Am I Gonna Be Able To Sit Through "Atlas Shrugged", The Film?

I like them both. I figure AS had a better premise (all the smart people opt out) while Fountainhead had better characters (Toohey and Wynand are interesting in their own ways, more so than Roark or Dominique or anybody in AS).

And the film adaptation of Fountainhead sucked donkey balls. For all of Rand’s hatred of censorship and watering-down of genius and such, I guess she bit the bullet and let the Hays-era attitudes pointlessly alter the story so Dominique doesn’t have to get divorced - twice!

[QUOTE=Docta G]
I get more enjoyment out of literature that doesn’t suck.
[/QUOTE]

Interestingly enough, so do I! :stuck_out_tongue:

At any rate, I don’t want to derail the thread either. I’m gratified to know I’m not the only one who enjoyed the book. I enjoyed the unabridged audio of Fountainhead as well (I don’t remember the reader, but he was pretty good), but I’ve never seen any of the movie adaptations. Basically, the only good book to movie adaptations I’ve ever really seen are the Harry Potter movies (FWIW, the unabridged audio of those was excellent…really better than either the movies or reading the books was, experience wise IMHO). Other than that, they generally fall short…most of the times far short.

Basically, however, if you don’t like the book you won’t like the movie is my general take on things, whether it’s AS or anything else. JMHO FWIW and all that…

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
I like them both. I figure AS had a better premise (all the smart people opt out) while Fountainhead had better characters (Toohey and Wynand are interesting in their own ways, more so than Roark or Dominique or anybody in AS).
[/QUOTE]

Toohey was always one of my favorites…certainly better than the antagonists in AS. I always picture 'luci as a Toohey like character, though he used to get annoyed when I alluded to that so I stopped doing it except in my head when I read his posts. :wink:

-XT

Add me to the list of Curiosity Kates who thinks the film previews don’t look horrible, but couldn’t get through the book.

As to why one would ‘want to’ see it if they didn’t care for the book, I agree that the writing style was just…not my thing. But style is not substance, and for the ideas to be around so long, SOMEONE has to have liked it, so…maybe they just need a new coat.
A change of media can REALLY change a story, as proven by countless other book-to-films that went horribly, horribly WRONG; so maybe one could go ‘right’. :stuck_out_tongue:

Ok, now it sounds just awful. Especially with multiple ‘parts’.

Alright, question answered <for me, anyway>
Thankees!

“Me, too” is proudly? I’ll try to use fewer words next time…

Well, you’d have to agree that we’re still arguing over her books decades later, and that’s something. :slight_smile:

To be fair, I’m not arguing anything. I’m making an assertion without justifying it: Ayn Rand was a literary and philosophical hack. I just think it’s sad that something so intellectually insipid could influence so many people. Then again, I don’t want to derail the thread either, so I’ll bow out and apologize if I’ve been a dick about it.

People argue over Nostradamus.

People argue over which fast food joint has the “best” hamburgers.

I find it rather humorous how many posters here feel the need to proudly proclaim their disdain for Scientology in any threads about that.

Jack in the Box, hands down!

:stuck_out_tongue:

Scientology fucking deserves it. You want to defend that bullshit make a fucking GD thread and I’ll be right there.

I can’t edit my old post but I would if I could. I see now what you meant and I’m sorry for my original response. It’s kind of a hot button issue for me. I really am sorry and I hope you’ll accept my apology.

[QUOTE=The Universe Lashes Out]
I find it rather humorous how many posters here feel the need to proudly proclaim their disdain for Scientology in any threads about that.
[/QUOTE]

I find it rather humorous how many posters here feel the need to proclaim their disdain for whatever book they don’t happen to like and make sweeping statements about it, implying that anyone who enjoys it is basically an idiot or has no taste. For instance, whenever Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time is brought up there will be some number of posters who will feel duty bound to come in and state that, having read through half of the first book they found the entire thing to be completely stupid and that anyone who doesn’t agree with them just doesn’t see how stupid and idiotic they are for reading through the other 12 books and anticipating the final one.

Anything written by Ayn Rand is going to fall into the same category…no matter what the actual subject of an OP is about a book by Rand or about Rand herself there will be a large number of posters who come in to drop a load about how they hated the book(s), or think they probably WOULD hate them if they could actually slog through them from beginning to end, how they are morally bankrupt, poorly written and reading them is the equivalent of raping baby kittens or pushing puppies into a meat grinder. That’s fine, but it does get old after a while.

As for Mr. Hubble’s Scientology, I basically don’t make it a point to go into such threads unless they are a debate about the actual philosophy (and I can’t say I remember too many of them lately), since I couldn’t slog through it without dislocating an eye from rolling them so much…which is why I don’t give an opinion about it. Me coming in to say ‘it sucked’ really brings nothing to the thread, since I didn’t even finish the book, and even if I did I thought it was such crap that I basically flushed it from my brain at the first opportunity and have only the vaguest memories of it now…my input would therefore be worthless to any discussion except in a ‘me too!’ sort of way. It’s not my bounden duty to jump into every thread I see on a book, movie, video game (that’s another of my pet peeves), play, article or whatever I disliked to give my two cents worth (and cheap at triple the price), if my two cents worth is merely restating the opinion ‘it sucked’. Now, if I have a bit more to add, then that’s another story.

What it boils down to for me is that different people have different tastes in things, and attempting to assert your tastes as some sort of yardstick is rather silly. I freely acknowledge that many people on this board and in general don’t like Ayn Rand (or Robert Jordan, or Stephen King or any number of other authors, movies, actors, porn stars, TV sitcoms, etc…though if you don’t like the Mythbusters you are obviously ignorant! :p). No problem…different strokes for different folks and all that. Don’t like it, then don’t read it (and certainly don’t watch a movie based on some interpretation of it)…and don’t participate in threads on the subject unless you have something more constructive to say than basically ‘It sucked’. While for a given person that might be true, it really brings nothing to any thread.

-XT

Hubbard. Not the astronomer.

Typo :slight_smile:

-XT

Oh crap.

Just wrote out a long post about the book, my feelings, my difficulty with it, and so forth.

Then I accidentally looked up a word definition in this tab and lost the post.

Precis version. I read it over 20 years ago at age 18 with no political context for it, except I knew I was politically leftist. I found the book written poorly, with heavy exposition, but yet was fascinated by the big ideas in the book. If it had been the age of the internet I could have found more information about the book and its politics. As it was, I found it off putting politically and was very disillusioned that my beloved teacher/librarian had recommended this book to me.

Yes I will probably go see it, although I am not sure it is something I will “enjoy” per se.

No, you’re not the only one. I also prefer The Fountainhead . . . the book, NOT the movie.

And to those of you who consider Rand’s work to be repetitious ad nauseum: Are you aware that she was born on Groundhog Day?

In Soviet Union, groundhog repeats you!

I’ll wait for the Agony Booth recap, then…