atlas shrugged, the movie

[Ed Hudgins]

The planned Atlas movie is still progressing. I can't give details at this time but watch over the next few months for more news.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ed,

Thank you for that news. Normally it is unwise to give out too much publicity during preproduction. Just hearing that things are going ahead from someone who is next to a person intimately involved with the preproduction (David Kelley) is good news.

Good news indeed.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Ed,

Thank you for that news. Normally it is unwise to give out too much publicity during preproduction. Just hearing that things are going ahead from someone who is next to a person intimately involved with the preproduction (David Kelley) is good news.

Good news indeed.

Michael

If I were making the movie it would be so radically different from the novel, except in the most basic premises, that it would be almost unrecognizable to the faithful. I would be denounced, of course, even though none of the heroes would have facial hair. I would modify "the sanction of the victim" concept and flesh out the heroes, etc., etc. Since I am never going to actually do this anybody reading this doesn't have to denounce me as a secondhander mediocrity (or worse); I am merely doing this as a thought experiment. But if I were not free to be as radical with the representation of the novel as I wanted to be, I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. What the faithful will get will grind on them almost as much. Mediocrity, no better than that.

--Brant

[Chris Grieb]

Ed,

Perhaps there can be a report at Summer Seminar on progress on the film.

Summer Seminar is July 8-15 in Towson, Maryland. Prices go up May 14th.

Edited April 30, 2007 by Chris Grieb

[Ed Hudgins]

Chris -- We certainly will have any update at the Summer Seminar July 8-15; register before May 14th while the price is still low!

Also we will be announcing soon our all-today October 6th celebration of the 50th anniversary of the publication of Atlas Shrugged, to be held in D.C. We'll certainly have movie news at that event!

[Daniel Barnes]

Brant:

>If I were making the movie it would be so radically different from the novel, except in the most basic premises, that it would be almost unrecognizable to the faithful.

Brant's got the right idea. If "Atlas" is literally faithful to the book, it will be a bomb. The dialogue alone will have them rolling in the aisles, and of course, can you imagine everyone sitting around listening to Brad Pitt talk on the radio for 50 pages of monologue? Please!

Easily the most interesting thing about "Atlas" is its radical, anti-coventional attitude, the huge imaginative leap that Rand took to get there. Why not get equally radical when making it? Greg Nyquist suggested someone like Charlie Kaufman (Adaptation, Being John Malkovich) should do it. Someone who's really brave, and is prepared to thumb their nose at the orthodoxy. Then it might just work.

[Brant Gaede]

I would open with someone reading the novel and we would experience the novel through that reader. This would follow by part of Galt's speech then "Who is John Galt?" The speech would be interlaced with the story throughout the movie, only small parts of it. The speech, of course, is John Galt. To really find out who he is you'd have to buy the novel and read the whole damn thing!--the whole novel! The movie would skim the surface of the novel, but be done with genius moving visuals. The whole idea is to accentuate the already great visual sense projected by Rand in the novel itself. Great as that was it wasn't the greatest thing about "Atlas" of course. What we would be doing is marrying the novel to the movie and the movie to the novel using real sight and sound and the sense of continual movement, not imagined. The more of the novel itself that the movie leaves unexplained, to a point, the greater the impact of the movie for the movie becomes "Who is Atlas Shrugged?" As the audience leaves the theater, each member can buy a copy of the hardback less the cost of the movie ticket! If I did the movie this way, I could be very faithful to the novel. I think one three hour movie could do this trick. Why could I be very faithful to "Atlas" this way? Because I would be merely illustrating it with a continual series of visuals. It would probably be best, then, to jump around the story in a way to visually make the novel a series of intriguing question marks? What is this?? What does this really mean and represent? In any case I wouldn't do it sequentially. I'd jump around like "Pulp Fiction."

--Brant

Edited May 2, 2007 by Brant Gaede

[Daniel Barnes]

Brant:

>The more of the novel itself that the movie leaves unexplained, to a point, the greater the impact of the movie for the movie becomes "Who is Atlas Shrugged?"...I'd jump around like "Pulp Fiction."

I agree totally. Avoid the obvious. The book is over-explained anyway.

Here's the sort of idea - jump away from Hank Rearden being so central and tell it all from the point of view of someone like Eddie Willers. Build up his character, and give it an, ordinary-Joe-caught-up-in-larger-events narrative, a bit like Joseph Cotton's character in "The Third Man". This device was used a lot in the 40's and '50s, which would give the film a subtle period flavour. Production design-wise, mix up all the eras a bit, like Tarantino did with his recent "Death Proof", where the feel is '70s but the characters all have cellphones etc. Actually, a parallel-universe '70s might be quite a good point to set it in, given the slow collapse of socialism in places like England, the garbage strikes, the oil shocks, etc. The Sex Pistols documentary "The Filth and The Fury", with its sense of slowmotion social breakdown would be a good reference point. Leave almost all the philosophy-speak at the door, get the dialogue entirely rewritten into fast, witty, pop aphorisms - so it plays more like Rand's Q&A, when she's on form, rather than her totally tin ear for the way other people speak. (Get Shane Black maybe?). Your instinct is good - don't try to slavishly replicate the book, make people curious about it should be the strategy. If they like the movie they'll dig deeper; if not, you've gained nothing anyway.

Start at the end: with a hand drawing a dollar sign over the ruins. But leave it ambiguous. People will go: hmmm, this will be all about the corruption of capitalism and greed...and then turn it right around on them!

Edited May 2, 2007 by Daniel Barnes

[Chris Grieb]

Daniel,

Your ideas show some good thinking about how the novel should be done.

I have heard that in one of scripts there was a use of objects in a very primitive way. The use of satellite dishes for clothes lines being an example.

Edited May 2, 2007 by Chris Grieb

[John Dailey]

~ Wow! Really interesting seeing what all these Quentin Tarantino-cum-George Lucas wannabe screenplayers would do with an 'over-explained' philosophical idea-heavy story (which most reviewers never had shown, and still don't show, an understanding of, ironically)...if these James Cameron screenplayers had the money to risk.

LLAP

J:D

[Daniel Barnes]

Chris:

>I have heard that in one of scripts there was a use of objects in a very primitive way. The use of satellite dishes for clothes lines being an example.

Cool, that's great! That's exactly the sort of thing. That would be true to the theme, but add a kind of surreal note at the same time.

[John Dailey]

~ Voight seems to have a penchant, if not preference, for playing villains lately. Given that there's been some discussion about Mormons in other threads and his latest movie is about a documented massacre by Mormons back-when, I wonder if there'd be part in AS for his looks and general style of acting? --- For those interested in this Bush-supporter (surprised?), check out...

Voight the anti-Mormon hawk

LLAP

J:D

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I caught a hint about this on another forum:

Randall Wallace: The World on His Shoulders

by Bob Verini

Recently tapped to adapt the epic tome Atlas Shrugged, Randall Wallace talks about the most challenging assignment of his career.

This is in Script magazine, May/June 2007 issue, Vol.13 No. 3

This magazine is for screenwriters. Unfortunately the article is not online. You have to subscribe to the magazine to read it, or find one at a news stand.

Michael

[Chris Grieb]

Michael,

I have read the interview. It is very enlightening. The magazine is $6.95. If you live in a large city you might be able to find it.

The most interesting quote is Wallace say he wants to make a movie that appeals to people who love Atlas Shrugged and "guys who love good movies." Wallace also makes an analogy to paintings of Vermeer. "So he had found exactly the essence that make you see the pearl. That what he wants to do with the "huge novel".

The interview will give an lover of Atlas great hope.

[Judith]

I would classify AS more as alternative history or possible future history than fantasy. There were no magical elements in the story. All events occurred within the realm of physical law with the possible exception of running motors on static electricity. The atmosphere acts as a capacitor, but there is not enough current available to run motors or electronic circuits on a steady basis. Some form of generator which transforms heat into motion or the kinetics of photovoltaic generation is required. TANSTAAFL, especially in the realm of physical processes.

I remember reading somewhere that the motor was based loosely on Nicolai Tesla's ideas. Look him up on the internet; he did have the idea of trying a concept like this, and F. Paul Wilson incorporated an old tower somewhere on Long Island remaining from one of the old experiments into one of his horror novels.

Judith

[BaalChatzaf]

I remember reading somewhere that the motor was based loosely on Nicolai Tesla's ideas. Look him up on the internet; he did have the idea of trying a concept like this, and F. Paul Wilson incorporated an old tower somewhere on Long Island remaining from one of the old experiments into one of his horror novels.

Nikola Tesla was a brilliant inventor and the man responsible for alternating current motors and generators. However, Tesla's attempts to transmit electrical power without conductors (wires) turned out to be failures. Tesla was both a engineer and a "wizard". In any case Rand did not understand what Tesla was doing. One cannot generate steady current from the discharge of capacitors. That is why we cannot base electric cars on capacitors. We need batteries of some sort.

Tesla based his inventions on classical electrodynamics (invented by James Clark Maxwell and others). He was also an aetherist. He held a view that was later discredited by experiment. There is now visco-mechanical luminiferous aether of the sort that Maxwell believed existed. Tesla was in good company. The aether concept was discarded mostly after Einstein developed his theory on the electrodynamics of moving bodies (aka Special Relativity).

In addition to inventing the technology of alternating current electricity, Tesla was the real inventor of radio. Tesla developed radio transmission before Marconi, but Marconi got the patent.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Randall Wallace: The World on His Shoulders

by Bob Verini

Recently tapped to adapt the epic tome Atlas Shrugged, Randall Wallace talks about the most challenging assignment of his career.

This is in Script magazine, May/June 2007 issue, Vol.13 No. 3

Michael,

I have read the interview. It is very enlightening. . . .

The most interesting quote is Wallace say he wants to make a movie that appeals to people who love Atlas Shrugged and "guys who love good movies."

I have reviewed this interview here.

Michael

[JanieJones]

honestly I think Angelina Jolie would be a horrible choice to play Dagny, she just isn't a very good actress, but then again Dagny totally LOST me when she jumped from Rearden to Galt (yeah yeah, I know). Brad Pitt would also be an awful John Galt. He's unlikeable enough so having to see his smug pretty face wouldn't work.

I'd more go for Barry Pepper as Galt, he might be able to convey what Rand was trying to get at but I just didn't buy. Very rugged and manly and brilliant looking, plus he's also got pretty hair like Galt.

Maybe Kristin Scott Thomas as Dagny. Very beautiful, very classy, not a ho (like Jolie). I could also see someone like Cate Blanchett. She is also a great actress. For Dagny its probably also better to have a well known face but not some superstar that most of the audience has a pre-conceived notion about.

Since Hank Rearden is the sexiest, most heroic and ideal man ever he has to be cast properly. If this were 30 years ago Clint Eastwood would be a no brainer. Ed Harris circa Apollo 13 would have been an excellent choice too, but both are too old for the role now. Some might say Harrison Ford but he's too wooden and too Hollywood. Honestly, I'd go with Damian Lewis. A more blond, aged Damian Lewis would be perfect. Not only does he physically resemble Rearden, he's also a great actor. After seeing Band of Brothers I could see him easily taking on a heroic ideal man part.

(and whats not to like, Lewis as Rearden, standing alone surveying his mills, hands in his pockets, hair blowing in the wind. hehe gotta go cool down now).

I'm convinced there's a supporting role in this for Kevin Spacey. Maybe Jim Taggart. As for Fransisco, beats the Hell out of me. I think an unknown sizzling Spanish actor, someone exotic, intense and brilliant. Anyone but Antonio Banderas.

Maybe Paul Newman can be Hugh Akston.

Sorry long first post. I love doing the casting for the movie version of books I'm reading.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Kathleen (JanieJones),

A warm welcome to OL.

Those sure are pretty people.

Michael

[JanieJones]

I dunno, I kinda got the impression from the book that these were the most beautiful people ever. Especially Franscisco, thats why he'd be so difficult to cast.

[Chris Grieb]

Janie,

First: Welcome!

Second: Good post!

All those people I like. I like Damien Lewis but would suggest he maybe to young for the role of Hank. Hank is I believe seven years older than the other heroes.

The Objectivist Center has a chronology of the novel done by Robert Bidnotto that shows these relationships. The chronology is worth looking at.

[JanieJones]

yeah Lewis is in about his mid-30s I think. Honestly my first choice would be Ed Harris in his mid-40s but I just think he is too old now. I think its easier to make someone look 10 years older as opposed to 10 years younger and Lewis is more than capable of playing someone a bit older, in my opinion.

The worst scenario would be Jolie as Dagny, Pitt as Galt, Ford as Rearden and Banderas as Francisco. That would be a nightmare.

And honestly I'm more into the literary instead of the philosophical side of the novel so for me, it fell apart a bit after around page 600. Up to that point I couldn't put it down, I just found it so riveting, the characters, the plots and the way Rand was able to present her philosophy within this. I felt after page 600 she lost this. Plus Dagny dumping Hank kinda irked me.

[Philip Coates]

For me, Dagny's choosing Galt is a problem: He is not fully fleshed out in the book or made concretely real in his background role plus the small section in the valley...you don't see him in sunlight and in shadow, in different circumstances or moods -- as opposed to the fully realized and thoroughly admirable, completely heroic, emotional and passionate, fully concretely real, vivid, larger than life, dramatic Francisco.

Her choosing Galt was a mistaken choice on Ayn Rand's part.

Is Francisco 'weaker' than Galt because he didn't lead the strike? Because he was torn between conflicts at some points? Because he was less "perfect" in some way? Was he less moral? Not as well 'integrated'?

No is the answer to each of those questions.

[Bidinotto]

The chronology of the events in Atlas Shrugged that Chris referred to earlier can be found here:

Timeline of Events in Atlas Shrugged

I also prepared an extensive Plot Synopsis, plus a Cast of Characters.

[Jonathan]

For me, Dagny's choosing Galt is a problem: He is not fully fleshed out in the book or made concretely real in his background role plus the small section in the valley...you don't see him in sunlight and in shadow, in different circumstances or moods -- as opposed to the fully realized and thoroughly admirable, completely heroic, emotional and passionate, fully concretely real, vivid, larger than life, dramatic Francisco.

Her choosing Galt was a mistaken choice on Ayn Rand's part.

Is Francisco 'weaker' than Galt because he didn't lead the strike? Because he was torn between conflicts at some points? Because he was less "perfect" in some way? Was he less moral? Not as well 'integrated'?

No is the answer to each of those questions.

I think you're forgetting one part of Frisco which wasn't "fully concretely real," which was the fact that when he went off to college he didn't shared with the love of his life the names of his new best friends or stories of their discussions and adventures. I don't know about you, but when I make the acquaintance of someone who possesses immense talent and intelligence, I can't wait to tell my wife about it. Keeping it secret from her because revealing it might spoil the mystery of the plot that we're a part of is usually something that I don't consider.

J

Edited May 14, 2007 by Jonathan