Angelina Jolie

I think she could do a good job. After all, she is supposedly a fan of the book. I think people should give her a chance.

Angie should play the part, actually.

Eeuuwww! Jodie Foster would get my vote.

hehehehehehehe, very cute, honey.

Angie, not sure I'm comfortable with you working so close to Brad Pitt though.

I would pick Jenny McCarthy

It's nice that she's a Rand fan and beautiful, but where's the intelligence and integrity? Brad Pitt's old flame would have been far superior.

I don't really like her for the part. She's too obviously "glamorous" and not obviously intelligent. I can't stop remembering the part in "Atlas" where the railroad workers suddenly notice that their vice-president is a woman and that she is beautiful. There's no way that one could say that about Jolie.

I'm another big fan of Jodie Foster for the part. In fact, I can't imagine anyone else in the role. She has the perfect blend of intelligence, fragility, vulnerability, toughness, and understated classic beauty that doesn't hit you over the head for the role. Remember her in "Contact"? She'd do the same thing in this film. She's also a Yale grad and an atheist in addition to being an incredibly talented actress.

Judith

My ideal Dagny is Sigourney Weaver and Jodie Foster is a close second, both would be perfect for the part. Both actresses, are, unfortunately, too old for the part in Hollywood's eyes. Angelina is OK, but too much of a sex kitten IMHO. Also, I kind of think of her as the Sally Struthers (but less whiny and pudgy) of this generation with her cause, which doesn't exactly score points for her with Objectivists. But this is for a general international audience so that probably shouldn't matter anyway..but still...

For a school project a while back, I cast the X-Files characters in Atlas Shrugged, Scully as Dagny, Mulder as Francisco, the smoking man as Jim Taggert, Langley as Ragnar, etc. I had a real life person as John Galt (guess who). It was pretty fun.

Kat

I think Jolie will do fine, assuming she ultimately does get the role. However, I was more than a tad startled to find out that the favorite book of the man picked as director/adapter of Atlas Shrugged, the movie, is errm, Mere Christianity, by CS Lewis.



If I'm going to worry about anything, I think I'll settle on that.

Sounds like Jolie may be a done deal, but my vote, if it mattered, would be for Jodie Foster. Angelina Jolie is definitely too much of a sexpot for Dagny. Jodie Foster, on the other hand, would make a great "adding machine in a skirt" -- until she puts on her evening gown, at which point she can look glamorous. Plus, she just looks smarter than Angelina.

I agree - Jodie Foster is a better choice - they are really going to have to play down Jolie's sexpotiness - and wrap & flatten those boobs somewhat.

I can't really imagine a more practical, more functional--more supremely capitalistically effective casting choice than Angelina Jolie right now. Anyone here have the peculiar fortune to see Oliver Stone's Alexander? Lousy movie, but Jolie was amazing.

As they say in Hollywood, this woman will open a movie, she will get the proverbial asses in the seats. Jodie Foster? Maybe, maybe not. Ms. Foster's excellent, don't get me wrong, but casting her at this point in her career could cut the box office take in half. She's a little older now and, to my mind, frankly a little too white bread.

I think the much more difficult casting decision is gonna be What's-his-face. Right now, I think Hugo Weaving would be an amazing choice.

[Possibly a duplicate post]

On the other hand, Jolie could use that image to advantage, playing against our expectations to build up tension, then letting her sexuality explode at just the right moment. Garbo and Kate Hepburn and their contemporaries used to do this. We'll see.

Peter

In the News:

Looking through a magazine called Tribute, displayed in movie theaters, something interesting caught my eye.

A section in the magazine called Star scoop reads:

“Angelina jolie has won her dream role as author Ayn Rand’s iconic heroine Dagney Taggart. Jolie, a longtime fan of Russian-born Rand, has been quietly campaigning to play Taggart in new film Atlas Shrugged. The movie adaptation of Rand’s epic tome has been kicking around Hollywood for many years.”


So it looks like Jolie wins the part, and I’m very happy about that. I think too many people have been focusing on Jolie the person—not the actor’s range to play the vivacious Taggart--and saying "But she's not like Taggart'. Um, actors play parts. Jody Foster does not look the part. Rand describes Dagney Taggart as a beautiful woman, and Jolie is a talented actor who can manage what the part demands. She can actually act regardless of being very beautiful.

About, Julie Delpy as Dagny?

Ciro writes: "Julie Delpy as Dagny?" Very superior to Angelina. Also try: Scarlett Johansson.

What bothers me about Jolie in the role is her woodenness, sort of an unfeeling stoicism....facial expression never changing. It's like the old joke: here's Jolie being angry...here's Jolie being happy...same expression, same pursed lips. Perhaps this is unfair. Perhaps I've only seen her in action movies where this kind of fit. But, Laure, being an emotionless "adding machine in a skirt" was a hostile caricature of Dagny, not something you'd like to see in every reel in her portrayal in a movie.

Jolie would be better for the more alienated, contemptuous of this earth, unable yet to shake of Nietzsche ande Hobbes Dominique Francon than Dagny Taggart, who is a much more psychologically healthy and more mind/body integrated woman than Dominique is till the last portion of the novel.

On the other hand, Michael pointed out that in at least one movie (Meet Mr. Black), Brad Pitt was able to play a rather Galt-like role, so has anyone seen a movie in which Angelina displays the "range" to pull off the enormously difficult role of Dagny?

Or even any movie in which she is not wooden, is emotional, clearly and convincingly comes across as a deeply passionate valuer (something indispensable to a woman, and more important...indispensable to portraying Dagny Taggart)?

I'd love to be proven wrong and I've not seen everything AJ has done.

So ....puuhhhleeezzzzzze!! ....give me some actual examples from her movies.

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.

Jolie's lips are too full and Foster's lips are...well, where are they?

In all seriousness, I would choose Jodie Foster over Angelina Jolie.

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

Kat, that photo of AJ put me over the top. (In endorsing her being chosen to play DT in AS the movie.) However, I was already headed in that direction (though at first I was appalled by the idea, for some of the reasons others have stated).

One factor that may have been overlooked in why she (I think) will be splendid as Dagny: she is best known for her "action figure" roles and the "Mr. and Mrs. Jones" movie, both of which have her as a very intense, physically active and focused person. Now, imagine that same dynamism ~channeled and constrained~ in the persona of a railroad executive. To quote Michael: Dayammmm! I think that her personal vibrancy and energy in that particular role will be ~explosive~ on the screen.

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.

REB

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

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...

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.

I have a new favorite for Dagney's role: http://delirium.lejournal.free.fr/Elisha_Cuthbert1.jpg
(She plays Jack's daughter in the hit show "24")

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.

Go to the following site:

http://www.wso.mb.ca/

It's the home page of the Winnipeg Symphony. Take a look at the picture of assistant conductor Rei Hotoda in the lower left corner.

Except for the brown eyes, that's pretty much my ideal Dagny Taggart.

Judith

No to Elisha Cuthbert. I'd have a hard time seeing her as anything but someone's rebellious daughter. Jodie Foster and Angelina Jolie are both good.


v.

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?

^Knightley

^Cuthbert

^Jolie

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

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.

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:


Michael

I just can't see Jolie portraying an individualist like Dagny when she is the complete opposite in real life.

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.

Robert, I agree with you on Judd being a better pick. Still, I just can't see Jolie pulling it off strictly from an acting POV. I guess we'll have to wait and see...

~ 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

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!

Dagny?

Jeff,

My vote is still going for Angie to play the part. Now that is really being objective on my part!

-V-

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'.

Ok, Nina Myers (before she betrayed Jack) had plenty of focus. Jolie just doesn't look like Dagny. That's not the best picture of Nina Myers either

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

Eh, her features are lacking the angles. Beautiful in her own right. Not Dagny Taggart's.

galt; The movie is The Painted Veil. It's a Maughum novel that I gather is set in China during a plague. I read nothing by Maughum and I don't know if I want to.

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....