The people behind the Atlas Shrugged series of films have things they want to tell you, and just to make sure that you know what they are, the movies tell you, and tell you, and then tell you again.
Obviously not your political bent. You should not let your politics taint your criticism or that would be propoganda. 78% of those that watched liked it.
Oct 12 - 05:39 PM
I wouldn't be so happy about that - i'd bet that 100% of those who watched it were Randroids. And the fact that only 78% of THEM liked it is a commentary on the quality of the film.
Oct 12 - 06:20 PM
It is not the quality of the film that should be considered, it is the message that it means to get across.
Oct 12 - 08:02 PM
This is a movie criticism website, and you are saying that the quality of the film doesn't matter.
Oct 12 - 08:07 PM
These folks would praise a theatrically-released Powerpoint presentation if it agreed with them, Sam.
Oct 13 - 07:29 AM
Wrong, Anthony. They'd praise a theatrically-released Powerpoint presentation if it agreed with Rand's philosophy. But I understand that you and Sam don't get the difference.
Oct 14 - 09:29 AM
@ Kleinsturn - I know your conservatism demands the you come to the rescue of your fellow righties, but don't worry about them, scro! There's plenty of 'tards out there livin' kickass lives!
Oct 14 - 10:11 AM
What message is that? Obey, toil, and worship your boss?
Oct 14 - 03:11 PM
It's a movie...of course quality of the film matters. If your movie is terrible, you won't get your message across.
Then again...Rand's messages are not ones that most people should get anywhere. They're mostly paranoid and terrible to begin with.
Oct 17 - 10:29 AM
Yes, similar to the book. But upon re-reading the book, one has to marvel at Rand's perspicacity almost 60 years ago. We really have gone from fiction to fact in 50 years.
Oct 12 - 06:19 PM
Well, they must be told, must they?
Oct 12 - 07:59 PM
Hite, we get it, you love Ayn Rand. Now fuck off!
Oct 12 - 09:41 PM
Rand is undeserving of her status. Keep on beating this unnecessary trilogy down.
Oct 12 - 08:35 PM
Rand's "Atlas" riffs on Epicurus view of the good life, updated for modern industrial times. Epicurus was the original critic of Plato. And what he thought back then has been calumnied ever since. You are for your own good? Not others? YOU must be a mindless hedonist (ie, an "Epicurian")! A feckless atomist - lacking any spiritual value!
Thus, today's Leftists join the Ancient Right-wing Christian reactionaries in not just their condemnation against "dangerous," rampant individualism, but their unengaged rationales. And that's why they - and YOU - hate "Atlas" so! Because Rand, like Epicurus, dissents from your stale, dead conformism. You cannot stand it!
Oct 13 - 03:34 AM
I don't know what Ken has said otherwise but it sounds to me like you assumed an awful lot in your reply. There's always the chance that Ken is NOT as you alluded to and, instead, simply doesn't appreciate Rand's work at all (and doesn't think others should as much either - for varied reasons other than those you stated) and that your assumptive reaction about why that must be is more a condition of YOUR conformism to some perception than it is a valid concern about Ken's individual perception.
Oct 13 - 04:46 AM
Randians: Talk like comic book villains. Act like comic book civilians.
Oct 13 - 07:32 AM
Yeah, Angela. It could be. But it wasn't. The "keep on beating" was the tipoff. You seem clever. I'll let you figure out the "why" for yourself.
Oct 14 - 09:32 AM
Bill, the notion that this never had to be made into a film or a trilogy could have been the rationale for using the phrase "keep on beating this unnecessary trilogy down." It isn't necessarily indicative of the philosophy or politics of the commenter in general, which could be completely unrelated to much of anything other than thinking Atlas Shrugged itself is bad (or completely undeserving of adaptation in this form). Does it likely allude to what Ken's view is - in that it's easy to read it as negative about Rand and/or Rand's philosophy in general? Certainly - but it's not quite as clear-cut as some people seem to think.
There's some sort of assumption out there from many that those who believe in or respect Rand's philosophy must also enjoy her books. This isn't expressly the case.
Oct 14 - 01:09 PM
Bill, the notion that this never had to be made into a film or a trilogy could have been the rationale for using the phrase "keep on beating this unnecessary trilogy down." It isn't necessarily indicative of the philosophy or politics of the commenter in general, which could be completely unrelated to much of anything other than thinking Atlas Shrugged itself is bad (or completely undeserving of adaptation in this form). Does it likely allude to what Ken's view is - in that it's easy to read it as negative about Rand and/or Rand's philosophy in general? Certainly - but it's not quite as clear-cut as some people seem to think. I mean, simply saying that a film was overrated doesn't mean one thinks it was bad - similarly, stating that someone is undeserving of their status doesn't mean one utterly disagrees or sees no value in the person having any status at all.
There's some sort of assumption out there from many that those who believe in or respect Rand's philosophy must also enjoy her "popularity" as an individual or her books. This isn't expressly the case.
Oct 14 - 01:12 PM
I wrote out one half-baked sentence, and get all of this. Rand fans sure are eager to defend their idol.
Oct 14 - 04:37 PM
Ken - yeah, isn't it interesting. All that chest-pounding about the supremacy of the ego and all that just turns out to be a defense mechanism for a buncha thinskins whose grand guru turned out to be a crackpot.
Oct 15 - 10:59 AM
Ken, you say that as though I was defending Rand rather than defending you against someone who was overzealously defending Rand.
Oct 15 - 08:22 PM
Olson - Reactionary-Revolutionary. Didn't know that was possible.
BTW - Who torqued your face? You look like The Thing splitting into two new organisms.
Oct 14 - 06:31 AM
Yeah, it is possible. BTW, why did you choose an avatar that looks like a melting burnt-sienna crayon?
See how that works, doofus?
Oct 14 - 09:33 AM
@Kleinsturn - A pimp's love is different from that of a square. BTW, you look a little pale. Need to get out of mom's basement more often.
Oct 14 - 09:45 AM
Oh god, that is some epic burn, Mr. Cens
Oct 14 - 04:39 PM
Oct 15 - 01:11 PM
Nice work, Mr. Olson .
Oct 14 - 02:01 PM
Pertinent comment, Mr. Olson .
Oct 14 - 02:03 PM
Amen to that Ken!
Oct 17 - 10:30 AM
i guess you missed the point that this is exactly where obama is taking the country ... and the "people behind" the movie is ayn rand
Oct 13 - 05:12 PM
Yes, at the root of it, the person behind this movie is Ayn Rand. And that is why it is failing so dismally at the box office - she's a really bad writer, and her crackpot theories don't have any traction in the real world.
Oct 14 - 06:58 AM
Her "crackpot theories" are rooted in Soviet Russia and she foresaw its demise.
are you paying attention?
How many more rounds of "quantitative easing" will we have to go through before you "get it"?
some earn, others loot and yet others mooch.
which are you?
Oct 14 - 09:25 AM
EVERYONE foresaw USSR's demise. It took 20 fucking years for it to go through its death throws.
Oct 15 - 10:45 AM
Sounds like The Dark Knight
Oct 14 - 12:52 AM
. . . and yet Commie Robots -- still don't understand .
Oct 14 - 01:59 PM
How about you "reasonable" Randroids take heed of what reviews are: opinion-pieces. Doubtless you'll maintain your fervent "reason" through your "objective" worldview, but remember that you're not disproving this guy one iota.
Oct 14 - 04:15 PM
Cripes. Just watched the first few minutes of part one.
if part II is "Straight to DVD" quality, it certainly would be an improvement. Your average movie about the rapture has better production values, writing and acting.
I mean, you start the story with a BANKER complaining about how others mooch off his labor? A banker? What? Really? Someone who takes your money and then charges you a fee for the privilege of taking your money and then loses the rest of your money and then takes your house. Really?
What's part two about? Heroic HMOs fighting the parasitic victims of car crashes?
Oct 14 - 04:32 PM
$3.2 million recovered from a $25 million budget. Wonder if there are any government film subsidies available to fund part three? ;-)
Nov 3 - 03:20 PM