Galt's Gulch
15

ASP3: This is John Galt

Posted by sdesapio 11 years, 6 months ago to Entertainment
1062 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Ideally, the actor playing John Galt in Atlas Shrugged Part 3 will appear to have jumped right off of the pages of Atlas Shrugged. However, in our quest to find the perfect John Galt, some tough choices may have to be made. That's where you come in.

If you had to choose, which would you consider the number one priority in casting John Galt?

A. As long as the actor looks and acts like John Galt, I don't care what his personal beliefs are.
B. The actor needs to possess a deep understanding of, and passion for, Ayn Rand's ideas first and foremost.

Leave your answer in the comments below.

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by Bill54 11 years, 5 months ago
    For casting continuity you could stay with D.B. Sweeny. Otherwise Hollywood high profile conservatives previously mentioned would do very well. The cast of Part I should have continued in Part II. No confusing the actor for their character. Gary Cooper was a superstar actor and his political savvy was not.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Rocky_Road 11 years, 5 months ago
      I concur with Sweeny.

      The debate between the cast changes has become non-productive, since this is 'water under the Gulch bridge'.

      What might be helpful would to keep the Part 2 cast for Part 3, and try to make some sort of continuity amends. I had no real issues with the Part 2 actors, and actually preferred Hank over Part1.

      I agree that Gary Cooper was a super star, and his unpretentious confidence in his demeanor lent well to his role in 'The fountainhead'.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by pghpete 11 years, 5 months ago
    I purchased "Atlas" in the fall of 1960 in anticipation of a long and boring train ride from Pasadena, CA to Flagstaff, AZ.

    It was the thickest paperback on the rack and I had no idea how Ayn Rand was poised to direct my life.

    In the following three months I continued reading, while attending class at America's most Liberal private boarding school in Sedona, AZ.

    Four years later, I graduated from Verde Valley School at a total cost of $50,000 and having read all of Ayn Rand that I could find.

    Forty years later I left Wall Street. Not as a Broker, but as a Coder and I’d proven to myself that Rand was right.

    Today, I’m too old to play John Galt, though I chat with him every day.
    Probably why I’m so “off the radar”.

    Want to find a great “John Galt”?
    Look in the mirror.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Monique 11 years, 6 months ago
    Kevin Sorbo
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Mimi 11 years, 6 months ago
      Hahaha. I read your mind. I said the same thing a couple minutes ago. He is an independent thinker who speaks his mind, leaning right more often than not,which would calm the fears of those fans that think that should be a consideration, and, also, he is a handsome, talented, and beloved actor. GOOD CHOICE, Monique!!!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by DaveM49 11 years, 6 months ago
    I was disappointed when John Galt's existence and purpose were revealed in Part One. That said, I have always expected him to be a "face in the crowd", someone who could live in the outside world without ever being noticed. Perhaps noted for his confidence and decision-making ability but not standing out physically in any way. I hope he will be played by a "nobody" so that not only Dagny but the audience (apart from those who have read the book) will have no idea who he is until he introduces himself.

    I am not concerned with the actor's politics. I am concerned solely with his ability to play the role.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by irishwolf4 11 years, 6 months ago
    Gary Sinise- Jim Caviezel- Tom Selleck- Bruce Willis- Clive Owen- Aaron Eckhart. Any of these guys would be awesome. Look at Clive Owen in the "Inside Man".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by vido 11 years, 6 months ago
      Why settle for an actor ?
      Would Rand Paul (the senator, whose first name might not have been chosen at random) be OK to play the part ?
      Would it be compatible with his current occupation as a senator ?
      After all, he knows how to pitch, and he probably deeply understands the spirit of the novel.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by DanconiaBTC 11 years, 5 months ago
        I think there's 0 chance of him doing it, but it would be great.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by vido 11 years, 5 months ago
          Maybe AS3's producer may want to just ask him, maybe, who knows, he would be happy about that.
          Even physically, I think he would fit the role quite well. Of course, there's the little issue that he's not an engineer, so he probably doesn't have the "engineer" behavior of always thinking of some problem in the background... But the speech part in the novel is definitely a political speech he would with no doubt perform with perfection...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jessicaarman 11 years, 6 months ago
    It doesn't matter if the actor playing John Galt possesses the deep understanding as long as the person chosen can portray the message (In it's entirety) of Altas Shrugged. This speech that Galt gives is epic and needs to be done right.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by mrkwhlbrk 11 years, 6 months ago
    Benedict Cumberbatch has the look and the acting chops. A is more important. It's called Acting, after all.

    What would Howard Roark do? I find it interesting to apply Ayn Rand's philosophy of the Arts to the production of AS. The ideas presented in The Fountainhead are directly applicable.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by SnakebiteJones 11 years, 6 months ago
      What would Howard Roark do? Howard Roark would make a work of art. He would never make a movie by committee. Instead of manipulating people to feel like they have a collective voice in the casting of John Galt, how about focusing on making a great movie? ASP1 was crappy by any measure but just the fact the movie was made rallied many of us who love the book. Part 2 was a missed opportunity. If ASP2 would have been a better product, the basic principles of personal responsibility & liberty could have been introduced to the public at large. Instead ASP2 was clunky, ran long & the marketing sucked. I hoped Part 3 would finish strong but now I see this is not a serious attempt to make a great movie. If Ayn Rand were alive today she would have nothing to do with this project. Ayn Rand believed in excellence & personal responsibility. Who is going to take responsibility for the total failure of ASP2? For crying out loud, Dagney & Hank Rearden drove Fisker cars; it's almost like James Taggart is making these movies. Short answer: it doesn't matter who you cast as John Galt if he's driving a Fisker automobile & reciting dialog that is better suited to a daytime soap. You will have accomplished nothing more than wasting time & money, not to mention destroyed the legacy of a great book.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by Rocky_Road 11 years, 6 months ago
        Your singling out the Fisker car(s) is totally wrong: Priced one lately? Definitely outside the reach of anyone who has not succeeded, and in total keeping with the 'smarts' that are paramount to being a 'producer' (gas was $40+ in Part 2).

        Add to that the pure aesthetics of these cars, and the class they add to their movie owners, and you have a perfect choice. It probably wasn't an accident that Francisco drove a Porsche...he didn't give a hoot where his money was going....

        P.S. I re-watched both parts last night, and I think you are wrong about their quality and lasting impact. Part 2 is my favorite, and I would like to see a relatively unknown play John Galt in Part 3. Any large actor will bring along viewer's prejudices, and preconceived images, of their past roles.

        Somehow I think that the right actor will relentlessly solicit this role, and for all the right reasons.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by $ winterwind 11 years, 6 months ago
          I absolutely agree. The right actor: in looks, in body style, in thought, in philosophy and in acting will, I truly hope, pursue the role, singlemindedly, until he gets it.
          N.B. list in random order
          further note: spellcheck suggests "simplemindedly" instead of "singlemindedly". humph.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by Rocky_Road 11 years, 6 months ago
            I should have asked snakebit.Jones to recall ANY scene where James Taggart was seen anywhere except in the back seat of a stretch limo?

            James didn't have it in him to succeed on his own, and certainly didn't have the independent spirit to drive himself around...unlike all the characters that we admire.

            The writers and/or director got it 100% right.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by SnakebiteJones 11 years, 6 months ago
              Exactly right; James Taggart didn't have it in him to succeed on his own. In the true spirit of Objectivism this movie should not be made by committee. Whose work is this movie? Who will accept responsibility for the production? If you believe in free markets you should have confidence this is a work that will rise or fall on it's merit. Nobody wants this movie to succeed more than me. I simply responded to the mass email I received asking for my opinion. I gave my opinion. That caused a defensive reaction from simple_sam whose foul language and crude response I would expect from a looter, not an Objectivist, as the content of his post is not objective in any sense of the word.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by khalling 11 years, 6 months ago
        I thought this whole exchange prompted by your comment quite interesting and representative of the kinds of conversations the Gulch usually has. Generally, the truly disrespectful are trolling around in here. Thanks for your input, snakebite
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • -1
        Posted by simple_sam 11 years, 6 months ago
        Right on. I agree. We don't want to have fun during the making of Atlas Shrugged and interact with the film makers! We're all just a bunch of boring douchbags so full of ourselves that we don't even know how to have a fucking good time at a fucking party thrown just for us!

        "You guys suck! The fictional characters in the books would never do it that way! WAH! WAH! WAH!"

        Seriously? Grow up and get a life Jones. You're pathetic. Better yet, just go away.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by bridgetlynn 11 years, 6 months ago
    B; I wouldn't want a John Galt who does not believe in excellence, freedom, and innovation. A socialist actor may be an outstanding actor, but will always portray a bit of that "I'm a wealthy, condescending [illegitimate child]" when playing a genius capitalist.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by patricking 11 years, 5 months ago
      What nonsense. Imagine the effort you'd have to go through if only a Nazi could play Hitler, or only a Democrat could play FDR. This is airhead thinking. Actors are paid to look and sound. What they believe when they're at home is of no consequence. But hire an Objectivist who talks like Elmer Fudd and Part 3 is going to sink lower than Part 2 did on its worst day. I give these people credit for perseverance but this movie series is destroying a great book. With DVDs this thing is never going to go away.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by billgt6hotmailcom 11 years, 5 months ago
    Answer "A" applies for me. A good actor leaves his personal beliefs behind when he assumes a role. The John Galt actor must convey a dead-serious sense of personal integrity, persistence, honesty, commitment to achievement "to the best of one's ability". He must have charisma and a strong grasp of rhetoric to persuade others to his cause.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by scottb 11 years, 6 months ago
    Option A in the choices above for sure. The actor needs to be able to deliver the role in a compelling and authentic way, not be able to discuss the philosophical underpinnings after the event. Taylor Schilling as Dagny was perfect - I found her deeply compelling and inspiring, and as a result she carried the movie. Unfortunately, the John Galt from the first film was forced, melodramatic, inauthentic - probably the weakest part of the film. Rand called her aesthetics Romantic Realism. Realism doesn't mean Naturalism - stylisation and exaggeration is good but not to the point that the authenticity (the feeling that the artistic statement is a plausible reflection of reality) is lost.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 11 years, 6 months ago
    A. And it should not be a famous actor identified with some other role. He should understand the character, however, as the ideal man in Rand's value system. Come to think of it, Hugh Jackman looks the part. Is he available?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by DebbiL 11 years, 6 months ago
    I've read many of the comments but didn't see any of the 30ish up and coming male actors which would do justice to the role of John Galt. Had you considered Chris Pine, Orlando Bloom or Jude Law yet? They are all actually in their 30s (not in their 70s like some of the suggestions), good looking enough to turn even Dagny's head, look like they could fit in anywhere and actors people would listen to when they speak. A book shouldn't be judged by its cover but if the book isn't interesting enough to even open, what good is it? People nowadays are mainly so shallow, that you need a ton of window dressing to get them to forking over real money to go to a movie. There is so much competition for all the movies which debut from week to week, that unless you have good looking actors who can actually act (and keep you from falling asleep or walking out on the movie), you may have trouble getting and keeping moviegoers interest up. The message of John Galt is important and you need a young Jimmy Stewart who will enthrall the audience to get that message through. Please don't do what you did in AS II by casting weak performers as they do not do justice to either Ayn Rand or her message.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo