aristotlejones

Seems the current backers agree with you as I just found this in imdb: ------------- Comments:Producers in talks with Charlize Theron to possibly adapt this as a mini-series. Status Updated:28 January 2010 More Info:See more production information about Atlas Shrugged (2011) only on IMDbPro. Note:Because this project is categorized as being in production, the data is subject to change; some data could be removed completely. -------------- Personally, I'd rather not have to watch Aeon Flux do Dagny, as Atlas isn't primarily about physical but moral courage and that requires an actor with the gravitas to pull it off at the scale required. (Railroad tycoon anyone?) This isn't a judgement on Charlize's acting abilities, just the physical aesthetic she has shown. And a well cast younger actor could do the scenes from Dagny's earlier years, as the main story takes place during the pinnacle of Dagny's career/deprogramming. <Φ>aj

I just watched 5 to 9, the latest episode of House M.D., which was mostly about Director Cuddy instead of being all about House for once. According to my tear-O-meter, it was one of the best TV episodes I’ve seen in a long while. I don’t want to give away too much of the plot for this episode, but if anyone ever gets off their encounter-suited butts and produces Atlas Shrugged the movie, this actress gets my vote for Dagny Taggart. She’s smart, sensitive, subtle, sexy and strong. She directs a world-class teaching hospital, managing the strong egos of an entire hospital of doctors and staff like she was herding a room full of cats. Ok, she gets scratched once in a while, but it comes with the territory, and she somehow manages to outstubborn most of the cats into getting what she wants and deserves. She has a major challenge where she ultimately has to stand alone against a lot of people, and puts everything on the line for what is truly the right and objectively just thing to do. It also happens, for once, to be the elitist thing to do. Also, in the situation, she takes advice from many of her peers, and there is an “Atlas” moment where she realizes her job is on the line, and House comments that she will probably just cave in and give them what they want and still probably keep her job, because she can’t not keep doing what she does. He was implying that she just doesn’t have it in her to do the moral thing. But House being House, that was his reverse psychology trying to help her see what she might not accept if he just said what he meant outright, and that would just take them to a more rational plane where they would have to admit their affinity for each other. But bottom line, it wasn’t House manipulating her, it was her deciding to do the right thing on her own, in spite of manifest excuses to avoid taking responsibility and having an emotional escape hatch. She was the epitome of a rational man, in Ayn’s sense. The actress who played Lisa Cuddy in this episode would make an exceptional Dagny, as her portrayal of Director Cuddy in this morally noteworthy scenario shows she has the chops to lend Mrs. Rand’s novel the authenticity it deserves. Anyone know anyone who can pass this along to whoever holds the rights to the movie? (or the casting director?) Stay Focused, <Φ>aj

Yah, but we never had any worthy ideals to corrupt. <Φ>aj

And this is how the police responded... http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2...cer_accide.html Just one daft canuck's opinion, but it appears your country is devolving... <Φ>aj

Riley Crane, MIT Physicist who led the Media Laboratory Human Dynamics Group to win the DARPA Network Challenge joins Stephen on the Report. http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/#clip251946 The winners of the DARPA Network Challenge applied a viral incentive structure (i.e. highest rewards for most useful information) that allowed them to find ten red balloons randomly positioned around the continental US in While other reports on this particular challenge focused on its geekiness, leave it to Colbert to find the self-interest angle to the method they applied to actually win. On a more general theme of which the above is an example, X-prize type competitions reward the self-interested competence of the winners, and also reward by exceptional ROE, the organizers of the competitions. Or to quote one X-prize winner, Burt Rutan: See what free men can do! <Φ>aj

Happy Light Bulb Day everyone! Especially apropos this year, given how effective a few rays of artificial light shined into the darkened monasteries of environmentalism have been in loosening the chains of irrationalism. Cheers, <Φ>aj

So, Astro Boy's father decides to homeschool, and gives him a stack of books to read. Top of the pile is Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, followed by Descartes, then Leonardo Da Vinci. Astro Boy goes: "Pass, Pass, Mmmm!" cool. <Φ>aj

I guess you missed Post #159 Where Lord Monckton was shoved to the ground. http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.p...st&p=240014 or Post #122 Where a journalist was muzzled and arrested for questioning "climate data". http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.p...st&p=239463 And how is it any less oppressive if a qualified scientist loses his career for questioning the data upholding "what everybody knows"? Won't it be too late if we wait for Khristalnacht?? <Φ>aj

Reason Magazine's Friday Funnies is titled "The Climate Change Debate" and can be seen here: http://reason.com/archives/2009/12/18/friday-funnies <Φ>aj

Um, link doesn't seem to have the clip anywhere. Try this one: http://justjared.buzznet.com/2009/12/16/ir...-out-watch-now/ <Φ>aj

The real "inconvenient truth" is that parasites and hypocrites are overpopulating the world and destroying civilization. Remember parasites & hypocrites are lazy or they'd be principled. We return you to your regularly scheduled soma...

I'd suggest you look into some of Nathaniel Branden's books on the subject: http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/in...php?cPath=21_24 And for two free samples of this thoughts on Love & Relationships: http://www.nathanielbranden.com/catalog/articles.php?tPath=3 In my opinion, love is always conditional because people have free will and can change for the better or worse, or they can just grow apart. But they do have a choice about who and how to value. <Φ>aj

I suppose the eco-preists at the CRU could plead they were only acting in good faith in trying to follow the precautionary principle. It only takes a kid with some time on his hands and a good father to disprove their rationalizations. But the precautionary principle is insidious in our current paradigm, and is used to excuse all sorts of terrorist, achem - government encroachments on our health, longevity, road safety, transportation, opportunity, happiness, creativity, property rights and liberty. A clever antidote to the precautionary principle is Extropy Institute's Proactionary Principle. From their site: What’s wrong with the Precautionary Principle? The precautionary principle has at least six major weak spots. It serves us badly by: assuming worst-case scenarios distracting attention from established threats to health, especially natural risks assuming that the effects of regulation and restriction are all positive or neutral, never negative ignoring potential benefits of technology and inherently favoring nature over humanity illegitimately shifting the burden of proof and unfavorably positioning the proponent of the activity conflicting with more balanced, common-law approaches to risk and harm. "The precautionary principle, while well-intended by many of its proponents, inherently biases decision making institutions toward the status quo, and reflects a reactive, excessively pessimistic view of technological progress. By contrast, the Proactionary Principle urges all parties to actively take into account all the consequences of an activity—good as well as bad—while apportioning precautionary measures to the real threats we face, in the context of an appreciation of the crucial role played by technological innovation and humanity’s evolving ability to adapt to and remedy any undesirable side-effects." For more, goto: http://www.extropy.org/proactionaryprinciple.htm <Φ>aj

How about the rationalist, anti-science philosophy underpinning the environmental movement? At least implicitly. (especially apparent in the recent Climategate revelations) <Φ>aj

For an idea of the scale of his accomplishments, go to a site about the book titled The Complete Patents of Nikola Tesla with excerpts on Tesla's Automobile & Broadcast Power http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/tesla.htm <Φ>aj