Angelina Jolie as Dagny


Kat

Angelina Jolie as Dagny  

59 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think Angelina Jolie is a good choice to play Dagny Taggart in the Atlas Shrugged movie?

    • YES! ? She's perfect for the part!
      15
    • Yes ? Maybe not the best choice, but she'll do fine
      18
    • Neutral - no opinion either way
      6
    • No ? She is not a very good choice to play Dagny
      10
    • NO! ? She is horrible for the part!
      10


Recommended Posts

One small note, though: I hope that if they do the "rescue" scene where Galt is being tortured, Dagny takes out the guard with martial arts rather than shooting him. That would be better in so many ways. No gratuitous killing. Strong woman (rather than equalized with a gun) takes out male thug with her bare hands. More chance to see her physical dynamism.

It might make for a more interesting movie, but it wouldn't be realistic, plot-wise. (But, hey -- when did that ever stop Hollywood?) I remember thinking back when we were having the ethics discussion about why Dagny shot the guard during this rescue scene that Rand probably had her do it because, as a woman, she simply didn't have the physical strength to overcome her adversary physically and tie him up as did her male counterparts. And it wouldn't have been very timely of her to hold him at gunpoint and wait for her male counterparts to come along and do it for her. So she had to shoot him.

But does anyone remember Madeleine Cosman's presentation from the 2005 TOC Summer Seminar? "Dagny Shoots and Flies." I had been debating whether or not to come to summer seminars for years, but the title of that one pushed me over the top, and I sent in my registration -- and the presentation was truly wonderful. I can still see Madeleine standing up there, saying, "My Darlings! It's ECSTATIC!"

So we know from the book that Dagny works insane hours, and flies enough to keep her pilot's license, and at least knows which end of a handgun to point at an adversary and how to pull the trigger. Is it realistic to assume that she also has the time to train in martial arts to any level of competency?

Judith

Nah, in the novel Dagny could have had the guard turn around, and she could have whacked him over the head with the gun. Works as well or better than a well-placed karate chop in disabling an opponent. And no need to take time to tie him up. In all, it might have taken 5 seconds more than drilling him with a bullet.

As for what is "realistic" in the movie compared to the book, we are already facing the prospect that there will be various changes in detail from the book. Perhaps Dagny's flying a plane will play no role in the movie. Perhaps she will not carry a handgun. Or, perhaps she includes self-defense training as part of her "insane" schedule, not spending all of her waking hours on the railroad.

There are many realistic ways to allow for Dagny to disable an opponent without necessarily having to kill him, and to have the competence to do so. Who knows, maybe the script writer will come up with an alternative that even Rand would have approved of! :-)

reb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Marital arts?

I can see it. The plot keeps thickening until the guard scene. Then there is a 15 minute martial arts fight, but that would have to include Dagny beating the guard and getting into the torture chamber where Galt is, and Hank Rearden, Francisco, Ragnar and others come swinging in through the windows dressed as Ninjas or something and fighting a whole bunch of guards with machine guns and stuff.

That'll knock 'em dead!

Maybe they could also put in an exciting car chase somewhere, too.

:)

Michael

(Hey! Stop that! Just joking...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marital arts?

I can see it. The plot keeps thickening until the guard scene. Then there is a 15 minute martial arts fight, but that would have to include Dagny beating the guard and getting into the torture chamber where Galt is, and Hank Rearden, Francisco, Ragnar and others come swinging in through the windows dressed as Ninjas or something and fighting a whole bunch of guards with machine guns and stuff.

That'll knock 'em dead!

Maybe they could also put in an exciting car chase somewhere, too.

:)

Michael

(Hey! Stop that! Just joking...)

LOL!

Ohmygod! I hope the producers don't read this post. You'll put ideas into their heads...

Edited by Fran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angelina will do fine as Dagny. She is very professional and has the acting range, the intelligence and the passion to play the part well. She understands the novel and is inspired by it. Her box office draw is worth gold, and it is considerations like this that get a movie seen by people. Her exotic beauty can rivet viewers.

Who would I chose as a possible alternative actress for Dagny?

Keira Knightley. She is only 21, but she can really act. See her in two 2005 films, *Pride and Prejudice* and, especially, *The Jacket*. She is fascinatingly beautiful, can play strong female roles and has considerable box office appeal. The question would be about how well she could get into Dagny’s character. I think that she is professional enough to do well also.

-Ross Barlow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
angelina-jolie.jpg

Angelina Jolie

Gee, that is a tough one. I've always visualized Dagny as looking a bit like Vivien Leigh, but softer and more beautiful.

Jodie Foster is a good kid, but I can't get over her 'trailer park' souther accent. She'd have to lose that before I could visualize her in this role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jolie or one of the other girls might make an excellent Dominique though. Just thought of that. Probably not Cuthbert, once again she doesn't have enough...I don't know, the best I can describe it is she's too sexy. The girls Rand wrote about aren't the hottest of the hot. They're girls who're pleasing to the eye, yet they didn't display it. Keira isn't my favorite for the role either, but this is a good picture.

Here's pictures of the three to give an idea. Who do you guys think would make the best Dominique?

keira_knightley_metamorfose_img_wallpaper_03_800.jpg

^Knightley

20060215193516_elisha_cuthbert.jpg

^Cuthbert

AngelinaJolie_PH_32.jpg

^Jolie

Edited by Danneskjold
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knightley would make a perfect Cherryl Taggart: the fresh-faced innocence, the enthusiasm, the eagerness...and her coloring is perfect for the part as well.

Cuthbert is simply wrong for any Rand role, in my opinion; she lacks the cleanliness of expression and seriousness needed.

And Jolie -- well, I could say the same of her that I say of Cuthbert, in addition to the LIPS.

People playing Rand roles need straignt lines, straight lines, straight lines! Thin features! Sharp features! Long lines! Nothing soft or lush! Nothing round!

That goes for the men as well. Someone like Harrison Ford or Liam Neeson would have features too soft and ill-defined for any of the male roles. That's why I pushed Kevin Bacon for the role of Hank Rearden; he has those perfectly linear, sharp, angular features a Rand male lead requires. Even Brad Pitt is borderline soft.

Note how Rand gives her villains soft, moist lips. Think about how Eugene Lawson's lips twist in "Atlas". That's one reason I simply can't imagine Jolie as Dagny. In fact, the guy who played the evil physician in "Batman Begins" had lips exactly as Rand describes Lawson's; as I was watching that film, I thought, "There's your Lawson!"

Karen Leslie Kirsch ran a participant-sponsored session at the 2005 TOC seminar in Schenectady to discuss fantasy-casting for "Atlas", and one of the questions she raised was whether physical type was important in casting the roles. Normally I would say no in casting a book, but Rand placed so much importance on physical type that in this situation I would say it is crucial to the entire feel of the film.

On the lighter side, one of the favorite party games we like to play at the banquets is casting Rand books against type.

Some of my favorites:

Dagny Taggart: Ruth Buzzi or Minnie Pearl

Dominique Francon: Roseann Barr

Hank Rearden: Danny DeVito

Judith :devil:

Edited by Judith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil,

Playing by Heart is a great place to start appreciating Angelina Jolie as an actor. It's a really good movie, little seen by just about everyone. As I said above, she's amazing in Alexander, making you actually believe that she's Colin Ferrell's psychotic mother. She's got a hell of a range, actually, she's just a huge celebrity and has become unfortunately associated with a character from a video game.

Kevin,

I'm heartened hearing this, as I was concerned about AJ having the acting skills to give Dagny the authenticity, power and vulnearability that I would have been looking for in the part. She does seem to be an actress who will pull the crowds in, which is hugely important.

If it wasn't AJ, I'm not sure who I would choose. I quite like Christina Ricci, and although she doesn't 'fit' for Dagny, she would probably play a good Cheryl.

Fran

I think Christina Ricci would play a good Cherryl as well!

I also think that Keira Knightley looks much like Natalie Portman, who I'd love to see play SOME Rand character (not sure which). I just like Natalie Portman though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Junket Report: The Good Shepherd

This is an interview with Angelina Jolie where she discusses the upcoming Atlas Shrugged film. Even though this was about another film, it started with a couple of questions about Atlas Shrugged. If you don't want to read the full interview, here is the part that interests Objectivists:

Angelina Jolie

Cinematical: Can you give an update on Atlas Shrugged? What sparked your interest in developing it? "I think it's a wonderful book. I'm a fan of her writing. I think it's an amazing project. It's, in many ways, a controversial and complicated project and I think it needs to be done right. There's been a lot of talk as to how that can be and 'what are the important reasons for making it?' There's a lot of really great people involved. It's being written now, and we'll see as the script comes out, how close we are. Then we'll know how close we are to possibly making it. Everybody involved, the producers involved, we all sat down around a table and we all agreed that if we couldn't do it right, if we couldn't do it justice, if along the way any one piece didn't come together like the right director or the right script, then we would all just fold it and not do it. So that's where we're at right now. We're taking it step by step, and we're going to make damn sure that it's done right."

Cinematical: What are the 'important reasons' you referred to? "I think it's too complicated to get into, because I think the discussion about that project, the misconceptions about her [Ayn Rand], different interpretations of her, that script ... it is a huge subject. So I'd be tentative about speaking lightly about it."

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hell, I can't see Angelina Jolie as a REAL female Indiana Jones, either. Or Anthony Hopkins as a REAL serial killer. Or William Shatner as a REAL astronaut. Or Bruce Willis as a REAL New York detective.

But they all portrayed those characters, and convincingly enough to make a lot of money doing it.

Yet people continue to try to associate the real-life personalities and philosophies of actors to their screen characters. That's silly. We call them "actors" for a reason.

Apart from being just untalented and physically wrong for a part (e.g., you wouldn't cast Paris Hilton as Dagny), you have to abstract an actor from whatever you know about his/her personal life and ideas, and simply ask: Can this person convincingly project the personality traits and psychology of a specific fictional character?

I think Jolie can. She IS a decent actress. While I think Ashley Judd is closer to the look of the Dagny character as described in the novel -- and while I think Judd has shown the skill and emotional range to portray the "Dagny type" of woman -- they could do worse than pick Jolie.

So quit "casting" the movie based on the philosophical mutterings of the actors. That's the least of my concerns. My two major concerns, in order of priority, are the script and the director. If they get those two things right, they'll probably get a fine movie. If they don't, the cast won't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

~ Robert's got the correct perspective...especially when you consider his examples. --- Cripes! Who'da thought of Hopkins as the original 'Zorro', nm the brain-eating 'Hannibal'?)

~ This readiness for an audience to identify an 'actor' with a character-type is precisely why the original 'Star System' in Hollywood was inculcated...and used (and still, more subtley, nowadays also). However, then, it was based ONLY on an actor's looks, and audience-familiarity of characters they played. NOW add in what tabloid knowledge(!) everyone has of them (even back then, many had a prob with Frank Sinatra playing a priest!) and NO ONE can fill the bill for Dagny (much less James; then of course, there's Galt, but...)

~ Such...irrelevent...criterion probs will clearly make no one acceptable for even playing Cheryl, fer Pete's sakes! Give it a break. --- Streisand was great in YENTL, , btw, so there!!

LLAP

J:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Addendum:

~ Concern about an actor's supposed/presumed/likely/'induced' belief system should be considered trivial in evaluating their 'ability' to p-r-e-t-e-n-d being a different character 'on stage/cinema.' How many actors did Hitler? Who cares what their beliefs were, politically? Maybe some actually agreed (presumably covertly) with him!

~ Some seem to approach this subject as if David Duke (or some 'outted' Klansman) was up for playing Thomas Jefferson. Well, ok; even *I* might have a prob wondering if it'd be worth seeing him on stage trying it. But, c'mon: Fonda (not the father...he was honest) was the last 'big name' who was obviously a hypocrite re Capitalism. Really, none since whom I'm aware of. --- Judd might be 'best', but Jolie is adequate. (Hope she's reading this.)

LLAP

J:D

P.S: Robert: I have no prob seeing Jolie as "Indiana Jayne". I liked that 1st one!

Edited by John Dailey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
sc_010.jpg

Dagny?

NO!

The more I see Jolie, the more I think she's right for the part. Someone (I think Roger) mentioned her focus in her action roles, and I think that's such a great point. She has the ability to "constrain" it, and it will be bitchin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I may put in my two cents. I just saw the new movie with Edward Norton and Naomi Watts entitled something like The Purple Veil or whatever.

I never saw Naomi Watts before but found her to be stunningly beautiful. I don't know the first thing about her as a person and certainly have no idea what her own philosophy is or whether she ever read the book e.g. Atlas Shrugged.

During the course of the movie Edward Norton's character behaved inexplicably to me. If I were in the same room with her, Naomi Watts, I wouldn't be able to take my eyes off her. She is just eye-catching. So is my wife incidentally.

On a purely physical level I would like to see her in the role which is not going to happen. But I can dream.

Anyone else know her at all?

galt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angie as Dagny. EXCELLENT for the part. Certainly she would be great for Dominique Francon as well, but Angie is just so utterly sexylicious, and Dagny, well, Dagny is just so lustworthy. Angie as Dagny... oh dear, I am going to get lots of "Jolie's" over that thought....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now