Mostly B, just because I think a true believer will come across better than someone who is not. Of course liberal actors have been good at playing strong conservative parts. So I'm torn, but still believe B.

Matt Kibbe from Freedom Works, he would be great!

The strongest characteristic I'd expect to see in John Galt is a clear-eyed gaze that has deep understanding. He is a man who deeply understands people, society and physics, so a gaze that looks through people into their minds would be best.

Well you are asking me to choose and giving me two options that on the surface appear to say that you cannot find someone who "looks" the part and believes in the philosophy of Ayn Rand. To be true to the book the actor, in my opinion has to have both. Sorry

The actor should understand Ms. Rand and her philosophy to the deepest level. She ran into this problem with Gary Cooper as Howard in the Fountainhead movie. He should be tall, thin, intense, and have a quit, deep voice. He should look like a creator rather than a looter.

An unknown, please. I wasn't familiar with many of the actors in parts I and II and that allowed them to become the characters better in my own mind. Many well-known characters could do a great job but they wouldn't BE John Galt for me. As for finding someone right-thinking...Good luck!

The answer is obvious. You need someone above it all. Someone who, just by mere presence alone, comes from a different place than the rest of us. Unfortunately, it's doubtful that such an actor exists today; but in the heyday of Hollywood, when movies were memorable and worthy of history, someone like a Clint Eastwood, in one of his iconic roles, or John Wayne from The Searchers or Hondo would be sublime. Find such a person and you have your movie.

Dougray Scott - Can deliver a very distinct and serious performance with a wry glint that he knows things that the other characters don't. Never considered him before but recently came across his work and had an impact.

A.
It's a movie. These are actors. 99% of actors are socialists. You could cast an Objectivist, but he probably would have zero acting ability.

I would specifically recommend Patrick Page. He has a strong way with language, being trained in Shakespeare, he's charismatic, bold, and handsome, and he's just successful enough to be right for the role but not so successful that he's overly expensive. I don't know him personally, I just admire his work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Pag...

I go with B. I think any of these three actors could be excellent John Galt actors: John Voight, Jim Gaviezel or Fred Thompson.

An actor like Tom Selleck, strong, confident and slightly aloof.

B. I think that above all part 3 needs to be honest. I see that someone suggested TOM HANKS--that's an example of dishonesty. I used to enjoy Hanks' talent, but he is the very antithesis of this philosophy. If he were cast, I would boycott part 3. So, I think that's very important. I love the idea of Gary Sinise, who quietly puts his credibility where his mouth is (so to speak). I think he's very honest, and my mental "picture" of Galt was very different than that described by Ayn Rand, anyway (I've never really been into redheads...). I think the honesty is of paramount importance---------adding to the drumroll for Gary Sinise.

Michael Shanks (Stargate:SG1) would be prefect. Right age if actress who played Dagny stays the same.

JEFFREY DONOVAN!!!

I think it highly unlikely that a strongly committed leftist would want to play a character clearly intended to be a hero who unequivocally stands for Objectivism. So I think it’s very likely that an actor who can do a good job of speaking the philosophy conversationally and can convincingly portray conviction in what he says (and does) will be a non-liberal in his personal beliefs. I would want that, and not insist on more, unless I were thinking of hiring a philosopher to do the part—a very long shot that might actually work.

C: Both. But if not C, then A. I think Dean Cain could handle the roll. Possibly Kevin Sorbo (if we can get past his Hercules days) And both should be in the budgetary realm of this project.

Definitely B...I hope that John Galt is ruggedly handsome...but he HAS TO ABSOLUTELY have the goals of Ayn Rand first and foremost. Atlas Shrugged is the most important book I've read in my lifetime and the finish of the movie has to be true to form.

Peeps, as a fellow conservative and disgruntled Republican, I must point out that one of the main issued of people with shared interest is a total lack of realism. Given the no named actors in P1 and P2, talented, but no named none the less, do you really think that P3 will muster the budget to pull off Grammer, Sinise, Willis, Craig, Lewis or Cumberbatch? Seriously, especially since the liberal media has done all it can to discourage people from seeing P1 and P2 with bad to no reviews, P3 would be a kiss of death role in the eyes of the SAG for any sustained or rising star. This is the hand we are dealt, so lets at least be productive and realistic about suggestions. While of the ones listed below, I think Willis is the most politically aligned with our views, he's still a long shot from a cost standpoint. Related to Willis (Die Hard 3) Jeremy Irons would make a great choice as has also expressed views in the media aligned with ours. But, budget, budget, budget. This question would have been taken more seriously if they provided a list of actors who have shown interest in the role and allowed us to weigh in, as opposed to misdirection to determine how much interest and enthusiasm there is out here to better determine if they make a P3 at all, and if so, if it goes straight to video or not. Just keeping it real. I'd like nothing more for P3 to be a billion dollar smash run away hit with top rated talent showing up on IMDB under cast, but this won't happen in our life time. To leave no question unanswered, I would propose either Bruce McGill or Joel Gretsch. Both good actors, both look believable, both should come relatively cheap compared with the other suggestions.

Carl Marino

B. If the actor possess a deep understanding of, and passion for . . . he would not be the wrong actor -the eyes have it, and I can look into almost anyone's eyes and read them like a book. In the way that we know, I am Dagny. My John Galt didn't show up until I was 45 (a few bad marriages under my belt), and I prayed for a mate, and basically described Galt (not that I thought of Galt when I said that prayer), and I met him within a week. He was overweight - but make no mistakes, after 18 years with my Galt - he is Galt. I am married to a Marine, and he is smart, naturally romantic, and smarter than me . . . the ingredient that had never been there before. When I say someone is a Marine - those attributes are honest, brave, works with conviction and passion. We can thank Agent Orange for the physical / health issues - and yet he NEVER complains.

We need someone who can be perceived to hold the ideals of the author, and stand apart as someone who is an intellectual as well.

The actor needs to possess a deep understanding of Rand's ideas, I don't care what his personal beliefs are

Not the guy from movie 2

Tim Getman, who portrayed John D. Rockefeller in "The Men Who Built America".
He has the bearing for it.