It occurred to me that despite being one of the most influential and highly debated novels of the modern era...

It occurred to me that despite being one of the most influential and highly debated novels of the modern era, there's never been a halfway decent film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged.

What does Sup Forums think about who could be cast in and direct a decent adaption of this novel? It seems like in the world of dystopian trilogies, it could be a success, if an talented and apolitical or conservative enough cast could be put together

I'll share my thoughts, curious to hear what you have to think about casting

Other urls found in this thread:

imdb.com/title/tt0480239/?ref_=nv_sr_1
youtube.com/watch?v=NjsAXbOIDac
capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Dagny Taggart: Amy Adams

Raised Mormon, which means she likely comes from a pretty conservative household. Could still stick with her, she doesn't talk about politics- which in Hollywood is often the sign of a conservative.

Very talented, easily enough to play the lead. Beautiful enough to realistically draw the affection of her multiple suitors in the story, but still normal enough looking where she can pull off the smart and hard working thing.

90% the top influential books don't have "good" adaptions. Some don't even have adaptions at all.

The reason is that in order to make it work cinematically, as with any massive novel, you'd have to make cuts, and the people who own the rights would oppose that.

It would cost serious money to do properly, and it would need a director like Peter Jackson or Christopher Nolan. Neither of whom would be likely to touch something so politically loaded.

Unless and until Rand's estate, which I believe is entirely under the jurisdiction of Leonard Peikoff, allow the kind of work any large-scale written work needs in order to become a film, there won't be a worthwhile adaptation of Atlas Shrugged.

It's 1100 pages long, faggot.

Yeah not hear to debate the novel, Rand, or Objectivism. The thread is about how it could be best adapted, not if it should.

But this highly political subject (release it in an election year), combined with the dystopian setting that's so popular could easily be a box office success if done right.

Pretty sure Ayn is pronounced 'Ein', as in 'One', not 'Ann'.

>Atlas shrugged
>highly debated

I don't think everyone agreeing it's complete shit makes it "highly debated" faggot.

Hypothetical casting, faggot.

Plus, wouldn't necessarily have to be condensed into one film. With cuts and a trilogy it could be done. If anything, perhaps better suited as a mini series

>Ayn is provinces Ein as in "one"
I literally have no idea what you're trying t say here.

But I always thought it was pronounced rhyming with Rain.

Everyone? You're delusional. Half the fucking Senators in this country campaign and get elected on it's principles. It's in every book store in the fuckin world. Cleary theres people that like it, want to read it, or hate it, want to debate it.

They already made a video games series about that, Bioshock. It turns out that everyone acting like a complete selfish prick leads to disaster.

You called her 'Ann'.

Hank Rearden: Aaron Eckhart

Worked with Nolan (likely a conservative), now Eastwood with Sully. Thank You For Smoking is a super libertarian movie. Olympus Has Fallen tugs on the America, Fuck Yeah strings. Hell he's even been on Fraizer. He's a full out Mormon too. Got to be right leaning.

Got the distinguished look to pull of the male lead. TYFS makes me think he'd have no problem pulling off the monolouges, particularly the court speech.

In-period, but assuming the period is the forties, which it seems like, rather than the fifties, when the book was finished and came out. Saturated color noir - Lynchian. For the architecture, Rand's preferences should be reflected - as they are in Vidor's underrated The Fountainhead.

Any casting would be wishful thinking, you have to choose from the much smaller pool of people who would be willing to appear in it. If we were assuming money was no object and anyone I wanted could be paid enough to put aside their ideological objections, that would be pretty un-Objectivist, wouldn't it? Rand would want people who agree and are willing to say so. That cuts you down to very few people.

I'm not him, faggot.

>Ayn Rand is the biggest joke in modern history

you libertarians are fucking pathetic.

Often, but never openly. Find me an atheist 'radical capitalist' Senator who believes in lassez-faire to the point of opposing all protectionism, and will say as much.

The book is pretty tedious. It has historical significance, but the writing and plot mechanics are outdated.

No one is John Galt. Fucking Ayn Rand was on WELFARE. That stupid stupid stupid cunt. She was just an embittered old twat that saw her daddy humiliated when stalin nationalized his business.

Why are you intervening, then? I was specifically talking to the user who deleted his mispelled reference out of embarrassment. Pity you haven't done the same with your garbled retyped quoting of me as saying ' is provinces Ein'. What does that even mean? How do you mistake the word 'pronounced' for 'provinces'? Why would someone so severely dyslexic retype all their greentexts?

Cheked

Also, you have a surface level understanding of the philosophy of the book and game if that's how you see it.

Firstly, Rapture failed because Ryan moved away from the principles he founded the city on. He expanded the Councils control, started fucking with free trade by blocking contraband.

Secondly, looking out for ones self interest isn't immoral. Collectivism destroys the individual. Objectivism is a humanist philosophy. But this isn't Sup Forums so I'm not gunna continue this debate

If I was doing it, I'd do it as a four-hour epic rather than a trilogy - it isn't structured in a way that lends itself to splitting up, to my mind.

Rand, and many conservatives, don't take issue with people receiving welfare. They're taking the path of least resistance and looking out for themselves.

They issue they take is the government that does the taking and redistributing. She didn't think they should be able to do that, but doesn't mean she shouodnt reao the benefits. I don't care about Tyrone collecting a welfare check. I'd do it too if I didn't enjoy my work. Work the system by all means. My issue is with the guys like FDR who made it possible

You conservatives have your head so far up your ass that you fail to see the errors of your ways, then you blame libertarians for your obvious mistakes.

>he thinks Bioshock is pro-Objectivist

This was a decent try out. The first part was done well but the second was terrible.:

imdb.com/title/tt0480239/?ref_=nv_sr_1

John Galt is this fantastical asshole who makes all your dreams come true. You know who really makes your dreams come true? A ubiquitously educated mass of scientists that spend their life parallel processing new ideas. Not some mystical daddy figure that you people below the curve thinks exists, but a mass of very smart normal folk who have advanced their education so far that one of this group will have a breakthrough.

The only problem with presenting this concept to you, is that you're too fucking stupid and ingrained in your need for a daddy that you can't understand it.

Questions for Atlas Shrugged: The Trilogy experts only:

1. Why was the setting changed from a late-50's speculative near-future view to the modern era?

2. Why did the cast change with every movie?
a. Why was Eddie Willers black in every iteration?
i. Isn't this super-racist?
b. Why show the short fat hairless Ellis Wyatt actor from Part I in Part II on the news when he was to be replaced with a tall skinny mustached man in III?

3. How was this allowed?

You uneducated dilettantes aren't smart enough to know this simple concept. Even though it created a polio vaccine, insulin, penicillin, the steam engine, jet engines, steel. EVERYTHING.

John Galt isn't the hero...

People who understand the book don't worship John Galt

The whole point is self reliance. Libertarians don't believe in the ubermensch. Trump voters do. You're an idiot.

Why are you talking as if you were addressing the masses, when most people are uninterested in or repelled by Rand's work?

>there's never been a halfway decent film adaptation of Atlas Shrugged.
That's because people like Zack Snyder like Ayn Rand.

What about Trump-voting libertarians?

It's not influential, it's not highly debated (the consensus is people who agree with the premise are asshats), the story doesn't even make a good novel, let alone movie

>The whole point is self reliance.

You know that all great apes are social right? There is absolutely NO self reliance in that entire genus.

You fucking people.

Objectivist here.

AMA

Did Ryan not move away from the principles he founded the city on?

Is that not why Rapture went from utopia to dystopia?

Bioshock isnt really about Objectivism, in a positive or negative light, at all. It's a look at power and how it corrupts and destroys both individuals and societies.

Sweet surface level understanding and pithy meme you got there though.

You're the "Jesus Lives" of ethos. No one cares.

>You're the "Jesus Lives" of ethos.
What does that mean?

Horrible choices.

Jessica Chastain is the Perfect Dagny, and Brad Pitt is the closest we have to Hank Rearden.

Oh that's right, it's been 20 years since a homeless weirdo held a "JESUS LIVES" sign while begging for change. So just picture that.

Brad Pitt oozes dumb stoner, how is he an appropriate Rearden?

He'd be an ace Eddie Willers.

Being social animals =/= apes are socialist animals, you fucking idiot. Setting aside humans are the only apes with an economy so you're comparing bananas to apples- apes living together doesn't mean one ape eats the banana another ape picked for itself. Apes compete for resources, mates, etc. amongst themselves.

That's how nature works. An individual organisms will to survive, pushing it forward. Animals don't give up their food to someone outside their family until after they've had their fill. In humans, we call that charity.

John Galt is the hero, you reatrd. But you don't have to worship the guy, but you can hold him up as a sign of moral superiority, as he is.

This movie was produced by the Atlas Society and not The Ayn Rand Institute, which means that this was bound to be shit from go. They don't care about the novel, they change things about it all the time.

They chose a modern era because it was "closer" and because it would have a lower cost. Stupid decision.

The cast changed because they did not have enough money to hire the same people every time, because a single businessman was handling 80% of the cost.

The Atlas Society believes that black people have been put down by society (which is fucking wrong and goes against everything rand ever said) so they cast a racial guy so that the entire movie isn't white, evern though eddie is white in the book.

Same, lack of money

It shouldn't have been allowed, but they thought this could go well.

Chastain looks like a pretty big lib based on that Miss Sloan movie she has coming. Though certainly she'd be great for it if she could set aside her personal beliefs and get into the character.

Pitt could be a good choice as well I think. I could see him more as Galt though

They absolutely sacrifice for the greater good when survival is threatened, otherwise they sacrifice for family on a daily basis regardless. They certainly don't amass wealth 1000x more than their neighbours, EVER. Especially in a time of abundance. What are you seeing right now, in a time of absolute western abundance and automation?

You're the kind of dipshit that probably knows who jane goodall is, but never listened to her in your lifetime.

Apes have no concept of wealth because they are base animals who still have to fight for survival day in and day out.

An ape would gladly build a stockpile of bananas if it could but it can't. It can't farm, or preserve food, etc etc. They live simple cus it's the only choice they can.

The apes that WERE smart enough, humans, naturally gravitate towards voluntary exchange and trying to be as wealthy as possible

I'm not doing either of those.

He doesn't ooze dumb stoner IMO, he could easily play a very focused character as he gets older. The only issue here is height, I think hiring BEn Affleck would be the second best choice, but I have serious doubts about his acting potential.

What I've inferred abotu Chastain form her various interviews and articles is that she is mostly putting up a show for acceptance. I've met her myself, and she's drastically different around people than she is when she is with friends. Also, her accepting The Huntsman jut shows that she is desperate for a good role but is trying to take them by being famous. I think she also lied about her age a few years ago.

So comfortable survival is based on sharing and fair commerce and not hording.. ok.

>Pitt could be a good choice as well I think. I could see him more as Galt though
Brad Pitt was going to play Howard Roark in 2004 before the movie was scrapped because the production studio wanted to do another summer flick.

youtube.com/watch?v=NjsAXbOIDac

start at 23:00

He's widely considered to be an anti-villain.

Dag and Hank are the real hero's. They're against the looters, but also try to resist "the Destroyer" in Galt- they don't want to quit, as much as they understand why Galt and others do.

You probably didn't notice that I'm arguing against rapacious capitalism and for comfortable barter that ends up with a society that doesn't have to police against a sub culture that ends up starving. Do you understand any of that? A people who can live together in relative comfort but might not be able to exploit one another while creating massive social misery and across the board danger and suffering in the common sphere?

This place is like trying to reason with plant life.

The externalities of this being a need for a massive police force, incarceration and oppression. Sorry I needed to add that because you all kinda seem dim to how a greased society works. See Norway.

This right here, the city goes to shit after Ryan takes over Fontaine Futuristics, becoming the Citizen Kane of Rapture.

That is complete horseshit, and you have no clue what you are talking about.

Do you know what John Galt did? Everyone else in the movie did the same in the end. Them not going to the valley and not leaving their businesses was a moral mistake, not being a hero. Them trying to stop Galt was a stab in their own back, and the book is about not accepting sacrifice as your life, and not the other way around. Plus, if you had read the book, you would have a couple more points which would show that Galt also ends up in the usual definition of "hero"

What I would love about Chastain is if you could land Oscar Isaac for Fransico too. The two of them have a long friendship, and great on screen chemistry.

He's been caught wearing an Atlas Shrugged shirt for which he was crucified by libs and then claimed he just wore it cus he liked the design of it. With a father that left Cuba I feel like there's a good chance he's from a fiscally conservative family. Could see him as a closet conservative.

He's got the charm and gravity for Fransico in spades.

What happened when Germany invaded Russia? Who moved the industrial base to the urals in an event never before seen in humanity? Was that a bunch of clever capitalists reacting to the invisible hand?

talking to you people is like talking to gerbils. Are you even 20 years old?

Wow. Never knew he was tied to that.

He did marry Jon Voight's daughter after all.

>Jon Voight probably supported Brad's case in the court against is own cunt daughter

LMAO what's your point?

Thank you, Ad-hominem man.

No, he doesn't look like Franciso. Francisco is this 6'2" thin, musular dark skinned guy with immense swagger. OScar is way too short and looks depressed.

Like pic related but darker

>greedy capitalism
>kek

Yeah that's the only capitalism there is. It's self serving. Always. So long as trade is free it CANNOT be exploitative. Stop being such a fucking sissy. Wealth is unlimited in a free market if you'd nut up and face the challenges that come with it instead of wanting a watered down version

So you corner store idiots go to sleep and wake up to a degraded world that you asked for. Just shut up and go to sleep and ask your family to forgive you in your depressing lives.

It's hard to make a good adaptation from a shit book.

...

Instead of being subversive and essentially running from the political reality he didnt like- Galt could have tried to face it head on, in the light, like Dag and Hank.

I understand Galt, but disagree with his means. He basically ends up establishing an oligarchy at the end because of his terrorist like approach, and an oligarchy goes against his own beliefs.

I get that most people don't really understand her, and most of the haters never read any of her work, but she's a shit writer. The Fountain was about 400 pages too long, and her messages are so hamfisted it makes your head hurt. That's why there's no good adaptation.

Yeah people gotta read the Hanks court speech. People can act like social welfare is this grand benevolent thing but all it is is armed robbery of the individual in the name of the masses.

People's inability to see how immoral that is horrifies me.

>Instead of being subversive and essentially running from the political reality he didnt like- Galt could have tried to face it head on, in the light, like Dag and Hank.

And what would that have done? The entire point is that the world is so deep in doo-doo that speaking out about it in public will only bring death to the speaker.

Bet you didn't even read the book, you little shit. Galt DOES get caught in the end and he is threatened, tortured and electrocuted.

>I understand Galt, but disagree with his means. He basically ends up establishing an oligarchy at the end because of his terrorist like approach, and an oligarchy goes against his own beliefs.

You don't understand shit. It isn't an Oligarchy. They have a proper government and everything.

>terrorist like
justify this.

>The Fountain

Francisco's speech is better
capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/

>buying into a single word of Ayn-IHAVEDADDYISSUSE-Rand

She was piqued that her father's pharmaceutical business was taken over by Hitler, and the shit people in the US adopted her. She was an intellectual grab by people who weren't intellectual at all, but financially based. EVERYONE knows this, but you peons can't get a grip because your betters don't let you know the truth. I'm amazed they let you watch art and entertainment network ffs.

It's almost like you haven't read anything by her.

Oh wait...

>hitler

stalin, not hitler, sorry folks.

The build thing isn't something that's fixed, actors morph themselves all the time. Obviously his height is, but not a big deal I don't think.

Oscar Isaac has no swagger though?? Poe Dameron is fly as fuck. You seen his dance moves in Ex Machina? He's pretty slick IMO. It's just he *can* do the depressed thing too, like in Llweyn Davis, but I don't think that's who he is.

>people actually enjoyed the fucking messes that are Ayn Rand novels.

people who live in abject poverty need a daddy figure. they love the idea of someone saving them. just watch..

Yes, I've heard the liberal rhetoric.
Fountainhead. Sorry, brain-fart.

>as an immature child im mad muh dad gave up his business and ran away like a sensible human being looking out for his family
>instead of growing up and maturing I'm going to hold onto this irrational childlike anger and create an entire philosophy to justify my feelings where I idealize immature and borderline insane traits in men

Obvious as fuck. There's a reason she was so anti-shrinks. Out of all her writings, she's the easiest book to read.

>Collectivism destroys the individual.

Wrong, it's the opposite, Hierarchical power relations destroy the individual. If I lived in a collective society where I didn't have to worry about money or housing or trying to fucking live and robots basically do most of the work, I would have far more choice as an individual than I do now.

Objectivism is the ideology of the rich because it allows them to have individuality, while everyone else below them gets to live in servitude.

>most influential and highly debated novels
it only sold 6 million copies
it's meme political philosophy for highschoolers who want to be different

The queen of objectivism accepted welfare. This isn't even an argument. It's just how to gently let these idiots down.

You're all probably 15ish, right? How do you think you'll be when you're 35? That person is the person you need to be now. You need to grow up TOO SOON. But do it.

Collectivism IS hierarchical power.... nationalized industry puts all means of production in the hands of the ruling elite.

With capitalism, people freely chose to buy from, sell from, work for, and hire people as they see fit. Capitalism allows for every transaction you make to be volunteer. You are FREE. Liberty is the fundamental principle of humanism.

Youre happy to be a slave to the state if it'll be your daddy and subsidize your life. Pathetic fucking degenerate.

>What is Projection for 500 Alex.

Dagny Taggart - Lauren Bacall
Hank Rearden - Robert Mitchum
John Galt - Jon Hamm
Francisco d'Anconia - Tom Cruise
Ragnar Danneskjöld - Errol Flynn
James Taggart - Norm Macdonald
Dr. Floyd Ferris - Robin Williams
Robert Stadler - Daniel Day Lewis
Wesley Mouch - Dennis Hopper

You fucking dumb twat no libertarian gives a SHIT about Ayn Rand or the choices she made as an individual. They like her ideas. If a hypocrite states a metaphysical truth, it doesn't magically become a lie. If she wanted to exploit the system, by all means. The problem isn't the takers- it's the enablers.

>Collectivism IS hierarchical power.... nationalized industry puts all means of production in the hands of the ruling elite.


No it isn't. You can have local democratic collectives, Cooperatives and the like. CAPITALISM is heirarchical power, as those with the most money and those with the most property, become all powerful, basically turning countries into their own feifdoms.

>With capitalism, people freely chose to buy from, sell from, work for, and hire people as they see fit.

No they don't. People work to survive, if they do not work, they fucking die. 7/10 workers fucking hate their jobs. Are they doing it for fun?

>Capitalism allows for every transaction you make to be volunteer.

Again wrong. The entire PR and advertising industry which literally exists to brainwash people shows otherwise.

>Youre happy to be a slave to the state if it'll be your daddy and subsidize your life. Pathetic fucking degenerate.

Says the retard who wants to be slave to unaccountable corporate power.

Would rather work in a democratic collective than fucking feudalism 2.0 thanks.

Are you like.. 85 years old?

Norm though. Love it.

>moving the goalposts
If one is a closeted fag does not mean he doesn't like to suck dicks, you should know this.

Local democratic collectives? Grow up you fucking hippy. There's billions of people in a world that's entirely connected. That shit doesnt fly. The global economy is here to stay.

You aren't forced to work.. you can chose not to and starve. That's death by your own stupidity and laziness, not a's a victim of someone else. Labour is a resource. In a free market, companies compete for that resource and as such you don't end up with any version of serfdom.

I work in advertising... brainwashing is 0% of what we do. (Though I suppose if it was, I wouldn't admit to you otherwise). All marketing is is a function of sales. You can't have a salesman talk to everyone individually so you boil it down and send it out to be as wide reaching as it can. Don't like TV ads? Don't watch. No one forces you to watch TV.

Corporate powers are entirely accountable to their shareholders for one (no huge corporation the likes you're thinking of are privately held for the most part) and to consumers that have the buying power that keeps companies alive.

Your own inadequacy is why you hate the competition of a free market and success of those that do it well. How'd Bern work out for you, you fucking loser?

>one of the most influential novels of the modern era
my fucking sides

t. /lit/

>Local democratic collectives?

No reason corporations cannot be collectivized into cooperatives.

>You aren't forced to work.. you can chose not to and starve. That's death by your own stupidity and laziness, not a's a victim of someone else.

Oh yes, great choice. Either accept arbitrary STATE ENFORCED property rights of an oligarchic class or fucking starve to death, great choice.

>brainwashing is 0% of what we do

Lol bullshit, you work in advertising. My PR university textbook started with the joke it was the most evil industry on earth. The PR industry is literally brainwashing, Edward Bernays literally says that in Propaganda.

>Corporate powers are entirely accountable to their shareholders for one (no huge corporation the likes you're thinking of are privately held for the most part) and to consumers that have the buying power that keeps companies alive.

Bullshit. Corporations have power into themselves. Customers do not have real power over corporations because the sad reality is that 99% of people don't give a shit about Boycotts and the PR industry works to BRAINWASH people to turn against the masses. Look at how successful Climate Change denial has been as an PR industry.

>Your own inadequacy is why you hate the competition of a free market and success of those that do it well.

You're just a fucking retarded 14 year old who has never entered the job market and has zero fucking clue what the realities of working in personal fiefdoms of the rich are like. Go jerk off to your failed bullshit contradictory ideology retard.

Oh btw, Capitalism literally cannot function without state power enforcing property rights with violence.

Man I really struck a nerve with the inadequacy thing, huh? Youre that sad about your dead end job you think some fucking collective will save you?

You're gunna be a lazy, insiginicant, peon in that reality too. Only difference is, so will everbody else.

Also just FYI being a libertarian/capitalist =/= being an anarchist. Government protecting my natural right to property is literally one of the only things it is meant for.

I can't keep talking to the wall like this. Good night. Have sweet dreams of some communist revolution in the U.S., presumably in your OWS tent.