Support NeoGAF

[Mrs. Manky]

If the budget for this movie is under $20 million or so, it'll make a profit, just because it's so cheap, and because of the controversy. First weekend low profit, and less every day after that. This won't have Battlefield Earth levels of fail.


If it actually had the big budget and the Jolie/Pitt involvement, people wouldn't be laughing.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

If the budget for this movie is under $20 million or so, it'll make a profit, just because it's so cheap, and because of the controversy. First weekend low profit, and less every day after that. This won't have Battlefield Earth levels of fail.


If it actually had the big budget and the Jolie/Pitt involvement, people wouldn't be laughing.

Well, anybody who was familiar with Rand and Objectivism still would be.

Edit: Mostly because we know that Rand wasn't really a storyteller, just a didact who wrote fiction; film being a storytelling medium, you'd pretty much have to gut what she wrote almost completely to make anything decent.

 

[Mrs. Manky]

Well, anybody who was familiar with Rand and Objectivism still would be.

Good point.

I mean people who are laughing at the actual production values of the movie.

And I wonder if anyone will try and pirate this.

 

[Freshmaker]

How would you put this into a modern setting? Defense contractors? Oil company?

Obama is advocating the construction of a high speed rail network...

 

[prodystopian]

Despite the awful trailer I thought maybe this could be not terrible, until I saw the director and writers (Only linking one writer because the other has NOTHING else on his imdb page).

Ugh.

 

[Expendable.]

we were invited to the first screening (spoilers: it is terrible).

[Review] Atlas Shrugged: Part I (Grade: C-)

 

[op_ivy]

we were invited to the first screening (spoilers: it is terrible).

[Review] Atlas Shrugged: Part I (Grade: C-)

i'm scratching my head wondering why, after that review, they gave it a C- score. what deserves a D? F?

 

[Expendable.]

i'm scratching my head wondering why, after that review, they gave it a C- score. what deserves a D? F?

He seemed to find a few things to like in it. I don't change the scores of my writers.

some more reviews I found:

Positive review - http://www.verumserum.com/?p=21923

A "must-see" film - http://www.washingtonbanglaradio.co...ews-atlas-shrugged-part-1-private-screening-a

Coming Soon gave it a 2 out of 10 - http://www.comingsoon.net/news/reviewsnews.php?id=74746&offset=10

 

[Learn2read]

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Have you decided how you’ll tackle John Galt’s epic speech in part three?

Well, I’m looking at a number of different things. Having John Galt give that speech, it might be in a casino environment. It might be that he is at a mountain retreat, rather than being where he is captured, not…that violent scene at the end. But we’re going to take a look. It doesn’t have to copy just that.

No, it absolutely will be a concentrate of entertaining words with a total, philosophic…But, you know, part three could be a musical…like a Les Miserables kind of a musical. That’s part of the impact and I guess I haven’t said this publicly yet, but I’m looking at it completely different if part three is a musical with quality music that’s done in a certain way that people will like. I mean, if you saw the play Les Miserable without the music, and then with the music, you may go in there saying, ‘oh hell, I would never want to see that great book in a musical.’ That’s going to shock a lot of people to see part three be a musical, and part two may be very different from part three and very different from part one. It has to be new, you know…We get a freshness, a vitality about it, and yet it has the same, rock-solid principles and philosophies that we all know and love.

 

[Stinkles]

Whatever you think of Rand's philosophies that trailer looked laughably low-budget.

The market will judge its excellence.

 

[Zwei]

I am interested in this.

 

[Stinkles]

The dialog in that trailer is HORRIFIC.

I did not need to be reminded of how bad the book is. To think that when it came out it was actually well reviewed. Jesus.

 

[Learn2read]

The dialog in that trailer is HORRIFIC.

Sample clip

 

[Escape Goat]

Oh noes they're building a train...or something. How terribly thrilling. :-|

 

[Tim-E]

Sample clip

Dear lord this is atrocious.

 

[Stinkles]

Oh noes they're building a train...or something. How terribly thrilling. :-|

Ironic given the fact that Libertopian governors now see mass rapid transit as some kind of affront to god.

 

[Gaborn]

Ironic given the fact that Libertopian governors now see mass rapid transit as some kind of affront to god.

????

1. There are no Libertarian governors.

2. You are surprised that someone that in your view is sympathetic to libertarianism (the implication I read from your disrespectful euphemistic idiocy) would be against state or federal funding for mass transit? If you read the book in the first place (something, given this claim seems unlikely) you might understand the distinction.

 

[mkenyon]

Sample clip

The best way to make it seem like the plight of the capitalist is just so horrible is by vilifying progressives and making them seem like the strawiest of strawmen that ever existed. Ugh.

 

[Stinkles]

????

1. There are no Libertarian governors.

2. You are surprised that someone that in your view is sympathetic to libertarianism (the implication I read from your disrespectful euphemistic idiocy) would be against state or federal funding for mass transit? If you read the book in the first place (something, given this claim seems unlikely) you might understand the distinction.

1. I didn't say Libertarian, and they shouldn't cling to Tea Party support, especially if, like you, they're familiar with "No True Scotsman" fallacies.
2. And I have read the book. We were forced to in college. It wasn't my choice. And the railroad is effectively a metaphor, I know. So I understand the distinction perfectly. I was merely commenting on the iron.
3. This movie is going to suck ass and I am going to watch it to make sure.

 

[Learn2read]

????

1. There are no Libertarian governors.

2. You are surprised that someone that in your view is sympathetic to libertarianism (the implication I read from your disrespectful euphemistic idiocy) would be against state or federal funding for mass transit? If you read the book in the first place (something, given this claim seems unlikely) you might understand the distinction.

1. Governors are returning mass transit money, on libertarian principles

2. ??? that was indecipherable

 

[Stinkles]

1. Governors are returning mass transit money, on libertarian principles

2. ??? that was indecipherable

Haha, thanks.

 

[Gaborn]

1. Governors are returning mass transit money, on libertarian principles

2. ??? that was indecipherable

The fact that someone objects to the government funding something does not mean they object to the item itself. I realize that's a hard thing for liberal gaf to accept.

 

[mkenyon]

The fact that someone objects to the government funding something does not mean they object to the item itself. I realize that's a hard thing for liberal gaf to accept.

Such mental masturbation (which I'm generally a fan of). The market has not provided an expansive and efficient rail system. Who's gonna do it?

 

[Learn2read]

The fact that someone objects to the government funding something does not mean they object to the item itself. I realize that's a hard thing for liberal gaf to accept.

Just days after the White House revealed its ambitions for a $53 billion, six-year plan for an American high-speed rail network, the place where it was all supposed to begin now appears to be out of the running. Today, Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) announced that he would refuse $2.4 billion in federal funds to build a rail line between Orlando and Tampa. The project’s construction would have required $280 million in state aid to be completed, but projections had indicated that the line would cover its own operating costs.

The Obama Administration has funded the project more than any other outside of California and hoped that the scheme, which would have opened in 2016 as the first line in a nationwide network, would serve as a model for the rest of the country. Numerous private corporations — including international conglomerates such as Siemens, Alstom, and JR East — have indicated that they would be willing to pick up the state’s tab and cover construction and operations risks, in exchange for the right to operate the trains.

derp derp

 

[RocketMoose]

Ironic given the fact that Libertopian governors now see mass rapid transit as some kind of affront to god.

Perhaps this movie is a stealth attempt by the Liberals to trick Tea Partiers into supporting high speed rail. Plans within plans!

 

[Gaborn]

derp derp

And? I said very clearly: There are no libertarian governors. A libertarian has no problem with a private company operating a rail road. Rick Scott is not a libertarian, therefore trying to use his apparent opposition to a private corporation doing so makes... no sense.

 

[Learn2read]

And? I said very clearly: There are no libertarian governors. A libertarian has no problem with a private company operating a rail road. Rick Scott is not a libertarian, therefore trying to use his apparent opposition to a private corporation doing so makes... no sense.

So him rejecting the proposal shows he's not a true libertarian - so I assume you were in favor of him accepting the proposal to have the gov't build a high speed rail system?

No True Scotsman indeed.

 

[Gaborn]

So him rejecting the proposal shows he's not a true libertarian - so I assume you were in favor of him accepting the proposal to have the gov't build a high speed rail system?

No True Scotsman indeed.

What? I was in favor of him rejecting government funding. I have no problem if he agreed to sell the land for a high speed rail to a private corporation to do so. That is my position. Pretending that somehow libertarians are inherently opposed to mass transit is a delusional fantasy.

 

[Learn2read]

What? I was in favor of him rejecting government funding. I have no problem if he agreed to sell the land for a high speed rail to a private corporation to do so. That is my position. Pretending that somehow libertarians are inherently opposed to mass transit is a delusional fantasy.

Which involved federal funding - state funding was off his hands yet he rejected it anyway.

And again, we're all just pointing out the irony that any productive project like high speed rail requires the resources of the the gov't and the invisible hand will do jack shit - yet it's the premise for the lolbertopian bible.

 

[Gaborn]

Which involved federal funding - state funding was off his hands yet he rejected it anyway.

Yes, and?????

And again, we're all just pointing out the irony that any productive project like high speed rail requires the resources of the the gov't and the invisible hand will do jack shit - yet it's the premise for the lolbertopian bible.

??????

 

[Chichikov]

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Please make it a musical, please make it a musical, please make it a musical.

Just look at this lyrical text -

The links you strive to drown are casual connections. The enemy you seek to defeat is the law of causality: it permits you no miracles. The law of causality is the law of identity applied to action. All actions are caused by entities. The nature of an action is caused and determined by the nature of the entities that act; a thing cannot act in contradiction to its nature. An action not caused by an entity would be caused by a zero, which would mean a zero controlling a thing, a non-entity controlling an entity, the non-existent ruling the existent-which is the universe of your teachers’ desire, the cause of their doctrines of causeless action, the reason of their revolt against reason, the goal of their morality, their politics, their economics, the ideal they strive for: the reign of the zero.​

Oh yeah, it's going to work AWESOME as a musical, just awesome (plus it makes just as much sense than the plot of Cats).

 

[Learn2read]

??????

Would we have an interstate highway system if it wasn't for the gov't? I'm not going to enter your imaginary world to argue with you. I stick with reality thanks.

 

[Gaborn]

Would we have an interstate highway system if it wasn't for the gov't? I'm not going to enter your imaginary world to argue with you. I stick with reality thanks.

Were we discussing the interstate highway system? I thought we were discussing a single line of high speed rail. The ASSUMPTION that any and every big project needs government funding is ridiculous. The fact that you have to use the highway system in a discussion about railroads demonstrates this. Stay on topic.

 

[Learn2read]

Were we discussing the interstate highway system? I thought we were discussing a single line of high speed rail.

I think you've been caught red-handed, bye.

 

[Gaborn]

I think you've been caught red-handed, bye.

yeah, run once your delusional mindset has been exposed. The fact that SOME projects are best done by the government does not suggest that ALL projects are this way. High speed rail projects can and should be done by private business when they want to, or not at all.

 

[Learn2read]

The fact that SOME projects are best done by the government does not suggest that ALL projects are this way.

If high-speed rail is best done by private companies, then why aren't they lining up? Also, you're saying:

interstate highway = good

highspeed rail = bad

Pretending that somehow libertarians are inherently opposed to mass transit is a delusional fantasy.

I'll just leave that there

 

[Trouble]

Gotta love it when bad guys use the powers of taxes. That'll get asses in seats.

 

[Chichikov]

Hey, there's a poligaf thread to argue about HSR or whatever.
Here we point and laugh at this hilarious hilarious film.

 

[Gaborn]

If high-speed rail is best done by private companies, then why aren't they lining up?

Probably because they don't currently see enough demand to justify there being enough money in it to make the investment worthwhile. So convince them.

Also, you're saying:

interstate highway = good

highspeed rail = bad



I'll just leave that there

Not at all. I'm saying that like anything else highspeed rail should be considered from a value perspective, and for the expected amount of passengers that are willing to use them on a regular basis. I think it's unquestionable that people have seen the benefit from the highway system, but I think it's less clear that a short intra-state highspeed rail project as was proposed for Florida would be a justifiable investment for business (or government) much less particularly beneficial for consumers in general.

In a sense it's sort of like comparing the highway system to the "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska that Palin supported-before-she-was-against-it (although she never was actually against it - until the campaign). Just because a person might acknowledge that government can rationally be the best caretaker for a national highway system does not justify funding a multi-million dollar bridge that would benefit a tiny number of people.

 

[Mrs. Manky]

Please make it a musical, please make it a musical, please make it a musical.

Just look at this lyrical text -

The links you strive to drown are casual connections. The enemy you seek to defeat is the law of causality: it permits you no miracles. The law of causality is the law of identity applied to action. All actions are caused by entities. The nature of an action is caused and determined by the nature of the entities that act; a thing cannot act in contradiction to its nature. An action not caused by an entity would be caused by a zero, which would mean a zero controlling a thing, a non-entity controlling an entity, the non-existent ruling the existent-which is the universe of your teachers’ desire, the cause of their doctrines of causeless action, the reason of their revolt against reason, the goal of their morality, their politics, their economics, the ideal they strive for: the reign of the zero.​

Oh yeah, it's going to work AWESOME as a musical, just awesome (plus it makes just as much sense than the plot of Cats).

MUSIC BY U2. PLEASE.

 

[CrunchyFrog]

Yet another book movie that should've stayed a book.

 

[Stinkles]

Yet another book movie that should've stayed a book.

Why we still got Da Vinci Code?

 

[eznark]

Part 2 has been greenlit and will be in theaters next fall.

 

[bengraven]

Part 2 has been greenlit and will be in theaters next fall.

I was so terrified they wouldn't complete it. Is it going to be two films or a trilogy?

 

[Deified Data]

Part 2 has been greenlit and will be in theaters next fall.

Fuck, seriously? Would never have guessed.

Is Part 2 basically John Galt pontificating for 2 hours?

 

[Stinkles]

I was so terrified they wouldn't complete it. Is it going to be two films or a trilogy?

Only way to do it properly is a Triology.

 

[what_rhythm]

I'm watching this on Netflix right now?

 

[eznark]

I'm watching this on Netflix right now?

Are you unsure as to whether or not that is what you are actually doing?

 

[Stinkles]

Are you unsure as to whether or not that is what you are actually doing?

I think he's questioning the wisdom.

 

[Lucario]

Please make it a musical, please make it a musical, please make it a musical.

Just look at this lyrical text -

The links you strive to drown are casual connections. The enemy you seek to defeat is the law of causality: it permits you no miracles. The law of causality is the law of identity applied to action. All actions are caused by entities. The nature of an action is caused and determined by the nature of the entities that act; a thing cannot act in contradiction to its nature. An action not caused by an entity would be caused by a zero, which would mean a zero controlling a thing, a non-entity controlling an entity, the non-existent ruling the existent-which is the universe of your teachers’ desire, the cause of their doctrines of causeless action, the reason of their revolt against reason, the goal of their morality, their politics, their economics, the ideal they strive for: the reign of the zero.​

Oh yeah, it's going to work AWESOME as a musical, just awesome (plus it makes just as much sense than the plot of Cats).

I actually proposed Atlas Shrugged: the Musical to my drama club a while back >.> I'd love to see this happen.