Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Atlas Shrugged Filming Wraps Up
The Atlas Society - The Center for Objectivism ^ | July 26, 2010 | David Kelley

Posted on 07/26/2010 7:06:51 AM PDT by Ed Hudgins

I spoke with Dagny Taggart the other night. “It’s a huge honor to be part of this film,” said Taylor Schilling, who plays the heroine in John Aglialoro’s independent production of Atlas Shrugged. Tuesday evening, July 20, marked the completion of filming. We caught up with Aglialoro and his team in a weary but ebullient mood as shooting wrapped after an intense five-week schedule.

The movie covers Part I of Ayn Rand’s novel, with two more films in the planning stage to tell the rest of the story. With six months of editing still to go on “Atlas Shrugged, Part I,” Aglialoro expects it to be ready for release by next March—unless it is accepted for Cannes or other major festivals, which would probably mean a June release.

In entrepreneurial courage and talent, the film project to date is fully the equal of the story it tells, Dagny’s heroic struggle to build the John Galt rail line.

Having optioned the film rights to Atlas in 1992, Aglialoro (pictured above with producers Harmon Kaslow and John director Paul Johansson) has worked with a number of studios and independent producers, with one project after another coming to grief. In the ten years I have been advising him about scripts, I have read at least six distinct scripts for everything from TV miniseries to feature films. Hopes ran high for a deal with Lionsgate Films and Baldwin Entertainment for a single feature-length film, with a good script by Randall Wallace and Angelina Jolie as the lead. After that effort fizzled, Lionsgate undertook a lower-budget miniseries last fall. But the script…

[For the rest of the story plus a video interview with Aglialoro, visit The Atlas Society website!]

(Excerpt) Read more at atlassociety.org ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: atlasshrugged; aynrand; johnaglialoro; johngalt; liberalmedia; whoisjohngalt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last
To: Ed Hudgins

ping for later blogging


41 posted on 07/26/2010 8:32:58 AM PDT by Bodhi1 (Homeschools for a reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 240B

240B — You have no clue what you’re talking about. There is zero indication that Rand was alcoholic or was even a casual drinker. (Have you read any of the biographies?) There is some controversy over whether her husband was an alcoholic. Rand was a heavy smoker, which is probabaly what killed her.


42 posted on 07/26/2010 8:35:02 AM PDT by Ed Hudgins (Rand fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Gen. Burkhalter
If you're into Westerns, the guy playing John Galt played the role of Newt Call's brother-in-law in "Lonesome Dove: The Series" and "Lonesome Dove: The Outlaw Years". They were Canadian Broadcasting productions that came out in the mid-90s. Not a bad, but the story ended on a cliffhanger when the CBC dropped it. They might be good to add to your Netflix queue, if you like Westerns.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

43 posted on 07/26/2010 8:35:54 AM PDT by wku man (Steel yourselves, patriots, and be ready. Won't be long now....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
I thought angelina jolie was playing Dagny?

From the above article:
In the ten years I have been advising him about scripts, I have read at least six distinct scripts for everything from TV miniseries to feature films. Hopes ran high for a deal with Lionsgate Films and Baldwin Entertainment for a single feature-length film, with a good script by Randall Wallace and Angelina Jolie as the lead. After that effort fizzled, Lionsgate undertook a lower-budget miniseries last fall. But the script proved unworkable and Lionsgate withdrew altogether. By March of this year, Aglialoro was back where he started.

44 posted on 07/26/2010 8:37:14 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen (It's the 'Land of Opportunity'... NOT... the 'Land of Entitlements'!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

I know who Rose is, but have not read any of her books. I probably will once I get through my current list. I Know Rose was more politically active and led a very interesting life. To be honest, that is a bit of a turn off for me.

I am more attracted to the simple struggles of simple but brave people. With the politicization of “libertarianism” a lot of these ideals were lost to elitists who tended towards decadence and atheism, which would have been anathema to the simple pioneers who lived the philosophy.


45 posted on 07/26/2010 8:44:26 AM PDT by cizinec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Ed Hudgins

OK

if you expect me to argue with you? It will not happen. You are right, I am wrong. I wish you a strong and healthy life.


46 posted on 07/26/2010 8:50:38 AM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ed Hudgins

Will they alter the story to show it taking place during the reign of the first halfrican American president?


47 posted on 07/26/2010 8:51:38 AM PDT by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ed Hudgins
I wonder when they'll start filming the sequel


48 posted on 07/26/2010 8:55:17 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast
Rand sure saw clearly what was coming our way.

Indeed. I've often thought that the end of society will be less Orwellian (think Gestapo thugs kicking down doors, an all-powerful, all-controlling regime) and more Randian (people more or less just giving up, society deteriorating due to apathy and a "not my job" attitude).

Thugs kicking in doors may be the end result, but it would take a long time to get there.

I had an interesting conversation with a consultant last week.... I was talking about my experiences with a large three-letter behemoth of a technology company. I thought that it was a horrific place to work - for various reasons that I won't go into right now - BUT...

...I said that "if I was 55 or so and had a few years to go to retirement, that this company would be a great place to work because I could work there, lay low, not do too much, collect a decent salary, grab some excellent bennies+retirement, for 5, 6, or 7 years before they even figured out who I was or what I did."

The (very smart, BTW) consultant's reply? "So, you quit this company because you just hadn't given up yet?"

More people are Galt than you would think.

49 posted on 07/26/2010 8:55:28 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RedMonqey

So was Hemingway

Please, if you do not mind, tell me please what you know of Hemingway?

I am curious.


50 posted on 07/26/2010 9:02:31 AM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: tanstaafl44

Have you (or anyone else) read The Obama Timeline: From his Birth in 1961 Through his First 100 Days in Office by Don Fredrick? It sound like the most complete background book on Obama. I wonder if it is well sourced.


51 posted on 07/26/2010 9:32:03 AM PDT by IM2MAD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
Of course he makes up for it with a three hour monologue at the end.

Which needs to be cut to 5 minutes, 10 at most.

52 posted on 07/26/2010 9:42:41 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ADemocratNoMore; Aggie Mama; alarm rider; alexander_busek; AlligatorEyes; AmericanGirlRising; ...

Atlas ping. Good news.


53 posted on 07/26/2010 10:07:50 AM PDT by Publius (Unless the Constitution is followed, it is simply a piece of paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
Of course he makes up for it with a three hour monologue at the end.

Kinda like Avatar.

54 posted on 07/26/2010 10:16:26 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Live jubtabulously!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ko_kyi; Publius
She didn’t think anyone was qualified to edit her writing.

Yep. She didn't think anyone really understood it. Her editor at the time was none other than Bennett Cerf, who begged her to cut the "This Is John Galt Speaking" speech. Her reply was a masterpiece of modesty: "Would you cut the Bible?"

But she knew it was too long. She stated in an interview that she'd budgeted three months to write it and that it took two years. When Publius and I were doing the Book Club thread on it I found the thing so dense and tightly-written that it was extremely difficult to discern a structure. It was there, it was just that the thing had been polished so much at that point that you couldn't fit a dialectical wedge into the seams.

You wouldn't need a speech like that in a movie, and it's doubtful whether the novel needed it either to succeed as a novel. It was a major roadblock to the dramatic narrative, but from Rand's point of view the dramatic narrative existed to present the speech, and not the other way around.

You can sort of tell by the uneven quality of writing where she chose to focus her effort. Certain bits are lyrical and tragic - Eddie Willers' fate, for example. Others appear hastily-written and ludicrous - the scenes with Francisco shooting guns out of people's hands and Ragnar Danneskjold crashing through a window like Tarzan on steroids. Rand the philosopher wrote The Speech, Rand the novelist wrote the Willers dénouement, Rand the scriptwriter wrote the raid. IMHO, of course.

55 posted on 07/26/2010 10:37:10 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

Eddie Willers didn’t really have a fate, did he? IIRC he was left standing in the desert by some train wreck, and we never heard from him again. If Cheryl Taggart hadn’t killed herself, they’d have been a well-matched couple.


56 posted on 07/26/2010 10:40:43 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan
The film does take place in today's world, as opposed to 1957 when it was published. It actually opens TV news talk show that includes two of the villains and one of the good guys.
57 posted on 07/26/2010 10:46:19 AM PDT by Ed Hudgins (Rand fan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: nina0113

I thought so too. Rand was brutally hard on her secondary characters. Personally if I was Cherryl I’d have beaten Jim Taggart with a ballbat and sued his sorry butt for divorce. In that order.


58 posted on 07/26/2010 10:47:11 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: wku man

I used to watch the Outlaw Years, loved it!


59 posted on 07/26/2010 10:49:06 AM PDT by tina07 (In loving memory of my father,WWII Vet. CBI 10/16/42-12/17/45, d. 11/1/85 -Happy B'day Daddy 2/20/23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
Rand was brutally hard on her secondary characters.

Elitists don't think 'the little people' are really people at all. I'm not nearly as great an admirer of Rand as I was in college.

60 posted on 07/26/2010 10:52:23 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson