Movie Review: ATLAS SHRUGGED (Pt. 1)

Blog Post
Atlas Shrugged: Part I is a 2011 film adaptation of the first part of Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, intended as the first in a film trilogy encompassing the entire 1,368-page book. The film was directed by Paul Johansson and stars Taylor Schilling as Dagny Taggart and Grant Bowler as Hank Rearden.
The book is a classic and telling Ayn Rand’s story on the screen takes more time to develop than is usually possible in a feature film. The screenplay takes on the challenge by developing characters along side the important nature of the plot. As we enter the film, in late 2016, the United States is in the throes of a sustained economic depression caused by global turmoil and which has been worsened by government’s attempts to fix them. As a result, gasoline prices are near forty dollars a gallon and passenger rail transportation has returned to being competitive in the marketplace.
The central message of the film is that civilization cannot exist where men are slaves to government and that destruction of the profit motive leads to the collapse of society. As we see events unfold around us in our daily lives, they bare a close resemblance to the plot (screenplay written contemporaneous with the beginning of the Obama Regime).  If you have any doubt that we’re in trouble, track the price of gold.
The central message of the film has to be a 10 out of a possible 10.
Who is John Galt? The movie asks the question as the mysterious John Galt leads a strike as the producers withdraw their talent, imagination and genius, thus, stopping the motor of the world.

“So you think that money is the root of all evil? Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?” (Atlas Shrugged – the Novel) — or prophecy.

I had a generally bad day today, but the movie was excellent and I am excited to see the next two installments. 

“One of the paradoxes of our age is the fact that the intellectuals, the politicians, and all the sundry voices that choke like asthma the throat of our communications media, have never gasped and stuttered so loudly about their devotion to the public good, and about the people’s will as the supreme criterion of value – and never have they been so grossly indifferent to the people. The reason, obviously, is that collectivist slogans serve as the rationalization for those who intend, not to follow the people, but to rule them.” (Rand)

WHO is John Galt? 

12 thoughts on “Movie Review: ATLAS SHRUGGED (Pt. 1)

  1. This book is incredible. I was leery when I heard that Hollywood was working on this because Hollywood has a way of turning evil government into evil capitalism. But then I heard it was being made independently and that was a good thing. Then leftist hack Roger Ebert blasted it on political grounds, which told me all I need to know! Then one of our visitors said it was a good movie and worth seeing. So I'm excited.

    Of course, it's nowhere around here yet, but I've got my cash in hand and I'm waiting. And if it is good, I will even buy the DVD just because I want this to succeed. This one could be worth it! 🙂

  2. Andrew – It is independently made and the acting is good but not world class. The point is the message and it's clear and resounds — but likely not with parasites like Roger Ebert and the Hollywood intelligencia.

  3. LL, His review had almost nothing to do with the film. It was all about the politics, though he couched it in terms of "the characters are saying things that just don't make sense"… translated: "they aren't spouting liberalism, so I refuse to understand them.

    He even had the nerve to finish with "the only people who will understand this film are devotees of the book and I suspect they won't like what's been done to it."

    Either Ebert's never read it or he's lying, because everyone who has seen it and knows the book says they've done a great job presenting the material. I think Ebert is lying. I think he wants this one to fail for fear that Hollywood will start producing films like this and end his sick little cultural monopoly.

  4. Andrew – The concept that capital is good – innovation is good and that only people who make or do something in the private sector generate jobs that are not a drain on society, is lost on socialists. It's no wonder that the other reviewer was lost in the movie if he is a socialist.

  5. I haven't read the book but I thoroughly enjoyed seeing the movie. Hoping to get to read the book soon. Good review, LL.

  6. Chickelit – watch the movie, it's playing locally to you.

    Teresa – the movie is based on principles that we see playing on the national stage today.

    Trestin – You'll enjoy it.

    WoFat – Socialists operate on misplaced emotion and foolishness.

    Opus – Ebert needs to find another job.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top