I just finished reading the book and now looking to see the films too. What should I expect?
>>72014519
A blatant hack of a film trilogy designed solely to keep the film rights. Really.
>>72014519
Shitty adaptation that completely misunderstood an already questionable book.
>>72014519
>looking to see the films too
Why?
A shit movie based on a shit book by a shit author.
>>72014519
The films are kind of amazing. It already starts off shitty, but gets even shittier and cheaper while it goes along, and then in the last film they're shooting in like, a high school gym.
>>72014519
I just finished reading the books as well. I was looking forward to watching the films, but have just seen their reviews... Not promising to be honest.
I'd actually enjoy watching an Atlas Shrugged movie that was all about Dagny building her railroad and the depression setting in, if they toned down the obvious villain/hero characteristics and it was in a period setting instead of the modern day. I remember actually kind of liking that part of the book, while the rest literally took me months to force myself through because every character acted so terribly unrealistic.
Railroad building and the railroad monopolies should get more attention.
>>72014519
>actually finishing that piece of shit
>making it throught the 100 page insane rambling monologue
Let me guess, braindead Trump voter?
>>72015496
>not liking it when the hero of the story defeats the villains by making a speech that goes on for 50 actual pages in small print
That's how real men get out of torture.
>>72015496
>Calls someone braindead for reading a book
>Reading
>Braindead
Let me guess, liberal who doesn't follow any form of logic?
>>72015496
>voting for a charmless criminal who cant even into email
>>72015567
This is my favourite book, but damn that speech was long. Written well and pretty much covers everything - but I seriously wouldn't have minded if it would've been cut down a bit.
>>72015496
>people who read are Trump supporters
W E W
E
W
>>72015575
>>72015671
He probably had it on audiobook. My point stands.
The movies are notoriously bad, like legendary-flop bad. I don't think the casts are even consistent through them.
>>72014519
How vast was Ayn Rand's ego. Like seriously, now that she's established her philosophy, surely (if it ever came to prominence) there would be no need for authors, that are not scientists?
In the book authors are portrayed as highly intellectual and the world will go to shit without them (alongside the industrialists), but if her philosophy is 'right', then what use are authors?
>>72015715
>>72015641
>This is my favourite book
I'll never understand this. There's books with much better stories and there's books with much better writing, and there's plenty of books with both. It's nothing but a vehicle for the authors philosophy, and it's a ham-fisted vehicle at that. It's like saying the Bible is your favourite book. Agreeing with the sentiments put forward is one thing, making it your favourite book is entirely another.
>>72015759
If you pulled authors off of science, it would die. Or be extremely painful. Authors get them funding for useless experiments like the Higgs Boson
>>72015759
In her dream-world everyone would realise the true philosophy, and so all the authors would write things that follow it, thus proving their self-worth, which is the only real thing that matters, while also being capable of surviving by people willing to read said books because it'd give them relaxation and joy from reading things that agree with their world-views.
The way she wrote her books is just an example of how she didn't understood that people can read a book and derive joy from the act without agreeing with the author's views presented in the book, or that a book could put forward a view the author doesn't actually agree with.
>>72015817
I wouldn't say I agree with everything that the book says. I'm just not much of a reader, so this book is pretty unique to me. There are times I wish it put the story ahead of the phiosophy a bit more, but I still really enjoyed it.
The story was incredibly grand in scope. I never knew what to expect, I mean I could roughly tell what would happen in the long term, but things just moved so quickly. When Dagny starts making the John Galt Line, I thought a good portion of the book would be spent on it - it turned out there's maybe a chapter at the very most spent on it.
It felt a bit overlong, but so much happens in it that I wonder what could have actually been taken out.
the fountainhead was a MUCH better book
atlas shrugged is a trainwreck of epic proportions
>>72015277
>Watched the first one out of morbid curiosity
>See preview for the second part and its an entirely new cast that is even more literally who than the last one
>All my keks
>>72015827
I thought I said authors of science are grand? I mean philosophers and fiction authors.
>>72016013
But why would they need follow-ups? Surely she would believe her phiosophy is correct, why would she need people doing anything else with it?
>The way she wrote her books is just an example of how she didn't understood that people can read a book and derive joy from the act without agreeing with the author's views presented in the book, or that a book could put forward a view the author doesn't actually agree with.
That's an interesting point. I don't know much about her at all to be honest.
>>72016124
>trainwreck
Seriously though, the train in the tunnel disaster was so fucking shitty.
>>72014519
If you love the book then stay far away from this shit
>>72016214
>I don't know much about her at all to be honest.
She was a recipient of welfare and couldn't into personal hygiene and it was remarked that she smelled like garbage.
Pretty much objectivism is just her salty philosophy full of butthurt about the government of her homeland and why it was so evil.
>>72016229
I was disappointed Dr Simon Pritchett wasn't the philosopher that died in the train crash. I thought they spent much longer on the philosopher than the other passengers, explaiing the same philoposhy he preaches, and don't name him. I thought it was meant to make you think it was him.
A few chapters on and you read that it wasn't him. It seemed like a missed opportunity to be honest, or at least misleading.
>>72016214
>But why would they need follow-ups
They wouldn't be follow-ups. They'd rather be shit like Robin Hood rewritten so that he actually does take the money back from the leeches that stole it, causing a utopia as the kings are destroyed and Friar Tuck can make his wine-making into an empire unfettered by the church's rules, while the merry men happily works for a fair wage from Robin in cutting down Sherwood Forest and using the wood to build stronger-than-ever houses. Shit that the people in her world would love reading about, without actually offering up any new viewpoints.
>>72014519
Watch The Fountainhead with Gary Cooper.
>>72016354
Well shit, I remember being confused about someone surviving the train accident and thinking it was just Ayn needing him alive, no matter how improbable. That probably explains it. I took a break reading the book somewhere around there, so I wasn't exactly glass-clear on all the characters when I returned.
>>72016327
I can tell you don't like her haha. Is this actually true? I've heard she was a bit of a hypocrite, she wasn't able to accept the person she was having an affair with having an affair with someone else.
She also called gay people "disgusting" or something.
>>72016363
So you're in agreement she was being a bit up her self and her profession in general? The world wouldn't collapse without them. Same with movie and theater stars. Even when reading I was wondering why that young actress got into Galt's Gulch.
I know they're celebrating talent, but not all talent is of the same importance. Surely she understood that?
>>72015641
>This is my favourite book
plz tell me this is a joke, if not i feel sorry for the Christitians in America
>>72015800
who?
>>72016471
The thing is, he's not even important. I don't think he actually says anything afterwards, other than possibly a meaningless lien or two.
I actually really liked that train wreck sequence, and especially the way the philosopher was killed. Not naming names, but it gave me the feeling that they've just killed off a pretty prominent 'looter' character. Of course that ended up not being the case.
Not really relevant, but another scene that had quite an effect on me was Robert Stadler watching Project X in action, and his subsequent speech dilemma. I don't think anything I've read has left as much of a feeling as his refusal to redeem himself in that scene.
It also leaves me wondering if he did in part start redeeming himself just before he died. Maybe it was just meant to be ironic, but what he was saying to Cuffy Meigs was pretty much what Galt had been saying.
>>72016601
I don't live in America. Liking a book doesn't mean you have to agree with what is being said.
3 movies with 3 different casts.
I've never seen anything quite like its, its absolutely awful.
>>72016551
Rand annoys me less than people who buy into her bullshit as some kind of enlightening new philosophy.
Objectivism has a few merrits but its so embarrassingly myopic that i have a hard time believing people can unironically support it.
She did receive government funds and she was notoriously eccentric. She is very divisive and so plenty of mud has been slung towards her.
>>72016551
I'd say the talent is of the same importance, because the industrialists needs to relax in-between propelling the world forward with their minds, just like they need their cars fixed by a mechanic. Hearing a singer or seeing an actress perform a role gives that relaxation. This saves them from moocher status.
She did however vastly over-estimate the importance authors would have in that world, just as she vastly over-estimated her own work.
>>72014519
the first wasn't terrible, if it was only a tv movie it would be pretty great... for a tv movie, the casting in the 1st movie was spot on, so much so that i couldn't get passed the first 5 mins of the second
>>72016864
>She did however vastly over-estimate the importance authors would have in that world
Thats literally every author ever.
The best example must be in footfall, baby elephant ayy lmaos invade earth and the world is saved by a goverment think tank of science fiction authors that are absolutely not inserts for the author and his friends.
>hey guys let's make an Atlas Shrugged movie
>that could work!
>but let's set it in the modern day
>okay that could work too... What modern industries will we use that has the same impact, though?
>Eh, let's just keep the railroad and steel mills
>>72015817
Are you trying to tell me there are books better than the Bible?
>>72017222
Kek.
>>72016835
I don't know anyone who's even heard of Atlas Shrugged, let alone is an Objectivist. Do you have any links to good articles that provide a counter to what Ayn Rand was saying in the book? I'd be interested in reading it sometime soon.
>She did receive government funds and she was notoriously eccentric.
In what way was she eccentric? Receiving funds from the government is pretty much the epitome of hypocrisy though haha.
>>72017222
A TV series would probably work much better for Atlas Shrugged. I don't know how they could cover that monstrous thing in 3 movies.
>>72017362
>In what way was she eccentric?
I remember reading somewhere about making her husband or lover wear a little bell, because she thought he walked too quietly.
so how disappointed were you that you got a 100 page monologue by coldsteel the hedgehog after keeping faith that something is eventually going to happend after the first 600 pages?
>>72016124
it also has a bretty good movie adaption
>>72018819
>after keeping faith
HA! I lost that way earlier. I just kept going down the tracks out of sheer stubbornness.
