the themes make it worthwhile to people who would agree with them. Realistically, this is not a movie for people who care anything about or are even interested in movies. It’s more a hobbyist thing—like Gods and Generals—aimed at people whose interest is strictly in the topic. |
Apr 27, 2011 |
|
You won this round, Ken… http://www.avclub.com/articles/atlas-shrugged-producer-threatens-to-go-galt-over,55181/ |
Apr 27, 2011 at 10:58 AM |
|
You won this round, Ken… The idea that a handful of movie critics—most critics didn’t even bother with reviewing it—ruined this film’s box office is probably the funniest thing I’ve read today. Then again, Rand herself harbored a fantasy of similar ludicrousness, which she expressed in art critic Ellsworth Toohey in The Fountainhead. |
Apr 27, 2011 |
|
Well then, I guess the free market has spoken. |
RHS Apr 27, 2011 |
|
The free market has been speaking for thirty or forty years but Rand’s Commissars won’t listen. |
Apr 27, 2011 at 12:37 PM |
|
They haven’t been listening because it has been working out pretty well for them and that’s what it’s all about—self interest. And that’s where all this objectivism turns on them. Evidently the vast majority of American moviegoers decided it was not in their interest to send money to see a poorly made dramatization of a rancid ideology and now Aglialoro is whining because their self interest doesn’t line his pockets. Funny how that works. Cough <schadenfreude> cough. |
RHS Apr 27, 2011 |
|
But how does Tim Peck feel about all of this? |
Apr 28, 2011 at 3:27 AM |
|
With America on the brink, should you ‘go Galt’ and strike? Is the solution to “go Galt” and quit society? No, Rand answered. The solution was simultaneously much easier and much harder. “So long as we have not yet reached the state of censorship of ideas,” she once said, “one does not have to leave a society in the way the characters did in Atlas Shrugged…. But you know what one does have to do? One has to break relationships with the culture…. Discard all the ideas – the entire cultural philosophy which is dominant today.” http://is.gd/3HFlSh |
Apr 29, 2011 at 12:22 PM |
|
“Onkar Ghate is a senior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, Calif.” So, totally unbiased piece there, right? If we really rethought our “entire cultural philosophy” then would money even have a place in society? I’m starting to think maybe L. Ron Hubbard’s bet included more than just Heinlein. |
Apr 29, 2011 at 12:44 PM |
|
If you’re going to try to send people to the latest release from the Ayn Rand Institute guy, you should also send them to the companion piece: www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/1014/How-is-elitist-Ayn-Rand-a-tea-party-hero-The-contradiction-should-concern-America |
Apr 29, 2011 |
|
But Ken, the free market of ideas is not really about a free market and can thus be ignored! |
Apr 29, 2011 at 1:05 PM |
|
Speaking of censorship, what does one have to do to be unmoderated? |
Apr 29, 2011 |
|
Speaking of censorship, what does one have to do to be unmoderated? I am not part of this process. The only area where I have any power—limited to clearing or deleting posts (for the record, I’ve only ever deleted spam or duplicate posts)—is within the realm of movies. I could also probably get you unmoderated status if you only posted in the movie section, but I don’t think that’s the case, is it? |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Moderation is not censorship. Sheesh. |
Apr 30, 2011 at 3:55 AM |
|
I certainly agree with that, but I do find the regulation of it handled rather curiously. |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Would it help if I used my own name? |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Would it help if I used my own name? That doesn’t seem to have any direct bearing, though I might personally find it easier, since it’s awkward addressing you as “Unaffiliated Egotist.” |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Have any of your posts ever not been cleared? |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Hijacking Ayn Rand “We know nothing is sacred anymore. How else could a book, a movie about ethics, reason, written by a woman who epitomized the American dream, a woman who fled a totalitarian state, who championed individual rights, fall prey to Tea Party propaganda, liberal denigration and other distortions that go on and on depending on one’s political beliefs or disbeliefs. ...In the spirit of Ayn Rand, let us not go quietly into the night. If we can agree with Ayn Rand and advocate the morality of rational self-interest, then don’t sell yourself short. Judge for yourself. Go see the film. Don’t let the hijackers get away with it.” http://is.gd/i8UwS8 |
Apr 30, 2011 at 7:59 AM |
|
Charlotte Cushman left this comment: “It is very interesting to me how all these articles are suddenly appearing to slam Ayn Rand ever since the movie came out. I wonder if the Left is feeling a little threatened. Perhaps a little blue now that their days of power are coming to an end.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-mola/hijacking-ayn-rand_b_855173.html |
Apr 30, 2011 at 8:17 AM |
|
The Flat Rock Cinema starts showing “Atlas Shrugged: Part One” starting next Friday. FRC, a small theater with cabaret seating, offers private viewings weekdays from 12noon to 3PM. http://www.flatrockcinema.com/ |
Apr 30, 2011 at 8:20 AM |
|
Ron Paul, Secret Freemason. http://watch.pair.com/synarchy-6.html ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... Wow, that’s fun. I can see the appeal. It’s calming. |
Apr 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM |
|
Who do I contact to allow my posts to appear unmoderated? It’s quite difficult to have a conversation when my posts take two or three days to clear. I see that in this thread several unmoderated folks make a habit of breaking several rules, while I have never broken one (although I acknowledge that this post could be construed as breaking one) |
Apr 30, 2011 at 9:47 AM |
|
Note to Mr. Peck: If you have something to say, fine. If all you’re going to do is copy-and-paste and post links to pro-Rand propaganda, then I believe you have a website of your own for that. |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Who do I contact to allow my posts to appear unmoderated? I have no idea who makes that call these days. If you want me to find out, I will. |
Apr 30, 2011 |
|
Mercy! 124 posts? Apparently Rand’s philosophy doesn’t engender much rational discussion. And it’s too bad because some of her ideas dovetail with Adam Smith’s economics. It would be nice to see a rational exchange of ideas rather than insults bandied back and forth. After all what is the individual’s responsibility for others? How far should the govt go? How does one justify stealing the fruits of one man’s labors to give to another who refuses to work? I have pretty much given up. Say the wrong buzz word and you automatically become a “looter” or a “tea partier”. Welcome to the internet. |
DrSerizawa May 01, 2011 |
|
Mercy! 124 posts? It is axiomatic that bad movies generate more comments than good ones. It is equally true that movies that are more about a specific agenda than they are about being movies. When the two are combined in one movie ... welcome to the internet, indeed. (See Fireproof or Expelled, the former has even more posts than this.) Doctor, I like you—I assume you know that by now—but Rand’s not something I’d much like to discuss with you, except in person. I mostly don’t like internet argument on topics like this anyway. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
How does one justify stealing the fruits of one man’s labors to give to another who refuses to work? You’re talking about CEOs, right? |
May 02, 2011 at 6:18 AM |
|
Apparently Rand’s philosophy doesn’t engender much rational discussion….. It would be nice to see a rational exchange of ideas rather than insults bandied back and forth. April Fools’ Day lasted all month, it seems, in light of the never-ending discourse on Ayn Rand polemics, smoking rights, ornamental tree rights, driving etiquette, and schlock movies with grits—some of to which I admit that I contributed. Fortunately, since May Day did not engender another round of simplistic anarchist theory, perhaps this month will see the level of MtnX discourse ratcheted upward, or at least the insults will be more creative. |
May 02, 2011 at 7:02 AM |
|
schlock movies with grits Hey, that was Important Stuff. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
The free market has spoken! Atlas Shrugged, Parts 2 and 3 will most likely not ever get made: http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/movies/121000454.html |
May 02, 2011 at 11:04 AM |
|
The “Capitalism: Is It Moral?” Debate is TONIGHT at 6p ET. Watch it live through the ARC FB page: https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=179836322068617 |
May 02, 2011 at 11:12 AM |
|
The “Capitalism: Is It Moral?” Debate is TONIGHT Will the Atlas Shrugged producer be there to explain why capitalism failed to support his movie? |
May 02, 2011 |
|
You’re talking about CEOs, right? Depends on the CEO. You know many? |
DrSerizawa May 02, 2011 |
|
but Rand’s not something I’d much like to discuss with you, except in person.\ Agreed. This is a movie site and the discussion should remain focused there. I just find it amusing how worked up people get over her work. |
DrSerizawa May 02, 2011 |
|
Depends on the CEO. You know many? I know way too much about way too many in the movie theater chains. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
I just find it amusing how worked up people get over her work. I’m not saying I don’t find it detestable, mind you. But surely you knew enough about me for that to be predictable? All the same, I’d give the film of The Fountainhead 4 out of 5. Actually, if you look at Rotten Tomatoes, you’ll see I did. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
There are books that should never be taken to the bigscreen, Atlas Shrugged in one of those |
Kwizats Haderach May 02, 2011 |
|
I just find it amusing how worked up people get over her work. It ain’t her “work” that gets people “worked up.” Nor her books. Nor the movies. It’s the cultish sheeple effect of half-baked cherry-picked self-serving philosophy that legions of thinking Americans find detestable and dangerous, and rightfully so. |
May 02, 2011 at 3:27 PM |
|
It’s the cultish sheeple effect of half-baked cherry-picked self-serving philosophy that legions of thinking Americans find detestable and dangerous, and rightfully so. Bingo! When I first discovered Rand, I was in my 30s and I found her to be a clunky, but fascinating writer who was 85% crackpot with 15% interesting ideas among the crackpottery. Then her cult members got into the mix and completely turned me off. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
I wonder if we can get this past FIREPROOF before it disappears from the ‘Still Showing’ list? |
May 02, 2011 at 4:32 PM |
|
I wonder if we can get this past FIREPROOF before it disappears from the ‘Still Showing’ list? Well, let’s see, it departs The Carolina this Friday, but it’s being picked up by the Flatrock Cinema, so maybe. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
“Apparently Rand’s philosophy doesn’t engender much rational discussion. And it’s too bad because some of her ideas dovetail with Adam Smith’s economics.” Hmmm…apparently you’ve never read Adam Smith. |
May 02, 2011 |
|
Hmmm…apparently you’ve never read Adam Smith. Er, yes, Rand’s objectivist ideas would certainly be opposed to free trade. How could I have missed that? |
DrSerizawa May 03, 2011 |
|
Atlas Shrugged and the Morality of Freedom [video] |
May 04, 2011 at 7:50 AM |
|
Tim Peck: Stop with the spam. If you want to talk about the movie, fine, but the next link from Rand Central gets deleted. |
May 04, 2011 |
|
Why put off until tomorrow what you can do today? |
May 04, 2011 at 10:48 AM |
|
I’m trying to imagine the version of this film that would most piss off the Randys. Maybe a rom-com version directed by Nancy Meyers? |
May 04, 2011 at 4:50 PM |
|
” I mostly don’t like internet argument on topics like this anyway.” Do you normally spend so much time on things you do not enjoy? |
Ricky Party May 04, 2011 |
|
You’d be surprised. |
May 05, 2011 |
|
Finally, the mainstream media acknowledges “liberal Hollywood is conspiring to destroy Atlas Shrugged” and… perhaps most revealing… Ayn Rand likes cake. http://is.gd/06Mc9u |
May 06, 2011 at 6:05 PM |
|
Finally, the mainstream media acknowledges “liberal Hollywood is conspiring to destroy Atlas Shrugged” You do understand that this is making fun of the idea that “liberal Hollywood is conspiring to destroy Atlas Shrugged,” don’t you? |
May 07, 2011 |
|
Dude, sir, the Colbert Report? Get help. I would recommend a talking cure over pure psychotropics. I realize your relationship with your counselor will likely become strained, but let’s face it: It would be helpful to transfer the animus you currently feel toward Everybody Else In The World onto a single, trained mental health practitioner, and you might then be free of your hatreds, though I suspect there’s a number of layers to peel back… |
May 07, 2011 |
|
It might be as well to specify to whom that’s addressed. |
May 07, 2011 |
|
Cake, indeed, TimPeck. You might try getting off on Paula Deen’s version of better-than-sex cake, which is even more psychotropic than Ayn Rand’s. |
May 07, 2011 at 4:40 AM |
|
That Colbert segment is hilarious. I must find time to start watching that show again. |
May 07, 2011 at 5:22 AM |
|
An ISO perspective on the film and the book and the author is worth a read, too: http://socialistworker.org/2011/05/05/atlas-shrunk |
May 07, 2011 at 6:29 AM |
|
Holy Carp! Someone needs to forward TimPeck’s comments about Colbert to the Colbert Report. I had no idea there was ANYONE who didn’t grasp he is satire. |
May 07, 2011 at 10:53 AM |
|
Atlas Shrugged: Americans Still Look for Economic Answers in Ayn Rand’s Classic [video] |
May 09, 2011 at 7:19 AM |
|
So is that renewed interested why the movie has dramatically tanked? |
May 09, 2011 |
|
The horror! The horror! Will it never end? |
DrSerizawa May 09, 2011 |
|
The horror! The horror! Will it never end? Well, it’ll probably be pretty much out of theaters come Friday (after all, it’s dropped to no. 22), which may have some impact. But we’ve got until around May 19 for this to drop off the front page. |
May 09, 2011 |
|
Hey Ken, I thought you vowed that all posts by timp eck containing links to pro-Rand propaganda would be summarily deleted. |
May 09, 2011 |
|
I did delete one. I left the Colbert one up for obvious reasons. I left this one up to see if he’ll actually answer a question. I’m skeptical. |
May 09, 2011 |
|
VICTORY! We have passed FIREPROOF. |
May 09, 2011 at 4:37 PM |
|
VICTORY! We have passed FIREPROOF. Why don’t we try with something actually good some time? |
May 09, 2011 |
|
Why don’t we try with something actually good some time? Perhaps this weeks Elitist Bastardry will give cause for some controversy. |
May 09, 2011 at 4:54 PM |
|
Ayn Rand and Alex in Clockwork Orange (pre eyelid-clips, of course). Try it on. See? It fits. |
May 09, 2011 |
|
Perhaps this weeks Elitist Bastardry will give cause for some controversy. It’s controversy that does it, not quality. |
May 10, 2011 |
|
Ayn Rand and Alex in Clockwork Orange (pre eyelid-clips, of course). Try it on. See? It fits. Alex had more elan and didn’t sound like he was doing a Natasha Fatale accent. |
May 10, 2011 |
|
But how are the train scenes? |
May 10, 2011 |
|
Excellent question. |
May 10, 2011 |
|
I believe Atlas Shrugged should be viewed as a warning that if we take socialistic principles to an extreme the negative consequences could be severe. This is similar to Orwell’s book “1984”, that while not realistic, exemplifies the problem of government becoming too intrusive in our personal lives. |
Tim Hubbs May 10, 2011 |
|
I believe Randian politicians divorce their wives while they’re on their deathbed and sell out the “little people” to propertied interests that can stroke their vanity and bank accounts. I believe anyone who can intellectualize or otherwise legitimize Rand’s message hasn’t really spent a lot of time with leaders of criminal gangs and other sociopaths. I believe every society that has reified a rigid class structure based on wealth has crashed and burned. I believe people who are into Rand are lucky their dreams don’t come true. Meanwhile, “socialistic principles” have yielded the polio vaccine, the Hoover Dam, the internet, and the Blue Ridge Parkway: The spectacle of a Randian believer throwing a tantrum about viewshed protections for land that’d be worthless without the “socialist make-work” Parkway always strikes me as particularly rich, dishonesty/calory-wise. But this is America, and conservative thought here is extremely flabby. |
May 10, 2011 |
|
Is Ken Hanke a member of Asheville Socialists? |
May 11, 2011 at 9:59 AM |
|
No. And it’s not germane or on topic, especially since I made it clear in the review that I find Ms. Rand’s so-called philosophy odious. |
May 11, 2011 |
|
Is Tim Peck an actual idiot or does he just play one on the internet? |
May 11, 2011 |
|
My favorite scene from Atlas Shrugged. |
May 11, 2011 |
|
My favorite scene from Atlas Shrugged Wow! The scene where Capital and Labor battle it out on the John Galt line, where Capital then comes to Labor’s rescue at the end. Boy! Don’t it get ya’? Must be from the upcoming director’s cut. |
May 12, 2011 |
|
My favorite scene from Atlas Shrugged. What was that I don’t even none of that made any who in the where did? |
May 12, 2011 at 5:55 AM |
|
What was that I don’t even none of that made any who in the where did? If the words sound queer or funny to your ears, a little bit jumbled and jivey, sing mares eat oats and does eat oats and little lambs eat ivy. |
May 12, 2011 |
|
Wow! The scene where Capital and Labor battle it out on the John Galt line, where Capital then comes to Labor’s rescue at the end. Boy! Don’t it get ya’? Must be from the upcoming director’s cut. James Taggart: “I gotta get that bike.” Dagny Taggart: “I gotta get that bitch.” John Galt: “Damn right.” |
May 12, 2011 |
|
James Taggart: “I gotta get that bike.” Dagny Taggart: “I gotta get that bitch.” John Galt: “Damn right.” You nailed it. |
May 12, 2011 |
|
Tear off your own head, it’s a doll revolution. |
May 12, 2011 at 3:42 PM |
|
Get the audio version of the book Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand: ......................... |
May 16, 2011 at 12:02 PM |
|
I find it oddly fitting that it’s read by someone named Brick. Also, is that a paid referral link hiding inside that bogus redirect link? Tim, are you attempting to live off of the sweat of others by taking a small percentage of every purchase made when a book is sold through that link? |
May 16, 2011 at 12:11 PM |
|
Also, is that a paid referral link hiding inside that bogus redirect link? Whether it is or not, I removed the link, since this is not a marketplace for advertising wares. |
May 16, 2011 |
|
There are 1084 pages, 645,000 words in Atlas Shrugged. There are 565 pages in a recent edition of Crime and Punishment. Moby Dick: 656 pages. The Sound and the Fury: 326 pages. The Old Man and the Sea: 128 pages. Is Ayn Rand’s book really worth that much reading? I can’t even find where Atlas Shrugged ever even won any literary awards. |
May 16, 2011 at 2:31 PM |
|
I’m still hoping that the RAGNAR, THE PIRATE! movie will be made now that the sequels to this are in doubt. |
May 16, 2011 at 4:31 PM |
|
I’m still hoping that the RAGNAR, THE PIRATE! movie will be made now that the sequels to this are in doubt. Perhaps they can make it a kids movie, then do a crossover with Thomas the Tank Engine. |
May 17, 2011 |
|
Hey, why do we have to drag everyone’s favorite engine into this? /has seen a live Thomas show. |
May 17, 2011 at 11:53 AM |
|
Perhaps they can make it a kids movie Hush or BB&T might take you up on that. |
May 17, 2011 |
|
Hey, why do we have to drag everyone’s favorite engine into this? /has seen a live Thomas show. Yeah? Well, I can up that—Thomas was the guest engine pulling the train when I made an ill-advised attempt to recapture my childhood by going to Tweetsie ca. 2003. (How did the place get so small between 1959 and then?) |
May 17, 2011 |
|
I will now act as my eldest son’s proxy by being very jealous. |
May 17, 2011 at 12:24 PM |
|
Hush or BB&T might take you up on that I can tell you from experience that BB&T holds their wallet very close to their chest. |
May 18, 2011 at 6:47 PM |
|
I dunno. They’ve been known to break loose with the cash where the prospect of spreading the Randian gospel is concerned. |
May 19, 2011 |
|
Here is an actual review of the film Atlas Shrugged: Part One. |
May 19, 2011 at 12:05 PM |
|
Wow! “An actual review” straight from Rand Central! How stupid do you think people are? |
May 19, 2011 |
|
Isn’t it somehow subjective to assume that their are “reviews” and “actual reviews”? Or did I miss something? |
May 19, 2011 at 12:15 PM |
|
Or did I miss something? The cult mindset. |
May 19, 2011 |
|
I don’t have anything useful to add, I just want to make sure this hits 200 comments before it falls off the front page. |
May 19, 2011 |
|
I trusted someone would tip the molehill-that-became-a-mountain past that 200 mark. |
May 19, 2011 |
|
Perhaps they can make it a kids movie, then do a crossover with Thomas the Tank Engine. Only if they get Ringo back as the narrator! Tom Waits as Ragnar and a cameo from Joe Biden as everyone’s favourite Amtrak passenger! |
May 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM |
|
I read the “real” review of the movie, and now know what we should all aspire to, notwithstanding thousands of years of Judeo-Christian philosophy and thought, the renunciation of predestination and exploration of concepts like “grace,” “mercy,” “love” and “reconciliation that form the different-ness of our civilization, our message to the universe. No, none of that. No. Each of us should, as the review so eloquently puts it, strive to be…. “proudly selfish and convey genuine independence, without appearing Nietzschean or arrogant.” Oh, and I had the distinct impression that the reviewer’s like 22 years old and lives in his mother’s basement. Just a whiff, mind you, but it’s there…. |
May 19, 2011 |
|
Well, Atlas Smug had a good run, but it’s off the main page now. Still, it exceeded even Edgy Mama’s debate on circumcision in terms of comments. |
May 20, 2011 |
|
Atlas Shrugged The Movie |
May 20, 2011 at 3:38 PM |
|
New theaters announced in AZ, CA, GA, ID, IL, KY, MI, NH, OR, and WA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss8LDBNcsWc |
May 20, 2011 at 4:12 PM |
|
Is that like flogging a dead horse? I think this thing needs to be retitled Gasbags Shrugged. |
May 20, 2011 |
|
Yuk yuk. Mountain Xpress movie critic make a funny. I just soiled myself. |
May 22, 2011 at 2:15 PM |
|
Meanwhile, there is a plan to spread the gospel of real freedom here in Asheville. There will be an upcoming study group and another possible study group, or maybe two of them will combine. One is a study group of Capital, Vol 1. The other is a more fundamental one, probably sponsored by the ISO. Get in touch with the Asheville Freeskool for more information. |
May 22, 2011 at 2:43 PM |
|
Yuk yuk. Mountain Xpress movie critic make a funny. I just soiled myself. I’m surprised you can tell. |
May 22, 2011 |
|
End the paaaiiiinnnnnnn!!!!!!!! |
 May 23, 2011 at 6:22 AM |
|
I should think it has to end soon, since the movie has now completely fallen of the charts, it seems. But there’s always the DVD release… |
May 23, 2011 |
|
But there’s always the DVD release… Marx wasn’t big until his exile, either. |
May 23, 2011 at 10:58 AM |
|
Marx wasn’t big until his exile, either. Zeppo? |
May 23, 2011 |
|
Yep. Sent to the islands following his disastrous coup attempt. |
May 23, 2011 at 1:29 PM |
|
Yep. Sent to the islands following his disastrous coup attempt. If that damned Harpo had kept his mouth shut… |
May 23, 2011 |
|
Well, I’ve read Otis Quackenbush’s excellent biopic, The Man Who Said Too Little and can understand some of what Harpo was going through. Terrible abuse from Grouch, an unresolved love triangle with Chico, and a feeling of remorse for being unable to save poor Gummo from the unscrupulous clutches of Willy Wonka. All in all, it’s amazing he ever shut up at all. |
May 23, 2011 at 3:40 PM |
|
But have you read S. Quentin Quayle’s rebuttal Are You Gonna Trust a Guy in a Red Wig with a Taxi Horn or Me? |
May 23, 2011 |
|
Not yet. I’m hoping the local library will get it ordered soon but, you know, it’s South Carolina. I should just be happy there’s still a library. |
May 23, 2011 at 6:19 PM |
|
That’s the worst of you liberal types—always expecting the government to buy things for you. |
May 24, 2011 |
|
The Marx Brothers, who began the revolt against the studio system, were fellow-travelers bent on imposing restrictions on the wealth-creators in the movie business. ......... |
May 24, 2011 |
|
Well, yeah. |
May 25, 2011 |
|
They had nothing on that rag-tag band of commies, THE TRAVELING WILBURYS. |
May 25, 2011 at 4:09 PM |
|
Why does God keep killing the wrong Wilbury? |
May 26, 2011 |
|
The producers of Atlas Shrugged Part I have decide to do part II: … The producers have set a tentative theatrical release date of Fall 2012. |
Jun 09, 2011 at 6:52 AM |
|
So much for releasing the movies on Tax Day by way of protest. They plan on going more directly after the Randian fanbase? Yeah, we saw how much money that lost last time. Translating website hits into viewer numbers is the fool’s game—just ask the people who made Snakes on a Plane. What became of “the damned liberal media caused my movie to fail, so I’m taking my marbles and going back to the gym?” What’s the plan to keep the damned liberal media from ruining his new entry in the franchise? That’s swell about the timing on the DVD release, you’ll be able to give it to people as a Xmas present. |
Jun 09, 2011 |
|
Maybe they finally grasped the initial concept of The Producers and figured out a way to cash in on the loss. |
Jun 10, 2011 at 5:39 AM |
|
And tax write-offs are a wonderful thing, too. |
Jun 10, 2011 |
|
Atlas Shrugged: The Trilogy is still alive. The producers of the Ayn Rand adaptation will bring the first part of their planned series to home-entertainment platforms this fall, courtesy of a deal with 20th Century Fox, and expect to begin production on “Atlas Shrugged: Part 2” in September. They hope to bring the new film to theaters during the 2012 election season. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/2011/07/atlas-shrugged-part-i-coming-to-dvd-and-blu-ray-in-the-fall.html |
Jul 02, 2011 at 7:36 AM |
|
Awesome! |
Jul 02, 2011 at 7:41 AM |
|
The producers of the Ayn Rand adaptation will bring the first part of their planned series to home-entertainment platforms this fall Like what movies—even unreleased ones—don’t come to “home-entertainment platforms?” By spring of 2012, it’ll also be in a Wal-Mart $5 dump bin, too. |
Jul 02, 2011 |
|
I was going to show part one as part of a right-wing fascist propaganda movie series, but now I can show both parts! Does the audience get to wear brown shirts? |
Jul 02, 2011 |
|
Might be fun. Might also look really bad to anyone who doesn’t get the joke. |
Jul 02, 2011 at 8:10 AM |
|
What I’m wondering is whether or not Ayn Rand’s no. one fanboy realizes that the only people seeing these latebreaking updates are those who are subscribed to this thread. |
Jul 02, 2011 |
|
the only people seeing these latebreaking updates are those who are subscribed to this thread. Which includes me and I am THRILLED to have two more chances to ignore this film. |
Jul 03, 2011 at 8:29 PM |
|
And that pretty much proves my point about the effectiveness of the Rand spamograms. |
Jul 03, 2011 |
|
Give a well reasoned argument for one sentence of John Galt speech. If you read it… If not, i suspect you checked Wikipedia for the theme. Give me one argument, and I shall blow you out of the water. |
Ragnar Jul 17, 2011 |
|
Give me one good reason why I should bother. |
Jul 17, 2011 |
|
Why should any of us bother to read Ayn Rand’s drivel? The insane rantings of a lunatic hardly deserve my time. Atlas Shrugged, the novel, has received no praise from literary critics, and foaming-at-the-mouth libertarians are the only reasons we even remember it today. The book would have already been swept into the dustbins if it weren’t for a small fanatic group of misanthropes who use this book as some sort of justification for being complete sociopaths. |
Jul 17, 2011 at 4:00 PM |
|
Maybe the city should allow Ayn Rand trucks downtown. |
 Jul 17, 2011 at 5:22 PM |
|
Why should any of us bother to read Ayn Rand’s drivel? I actually have read the damned thing, though it was somewhere around 1982. I have never felt even slightly compelled to repeat the experience. |
Jul 17, 2011 |
|
Maybe the city should allow Ayn Rand trucks downtown. Ah, the purpose for all this interest in traveling vendors revealed, eh? |
Jul 17, 2011 |
|
You didn’t even try to argue her opinions. You just don’t FEEL that they are right… |
Ragnar Jul 18, 2011 |
|
In which case I must leave you Oh, would you? Your rotters and looters Our rotters and looters what? May the man of the mind forgive you When you meet one, give him my regards. All I’m seeing here is a Rand fanboy hiding behind a screen name he picked up out of THE BOOK parroting the nonsense of the Head Crackpot in Charge and thinking it proves something. |
Jul 18, 2011 |
