Galt's Gulch
14

Atlas Shrugged III movie is Great

Posted by disabledveterangoarmy 10 years, 2 months ago to Movies
58 comments | Share | Flag

I saw the movie today and it was great.
SOURCE URL: https://www.flickr.com/photos/10946398@N02/15216775941/

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by kalkalmanek 10 years, 2 months ago
    I saw the AS 3 yesterday at 11:30 AM. I was hoping that it would have shown the machine that blow up things from a distance and how the Taggert Bridge was blown up but that was the only disappointment. It is a very short movie but it shows somewhat what the liberal & bureaocrates have done to the once great country. We can take it back now since most democrates have finally seen what damage they.have done to this country by giving a man a fish instead of teaching a man to fish. "Run Ben run
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by peterchunt 10 years, 2 months ago
    I thought the movie started out slow at the beginning, ended up to melodramatic toward the end, and didn’t follow the book entirely. But I am glad I saw it, and will probably get a DVD of it (to go with my first two DVDs).
    I was disappointed in the attendance and hope more folks do attend. No escaping the analogies to what is happening today.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Radio_Randy 10 years, 2 months ago
    I still plan on adding part III to my collection. I will need to replay it a number of times to get the full effect, I am sure.
    My initial impressions are:
    1. John's speech was great (even if it did run a tad under 3 hours).
    2. I was expecting great things from Ragnar, but was disappointed.
    3. The actor who portrayed Francisco D'Anconia...really???
    4. I'm not going to spoil John's stay at the SSI Hotel. However, after everyone's had a chance to see it, I would like to discuss the over exuberance of the special effects folks.
    Overall, the movie was far too short to give me the feeling I was expecting...however, in saying that, I also have to state that it took more than one viewing to really appreciate parts I and II.
    Part III reminded me of the (first) movie Dune. Many portions from the book were lightly skimmed over and were difficult to follow. It would probably have been better if I had NOT read the book, three times, before seeing the movie.
    I'm still hoping for a decent mini-series.
    Lastly, I was disappointed at the low turnout for the movie. I counted about six couples at the 6:40 PM showing, on opening night. Damn! We drove by a theatre showing Z Nation and the line went around the block.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • -4
    Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
    I hope his movie is pulled and nobody else goes to see it...... Awful, awful awful... Ayn Rand is rolling in her grave .....


    My Review:

    Who is John Galt?..., part 3 was an affront to the book and the original characters created by Ayn Rand.... Seriously?....Frisco was 4' 11" with a pot belly..... and had to stand on a stool to hug Dagny? Dagny was a frail, tiny bit of a woman with goo goo eyes for Galt and barely had a presence in a room with other people? James Taggart's character was awful, Ragnar was unconvincing and unbelievable........Reardon looked like an extra from the original Saturday Night Fever....... John Galt looked like a day time Emmy nominee......... or an actor in a shampoo commercial.......I mean really, why was this permitted to hit the theaters? The greatest book ever written deserves much better representation than this....... In all honesty , this movie did more damage to the book than good. I understand fully about budgets , but if they didn't have the budget, they should not have made the movie......... There was no seriousness in any of the scenes, no description of what was happening, and no gravitas whatsoever....Two characters that were true to original form were Ferris and Stadler, great job on those two picks...Hugh Axton was reading his lines off a cue card in almost every scene..... Midas Mulligan was in no way credible as a wealthy banker, but perhaps he was also a Russian scientist. In order to have the proper effect and respect, this production should have been done as a mini series over the course of 1 or two years with much better character development, description and yes ...........ACTING... As the old saying goes, if you can't do something well,.....don't do it at all.

    My recommendation is not to see this movie to those of you who have read the book as you will be extremely disappointed, and to those who have not read the book because it is no way indicative of what the book represents!!!


    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by disabledveterangoarmy 10 years, 2 months ago
      That is so strange as I understood the movie from start to finish myself. I was very pleased with the movie. I even intend to purchase the DVD when it comes out also. The best $7.00 I ever spent on the movie ticket.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ewv 10 years, 2 months ago
        I would like to see someone who saw it comment directly on the specific characterizations by Joseph, and specifically for Joseph, as well as others, how does it compare to the first two parts?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ Ripside 10 years, 2 months ago
      I think you have called several of the same criticisms my wife and I had, though your summary is a bit harsh. While there was issues, I was still happy as hell to see it on screen. I expected there would be budget limitations on effects, sets, actors, etc. I wasn't expecting much there and was pleasantly surprised. I liked Galt (Kristoffer Poloha?). Maybe I'm swayed because I met him in person after the movie, but in my mind from now on he will be Galt the next time I read the boom.

      While we agree on most of the flaws - they didn't take away from the impact that much, and I look forward to seeing it a second time in theaters, and for the BD release.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • -2
        Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
        Ripside, I was harsh because I am disappointed and frankly, I'm offended by this production,...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by $ Ripside 10 years, 2 months ago
          I will remain objective about the movie(s). They entertained me, and doubt they will ever reach much of an audience outside of fans of miss Rand.

          Appreciate the honesty - and hesitate to give much credit to anyone saying it was "the best movie ever", no offense to those, but it wasn't.

          I upvoted your comment, because I believe it can bring about some intelligent, objective discussion about the films. I don't think that thoughtful remarks, no matter how negative, should be hidden from discussion.

          I will still support it though, and am happy I "kicked in."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
            In fact, ripside, these movies have brought thousands to reading Atlas Shrugged and seeking out more about Objectivism. This movie will do the same. I am surprised (as I was with Medved's review) with the pleas to NOT go see it. Why not give your opinion and let people find out for themselves. No this is agenda driven-a campaign to smear and affect box office sales.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by $ Ripside 10 years, 2 months ago
              I'm all for getting the word out, and filling seats - and would never suggest to anyone that they not see it. I was a backer - and hope to see it succeed in all possible ways.

              If these comments are part of a smear campaign, an intentional and deliberate way to keep people away from theaters, then I regret any agreement with the commentator . I was simply looking to further objective discussion about the film, and argued against downvoting every negative opinion.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
                yes, I know you were. I am referring to joseph here and others who claim to love the book. very telling.
                I also wanted to correct your thinking on how many people have come to Rand from the movies. The current President can't get credit for everything ;)
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • -2
                  Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
                  What do you mean by "CLAIM " to love the book?
                  Are you suggesting that I am being disingenuous because I think at a higher level than you do?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by Eudaimonia 10 years, 2 months ago
          Joseph, not that it will make any difference, but this is not the first time we've seen the trolling tactic of claiming to be a Libertarian/Randian/Objectivist as a cover to rip everything.

          You have identified yourself quite plainly.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • -5
            Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
            Eudaimonia..........It is my love for Rand and the book that compelled me to make my statements........ You obviously no little about the book , or Rand herself.......If Mr. A has any sense of pride or love for Rand, he'd "Blow this movie up with DYNAMITE"

            Consider a core argument of the Randian canon – Howard Roark’s trial defense in The Fountainhead. Roark manages to justify trespassing and physical destruction of another person’s tangible property, all in the name of preserving the sociopathic architect’s “right” to avoid looking at a building that was similar – but not identical – to one he designed.For those unfamiliar with the novel, Roark is an architect who spends his career in relative obscurity despite his obvious talent. Roark personifies Rand’s concept of pure egoism: He designs and constructs buildings primarily for his own satisfaction. The climax of the novel involves Roark designing a government housing project called Cortlandt. Roark makes a deal with Peter Keating, the architect who actually holds the commission for Cortlandt: Roark will design Cortlandt for Keating anonymously and free of charge provided the complex is constructed to Roark’s exact specifications. Keating cannot change the design. Keating, in turn, secures a similar promise from Cortlandt’s owners, but they ignore this and make changes. When Roark sees the “deformed” Cortlandt, he sneaks onto the property and blows it up with dynamite.

            " I designed Cortlandt. I gave it to you. I destroyed it"
            Howard Roark

            Source: Mises Economics

            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
              your love for Rand led you to quote a criticism from Mises Economics instead of the actual book to make your point?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • -1
                Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
                yes, wanted something descriptive and broken down enough so even you would understand it.....
                If I took something out of the book, you'd have to ask me to explain it to you
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
                  Hmmm. Instead you cited a passage who's author's criticisms were false and misleading. Roark's justification for the destruction was laid out in his courtroom speech and centered on the valuing of personal property rights. Perhaps you have not read the book?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by gerstj 10 years, 2 months ago
      I would recommend going to see it since it is a major vehicle for current communication. However, the film was severely limited in execution and needed to be more than something approaching an audio book presentation. The first twenty minutes or so were particularly bad and the acting amateurish. It does get better, but that opening would lose some of the audience.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • -3
        Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
        It is an awful representation of the book and I believe it gives fodder to the Hollywood elites and move critics to Bash Ayn Rand even more so than they have done in the past............ If I was an Anti Ayn Rand person, I would use this movie to point my finger and say....."look at this nonsense that all those kooks have been worshiping for years"!!!!! It hurts the brand, it hurts the book, and it hurts Rand followers who hold the book in such high regard.. MY WISH IS THAT THE MOVIE BE PULLED so it ill not be used as a tool to mock Ayn Rand or the "book".. Sorry but this is my feeling and my opinion........You are all free to have your own.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • -3
      Posted by lostsierra 10 years, 2 months ago
      Since I doubt there is much marketing effort for the film I doubt it will do much damage. The creation of this film I suspect has a lot to do with some huge egos. Putting out a second or third rate product takes a certain type of man. But then he knew most of his followers would buy it anyway and rave about it. I know something about marketing and putting out products as I do that for a living. Am a journalist, too, film reviewer, educated in film and a screen writer. I saw the first two movies, may not see this one; I am not an Objectivist. You have to have a good product. Mr. A has well less than a good business resume and track record and lacked the capital to pull this off properly. This whole episode of making the movie is a good case history for a business school case on how not to do things. Would it have been otherwise . . . oh, hell, who is John Galt? Still asking . . .
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
        lost, these movies have brought thousands to Rand. Hell, they brought you to this site. It's up to Objectivists to do the rest. I'm surprised by your personal attacks. Not like you...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by lostsierra 10 years, 2 months ago
          I researched Mr. A and he was not someone I'd want to do the films. The first two were B grade with no marketing. You have to have the capital to do it right. Dinesh D'Souza has done two outstanding films without Hollywood and he got the money together to do them well and they sold well as docs. Also, I would do a film for its artistic merits and story and not as an attempt to influence an election. That failed. I don't know that the films have brought thousands to Rand. 1,000s ? You need millions.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
            the war of ideas does not influence millions overnight. JA figured out how to acquire the rights and he made the movies his way, which was also his right. The Ayn Rand Institute and The Atlas Society have seen record numbers using their sites, attending their talks, viewing their videos. Much of that is due to audiences for the movies. I would need scott to confirm this, but there are almost 10k members of galtsgulchonline-no other forum even comes close to that number. I don't know whether I'll like the movie or not, but I sure am glad I met you here and appreciate your insight and posts. As a matter of fact, I have made significant friends here in the gulch. The life long, got your back kind. Thank John Aglioloro and Scott Desapio next time you see them for me. They've put countless hours in to make that happen.
            "It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." Samuel Adams

            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by ewv 10 years, 2 months ago
            Does anyone know how much the D'Souza works cost in comparison to AS? Regardless, I think that it takes a lot more to produce a work of fiction like AS. It takes a lot of production values, include acting, directing and writing, that must be understood as Ayn Rand intended it to project her unusual sense of life -- she wrote AS to project in fiction her idea of the ideal man and a radically different and new philosophy that makes it possible, not narrate a story. It takes more than just a plot and good but stock acting. Some of that translates into money to pay the people who can do it, but it's more than that: In today's culture it's practically impossible to find at all, especially when dealing with Hollywood. None of that is necessary when narrating a non-fiction documentary.

            Who else would you have used to make the films? An expert who didn't know what it is supposed to be, or if he does, deliberately reverses it? John knew what he was after and learned what he had to in a field he had not worked in to do what he needed, the best he could after working for years on the first approach only to find that it was impossible and time was running out. Regardless of how well anyone thinks of how well the results turned out, which approach is better?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 2 months ago
            Well then, sounds like you've thought this through and have all the right ideas in place to hit it out of the ball park. I'm sure we all look forward to YOUR personal rendition of the Atlas Shrugged book to movie adaption. Call Dinesh and find out how he got all that money together and you can do the same,.... hell, sounds like you can do it even better.

            --hey, what d'ya waitin' for? Hurry up! The world needs saving!!!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by gerstj 10 years, 2 months ago
        But even if this is an ego project, why would the developers pull up short and not market ASIII properly? Why go to all this trouble to make the film and then rain on their own parade and letting it show to almost empty theaters? Peculiar.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by ewv 10 years, 2 months ago
          Not much money left over for marketing. Thinking long term, which is better: put it into the film or "marketing". Should Ayn Rand have spent all the years she did writing the novel, or a lot of that time in a lucrative job making money to market what would be left of the book?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by gerstj 10 years, 2 months ago
            Balance. I don't think producing a movie without any significant marketing plan and funding is a good strategy and does not produce value for the film product. If it fails badly, then it will only be of value to those who already valued Ayn Rand.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by NealS 10 years, 2 months ago
        Well we do know for sure it could not be made in Hollywood, at least not today. There would only be a few known actors that would have to play multiple parts. Could you imagine how it would be promoted, not? ... I am John Galt.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by lostsierra 10 years, 2 months ago
          Sure it could be made in Hollywood, though not necessary. D'Souza's made two great docs that were artisticly and financially successful. They've enjoyed a much larger audience.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by NealS 10 years, 2 months ago
            My point was only that most of Hollywood has gone flaky on U.S., with their PC and all of that other nonsense. And now that you bring it up, where were you with your artistic film skills and $20-$30 million when it was being made? I do understand all your points however. Maybe some day it can be made again, with the same actors throughout, similar story, noted director, big budget, and some great promotion.

            My only experience is a patent I was talked into getting for a terrific product that no one knew they needed until they actually saw it in use, and some said they're not sure they'd ever use it, it was poorly marketed. At least I recovered expenses and made a few bucks selling it face to face to people I ran into. This was before the internet went commercial.

            I'd like to see Atlas Shrugged as a mini-series based closely on the book on some network like A&E Classics. I think FOX Movie Network might keep too many people, people that need to see it and understand the message, prejudicially away. I enjoyed D'Souza's films, read his books too.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • -7
        Posted by Josephaliota 10 years, 2 months ago
        Lostsierra..I agree with you......people like Eudamaonia and Khalling will wear the pom poms regardless ....... Maybe they should read the book and read more about Rand's theories on "reason".... then maybe they would not be so incoherent
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Susanne 10 years, 2 months ago
          Incoherent? You mean like your post? Um Hmm... Speaking of "reason"...

          I find it interesting I've not seen you here before, yet you seem to know the players so well... Almost as if you're a sock puppet. So the real question remains...

          Who do you post as when you're not hiding behinf a nom d'fume, "Mr. Reason"? Perhaps someone who showed his hand once, dropped his drawers for the world to giggle, and was muted to keep the sanity of those who belong here? Hmmm???
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by khalling 10 years, 2 months ago
          I have not seen the movie. I simply responded to your extremely emotional responses, including the pleas for people to avoid seeing it . An Objectivist position would be to simply give their opinion, certainly not promote people not thinking but following your lead. You also quoted material regarding the Fountainhead from a critical source instead of quoting Rand or the book itself. Why? You are new here and ad hominem does not fly-nor persuade. why are you here?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 2 months ago
          hey, Joseph ... my first experience with lovemaking
          was not all that I had hoped, since the woman was a
          tall, slender person and I like tall and curvy.... but
          I did not murder her since she did not rise to my
          level of expectations! I still praise her to this day,
          46 years later!!! -- j

          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • -5
    Posted by judyanne 10 years, 2 months ago
    Totally agree with josephaliota, AS3 should never have been released, it absolutely does a huge disservice to Ayn Rand and will discourage the strength of her message to the masses....AWFUL, AWFUL, AWFUL......
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by gerstj 10 years, 2 months ago
      Well, it has been released so we need to make the best of it. The masses are not seeing it because of poor marketing and lack of word of mouth IMO. Maybe considering the film as more of a didactic docudrama will give it a better image.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo