So, did you go see it? Good, bad, indifferent? What did you think of the new cast? Are you pumped for Part III or sick of the whole thing?
I won’t be seeing this one until it’s on DVD (not doing another six-hour round trip into so-called civilization, thank you).
But I know some of you must have seen it last night or will see it soon. All reviews and mini-reviews welcome. If you don’t have a review of your own, got any good review links?
The mainstream reviews are, no surprise, abysmal. But some at least are hilarious:
http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/2012/10/14/movie-review-the-shrugging-continues-atlas-shrugged-part/XXZtos50kMI3u0OaLFVvsL/story.html
I’m hoping to hear more from “real people” reviewers, since it’s pretty predictable that mainstreamers will just use this opportunity to show off their skills with the verbal punching bag.
Forbes’ reviewer John Tamny and Reason’s Brian Doherty like it:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2012/10/07/movie-review-why-atlas-shrugged-part-ii-is-a-must-see-film/
http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/11/atlas-shrugged-part-ii-election-edition
Big zero on Rotten Tomatoes; no surprise.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/atlas_shrugged_part_ii/
I saw the Rotten Tomatoes reviews. Seems quite a few were so negative on the book that they’d have hated the movie if it rocked along like Iron Man.
Which, I gather, it does not.
Just finished seeing the film. It’s only a 30 minute round trip for me. Frankly I really liked the film. The tired look of Dagny reflects perfectly her state at this point of the story and it is appropriately contrasted by Francisco’s vitality. Hank Reardens does take about two scenes to get used to but is portrayed well. Ha speech in court was trimmed to bare essentials but I still liked it. I think that is the only part that was a let down. I think the only area lacking proper effort by the director was on background scenery. It just didn’t look as run down and God forsaken as you would expect and was better managed by the first film.
The final verdict:
worth two cinema visits easy if it is playing within 30 miles from you. DVD if it’s a 600 mile round trip.
Sorry forgot to answer your question. Hell yes I can’t wait for part three. If only to see how they trim down John Galts long winded response. I hope they keep the actor who portrayed Francisco in thus one. And I always like this Dagny since she was THE hot girl during my teen years.
Thanks, Richard. Yeah on the John Galt speech thing. Somehow I’m picturing two or three separate movies just to get through that one speech. 🙂
Samantha Mathis was THE hot girl? Well, who knew? I had to go look her up just now. Then I realized that the only movie I ever saw her in starred Christian Slater. And back then HE was a very hot boy. (After Heathers.) Never even noticed her. How times and people have changed.
It wasn’t as pure as Pt 1 – I think the desperate circumstances of production for 1 made it have a sort of clear flow. This is more hectic and colored. But the thriller aspect and econ-political passion of the book still shines through. A number of unfortunate continuity errors and such – some quite severe. The Richard Halley sequence was bad. Dagny seems overly tired even with the world collapsing, but Rearden’s character was more or less successfully updated for 2012, and his clotted marriage makes more sense given our times. Some very interesting adaptative decisions (e.g., making TT have a central nerve center and having Dave Mitchum work there). Eddie Willers is a stronger character, seems a better match for Dagny. Francisco stands out – he has the burning passion (almost mystical) of someone who has seen another world. Not much like the Francisco of the book – the Zorro-inspired D’Anconia has become more an avenging/liberating angel, but through him we hear some of the purer moments of Rand’s voice come through. (There’s not much of it in the movie – the plot and some of the relationships have been extracted.) During some of the film I felt uncomfortable with the tonal departure from Rand. I whispered to C., “This is the novel, fractured and rendered into Muzak.” But there were moments of truth and beauty and passion.
Sounds like it’ll be worth going to a matinee priced showing so I don’t have to pay out as much in ticket price. But that won’t be til next weekend. After all, they may do a better job on the next(and maybe last) “installment”.
After all this is the middle of the story which sometimes drag.
You can tell they spent serious money on the production. The acting was competent, special effects were generally good, and the story line followed the book. Esai Morales who played Francisco was especially good. All of the supporting actors were excellent with Rex Linn capturing the thug nature of politicians perfectly as Kip Chalmers.
I watched the 2:00 pm matinee this afternoon. The theater was 3/4 full.
But no one was smiling as we filed at the end. The events portrayed are now too close to reality.
Went and saw the 6:15 pm show on Friday in Gurnee, Ill with maybe a dozen or 2 in the audience. Overall I would say it was a better production than the first, but with a few flaws. Some spoiler alerts for those who have not seen the movie follows.
Dagny pushed open the doors to Ken Danagger’s office when she realized that the “destroyer – John Galt” was probably in the office. This is completely against character. She would never force her way into anyone’s office.
They have James Taggert and his wife Cherryl sitting in a theater listening to Richard Halley’s last concert before he quit. He is shown to have already quit in the first chapter of the book.
They left out the part where Ragnar Danneskjold confronted Rearden after they took away Rearden Metal and gave him that bar of gold. This was one of the best parts of the book. I always liked Ragnar’s character. A kindered spirit perhaps.
The scene where Francisco goes to the cabin to get Dagny after she quits leaves a lot to be desired. He implies that because they used to play there as kids he figured that is where she would be. It was a short scene and she gets notified of the Taggart tunnel collapse via cell phone (updated for the times).
They left out the confrontation scene between Francisco and Rearden in Dagny’s apartment, where Francisco learns that Readen is Dagny’s lover, before she heads out to Colorado to stop Daniels from quiting. This was one of the most powerful scenes in the book.
Jeff Allen, the bum hitching a ride on the Comet is turned into a worker for the railroad who drives up in a truck to see if he can figure out why the train is stopped. His story of what happened at the 20th Century Motor Co. is short, but the meaning gets through. When Dagny calls Daniels and he tells her he is quitting she takes the truck to drive to the nearest airfield and buys a jet to go and try to stop Daniels from leaving. Excellent special effects for the plane chase through the mountains.
Francisco’s speech on Money at the wedding of James Taggart is short but the essence gets through. His character is much better portrayed in this movie compared to the first.
The scene where Dagny first sees John Galt after the crash shows other people in the background whereas in the book he reaches her alone. The movie ends with John reaching for Dagny’s hand when she is still in the wreckage without a clear glimpse of John’s face. It is always in the shadows.
The essence of the book showing what we are going through right now in this country comes through pretty good. The characters of the slimy bad guys are portrayed very well by the actors.
They had a great deal to put into a one hour 52 minute movie, so a lot was left out or combined together. But, all in all I would give it a solid “B” despite it’s flaws, and yes, I will go see the third movie when it comes out.
“They left out the part where Ragnar Danneskjold confronted Rearden after they took away Rearden Metal and gave him that bar of gold. This was one of the best parts of the book. I always liked Ragnar’s character. A kindered spirit perhaps.”
Are they leaving Ragnar out of the whole movie series or what?
In the first movie, they just threw away the Hugh Akston scene where (in the book) he tells Dagny how proud he is of his three pupils, Francisco, Ragnar, and the-one-who-is-not-to-be-named. I always liked that scene and its contrast with Eeeevil Stadler’s disparagement of the same three students.
And yeah … the gold bar in the woods scene is a great one. I always loved the way that Hank coldly rejects Ragnar, his offer, and his piracy — then reflexively protects him.
(Funny, for a book with a reputation for being wooden and talky, we sure can recall a lot of great action.)
I’m sorry to hear the gold bar scene is gone. But I’m glad to hear everyone (including the excruciatingly mocking mainstream reviewers) say Francisco is better played this time around. He was always my favorite character.
Saw it Friday morning. Loved it! Can’t wait for Part 3…
Saw if Friday afternoon with the Missus (she was up at 3am that morning and caught the first movie on Netflix). I’d agree with much of the above. It could have been better done, could have delved more into the side of Ayn’s message that doesn’t appear to pander to the Neo-Tea-Partiers (you know, after the disgruntled GOP folks took it over) at the expense of the other side of the liberty coin. Such is life, I suppose, and this book had a primarily economic message anyway. There were a number of scenes I felt could have been shown, and while I would have gleefully watched every second, the average moviegoer probably couldn’t bear it.
I want to know more about the Gulchers’ airplane.
Thought the movie was good. Thought the movie was not dark enough though. No TSA in the train stations, no militarized swat teams on the streets. No fat people either in a nation suffering from gross obesity.
RottenTomatoes.com gives it an 81% audience-approval rating and a 0% critics-approval rating.
I saw it Saturday night and really liked it. I think Dagny is still wrong, but she plays the part well, just doesn’t look the part. I loved the new Hank R. I thought the new actor played him very well. I hope he stays for part 3.
They did make a lot of cuts that I wished they had left in, i.e. the gold bar scene and a few others, but it was done well. I can’t wait to see part 3!
.
Saw it Sunday night, only two others in the theater.
I liked it. It was made better than the first.
Hollywood IS to be commended on the QUALITY they put in their productions, which the first movie seemed to lack ….. a little bit.
However, the second movie was a lot better, more background people, better scenes, etc.
Just like the next Star Trek movie, I can’t wait for Part 3.
.