The title of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged analogizes the legendary giant holding up the world, who finally tiring at receiving no thanks, decides to shrug. My eyes are tearing as I report that while retaining the book's name, the movie shrugs its intricate underlying story and moral teachings.
Published in 1957, the opus largely transpires in a not too distant future. Describing the ruination of the '50's culture of hope and prosperity due to the welfare state forcing people making a living to pay for those too lazy to work, John Galt leads the best minds to cease contributing their time and talents, thereby causing the country's collapse.
The author was prophetic. Although Galt was fictitious, the railroads, the mills, the family farms have since disappeared, joining other productive jobs now overseas. Doctors no longer make house calls: the true cause of our health care crisis. Atlas Shrugged years ago, the novel standing as a history lesson needing to be understood if humankind is to recover.
The movie ignores that history, commencing five years from the stagnant present day, the railroad and mills incomprehensibly restored. We're fed merely flashes of newspaper reports on the bad economy with no comparison to America's glorious days.
In contrast, the novel opens with Eddie observing specifics of decay as he walks New York City streets. The scene shifts to his railroad boss Dagny experiencing first hand the circumstances ordinary folks endure as she rides a train stopping from negligence. Later, we're presented the essential backstory of Eddie and Dagny growing up together, how their past shaped their present. Context, focus, and drama, so frustratingly absent from the motion picture.
In this feature, hero Hank looks Hollywood handsome and initially seems more upright than today's crooked businessman in bed with politicians. Except noble Hank literally beds rival Dagny who displays a mindless grin after their tepid sex. Dagny's earlier relationship with Francisco in the novel is richly complex, although in the film he's a nitwit, so I guess it doesn't take much from Hank to satisfy her. Oh, by the way, Hank's cheating on his faithful wife Lillian. Missing is novel Hank's guilt and struggle over his affair with Dagny. You see, back in the book's time, it was wrong to violate one's marriage. Today it's common behavior, so the movie, yes, I'll say it, shrugs this immorality and its consequences. (I'm a Hitchcock fan, and had he been director, I imagine he'd have had Hank take a shower. . .)
In the novel, Dagny's brother James is a villain who drives his wife Cherryl to suicide. The film does not reference her. Indeed, James is portrayed as a nice guy over his head as chief: he's bullied by his powerful sister, his subordinate. Ergo, Dagny and Hank are painted hedonistically, their suffering victims being James and Lillian.
John Galt in the novel is a man of mystery and integrity. On screen he becomes a shady figure in a ponzi scheme luring people with promises of higher profits derived from later investors.
The film abruptly halts. Parts two and three depend upon ticket sales. On opening weekend, I attended a nice theatre in a nice suburb with a tiny audience most of whom fell asleep. The online rave reviews came from book admirers desperately reading into the movie the countless pieces lacking. In the tome, Dagny and Hank wouldn't hurry a project to finish on time, they'd do it right or not at all. Whereas the movie makers failed to practice what they ineptly preached as they apparently rushed through this mess to meet a completion deadline.
The novel's concluding chapter is entitled "In The Name Of The Best Within Us." An authentic version of Atlas Shrugged could be filmed by someone who hasn't shrugged. Perchance, kind reader, how about you?
Published in 1957, the opus largely transpires in a not too distant future. Describing the ruination of the '50's culture of hope and prosperity due to the welfare state forcing people making a living to pay for those too lazy to work, John Galt leads the best minds to cease contributing their time and talents, thereby causing the country's collapse.
The author was prophetic. Although Galt was fictitious, the railroads, the mills, the family farms have since disappeared, joining other productive jobs now overseas. Doctors no longer make house calls: the true cause of our health care crisis. Atlas Shrugged years ago, the novel standing as a history lesson needing to be understood if humankind is to recover.
The movie ignores that history, commencing five years from the stagnant present day, the railroad and mills incomprehensibly restored. We're fed merely flashes of newspaper reports on the bad economy with no comparison to America's glorious days.
In contrast, the novel opens with Eddie observing specifics of decay as he walks New York City streets. The scene shifts to his railroad boss Dagny experiencing first hand the circumstances ordinary folks endure as she rides a train stopping from negligence. Later, we're presented the essential backstory of Eddie and Dagny growing up together, how their past shaped their present. Context, focus, and drama, so frustratingly absent from the motion picture.
In this feature, hero Hank looks Hollywood handsome and initially seems more upright than today's crooked businessman in bed with politicians. Except noble Hank literally beds rival Dagny who displays a mindless grin after their tepid sex. Dagny's earlier relationship with Francisco in the novel is richly complex, although in the film he's a nitwit, so I guess it doesn't take much from Hank to satisfy her. Oh, by the way, Hank's cheating on his faithful wife Lillian. Missing is novel Hank's guilt and struggle over his affair with Dagny. You see, back in the book's time, it was wrong to violate one's marriage. Today it's common behavior, so the movie, yes, I'll say it, shrugs this immorality and its consequences. (I'm a Hitchcock fan, and had he been director, I imagine he'd have had Hank take a shower. . .)
In the novel, Dagny's brother James is a villain who drives his wife Cherryl to suicide. The film does not reference her. Indeed, James is portrayed as a nice guy over his head as chief: he's bullied by his powerful sister, his subordinate. Ergo, Dagny and Hank are painted hedonistically, their suffering victims being James and Lillian.
John Galt in the novel is a man of mystery and integrity. On screen he becomes a shady figure in a ponzi scheme luring people with promises of higher profits derived from later investors.
The film abruptly halts. Parts two and three depend upon ticket sales. On opening weekend, I attended a nice theatre in a nice suburb with a tiny audience most of whom fell asleep. The online rave reviews came from book admirers desperately reading into the movie the countless pieces lacking. In the tome, Dagny and Hank wouldn't hurry a project to finish on time, they'd do it right or not at all. Whereas the movie makers failed to practice what they ineptly preached as they apparently rushed through this mess to meet a completion deadline.
The novel's concluding chapter is entitled "In The Name Of The Best Within Us." An authentic version of Atlas Shrugged could be filmed by someone who hasn't shrugged. Perchance, kind reader, how about you?