| SNEAK PEEK: Atlas Shrugged Clip: Henry Rearden Comes Home |
|
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Henry Rearden Comes Home [Atlas Shrugged]
10 comments:
-
Wabano said...
-
Vespasian: "Pecunia non olet"
http://project68.narod.ru/Integ/2/ulya/nu5.jpg -
2/22/11, 9:59 PM
-
Wabano said...
-
How could you have toga parties without clean togas(urine trading was the first chemical industry!)
-
2/22/11, 10:03 PM
-
Aleara said...
-
Not a good book, and not gonna be a good movie.
My fides include reading Atlas Shrugged in 1980 and again in 1997. Fountainhead in 1983. Other dabblings in Rand whenever.
War and Peace twice. Lord of the Rings 14 times. Macbeth 7 times live. Lear? Well, there's a reason I'm Alear. Ulysses twice, but much much dabbling. Not exactly a front to back novel.
I'm certain to see this movie but it's starting out as a B-, and it's just gonna disappoint further. it's gonna give the left way too much to laugh at, and for good reason. Too bad.
Turing word: trali
And Rodg, please ban me for life if ever again I get so pretentious as this. -
2/22/11, 11:23 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Now Alear, Atlas Shrugged is a LONG book and at times tedious however, it is a good one in that it accurately describes the terror that a commie ratbastid government can inflict upon its populace. The mere fact that the best have to just flat ass quit speaks volumes to the futility of fighting a stupid premise foisted on the populace by stupid people masked as intelligent ones. Please note in the book, the stupid ones seem to be the most ruthless and nastiest.
Fountainhead is long too - think that is a Rand trademark - but still a good read. I will watch this movie with open eyes. I know hollyweird can f$*# up a wet dream so I will reserve comment for the whole picture. A definite watch.
Bolivar -
2/23/11, 6:33 AM
-
douglas said...
-
Movie is gonna bomb. I think they got a lot of progressives to work on it and they were secretly out to kill it. If Rand were writing it today, she would not write about inconsequential industries like railroads and steel mills. They should have made it either a period piece (where rail and steel were important) or updated the industries. Reardon could have invented the telephone pole cel tower and given his wife errings that are a wi-fi basestation.
-
2/23/11, 8:16 AM
-
Hell_Is_Like_Newark said...
-
Douglas:
From what I have been reading, like Rand's novel, the story uses an alternative universe means to tell a story. In this universe, the price of petroleum is so damn expensive that automobiles and air-travel just isn't practical. I would also assume shipping material (steel) from from say China would also be cost prohibitive. Rail (in real life) does offer the best fuel consumption per ton for moving freight (not at high speeds) and can use electricity (the Pennsylvania and Lackawanna railroads were largely electrified early in the 20th century). -
2/23/11, 9:04 AM
-
douglas said...
-
Bull. It was seta few years in the future. She was showing the consequences of progressive policies. I remember being shocked by the early description od a "prosperous" MYC street. Only every third store was empty. Well, we're getting there only very few people seem to understand what is making us poorer and what has to change to make us richer.
As Thomas Sowell wrote, very few American hae ever owned an acre of farm land, but private property in the Midwest has made the American farmer the most productive in the world and made food purchases more affordable for every American. -
2/23/11, 9:23 AM
-
douglas said...
-
Rand's intended audience knew how important railroads and steel mills were because they were important in the America outside their window. A drama about the trials and tribulations of the nations largest coin telephone manufacturer is not going to engage many people nowdays
-
2/23/11, 9:29 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Whoa, "not a good book" Did you read the same book I've read several times? It was riveting and exactly captured progressives and their smug know it allness.
And "pREgressives worked on it to kill it" Hmm, well did you watch this scene? Looks to me they've gotten it exactly right. The elitism of pRegressives oozes out like the filth it is in real life.
Also, the movie is in 3 parts which says to me they really want to tell Rand's story-how they're going to convey one of my favorite chapters in any book e-vah, The Sign of the Dollar, is going to be fascinating.
I've listened to the producer interviewed several times and there's no doubt that they have gone to great lengths to make this a "game changer" as Rog puts it.
Further, I've seen several trailers and clips and it sure looks to me that this is a 180 from the usual "old white men are evil" line that Hollywood has fallen into.
I think the timing for the release couldn't have been more perfectly chosen. I hope that a lot of people that think government knows best will see this movie and awaken.
MM -
2/23/11, 10:33 AM
-
BruHa said...
-
I wrote about this in my little insignificant corner of the iternetz. The short of it. A movie can never be a book. However I think the movie can be viewed as an advertisement for the Book. Kinda-- You saw the movie....Did you read the book? (Self promoting and shameless incoherent link and plug for myself: http://thebruha.blogspot.com/2011/02/atlas-shrugged.html
-
2/23/11, 5:14 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)