Finally got to see Atlas Shrugged (Film)

[studiodekadent]

So, my DVD copies of the Atlas film arrived and I finally got to see it. The following are my comments. Don't expect something deep and formal yet.

1) I'm sad they minimized/downplayed the whole "Hank feels that sex is evil and Dagny cures him of his mistake" thing. Hank/Dagny is my favorite relationship in Rand's literature, and I wish they had kept the scene where Hank is playing the Fallen Woman routine and Dagny can't believe Hank would possibly think Sex Is Dirty. But no, the film had to be marketed to social conservatives as well, so we COULDN'T POSSIBLY hammer home a rejection of religious sexual ethics...

2) Dagny comes off as a bit less self-assured than she does in the book. In Atlas, its Hank that's got the lack of self-assuredness and Dagny helps him. The film seems to reverse this at one moment (Dagny in her apartment making a late-night phone call to Hank). This is a bit sad IMO since Dagny is awesome BECAUSE she's absolutely self-assured.

3) Those critical comments aside, I have plenty of praise. First, Lilian Rearden is horrific. She's clearly a haughty, secondhander 'society woman' bitch who's only concerns are reputation/face and "being seen" by other secondhanders. I found her nauseating. She's a grotesque social climber. The actress pulled it off very well.

4) Hank Rearden is very well-played. I'm familiar with Grant Bowler (he's New Zealander actor that mostly works in Australia and I've seen him on several TV shows I've watched). In the book, Rearden is sort of the audience surrogate, who's constantly confused and not able to understand other people. In the film, Grant shows this by having Rearden make the "I don't really understand but I'm going to make a politely-perplexed smile" smile, which both conveys Hank's feelings AND manages to make him more 'relatable' (smiles are generally more relatable than a stoic, unmoving, botoxed face) to the audience! Great show. I also like how Rearden makes one or two snarky, sarcastic remarks.

5) Apart from the slight chickification of Dagny, she's otherwise excellent (in spite of the wrong haircolor). She looks great, but sleek and not excessively fanserviced out. She's got the determination, the drive, and the sheer competence. She's got the right level of coldness to her, for the most part, as well.

6) Ellis Wyatt was quite endearing.

7) Sometimes I think John Galt's short monologues were a bit too blatant (weird criticism of an Atlas film, I know). The last one in particular, when he says "I come from a place we call Atlantis" is a bit corny.

8) Hugh Akston is played by an actor that is far too young for the part.

9) All of the above aside, let's get to the critical issue. The film, in spite of its budgetary limitations, does convey the message of the book and the spirit of the narrative. The John Galt Line's first run is just as powerful in the film as it is in the book. My eyes were moist.

10) The acting, production and quality were far higher than one would expect given the budget. Overall, I greatly enjoyed the film.

11) The critical reception was bleedingly obvious in its bias. The film was nowhere near as bad as the reviews said. Coupled with the fact that almost every single negative review contained several mistaken allegations about Rand's philosophy, I am led to one conclusion: pretentious cinematic "enlightened artistique" shitstains like Roger Ebert were motivated more by a desire to stop people from seeing the film (and thus "containing the poison") than actual unbiased artistic considerations.

The opinions of social elites have a startling tendency to advocate philosophies which pander to their own Constructivist Rationalist "I'm superior so I should design society" power-lust. Philosophies which would make it impossible for these kinds of people to use the State to force society into their referred shape (or own image) are thus the enemy.

The spirit of Ellsworth Toohey was on full display in all those negative critical reviews of Atlas. Den Uyl and Rammussen were quite correct when they pointed out that the fact Norbit has a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes than Atlas does is a true mark of shame for the profession of film criticism.

THINGS I'D LIKE TO SEE IN THE SECOND FILM

Basically, I'd like to see a film that is just as willing to piss off the conservatives as the left. The first film seemed a bit too "lets put the bits that offend God and Christianity in the background." I'd love to see at least one utterly anvilicious moment that has slaps Jesus in the face and reasserts a simple fact; "your mind and life belong to you" implies not only that "your mind does not belong to other people," it also implies "your mind does not belong to god."

[studiodekadent]

Also, just adding...

James Taggart was very well acted... He came off as such a slimy, treacherous smug snake. Not as incompetent as shown in the novel, but in many ways more malevolent and dangerous.

[GALTGULCH8]

I ordered two copies and gave one to my son. I had seen the movie three times in the theaters in MA and enjoyed it each time despite the flaws e.g. the character of Owen Kellog in one of my favorite scenes was played by an actor who appeared to be more of a nerd than a competent manager of a division of a transcontinental railroad.

My son had read the book when he was fourteen or so. He once recommended it to a classmate who was a young lady whose father had been encouraging her to read it to no avail, by saying to her, "Its the kind of book that once you have read it, you will wish you had read it sooner!"

He hated the movie. He suggested that rather than tell people to see it, that I tell them to read the book.

[Philip Coates]

Subject: Being Open, Emotional -- and "Human" in the Best Sense

SDK, many good observations about the characters, the critical reception, the acting in Post 1. However, I have to - very strongly - disagree with this point:

"2) Dagny comes off as a bit less self-assured than she does in the book. In Atlas, its Hank that's got the lack of self-assuredness and Dagny helps him. The film seems to reverse this at one moment (Dagny in her apartment making a late-night phone call to Hank). This is a bit sad IMO since Dagny is awesome BECAUSE she's absolutely self-assured."

The phone call does not display "lack of self-assuredness". Self-assuredness does not mean you never feel depressed or lonely or complain about the state of the world. This was a scene that made both Dagny and Hank seem attractive and likable. She was opening up about her feelings about how it was to deal with the lowlifes, the uncomprehending. And he was being supportive.

There is a line in Atlas about what she sensed in Hank that if ever she needed someone's strength to lean on, he would be there. And this scene provides the first glimmer of that. When a woman leans on a man for support it doesn't always mean she's not strong enough to stand alone. When someone admits something personal that bothers them, it's not a sign of weakness but a sign of feeling open enough to share, trust someone enough to think they might receive it in the spirit in which it was intended.

This short scene reminded me of another in a movie from 2006. The recent James Bond films show formidable fighting skills on the part of Daniel Craig, assertiveness, ability to smoothly and confidently deal with women, bad guys, challenges. But the scene I loved the most in "Casino Royale" was effective and moving because it provided a 'human' insight into the characters and showed positive character traits: Bond has just had to fight and kill several bad guys in a brutal and bloody scene in the stairwell of the casino. Eva Green, who is not a super spy and whose job was just to finance the gaming, has just been a part of it and a witness to it. Minutes later, after the bodies had been disposed of, she is back in her room and is shivering on the floor of her shower, cold water streaming down her, silently looking straight ahead. She had been a formidably strong, witty, combative foil who had expressed nothing but contempt for the smug, 'macho', womanizing Bond.

Daniel Craig stands there, looking down, observing her.

He steps into the shower, sits down very slowly beside her in the stream of water, drenching his tuxedo and slowly reaches up and turns the water to a warmer temperature and puts his arm around her, sitting together for a very long time in total silence with no words...as long as it takes to reassure her.

Now this scene, unlike the evening phone call in Atlas, -does- display 'lack of self-assurance' on the part of Eva Green, if you want to call it that. But there is nothing off-putting about it. Nor is it a sign of character flaw or of weakness or of something to be disliked or disdained or disapproved of. She is a youthful graduate of one of England's top colleges. This is an early job for her. She's never seen a brutal fight to the death and gore right in front of her. And she's stunned and shaken by it.

Now here is the important "human" point. (And a departure from the usual special effects, carnage-driven movies.) She *ought to be* stunned and shaken by it. If you're not, if you can just shrug it off stoically, it's not the case that you are an "Admirable Objectivist Hero". Instead, there is something wrong with you emotionally.

That single scene made the movie for me. And it also explained why the two lead characters would 'break the ice' and she would be drawn to him after such a hostile beginning. She saw another side to him besides a formidably lethal piece of machinery. (As a minor side point, she had done her part in the fight scene in the stairwell and held it together just until she could get back to her room.)

PS, Eva Green would be a great Dagny, by the way.

[studiodekadent]

Phil,

I understand the point you're making. I agree that stoicism isn't mandatory (believe me, I'm quite an example of that). And I agree that when a woman requests a man's support it isn't degrading.

All I am saying is that in the novel, Dagny struck me as more "water off a duck's back" than she does in the film. Sure, for the most part, Dagny still IS very "water off a duck's back." My observation is more a matter of degree.

Its also a point about the Dagny/Hank relationship... I really like how it breaks the mold of Rand's typical relationships. The woman is more direct and forward than the man, the man learns something from the woman. This didn't come across in the film, at least it hasn't yet. Maybe in the future they'll do something that indicates that.

That said, these are minor reservations in the grand scheme of things. I did find Bowler's Rearden very good, and Dagny was (in general) very well portrayed.

One thing I will say is that I prefered how the movie portrayed the Hank/Dagny sex scene. I don't share Rand's thing for rough/explosive/bodice-ripping/ravishment sex.

[Philip Coates]

> All I am saying is that in the novel, Dagny struck me as more "water off a duck's back" than she does in the film. [sDK]

That's a nice phrase. I agree with you that she is more that way in the novel. I admire Dagny of the novel, but wouldn't find her romantically attractive. In the case of the role that Taylor gave us in the movie, I both admire her and find her attractive.

It's not just physical, it's a matter of attitude. I never have liked tough women who are "stoics". Lived in NYC and dated too many tough women executives. Been there, done that. I like emotionality in my women, actually in people more broadly....a matter of personal taste!

> One thing I will say is that I preferred how the movie portrayed the Hank/Dagny sex scene. I don't share Rand's thing for rough/explosive/bodice-ripping/ravishment sex.

I tend to agree with you in not too much having Rand's tastes. . . . But it's very contextual and I'm willing to grant a woman's requests.... :-)

[Xray]

Hank Rearden is very well-played. I'm familiar with Grant Bowler (he's New Zealander actor that mostly works in Australia and I've seen him on several TV shows I've watched). In the book, Rearden is sort of the audience surrogate, who's constantly confused and not able to understand other people. In the film, Grant shows this by having Rearden make the "I don't really understand but I'm going to make a politely-perplexed smile" smile, which both conveys Hank's feelings AND manages to make him more 'relatable' (smiles are generally more relatable than a stoic, unmoving, botoxed face) to the audience! Great show. I also like how Rearden makes one or two snarky, sarcastic remarks.

Rearden had to be 'humanized' for the movie; I can't imagine the audience would have positively related to a character matching the description in AS: "Ever since he been told that his face was ugly, because it was unyielding, and cruel, because it was expressionless." (p. 28)

Apart from the slight chickification of Dagny, she's otherwise excellent (in spite of the wrong haircolor).

Despite Dagny being described as a brunette in the book, I always 'visualized' her as a blonde (probably because of her Scandinavian name), and looking almost exactly like Taylor Schiiling in the role.

[Selene]

Rearden had to be 'humanized' for the movie; I can't imagine the audience would have positively related to a character matching the description in AS: "Ever since he been told that his face was ugly, because it was unyielding, and cruel, because it was expressionless." (p. 28)

Angela:

I can.

Adam

[Reidy]

The quote describes a classic type in the movies. John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, Alan Ladd, Gary Cooper, Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood (plus maybe Clive Brook in England) all spent a large part of their careers playing such characters.

[anthony]

The quote describes a classic type in the movies. John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, Alan Ladd, Gary Cooper, Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood (plus maybe Clive Brook in England) all spent a large part of their careers playing such characters.

A younger Clint Eastwood would have been good for the role.

Daniel Craig is the nearest, today.

Not "dehumanized", more stoically, deeply human.

There aren't many in our metrosexual age.

[Selene]

There aren't many in our metrosexual age.

You mean our menstruational age?

[Xray]

The quote describes a classic type in the movies. John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, Alan Ladd, Gary Cooper, Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood (plus maybe Clive Brook in England) all spent a large part of their careers playing such characters.

"Ever since he been told that his face was ugly, because it was unyielding, and cruel, because it was expressionless." (AS, p. 28)

Imo the quote would fit better for the role of a Hollywood Black Series villain.

Even among those who play villains in films, a downright cruel face would be a rarity.

[Brant Gaede]

The quote describes a classic type in the movies. John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, Alan Ladd, Gary Cooper, Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood (plus maybe Clive Brook in England) all spent a large part of their careers playing such characters.

"Ever since he been told that his face was ugly, because it was unyielding, and cruel, because it was expressionless." (AS, p. 28)

Imo the quote would fit better for the role of a Hollywood Black Series villain.

Even among those who play villains in films, a downright cruel face would be a rarity.

There are cruel faces and there are cruel faces. Some faces project cruelty and some faces have cruelty projected into them. The latter applies to the face in the quotation.

--Brant