Movie: Atlas Shrugged Moving Ahead

From today’s Variety:

Lionsgate shrugging

Studio to shoulder long-gestating ‘Shrugged’

Ayn Rand’s most ambitious novel may finally be brought to the bigscreen after years of false starts.

Lionsgate has picked up worldwide distribution rights to “Atlas Shrugged” from Howard and Karen Baldwin (“Ray”), who will produce with John Aglialoro.

Angelina Jolie, a longtime devotee of Rand’s, and Brad Pitt, also a fan, are rumored to be circling the leading roles of Dagny Taggart and John Galt.

“Atlas Shrugged,” which runs more than 1,100 pages, has faced a lengthy and circuitous journey to a film adaptation.

The Russian-born author’s seminal tome, published in 1957, revolves around the economic collapse of the U.S. sometime in the future and espouses her individualistic philosophy of objectivism. The violent, apocalyptic ending has always posed a challenge but could prove especially so in the post-9/11 climate.

Howard Baldwin said some people have pigeonholed “Atlas” as better suited for a miniseries. That’s why he sometimes pondered turning “Atlas” into two movies. In fact, a two-part script penned by James V. Hart (“Contact”) for the Baldwins envisions “Atlas” as two pics, although it’s likely to be reworked.

For years, producer Al Ruddy tried to make Rand’s definitive book into a movie, attracting the interest of Clint Eastwood, Robert Redford and Faye Dunaway at one point.

But while Rand was still alive, she had script approval, complicating the process. After the author’s death in 1982, Ruddy continued his efforts and, in 1999, he inked a pactpact to produce “Atlas” as a miniseries for TNT. Ultimately, the deal faltered.

In 2003, the Baldwins acquired the film rights to the novel from Aglialoro, a New York businessman, after launching Crusader Entertainment with Philip Anschutz. Hart was hired at that time to adapt.

Anschutz, however, ultimately decided not to make the movie.

The Baldwins then took the project with them when they left Crusader and formed the Baldwin Entertainment Group.

“What we’ve always needed was a studio that had the same passion for this project that we and John have,” said Baldwin,

Generally speaking, Lionsgate keeps production budgets below $25 million. “Atlas” is likely to cost north of $30 million, but the studio will reduce its exposure through international pre-salespre-sales and co-financing partners. Actors would likely take less money upfrontupfront – a common practice for the indieindie.

Rand’s individualistic and character-driven stories have captured the imagination of Hollywood before. Warner Bros. made “The Fountainhead,” starring Gary Cooper as the maverick architect Howard Roark, in 1949.

Oliver Stone was attached to direct a remake of “Fountainhead” for Warner Bros. and Paramount, but the project has languished in development. Along the way, Pitt expressed interest in playing Roark.

Cool.

That’s exciting news. I’m worried that it will be butchered though. Speaking of which…

Lionsgate has picked up worldwide distribution rights to “Atlas Shrugged” from Howard and Karen Baldwin (“Ray”), who will produce with John Aglialoro.

Does anyone have any insight into John Aglialoro? He’s a member of the board of TOC and a registered Libertarian.

As long as the message isn’t butchered, I don’t really care how many liberties they take with the plot. Trying to translate a book like AS directly into a movie would be a disaster anyway. They’re gonna have to take liberties if they want it to be watchable.

It can be done. The Lord of the Rings was successfully executed and will forever be a shining example that anything can be made into a good movie. (Has anyone read those books? They are even similar to Atlas Shrugged in that they are long-winded.)

And the movies took quite a few liberties.

TOC *and* a Libertarian? *gets the pitchfork and torches*

I don’t see how even a TOCer could really mess up Atlas. The worst thing they could do would be to cast Pitt as Galt and Jolie as Dagny. I don’t want to see either of them in this film *at all*. If they manage to get decent actors I still retain some semblence of hope…

Just in case you where wondering (like me)

Angelina Jolie as a Blonde:

http://www.lifeorsomethinglikeit.com/wallp…/01_800x600.jpg

Wow - I didn’t think it was possible but she looks *uglier* as a blonde. If she *has* to be Dagny I hope they let her keep her natural hair color.

Myself:

Angelina is a great actress. In fact, she gets better with every movie. She is excellent at conveying confidence and intelligence and she is absolutely beautiful. I will admit she looks terrible as a blonde, but I don’t remember Dagny’s hair being blonde like that… actually, whose hair was that blonde in the story’s time frame? Nobody’s, right?

Brad Pitt is a good-looking 40-year-old, but an awful actor. He also isn’t built like John Galt.

It can be done. The Lord of the Rings was successfully executed and will forever be a shining example that anything can be made into a good movie. (Has anyone read those books? They are even similar to Atlas Shrugged in that they are long-winded.)

Atlas Shrugged is not long-winded. It is not unnecessarily prolonged, tedious, or protracted. The length is appropriate. To use the word long-winded to describe the work of a writer is an insult if not true, since it implies that the author just rambles on and never gets to the point.

Perhaps, you’re thinking of a different meaning for your word. But Atlas is NOT long-winded. To most it may be but if one understands the nature of Romanticism one begins to see the necessity of certain scenes, narrative, and dialogue.

It’s a tribute to the genius of Ayn Rand that she could pull her theme off in 1200 pages.

Jose Gainza.

What’s ugly about Angelina? Dagny she’s not, but ugly?

Come on, you guys are really letting me down! Why hasn’t anyone railed about this sentence yet? :

The Russian-born author’s seminal tome, published in 1957, revolves around the economic collapse of the U.S. sometime in the future and espouses her individualistic philosophy of objectivism.

I think there is a little something wrong with the last Word.

Angelina is a great actress. In fact, she gets better with every movie. She is excellent at conveying confidence and intelligence and she is absolutely beautiful. I will admit she looks terrible as a blonde, but I don’t remember Dagny’s hair being blonde like that…

I don’t know where people get the idea that Dagny was blonde. Rand’s initial introduction of the character includes the line “A sweep of brown hair fell back, almost touching the line of her shoulders.” IOW, Dagny is a brunette. Rearden’s hair is described as “ash-blond.”

Yes and no. It’s not the correct way to spell Objectivism, but the person who wrote this is obviously a non-O’ist and doesn’t no better and it’s still half-decent publicity. So I’d say it’s a wash and a non-issue in this case.

khaight:

Yeah, I saw Dagny as brunette in my head, which I usually trust, as I make a point to get an accurate mental picture of fictional characters based on the descriptions in their novels. But I had no immediate reference, so…

In that case, Angelina would only be disqualified for being too beautiful or exotic (her eyes, lips and skull structure), since I remember Rand making a point to describe Dagny as striking but not beautiful (in contrast to Dominique in The Fountainhead, who was “the most beautiful woman he had ever seen,” or something like that.)

AMERICONORMAN:

Atlas Shrugged is long-winded, and by that I do mean that it is unnecessarily long. I understand that you are a writer who especially holds Rand in high esteem. Well, I am a reader, I’m not really interested in justifying a novely by pidgeonholing it into an established genre, and strictly as a narrative, at times Atlas Shrugged was almost painful to trudge through. There must be a way to give your reader a heavy sense of the passage of time without actually making them experience it in real life, as they read.

Anyway, I still like the book for other reasons, but honestly, I would be surprised if you weren’t in the minority in thinking that it is concise. I mean, she drills the same points over and over again sometimes three and four times!

I would be surprised if you weren’t in the minority in thinking that it is concise. I mean, she drills the same points over and over again sometimes three and four times!

Well, with respect to this particular forum, you are in the minority. This has been discussed on here before and the “majority” consensus as I recall was that she said exactly what she needed to say, no more, no less. Past that, I’m not sure what evidence you have to support what other readers thought of it in terms of length.

That said, this thread needn’t sidetrack off the movie onto this particular issue. If I can find the other thread I’ll link it so that debate can be taken there.

Am I the only person who likes Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie for these roles? Yeah, they’re both modern-day hippies, but that shouldn’t affect their abilities to play the roles.

I actually think Pitt is a good actor. My favorite role of his is Legends of the Fall, but he’s had some other good ones as well. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie that Jolie is in, but she looks about like what I’d expect Dagny to look.

Am I the only person who likes Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie for these roles? Yeah, they’re both modern-day hippies, but that shouldn’t affect their abilities to play the roles.

I actually think Pitt is a good actor. My favorite role of his is Legends of the Fall, but he’s had some other good ones as well. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a movie that Jolie is in, but she looks about like what I’d expect Dagny to look.

Well, here I am. I think it’s perfectly okay. I suggested Brad Pitt as Galt in my first post when starting this thread and I still stand by my decision. Even though I would prefer to see Kiera Knightley as Dagny (I think that she would be perfect for that role), I’m glad that at least one of my preferences is met. But then, I would have prefered Christian Bale as Galt.

To the “I can’t stand that Brad Pitt isn’t John Galt”-folks, well here we go: Brad Pitt is an actor. He is neither an Objectivist nor is he a physicist and he is also not a philosopher last that I heard of. Who cares what he does in real life? He’s playing a role. Tim Robbins also played Dufresne, didn’t he? Did that spoil the movie? Nope.

The same applies regarding Angelina Jolie.

I’m glad the damn movie finally gets made at all. And since it will be made with world-known actors the movie will attract a world-wide audience. This is way more than I ever hoped for.

So I pay tribute to my name as I, for one, am happy.