B. Getting the message right through good storytelling. Part III is arguable the most exciting and most difficult part to bring to the screen - it's so much darker than part I & II but the message needs to be shared - especially with the current state of affairs in the world around us. Please invest in writing a good screen play and keep continuity with the story. Choose actors from Part I and Part II and make it work. Good luck -- I can't wait to see it!

Message, Original cast,

B. The message. But in order to do that you need get all of the other A through E right. The message is what it is all about, the reason for the film, and the reason Ayn Rand wrote the book.

Staying true to the book is most important for me. Next is casting. I was VERY disappointed in the new cast for part II and I'm not sure how I would feel about another change. Definitely do not come up with a third cast! I can't believe we have to wait another year for the final segment. I do believe cast #1 was better.

E. Hiring the right director because he can get a-d right. Just look at how hiring a good director launched Star Wars and how lame George Lucas really is as a director when he had 100% control. It takes more than a good story.

B. Getting the message right

B

I have read AS abridged once. and unabridged twice, I actually love Rand's writings and have read all her books. They take the reader to another point in time and into an elevated state of mind. This is something both AS1 and AS2 where unable to achieve, maybe to much Hollywood but not even close to a really good movie.
In all fairness this has happened to many classic ie The Count of Monty Christo, but when you make a 3 part movie, I would think you could get me sucked in a bit more than a mild curiosity.
Maybe the movie industry can't feel true emotion or understand the male bonding aspect of Rands caricatures,and how a man must feel towards another man before he gives a shit. Rand seamed to write her men with more of a dykes feel to them, but her males was strong, Bogart-ish. I feel nothing for any of the caricatures in these movies and no desire to try to understand why they are doing the things that they are doing. My favorite person is Francisco D'Anconia and in the book you see his actions from the view of almost being him or from Dagny's eyes, but you respect him, and the story always explains his bad behavior through one of the other caricatures. In the movies you see him as if you where one the looter watching him. And this happens to all of the main caricatures in the book. So sorry but the movies sucked and I can't put my finger on it. The unknowing viewers will crap when Dagny falls for John and won't even understand why they are so attracted to one another...because the caricature development Sucked.
I had my wife watch it and she said “I thought this was a great story, why would I even read the book?”

part b...unless you have the story all tied in from part 1 and 2 the 3rd one wouldnt make sense..do i make sense...lol..hmm..i think if you make sure all the caracters are the same you wont have any trouble..the cast will naturally adapt to the theme of this whole thing..i could feel the ora around the cast when they did part 2..i think it was great..i cant wait till the next one..keep em coming gang..eazyrider

B. message is everything. Ann Colter could play Dagny

I liked all the new actors, except Dagny. The original one was fine. The new one was a good actress, maybe even better...but was not great looking enough. Dagny has to be pretty "Smoking Hot' but in a demure and classy way. I am not sure the original actress was actually hot enough. Sex is a big part of the story, although by today’s standards the story is pretty tame. I agree with the complaints about Eddie. Why in the world do we have to be so politically correct as to cast Eddie as a black guy? I really liked the new Walt Mouch. The original one was excellent but the new one has such a slime ball appearance due to his previous role on ER the television show, he was perfect. The best aspect of Part 2 was that it opened with an exciting scene and it kept you on the edge of you seat for the whole movie in a way that part one just did not. The slickest single scene in part 2 was when Dagny was filling the pickup truck with gas and the Tattooed Hispanic guy with the shotgun keeps an eye on her to make sure she pays. He looks at her, she looks at him and they give each other a nervous grin....what a priceless scene. I really liked the new DiAnconia, the original actor looked like he was a Peruvian Indian. DiAnconia was essentially pure Spanish. Based on the book being written in the 50s he should have been a pretty big guy, with a thin mustache. This is what we saw in leading men of that time. Maybe Ricky Ricardo, but with the mustache. All in all though, I did like the new one.

B. Getting message right! That is an absolute requirement for anyone respecting Ayn Rand and her work. Her message was correct and doesn't need modifications. AS I and AS II did modernize the setting which was OK by me. AS III does need to continue on seemlessly. Again, the message is timeless! The casting needs to be as good as it can be. Atlas Shrugged deserves the best in all departments.

B. Getting message right! That is an absolute requirement for anyone respecting Ayn Rand and her work. Her message was correct and doesn't need modifications. AS I and AS II did modernize the setting which was OK by me. AS III does need to continue on seemlessly. Again, the message is timeless! The casting needs to be as good as it can be. Atlas Shrugged deserves the best in all departments.

I would tend towards B & E. I say B for the simple reason that the book had a big effect on my life: it helped me to value myself.

Before reading AS, I followed the morality of altruism - which as I discovered, was a very unhealthy way for me to live. The majority of society fall into two camps in my opinion. Half are tied down with altruism - denying themselves, the other are exploiting the first half, with no scruples whatsoever. These seem to be the only choices available to society & that needs to change.

If the message is the main theme of the movie then it will get noticed & have credibility for that reason. If A, C, D & possibly F are prioritised, there is a danger of part three being pretty boring - especially considering the colossal 'Galt speech'. I don't envy you guys with the challenge of pulling that off, without many people losing interest... but then, if people lose interest in Galt's speech, they'll likely lose interest in the book.

I do think E (a good director) is important. I would suggest hiring the biggest a***hole you can find - one that is going to push the actors to their limits. Find the Howard Roark of directors: one who's unknown & possibly laughed at by the majority but who you know will get the job done because he believes in it.

Regarding actors, I preferred Dagny & Rearden in part two for the simple reason that they had more balls. In part one,the Dagny & Rearden characters may have been 'sexier to look at but they (especially Dagny) seemed pretty vague.

If you do use the same actors as you did in part two, I could suggest that you do your utmost to piss Samantha Mathis off before every shoot to ensure that she stays angry. Push her hard & grill her hard over her lines. Make her mad (although that's the Director's job)! There's little more attractive than a woman with presence. Other than that, stick to the plot & the rest should take care of itself.

Casting!! Definitely. I was sorely disappointed in seeing that the cast of the ASPII was completely different from ASPI. Is it going to be more of the same for ASPIII?

I was very disappointed with both. I say scrap both movies and start again. Get a new script, director, actors. The movie should tell a great story. Start the story with a cataclysmic event (perhaps in the middle of the story)to get the viewers attention, and then interface mystery. It should be suspenseful, and appealing to the general public. Let action and cinamatograpy tell the story. Use dialogue sparingly and develop the characters through action. The characters should be unique and sexual, Like John Hamm as Henry Rearden and Angelina Joli as Dagney.

To ascertain where the priority should be, we need to look at the goal. What is the goal and how best to achieve it. My thoughts would be for a blend of the message portrayed by the actors and enhanced by the vision of the director to stay on task. My wife had not read the book, even after several requests by me however, when she saw ASII, there were enough tie-ins with what is going on around us that she was able to relate. She then asked to watch AS1 and even has the book now. To change the actors just because, may create continuity issues resulting in the messages being diluted or lost with the questions of why.

Showing the parallel to today's political climate

Getting the message right. if the film does not convey the message, what is it conveying? I was disappointed at the portrayal of the moment of revelation at the end of Part II when Dagny meets Galt for the first time. The novel shows this as one of those perfect moments. Maybe the start of III can improve on it.

http://www.examiner.com/review/atlas-shr...

http://www.examiner.com/review/atlas-shr...

B. THE MESSAGE!

My #1 disappointment with Parts I and II were the very short "speeches". Ayn Rand spent pages and pages and pages on D'Anconia's speeches, Rearden's trial defense speech, Ragnar's speech, and John Galt's radio address. If people can make movies of Shakespeare plays that remain true to the lengthy monologues and still keep them interesting, then Part III can remain true to the lengthy and IMPORTANT speeches by Galt, D'Anconia, etc. which make these great men leave their life's work behind to join Galt's strike.

I have more comments on the films here. I would appreciate it if everyone read them:
http://zachfosterrants.blogspot.com/2012...

Both parts have been great, unfortunately you had to change characterts. Only a few things have changed from the book, but it doesn't hurt the story line. Only a persom who has read the book can follow the story line where there are a few unexplaned happenings. I await the 3rd part and hope it keeps up the same standards that 1 & 2 have done. Some of the viewers I know had to have some of the that happened to the railroad. The cutting back on cars and speede, the tearing up track to repair the decaying otherr tracks. All in all the story line stays true to form.

Casting. I was disappointed in the actress chosen to play Dagny in the second film. No personality, no strength of character, and, frankly, not too attractive as Dagny is supposed to be. The rest of the cast is OK, but In my opinion, the casting in the first film was next to perfect.

A Casting. I loved Taylor Shilling and Grant Bowler