In director Paul Johannson's modern-day update of Ayn Rand's epic 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, the not-too-distant world of 2016 has become a very frightening place — especially for the capitalists and corporate types, deemed as this film's "rugged individualist" heroes on the DVD cover.
America is on the brink of economic disaster, and gas prices have hit 40 bucks a gallon, necessitating a return to the rail system as the primary means of affordable transportation. Meanwhile, banking CEOs and other people who "get things done" are mysteriously disappearing faster than you can say "Who Is John Galt?"
An out-of-control government bureaucracy is also uncharacteristically hostile to corporate interests, making things tough for them by passing laws limiting their holdings to a single company, and making it illegal for any company turning a profit to fire its workers. Oh, the horror!
The perspective of these workers, by the way, is an element missing from the story altogether. The only time the working class is acknowledged at all in Atlas Shrugged, the point seems to be to dismiss them as parasites sucking the life force from the corporate machine. Or as Dagny Taggart, one of this film's two main protagonists puts it, "What's with all this altruism, anyway?"
Other than this sort of back-handed lip service, you never see the working stiffs building her railway system at all. It's as though they never existed.
Rather, the main point of Atlas Shrugged seems to be an attempt, so thinly veiled as to be transparent, at promoting the "Objectivist" ideas put forth in Ayn Rand's books. This school of thought espouses the virtues of self-reliance and self-determination, and the idea of a free market unfettered by such inconveniences as taxation and government regulation. It's no wonder that libertarian purists like Ron Paul have embraced Rand's Objectivism like some kind of new religion.
What is more curious however, is how conservative Christians have likewise hitched themselves to an atheist movement that celebrates blind selfishness and greed over the "feed the hungry, clothe the poor" teachings of Jesus. When the other heroic figure of this film, corporate honcho Hank Reardon, defends his tireless drive for profit, he does so almost incredulously, simply saying "because, it's mine."
So it is inevitable when the two main characters, Reardon and Taggart, form an alliance to defend their corporate interests against a sea of government bureaucrats conspiring to bring their two respective empires down. The government types here are portrayed as bumbling idiots — people who would impede any forward progress during bad economic times in the name of misguided altruism at best — and evil, inherently corrupt conspirators at worst.
Article comments
1 - LKJ
Ron Paul is not an objectivist. Objectivists see no moral duty to charity, and Ron Paul does. Just because you value much of her statements doesn't mean you swallow her view on intercommunity relationships. We just don't mix up community with government.
2 - Glen Boyd
Fair enough. What I find more disturbing though is the nonchalant attitude towards the less fortunate, and the idea of giving "job-creators" a free pass, while the middle class ponies up on paying the bills. So where are the jobs?
Like it or not, Ayn Rand's "Objectivist" devotees have now ballooned to include every Tea Party nutcase and disenfranchised conspiracy theorist under the sun. Ron Paul's embrace of her views has played a large part in this -- it's no mistake his campaign once promoted the slogan "Who Is Ron Paul?"
-Glen
3 - Dragostea Din Tei
You didn't like the movie much? Too short? low budget? And the working class given short shrift?
When I scrolled down to see the author I expected to read it was Wesley Smooch.
4 - Igor
Ayn Rand was such a poor novelist that I'm surprised anyone would read her except to confirm their radical rightist political predispositions.
5 - Glen Boyd
I've never read anything by her, but judging by the script of this movie I'd probably agree. It just struck me as very one dimensional thinking.
-Glen
6 - Glenn Contrarian
I read "Atlas Shrugged" back in the day when I was a Republican. Even then I knew that the concepts she presented would - like 'perfect communism' - exist only in a political extremist's fantasyland.
7 - Glen Boyd
Exactly, Glenn. Whenever some ideological vision of a utopian society is being promised, that's the first signal to run like hell.
-Glen
8 - El Bicho
if I had known you were going to review it, I would have told you it was coming
9 - Glen Boyd
It came to me out of the blue Bicho, completely unsolicited...were you resonsible for that? Scratching head here...
-Glen
10 - Joan
I'm not a fan of Rand's political beliefs, but I did love The Fountainhead. The book, not the movie, which is a mess. I haven't read Atlas Shrugged yet but Part I of the film intrigued me.
One reason I liked The Fountainhead was Rand's prediction of the rise of mediocrity, which has certainly arrived, and the tabloid mindset. As an artist myself, I wouldn't take her philosophy as far as she does. I do believe, however, in knowing who you are and doing work you believe in and you are proud to have bear your name. I am also a huge believer in altruism. I remember in college a teacher describing communism and asking if any of us would like to live in such a society. Then she said, "quite frankly, I would." It sounds good on paper only, like some of Rand's ideas.
11 - Glen Boyd
Ideas like these are almost always fine on paper, but never work because human nature pretty much guarantees they won't. Socialism begats communism, etc. Interesting comment though, Joan. The movie still mostly stinks though.
-Glen