Atlas Shrugged, Part I -- the movie


Barbara Branden

Recommended Posts

Atlas Shrugged, Part I, the movie

I am delighted, overwhelmed, and stunned.

Yesterday, I saw Atlas Shrugged, Part I, the movie. In advance, I was tense and worried. What if it was terrible? In that case, no one would consider a remake for years, if ever. I didn't think it would be terrible, especially after I saw a clip from the film: the scene where Rearden comes home to his family after the first pouring of Rearden Metal. The scene was very good indeed. But. . . .

The movie is not so-so, it is not OK, it is not rather good -- it is spectacularly good. I won't go into detail; for this, see David Kelley's review, with which I am in agreement (http://www.atlassociety.org/atlas-shrugged-movie-film-news) -- except that he rather understates the film's virtues.

The script is excellent, as is the acting. The music is first rate, and immensely adds to the tension that the action and the tempo of the film create. Visually, it is very beautiful. And wait until you experience the first run of the John Galt Line!

The film's greatest virtue is that, from the first moment, one steps into the world of Atlas Shrugged. The writers whose works live across time share an essential characteristic: their unique and personal stamp, their unique and personal spirit, emanates from every page of their writing, and one knows it could have been created by no other sense of life, no other intellect. The literary universe of Dostoievsky, for instance, its tone, its emotional quality, is instantly recognizable and can never be confused with that of Henry James or Victor Hugo or Oscar Wilde or Thomas Wolfe. And so wtih Ayn Rand: one turns the pages of The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged and one has entered a self-consistent new planet, formed in the image of the world view and the values that were hers alone.

To a remarkable degree, the movie captures the spirit, the sense of life, that was Ayn Rand's alone.

Does it have faults? I suppose so. I could not care less -- and I suspect you won't care either.

Barbara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Barbara.

"The road is cleared, ...We are going back to the world."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barbara, I am so glad that you got to see an early screening of the movie. And thank you for your emphatic endorsement of the movie. I had thought it highly probable that Atlas the movie would be excellent, and now I think it's a certainty. :-)

REB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given Barbara's depth of knowledge, understanding, and experience with Ayn Rand and Objectivism, I defer to her judgment on how accurately the movie conveys Atlas Shrugged's "sense of life." I look forward to seeing it in the theater.

As Roger and many others here have commented, we can expect very few, if any, positive reviews by the MSM's movie critics. Considering how much the media has poured-out hatred of all things "Rand," I expect to see condemnation, ridicule, distortion and, of course, misrepresentation of the movie's quality and certainly its message. With any luck, that sort of mistreatment will backfire on the critics, just as it has on their "reviews" of the novel, itself. My response has always been, "Read the book and judge for yourself." This is also true for the movie. Watch it and then decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To a remarkable degree, the movie captures the spirit, the sense of life, that was Ayn Rand's alone.

Does it have faults? I suppose so. I could not care less -- and I suspect you won't care either.

Barbara

How well did it capture the novel?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barbara,

Thanks for that review.

I will be glad to point to it a year from now and crow about the accuracy of your optimism. (There. I'm out on a limb, but that's my prediction.)

Nobody knows the future with certainty, but I have no doubt some serious changes are coming to America--and consequently to the world. I believe they are changes for the better. And I also have no doubt this movie will be one of strong influences on the mainstream.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I've decided I will see it after all. I always thought the best part of AS was the first third.

--Brant

can you imagine LPs' podcast about this?--I haven't seen this movie and I'm not going to see it based on credible reports from people who have seen it . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very happy to hear Barbara's assessment. I'd be more likely to give credence to her view than anyone else in the Objectisphere who has chimed in and seen the movie. [ She is probably the wisest person who posts here, and perhaps among the Oist senior figures (in my view, Peikoff and Kelley are a bit too 'eggheadish' and don't seem to have the emotional/psychological development). ]

The "sense of life" issue is the main thing you want the movie to capture (Barbara hints at that, but doesn't say if that is her view). First, you buy into the spirit of the system through the fiction, then you want to grapple with the philosophy. Second, the philosophy, the very detailed plot, the development of every character are all too complicated to be fully fleshed out in a movie. And if people like the unique sense of life - and if the movie expands to a thousand theaters rather than a dozen - you will see that 800,000 copies sold last year double at least.

It's, unfortunately, likely to be a year or two before most of us get to see the movie.

It has to go through its 'limited release' phase - probably some months long? - before it either expands all across the nation or goes to DVD. I don't live in a big city, and the nearest theater twenty miles away is a multiplex which -never- plays anything other than the top ten "blockbuster" movies that are playing in every theater in the nation.

Edited by Philip Coates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting point as well about knowing instantly one is in their unique universe if one is reading one of the very great or at least most lasting writers. (I'll have to think about that one a bit more.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very happy to hear Barbara's assessment. I'd be more likely to give credence to her view than anyone else in the Objectisphere who has chimed in and seen the movie. [she is probably the wisest person who posts here, and perhaps among the Oist senior figures (in my view, Peikoff and Kelley are a bit too 'eggheadish' and don't seem to have the emotional/psychological development).]

I agree. Barbara is a wise woman. Most of the rest of us are merely wise guys. :-)

You're not going to hear diddly-squat from Leonard Peikoff about Atlas I, II, or III. (If I'm wrong, you will be able to knock me over with a hummingbird feather.) David Kelley very graciously and perceptively reviewed Peikoff's OPAR. If anything set the tone for "Open Objectivism," I think that single fact did. But you won't see a similar attitude out of the ARI camp. Hell will have to freeze over first. IMO, anyway.

The "sense of life" issue is the main thing you want the movie to capture (Barbara hints at that, but doesn't say if that is her view). First, you buy into the spirit of the system through the fiction, then you want to grapple with the philosophy. Second, the philosophy, the very detailed plot, the development of every character are all too complicated to be fully fleshed out in a movie.

To me, it's apparent that Barbara meant ~exactly~ that. In my own view, an artwork, especially a dynamic one like literature, theater, film, or music, presents an imaginary world (she used the words "world" and "planet"), which embodies an "implicit metaphysics" or sense of life, a broad abstraction about man and reality--as well as the artist's distinctive style (Rand used the term "psycho-epistemological sense of life").

If Atlas I captures both of these aspects of Rand's novel, it will be a major triumph, because it will not only convey her philosophy but also her unique spirit. Those are the essentials I hope to see presented, along with the view of rational selfishness and laissez-faire capitalism as moral ideals. Beyond this, I'll be happy with essentialized portrayals of characters and issues, because ~many~ people will then be led to read the novel.

And ~then~, we will see the big social/political changes in America that Michael Kelly is alluding to and hoping to see, as am I.

After the Tea Party has worked so hard to set aside all the social conservative agenda in order to focus on the low tax/limited government issue, and has enthusiastically helped to promote Atlas I, I hope we don't queer the deal by scaring them off up front with ~our~ social agenda issues, such as atheism and abortion. There's plenty of time to sort this all out, ~after~ they've become radicalized in re rational egoism and capitalism. In Peikoff's terms, I'd like it if Atlas I produced several million new M-1's, who would be highly valuable allies in rolling back the state.

And if people like the unique sense of life - and if the movie expands to a thousand theaters rather than a dozen - you will see that 800,000 copies sold last year double at least.

It's, unfortunately, likely to be a year or two before most of us get to see the movie.

It has to go through its 'limited release' phase - probably some months long? - before it either expands all across the nation or goes to DVD. I don't live in a big city, and the nearest theater twenty miles away is a multiplex which -never- plays anything other than the top ten "blockbuster" movies that are playing in every theater in the nation.

Phil, I'd imagine that if it is a smash hit, it will expand to at least several hundred theaters (if not a thousand) rather quickly. Who more than the producers of Atlas to be motivated by the opportunity for expanded profits! :-)

At worst, I think it's likely that they are aiming at releasing the DVD in time for Christmas holiday gift-giving. So, that's 8 months, rather than a year or two.

Here in middle Tennessee, if no Nashville theaters show Atlas I, my wife and I are already planning a weekend getaway to the nearest city that does show it. (Atlanta? St. Louis? Louisville? Indianapolis? Charlotte? Memphis? Cincinnati? Pittsburg?)

I have a gig on April 15 anyway -- a jazz writers night -- on which I will be performing and having one of my works performed, so we will be a bit behind the opening night curve, in any case. So, April 16 will be our special night, come hell or high water!

REB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting point as well about knowing instantly one is in their unique universe if one is reading one of the very great or at least most lasting writers. (I'll have to think about that one a bit more.)

Phil, for me, it's kind of hit or miss. My favorite authors, even the pop culture ones, have always hit me that way. Mickey Spillane, for example. Or Lee Child or Robert Crais, two of my current favorite suspense novelists. Or James Patterson, who writes very violent, gut-wrenching page-turners. They really know how to establish atmosphere and context. Others I enjoy, such as Tom Clancy, not so much. It's so naturalistic, that I have the sense that it really ~could~ happen in this world, so I value him more for the story and the suspense.

Interestingly, I have a similar response in music. Very different composers like John Williams, Claus Ogerman, Dave Grusin, Prokofieff, Debussy, Ravel, Shostakovich, Rachmaninoff, Dvorak, Beethoven, Bach, or Saint-Saens (to name a few), I find immediately recognizable by their style, and by the "world" I am entering when I listen to them. Others, such as Haydn or Schubert or Mahler, not so much. (I fall asleep during Mahler, though I know he is a great composer.)

But you're right, this is a very interesting topic. Short of some breakthrough in understanding how this all works, and how to share it with others on a conceptual level, all I can do is recommend pieces I think are outstanding and hope others "get it" and enjoy them.

REB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The story I've heard about Peikoff's opinion is that he was sued for breach of contract and that he agreed as part of the settlement not to say anything in public about the movie. If this is accurate, we'll indeed be hearing nothing from him. What others in the circle have to say will be interesting, as will Peikoff's explanations of why he has nothing to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ted,

It's on the TAS site. He reviewed it right when it came out. I'll find the link in a sec.

EDIT: It was a bit harder to find than I thought, but here it is: Peikoff's Summa by David Kelley.

Michael

Thanks. I think you can imagine how unhelpful a search on "david kelley review leonard peikoff objectivism philosophy ayn rand" might be

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