Atlas Shrugged: Who is John Galt nominated for five Razzie Awards.

Posted by JRMR 6 years ago to Movies
25 comments | Share | Flag

Personally while I had problems with Part III, I still enjoyed the movie and don't think it deserves these nominations. There were FAR WORSE movies this year than Atlas.

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 10
    Posted by $ winterwind 6 years ago
    Yes, but they were probably left-leaning [with all that implies] things.
    They [whoever they are this week] doesn't dislike the movie, they dislike the message, but they can't say that because then some wise-ass [hmm, who comes to mind?] would ask "why do you dislike the message?" so they have to say they dislike the movie.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 6 years ago
    OK, I liked a million ways to Die in the West... it was meant to be a cheap, light boffo comedy, and it met those expectations... It was like reading a cheap pulp fiction book for its entertainment value. Heck, I might even watch it again sometime!

    Worst, beyond any expectations, was the Interview - from the asinine premise to a cruddy plot to bad acting to the pre-adolescent toilet jokes to the whole BS-contrived media campaign... well... just (to borrow a phrase used occasionally by my borhter), "Fuggly".

    ASIII did have some pretty serious issues (casting continuity thru the 3 movies was a major downfall, as well as using LA locations for NYC and/or the high Rockies of the Gulch, changing some of the paradigms of the book for the screen, and one part IMO seriously miscast) but not Razzie-esque - compared to some of the truly awful movies this past year. Some of the performances were outstanding, especially the Pohala/Regan chemistry that truly glowed!) and the message got out there.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by brando79az 6 years ago
    I had to defend AS3 on's site. Not only did the reviewer not like the movie, which was fine. He treated anyone who would like the movie like an idiot. Here was my "user review" to answer the site's review.

    Blu-ray's review was, again, biased. Unlike the first reviewer, however, this new reviewer knew his review was biased and disagreed with a large portion of the audience. The reviewer could have reviewed this with an open mind and even inserted a disclaimer that socialists and communists may want to pass to another movie. Instead, he started his review with a condescending lecture to anyone who may like the move and/or the movie's message.

    I, too, am an educated man and I, too, read the cited works. Unlike the reviewer, however, I can look at a film objectively (no pun intended.) I started my life with a liberal leaning background. This was conceived by my parents and enforced by public education. It was not until higher education and professional and personal experiences taught me to think for myself and think critically, that I sought to further my education for fiscally conservative and objectivist paradigms.

    Do I consider this a perfect movie? No, with a larger budget and better talent I am sure there would be some improvements. Did the production value hold up to a Spielberg/Lucas production? Not by a long shot. This was a low budget movie. Do I have some critique on the screenplay? Yes. I thought some of the events were forced. Acting? Not of the highest caliber.

    I did not rate the movie 5/5. This score demonstrates my objective and open-minded review. I care about this story's message and wish everyone would see it but I do not recommend this movie to's entire audience. I do, however, recommend it for those who are at least curious about alternate paradigms, for those who want ideas to inspire REAL "Hope and Change" in this world and for those that just want a unique story.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 6 years ago
    I went to see AS1 and AS2 on the big screen and liked them both. AS1 a little better than AS2. Then I purchased the DVDs for a second look and still liked them in spite of all the leftist BS out there. AS3 was shown on the big screen too far away to go see (bummer), so I had to wait for the DVD. Picked it up today and hopefully will have time to view it tonight. Razzie Awards? Who cares. Screw these people. I'm tired of idiots telling me what to like or not. I can make up my own mind. Hey, maybe that's why I'm not in the recipient class.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 6 years ago
    It all depends on how seriously you want to take The Razzies. From a perspective of ignorance, AS3 would be nearly incomprehensible to certain viewers. To those who see the film as a story supporting a philosophy, they would probably feel angered that the heroes didn't make sense as they expressed attitudes alien to everything they believed in since childhood.
    Could it have been made better? Yes, with many multiples of dollars more. As strictly a film-only critic I could point out the flaws. However, a film on a limited budget, expressing an all encompassing philosophy the movie is damn near a miracle.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ ssdwin 6 years ago
    I was beginning to worry that there hasn't been any criticism. Now, I'm happy. Hopefully, there'll be more. People will say, Gosh, what could be so bad about such a good book and buy the DVD. The commercials for AS III are very good.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Temlakos 6 years ago
    Clearly this is a message problem.

    The most I would say of AS3 is that it didn't do the message justice. I doubt any film could, with only an hour and a half. AS3 needed to be split into AS3A and AS3B. That's what the Hunger Games producers did with their franchise.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by exindigo 6 years ago
    Part III stunk. Yes, overreaching government is inherently bad. That could have been said in thousands of different ways. We didn't need three movies.

    The music was so hackneyed and the plot so much of a "Woman's" story that the real message in this message movie was lost. Gee Dabney gets boned by John. What did this add to the movie? Nothing. It was like the directors ran out of ideas so they threw a sex scene into the mix. It went nowhere, added nothing to the movie and wasn't even a good scene.

    Why try to make "the valley" seem like Miltons "Shangra La?" Oohhh we get to see a paradise powered by Imagination. "South Park" did a much better job with Imaginationland.

    The movie is preachy in an overly preachy way and that is no way to get a message across. Look, you want people to get the idea? Here's my comments and suggestions:

    Producers. Thanks for the effort. You failed.

    Director: High School Juvenal would be a better description.

    Writers: Why confuse the issue? The script didn't work to promote the ideas and didn't grab anyone's attention long enough to "get" the idea.

    Composer: Who told you to write such saccharine crap. The idea is supposed to be self reliance and innovation. The music was more suited to a Lifetime or Oxygen channel chick flick about a professional woman who discovers love while she is having a career defining crisis at work. Oh wait, that's the plot of AS III!

    Actors: Wooden acting all around. About as much enthusiasm as a mid-level manager's meeting at IBM: Nobody says anything daring for fear of getting fired.

    You want to portray AS philosophy?

    1. Do short character pieces showing how the average guy overcomes obstacles to create a business. Start with small companies and show how ideas catch and the resistance to new ideas.

    2. Hire a composer who writes contemporary classical based music.

    3. Here's a good plot: A young artist is struggling and applying for grants. Finally the artist gets a grant then has a grant committee start trying to direct his work in a certain direction. The artist must overcome the "rules" to maintain his artistic integrity and his artistic direction but the attraction and distraction of success is a bigger hurdle than he imagines. Not the Fountainhead but kind of a combination of what AS should have been and Fountain head kind of did.

    There is a reason that Ayn Rand chose to compare innovators to artists but if you don't understand it, I can't explain it to you.

    Plot idea: A teacher is nearing retirement after 35 years of teaching in a public high school. He is challenged by a kid who is new to the school. He has been home schooled his entire life but wants to meet girls so his friends tell him about all the girls in school. He enters school and starts arguing with professors who are more interested in spouting propaganda than teaching. He finds an unlikely ally in the near retiring teacher who reads AS at the student's suggestion. Years pass and the teachers is dying. Who comes to visit him? The kid he met in HS. Through a series of flashbacks we see how the kid started and failed at several businesses but remained convinced that self-reliance was the only way to be successful in his won eyes. Scenes are flashed back and forth between the actions of the two and the sick room where the teacher is dying. One of his last realizations is that he has never lived as a really free man which the kid he had such problems with seemed to attain.

    There's ton's more. Dump the movie as a ham-handed effort to be profound. Start thinking like Rand instead of Spielberg.

    Nice effort and good intentions gone awry.

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ohiocrossroads 6 years ago
      So "Dabney gets boned by John", and that added nothing to the movie. When you post garbage like that, it makes me think that you have not read the book. The girl's name is Dagny, and there is a sex scene in the book between John and Dagny, pretty much as portrayed in the movie.

      Why didn't we need three movies? The book has three parts.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by exindigo 6 years ago
        Thanks for responding:

        It's that stupid autocorrect. But ultimately, I didn't proof before I posted so the error is mine. I read the book twice. Once when I was in HS as a freshman and again about ten years ago. The sex scene in the book had to do with the oath if I remember correctly and it was done to stop criticism that the philosophy was inhuman an loveless because it so focused on "self" that anybody else was not a consideration.

        But if that is your major complaint about my critique, I feel fine.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ohiocrossroads 6 years ago
          No that wasn't my only complaint about your critique. I'm also wondering where you're coming from outlining plot ideas that have nothing to do with Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand wrote AS as a vehicle to advance her philosopy by integrating it into the plot of a novel. If you want to advance your story of the teacher, write your own 1000-page book that stays on the bestseller list for 59 years, then maybe a movie will be made about it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by exindigo 6 years ago
            I don't need to. Ayn Rand already did it. Rand would think a copy is not in line with her philosophy. Innovation remember? The idea of independence and self-reliance are not just the domain of Rand. Self-reliant people respect Rand for pointing out the obvious, to them, way things work. But innovators are hamstrung by my than government. Competitors who are looking to extend business models without investment in R and D are also the enemies of innovation.

            If you want to copy Rand, feel free.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Radio_Randy 6 years ago
    Well...I kind of agree with the Razzies rating, assuming they are rating the movie the way I would rate it. Before today, I had never heard of "Razzie".

    I saw Transformers, Age of Extinction and was disappointed. The previews made it look like a fresh plot, but it was just robots beating the Hell out of other robots...again.

    I saw Noah...the effects were okay, but the plot sucked. Of course, what would you expect from an Atheist producing a Christian themed movie. I don't expect The Exodus to do any better, for the same reason.

    ASIII had a good message...just like parts I and II. If it had been produced with a BIG budget, lasted longer and had a better selection of actors...THEN received a Razzie award, I might blame it of leftist morons. Unfortunately, I don't think I can firmly plant the blame on those folks.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 6 years ago
    I have movies sent by Netflix. Yesterday halfway through Transcendence, I found myself irritated and muttering something like, "Hey, lady, your husband in the worldwide web is making slaves out of the people he heals (like but unlike Jesus). Why does that not bother you at all?" The lady was NOT a sociopath.
    Next I plan to to have Left Behind sent and bring it over to a friend's house. She thinks it may be good because Nicholas Cage is in it.
    (I plan to as if she's seen the Kick-Ass movies--ha! ha!--that I found highly entertaining).
    Netflix viewer reviews put down the movie for all kinds of reasons, including bad acting. Nicholas Cage? I've always liked his characters.
    I also noticed tucked away between the bad reviews those which complained that the movie was only being put down because of a religious message.
    I shall see for myself. Netflix gave it 3 out of 5 stars as a prediction that I will like it instead of #4. like it a lot or #5 love it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo