"Atlas Shrugged," the movie

Seattle Times ^ | 4/9/11 | Bruce Ramsey

[Lurking Libertarian]

her book scares the crap out of me in the same way “Witness” (by Whittaker Chambers) did when I read it for the first time.

Interesting juxtaposition. Whittaker Chambers reviewed Atlas Shrugged for National Review when the book was first released, and HATED it. (You can find his review on Google.)

[Publius]

I wish you'd been here for the book club.

FReeper Book Club: Introduction to Atlas Shrugged
Part I, Chapter I: The Theme
Part I, Chapter II: The Chain
Part I, Chapter III: The Top and the Bottom
Part I, Chapter IV: The Immovable Movers
Part I, Chapter V: The Climax of the d’Anconias
Part I, Chapter VI: The Non-Commercial
Part I, Chapter VII: The Exploiters and the Exploited
Part I, Chapter VIII: The John Galt Line
Part I, Chapter IX: The Sacred and the Profane
Part I, Chapter X: Wyatt’s Torch
Part II, Chapter I: The Man Who Belonged on Earth
Part II, Chapter II: The Aristocracy of Pull
Part II, Chapter III: White Blackmail
Part II, Chapter IV: The Sanction of the Victim
Part II, Chapter V: Account Overdrawn
Part II, Chapter VI: Miracle Metal
Part II, Chapter VII: The Moratorium on Brains
Part II, Chapter VIII: By Our Love
Part II, Chapter IX: The Face Without Pain or Fear or Guilt
Part II, Chapter X: The Sign of the Dollar
Part III, Chapter I: Atlantis
Part III, Chapter II: The Utopia of Greed
Part III, Chapter III: Anti-Greed
Part III, Chapter IV: Anti-Life
Part III, Chapter V: Their Brothers’ Keepers
Part III, Chapter VI: The Concerto of Deliverance
Part III, Chapter VII: “This is John Galt Speaking”
Part III, Chapter VIII: The Egoist
Part III, Chapter IX: The Generator
Part III, Chapter X: In the Name of the Best Within Us
Coda: Ten Years After
Afterword and Suggested Reading

[ladyvet]

Closest place showing it to me is five hours away. I guess I'll wait for the DVD.

[70times7]

When globes collide...

[BCrago66]

Here’s the “demand Atlas” section of the official website. Put in your zip code (and email) and see what happens - my guess it that it directs you to the corporate headquarters of local theaters.

So far, Pittsburgh is the 4th most demanded. I had no idea that Ayn Rand was so big in Providence, RI.

http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/demand?

[rlmorel]

LOL...the irony, eh? I am well aware of that, and I have a lot of respect for Whittaker Chambers as a writer. His book is chock full of snippets of text, so much so that I have forsaken my copy with the highlights to use the ebook version that lets me highlight and easily look up things I think are valuable...and I did the same with “Witness”.

But, that said, it is 100% obvious to me that both Whittaker Chambers and Ayn Rand attack the same thing, just from different directions.

I know that sounds like a real contradiction, given that Whitaker Chambers was a devoutly religious man and Ayn Rand was a complete polar opposite.

But I think that one can make the argument that in both cases, the enemy is liberalism. In Whittaker Chambers book “Witness” his enemy is, ironically enough, atheism as expressed by communism. (Man substituting himself for God…)

In Ayn Rand’s book “Atlas Shrugged”, her enemy is clearly the overarching and statist government, or, at a more fundamental level, the idea that the fruits of a man’s labor do not accrue to him.

In either case, I think that Ayn Rand would be able to view the situation that Whittaker Chambers writes about and see the very reflection of her issue, and vice versa for Whittaker Chambers.

Fascinating stuff, but now more than ever, it is more than just food for thought. In both of these cases, our very future now depends on us understanding these threats and coming to grips with them.

[Lurking Libertarian]

But, that said, it is 100% obvious to me that both Whittaker Chambers and Ayn Rand attack the same thing, just from different directions.

I agree, which is why I find Chambers' review of Atlas Shrugged so over the top (he accuses her, in so many words, of wanting to send her ideological foes to "the gas chamber").

[GSWarrior]

I'm seeing the movie, not on premier night - 4/15 - because I'm averse to crowds,

Crowds? I like your positive outlook.

[maine-iac7]

So far, the closest is in a neighboring state - 5 hours away ;o(

[rlmorel]

I know… it’s almost funny, but I think that perhaps Whittaker Chambers completely missed her point of view because of A) her atheism, and B) his time and place. I think he was so completely immersed in it, that he couldn’t see the forest for the trees.

[Sea Parrot]

Looks a little Obamanisque hey.

[rlmorel]

LOL...You come on down, Mainiac-7, and we’ll go to one of these liberal theaters in Massachusetts and watch it!

I find most interesting that there are eight places in Massachusetts where one will be able to see this film. I would’ve been surprised if there had been even two of them… I wonder how that happened.

I always tell people there are more conservatives in Massachusetts than one would think, perhaps the secret handshakes went viral somewhere… :-)

[BCrago66]

I like New York, but for me, 20 people in a theater is a crowd when they’re talking, texting, opening wrappers, etc. during the movie. When I can, I prefer movies in a couple theaters on the Upper West Side where the elderly people hang out, or at 10:30 AM, when the whippersnappers are sleeping.

[rlmorel]

Isn’t it great? I’d like to think that particular graphic was a severe poke in the eye, and even if the artist did it merely as a way to help make money, I don’t have a problem with that!

It’s kind of a truism the graphical artists are generally on the liberal side, but I suppose it’s possible that there may have been one who is conservative and his reputation preceded him enough that he came to the notice of the producers…

Granted, monkeys might fly out of my butt too, but it is possible!

[rlmorel]

I used to be an inveterate moviegoer, and there were times when I recall going to several movies a week. But I think I just got older, and the stuff coming out of Hollywood stopped appealing to me. Pile on top of that the dramatically rising price of theater tickets, and I very rarely go to the movies anymore.

I consider myself extremely fortunate though, because in my little town, we actually have a small, independently owned movie theater. Tickets are $7.50, and matinees are only five dollars. The people who work there or polite, and the price of concessions is reasonable. If I go to a movie now, I go there and enjoy it. I like the fact that we do have a small theater in our town, and I like to be able to contribute to its profitability. Nowadays, not many people can say that they can take a walk to the movie theater.

I confess, that there is one particular thing that I do not like… they don’t clean the floor often enough in that place, and I assure you, it is completely and totally disgusting. I’m talking feet really and honestly sticking to the floor, and walking out with visible residue on the soles of your shoes.

Last time I went, though, it was much better, so I think someone might have written a letter or notified them. Heck, it’s not that much work just to get some kid to go drag a hot swab through the aisles...

[Sea Parrot]

Can’t find any of the casino theaters in the Laughlin Nev area with it. So as soon as it is released, will put it on save at at Netflix.

[Clock King]

No system of math or philosophy will ever be complete, and hers is no exception. She still understood the Leftist mind better than anyone else in her time.

[SoothingDave]

I figure cause the Waterfront is accessible from the Parkways and the South Hills isn’t.

[BCrago66]

I can’t think of any theaters I go to that match your description, at least not in the last 20 years. I liked going to them in my youth; better kept, customers more polite, more interesting selection of films. Maybe independent theaters will make a comeback, as people get tired of a more homogenized existence. But outside the big cities, where rent is, as they saying goes, too damn high.

[Ramius]

Atlas Shrugged was the hardest book I've ever slogged through. For about the first 1000 pages, it was utterly excruciating. However, the last 168 pages were gold. I disagree with Ayn Rand on two points: 1) Her lack of belief in God, and 2) Her Objectivism doesn't take children into account.

I actually found the entire book to be gold. The characters are stark, and yes, almost cartoonish... but in a graphic novel sort of way. I loved the whole thing, though yes too... a couple of the speeches were a bit long. An editor could have helped.

I wouldn't take anything out of Francisco D'Anconia's "Money" speech. I think it works as is. But the Galt speech... yeah... too long.

Regarding your two observations... I disagree there. a.) Rand's atheism to me is totally irrelevant to objectivism. Objectivism does not require one to be an atheist, she just happened to be one. and b.) Children. This is a misunderstanding of what objectivism and "enlightened self-interest" really means.

"Enlightened self-interest" means more than most people give credit. It means long-term interest of one's own values. "Values" only means whatever a person finds ~personally~ valuable. Don't all parents have a "selfish" interest in the well being of their children? Of course they do. Selfishness in this context includes the wider context of all those things we find to be important to us.