‘Atlas Shrugged’ Producer Sets Record Straight On Upcoming Trilogy

bighollywood.breitbart.com ^ | July 20, 2010 | John Nolte

[EveningStar]

Atlas Shrugged book review at National Review, by Whittaker Chambers, December 28, 1957

[Darkwolf377]

Anthem was pure torture for me to read, but you might have a point—it could be an okay movie. Not with music by Rush [one of my nominees for worst band ever] but if well-directed and art-directed.

[livius]

I hope they get a good screenwriter. While some of the general concepts in the books were good, they were laughable as novels and had characters that ranged from wooden to ludicrous.

Of course, literary quality is no indicator of importance. Uncle Tom’s Cabin was a truly horrible book but very influential. As I say, I hope they get a good screenwriter who can pick out the nuggets from the dreck.

[BelegStrongbow]

Why not Gary Sinise? or, for that matter, Mark Harmon?

[Seruzawa]

I’m looking forward to all the bestselling books that are going to be published by all those freepers who think Rand is an intellectual lightweight. Should be interesting. I wonder how long until the first one?

AS could have been pared down, but maybe she figured that many readers would be liberals and that 800 pages of the same philosophy still wouldn’t be enough to sink in.

[Malsua]

Bleah. Why summarize in a speech what you just spent 800 pages telling me anyway?

Yup. I'm reading it going "ALRIGHT, ALRIGHT, I GET IT!!"

So I skipped ahead 50+ pages. The whole concept was kind of ludicrous anyway, that heads of government would sit there ostensibly for 3 hours and listen to Galt blather ad naseum. The book would have been much better with Galt reading a page with bullet points summarizing the whole concept in 5 minutes of radio time.

[MNDude]

I know nothing about her (other than her book). What do you say she’s bad?

[OldMissileer]

I do hope they cut the long speech by Galt at the end.

The only part of the book that made me cringe and my mind melt.

100 pages of dead horse beating.

[GonzoGOP]

Have I missed something on my seven plus readings?

Probably the whole part that goes

"For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to your neighbors-between those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of ghosts in heaven and those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of incompetents on earth. And no one came to say that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it."

I always took this as a criticism of the televangelist/jihad crowd who misused religion to rule over mankind. However it could equally be taken as a condemnation of religion in general. Especially if you consider that Rand was an outspoken atheist. I liked the book a lot but I could see where those who take there religion very seriously will have to confront ideas they don't particularly want to.

[Darkwolf377]

The Fountainhead film was very well done, and unique as a film of ideas, especially for its time. There`s nothing in it that indicates atheism to THIS atheist--Rand was saying the individual should be the one who decides what he/she believes. I don`t see how that`s anything but anti-totalitarian, something Rand was all about and which I can`t disagree with.

The Fountainhead was well-directed and scripted--it`s not a melodrama for people who need sentiment and studio-approved `morality`.. It`s about a specific view of individualism. If you want to stand with the socialists against that just because it doesn`t pander to your specific religious beliefs, have fun.

[wally_bert]

How about Claudia Christian?

[tired_old_conservative]

I seriously doubt Atlas Shrugged can ever be turned into a movie that works or makes much money. It's technical aspects are pretty dated by now, so it would require a fair amount of re-imagining.

It's more about making a philosophical point than telling a story, too, which would complicate any screenplay.

[cdcdawg]

I think the speech is simply the author philosophically pleasuring herself.

[whence911]

I think Pillars was going to be 3-4 hours. The producers and directors went out to vists the author and they all agreed, 8 hours.

[whence911]

1 director

[sam_paine]

Surely now it’s generally accepted as a good one (certainly when compared to the prequels, or even Return of the Jedi.)

But I vividly remember in 1980 many people complaining about Empire as just a filler, or bridge.

[GonzoGOP]

I seriously doubt Atlas Shrugged can ever be turned into a movie that works or makes much money. It's technical aspects are pretty dated by now, so it would require a fair amount of re-imagining.

Same could be said about Heart of Darkness. A bunch of British Victorians sailing a steam boat up a river in the Congo isn't much of a story for today's audiences. But change it to a Recon team sailing a PBR and the Mekong, throw in a little German opera, and you have yourself a blockbuster.

[Moonman62]

One of the highlights of her life is that in front of all their friends, she told her husband that she was going to cheat on him and that there was nothing he could do about it. Then she went out and did it.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

The book developed a quasi-religious cult. The cult has its holy books(Rand's writings); its prophetess, Rand; its church, its successors writing epistles to the faithful; its dogma and its heretics.

[twigs]

I don’t “follow” her. But I find her perceptions in Atlas Shrugged amazing. She really knew what repression of the producers in a society would bring. Her stand on religious and moral views, or should I say, lack of them, were troubling.