« New research on what triggers autism | Main | What will they think of next? »
Update on *Atlas Shrugged* the movie
Here are the details. It will be a trilogy. Many millions will be invested. Philosopher David Kelley is serving as consultant. Angelina Jolie remains very interested in the Dagny Taggart role. It will probably drive me further into the hands of Veronica Mars.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on July 13, 2006 at 02:30 PM in Film | Permalink
Comments
God help us.
Posted by: Scott Scheule at Jul 13, 2006 3:26:39 PM
If only to counter the above comment ... Hurray!
Posted by: Jake at Jul 13, 2006 3:31:50 PM
shibby
Posted by: josh at Jul 13, 2006 3:52:50 PM
I like reading this blog and visit it regularly.
But I am going to lose respect for Tyler Cowen if he turns out to be an Ayn Rand fan.
Posted by: Dirk at Jul 13, 2006 4:32:14 PM
I can't imagine a trilogy. Can't mentally break in down in my head.
Now, I could imagine a four-movie series in which #3 is just John Galt's very, very long monologue.
But not a trilogy.
Posted by: Richard Bellamy at Jul 13, 2006 4:36:42 PM
Really? Given the depth and scope of Ayn Rand's philosophy, I find it hard to imagine it lasting more than about five minutes.
Posted by: Tony at Jul 13, 2006 4:56:57 PM
"Now, I could imagine a four-movie series in which #3 is just John Galt's very, very long monologue."
Isn't it like 25 pages? lol
But, lets look at the actual book, and plot of the book and ignore teh pheelosso'fy of Ayn Rand. Will it be interesting?
The characters are very good for movies, as they easily identifiable, the rich playboy, the business man, the driven business woman thwarted at every step, the kindly professors, one who remains true and the other who gives up the dream. And John Galt himself, misunderstood genius. So one huge plus for the movies.
Second, the plot is acuually not bad. A decent mystery, some completely interesting side plots. Plus enough glamour, enough put downs of elites, DTs offensive brother. There is far to many words in between actual action, but overall, it should translate pretty well. Plus for movies.
However, there are two very large problems.
One of the main symbols in the book is the cigarette. It comes up over and over as a direct symbol for capitalism. I have a difficult time thinking of the book without thinking about all of the smoking scenes, ya know, fire tamed at the fingertip of man and all that. We now know cigs are very bad for you and cause a large number of health problems. So does capitalism cause these bad things too? Um...When I brought this up to some randians, they said the choice of symbol was 'unfortunate'. hehehe.
Second, John Gs invention is something that mines energy directly from space. Also known as 'Zero Point Energy', or ZPE, today, these 'inventions' have resulted in a field full of cranks, charlatans and outright theives. I happen to believe that one day we will be able to do this. Tesla claimed to be able to do this. But the fact remains for right now it would be difficult to find a single 'invention' that is more disreputable. It overlaps directly with some of the more comical UFO people. If you thought that DaVinci code was less than truth based, you should see this field. It is literally conspiracy theory central.
Posted by: mickslam at Jul 13, 2006 5:47:49 PM
Atlas Shrugged has a pretty nice outline for a movie, centering on the tangible, film-friendly parts of the plot--Dagny's love-quadrilateral with 3/5 of the smartest and most dynamic people on Earth, the search for the secret of the magic engine, and the slow-then-fast collapse of civilization. But they basically won't be able to do more than hint at the core of the plot, which is the philosophical development of the three main characters. That part of the plot is the reason for having multipage speeches and philosophical discussions in the book, but those would kill any movie, and so that whole side of the plot will have to be done by implication and hint.
The chemistry between the actors will be really hard to get right. Dagny has to click with three different leading men, each in a different way, and each at different parts of her life.
Posted by: albatross at Jul 13, 2006 6:26:24 PM
trashy romance novel for economists?
Posted by: Jor at Jul 13, 2006 7:48:14 PM
When it comes time for the long monologue, they'll have the words "READ THE BOOK" come up on the screen. Otherwise, the movie has no chance commercially.
Tony, I am curious... do you mean your comment to be an insult, or a compliment?
Posted by: Wulf at Jul 13, 2006 8:05:34 PM
Mickslam: what makes you think that "we will be able to" mine energy from ZPE? Because scientists bother to use the analogy? You can do meaningful physics by assuming that no energy can be extracted from a ZPE (ground state) system.
If it's one day possible, then we'll have to find a manipulable theory that bypasses QM, and I wouldn't hold my breath for that.
I wouldn't mind having more movies with heart, though, right/wrong/whatever. Try to sell me something, don't just read it to me out of a comic book.
Posted by: juwanna at Jul 13, 2006 10:51:08 PM
juwanna,
Just idle speculation, as if its there, it can be done , so it will be done type of thinking and no I didn't get killed and my lab destroyed because I discovered the circuit. And I don't think tomorrow, I think closer to 100 years. Wasn't there a link here - try kottke.org if not, about a group of scientists including some real big wigs, who just got together to talk about the energy in space?
Posted by: mickslam at Jul 13, 2006 11:07:23 PM
It's been a while since I read the book, and I'm not sure I understand what you mean by ZPE, but didn't the machine draw power from static electricity already present and not generate any new power?
Posted by: John Jenkins at Jul 14, 2006 12:15:15 AM
As a side note, neither did I invent the damn thing and leave it to rot in an abandonded factory because I disagee with my employers philosophy, and then take a job sweeping floors while simultaneously getting meetings with the most powerful and successful people in the world and convincing them over the course of a single meeting to retreat to a small, hidden community near Aspen.
Posted by: mickslam at Jul 14, 2006 12:17:52 AM
I really hope they don't try to be too 'current' a la Vendetta's adaptation, and lose the universal themes of the novel.
Posted by: quitacet at Jul 14, 2006 12:43:31 AM
Mickslam - great synopsis. I say...Kevin Spacey for Galt.
Posted by: Alex Ambroz at Jul 14, 2006 7:10:53 AM
mickslam:
Yes, but that's because all the smartest people *you* know probably don't agree on all important matters of ethics, politics, tastes in art and music and literature, etc. (Though to be fair, they're all watching a dying culture, so maybe it's not so much that Richard Halley's music is better than all the other good composers out there in everyone's opinion, as that Richard Halley is the only composer out there whose music doesn't sound like an industrial accident. It's a heck of a lot easier to get lots of people to agree about what they hate than about what they love, at least in this context.)
One of the really valuable ideas from AS, though it was certainly around before in trading cultures, is the idea that an appropriate way of avenging yourself for being treated badly is just to stop doing business with them. ("Let them trade with themselves," in Vinge's formulation of this for the Qeng Ho.)
Posted by: albatross at Jul 14, 2006 10:30:13 AM
One dimensional characters. Sordid romance. Hit-you-over-the-head ideology. You don't have to think too hard. Hell if Passion of the Christ is a barometer this movie is a HIT!
Posted by: Mark at Jul 14, 2006 2:04:05 PM
I read many years ago about a nano-motor that worked on static electricity.
Posted by: Alex Tabarrok at Jul 14, 2006 2:37:48 PM
Mark:
Does that mean they're going to have to include the Galt under torture scene? (Helpful hint to rebellious geniuses everywhere: It's not really required to help them fix their torture machine. Their next scheduled interogatee will probably not thank you.)
Posted by: albatross at Jul 14, 2006 4:45:22 PM
I just want to see the fast ride on the green raise scene, and the love scene/wrestling match that comes afterward. (Didn't Ellis Wyatt get a little annoyed with all the *noise* his guests were making? No wonder the guy seldom had guests.)
Posted by: albatross at Jul 14, 2006 4:47:56 PM
Say what you will about Atlas Shrugged, but I can't help
but like a story that depicts passive-aggressiveness as heroic.
Posted by: Keith at Jul 14, 2006 4:58:57 PM
Here's the IMDB website. I would have typed up the http
hyperlink, but I swear, by my life and my love of it, that
I'm not going to live for anybody else, nor ask anyone else to live for me. Don't tell my wife.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480239/
Oh, hey, they're talking to Brad Pitt for the role
of John Galt. Gag me.
Posted by: Keith at Jul 14, 2006 5:19:15 PM
A trilogy? If they show this at Guantanamo, the ACLU will go crazy.
Posted by: Steven Donegal at Jul 14, 2006 5:27:48 PM
They could improve upon AS in the movie by having Dagny say somewhere in the middle that she wants children, but not in the kind of corrupt society she found herself in. Then when Galt shows her the way out, the end of the movie could show her pregnant with his child, and that would symbolize the renewal of vitality in the new society the strikers plan to build.
That would map real human behavior better than Rand's inexplicably sterile ending. (Where do the "youths" come from who can look forward to the future without uncertainty or fear?) I draw the analogy with the baby boom after in the U.S. after nearly two decades of depression and war, when men and women of childbearing age felt they could increase their reproductive success because they expected better economic conditions.
Posted by: Mark Plus at Jul 14, 2006 9:13:19 PM
