Galt's Gulch

Atlas Shrugged Part III

Posted by sdesapio 13 years, 2 months ago to Entertainment
55 comments | Share | Flag

The Producers of the Atlas Shrugged movies meet with their team to discuss the future of the trilogy.

In the video: Joan Carter, Scott DeSapio, Harmon Kaslow, John Aglialoro, David Kelley, Laurie Rice, Duncan Scott

Music by Elia Cmiral "The John Galt Theme" - available for purchase on iTunes: http://bit.ly/AtlasShruggedSoundtrack

SOURCE URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9oWW3yHuAQ&hd=1

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ kathywiso 13 years, 2 months ago
    This is so exciting.... to see the people who are so passionate about the novel coming to life.... like we are.... Thanks for this behind the scenes peek Scott....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by notyou2 12 years, 10 months ago
    Taylor Schilling recast as Dagny and Rebecca Wysocki recast as Lillian. Esai Morales (Francisco) stole the show in part II--it would a crime if he is not cast in III. JG and Ragnar are going to be tough ones!! I'm thinking Jake Gyllenhaal might be good in either role....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by notyou2 12 years, 10 months ago
    Taylor Schilling recast as Dagny and Rebecca Wysocki recast as Lillian. Esai Morales (Francisco) stole the show in part II--it would a crime if he is not cast in III. JG and Ragnar are going to be tough ones!! I'm thinking Jake Gyllenhaal might be good in either role....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tjdancer 13 years, 2 months ago
    Yes, bring back Taylor. Samantha always looked like she was about to cry - not a lot of chemistry
    with Reardon either. Part 2 Francisco, however, was brilliant as was the 2nd Mrs. Reardon.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Stealth 13 years, 2 months ago
    I found the men from part II to be incredibly sexy, I loved the raspiness of Hank Reardens voice and Esai's suave latin accent was such a complete turn on!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ brewer37 13 years, 2 months ago
    If there's a new cast of actors playing part three of a series that had different actors for parts one and two, you will have a 'Cloud Atlas' type feel. And most people won't get it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by 2600 13 years, 2 months ago
    Kaslow talks about "message", "dialogue", "events" and "scenes". None of these have power without characters. Casting continuity has been a critical flaw in the production of this "trilogy".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Susanne 13 years, 2 months ago
      The disruptive factor is that you're used to a certain face, voice, and mannerism being that character... and when you change that it takes the potential of reality out of the character. Think of the Original Star Trek... What if they switched up or repalced the cast every season? Likely it would have died by the 3rd, because Shatner/Nimoy/Kelly et al were the face, voice, and characteristics of Kirk/Spock/McCoy et al... Or if every movie in the Harry potter Franchise used a different cast for each movie? By the 3rd, you'd lose intrest, because you don't have anything *invested* in that character, ESPECIALLY if you've never read the book. Even Ian Fleming's Bond Character, which has changed a number of times... kept the same "Bond" for a series of movies before recasting.

      Personally, I liked both casts on AS I and II, but it would have given it Continuity had they used the same people.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LetsShrug 13 years, 2 months ago
      I'm not sure why the change of cast is seen as being so disruptive, other than all the comparing going on about who did a better job etc (I've done it myself), but the point it, the story is being told, on the big screen...FOR THE FIRST TIME! Monumental job and monumental accomplishment. I'm just glad it's being done, and done well. :)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by khalling 13 years, 2 months ago
      I'm in agreement with LetsShrug on this. IF this was a broadway production, people would complain about the performance if sub par but are happy to see many stars play the roles. However, when you see them one after the other, it's just natural to compare
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Morry 13 years, 2 months ago
    Given the constraints (primarily insufficient time) I think parts I and II were super, and I expect the same from part III, esp. after seeing this little video clip. However, because of the nature of the book, I just don't see how it can be adequately presented even in 3 movie-length installments. It's not only an action/mystery/romance/etc novel, but one of IDEAS, and very RADICAL ones, compared to those currently prevailing. So . . . much MUCH more explanation/education becomes a REQUIREMENT for an excellent job. ATLAS SHRUGGED needs a "mini-series" of at least 10 and probably 20 episodes, each of feature-movie-length, in order to do the book full justice. With only 4-5 hours available, the movie almost HAS to be restricted to those who are already familiar with the book and can therefore fill in the inevitable blanks, and accurately understand the highly abbreviated dialogue because they already know the full details of their contexts. I don't think it's possible to convey the book at all close to accurately for someone who has NOT read the book, even with 6-10 hrs of screen time. Having said this, I repeat that -- GIVEN THE TIME (and other) CONSTRAINTS -- what I've seen so far is probably close to the best job possible.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 13 years, 2 months ago
      I disagree with your premise. I movies do an excellent job within the time constraints. They are a good cliff notes of the book. Those of us that have read it can fill in the blanks. Those that haven't read it feel the need to then go read it to see what they've missed. My brother is one of these. After seeing both movies he said "What happens next?" I said. "Here's my book. Read it." He is reading it now.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rsneidman 13 years, 2 months ago
    I'd like to see the same cast from 2 continue in 3.
    One cast change is enough. I think Samantha Mathis did fine as Dagny, just needs a bit of refinement for 3. The actor that played Hank Rearden was much better.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Tuner38 13 years, 2 months ago
    This is on a scale beyond Les Miserable. Think how often it took to bring that masterpiece to the screen so that it's message resounded. Crow epistemology is clearly in play and the message of Billy Flynn to Roxey applies. The succinct message is two fold. The rejection of sacrifice and the acceptance of reason.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by randallj66 13 years, 2 months ago
    When will we see Ragnar? and his fabulous battleship? I would recommend a CGI triple haul ship. Now that would look futuristic and cool. You all have done wonderfully though. Thanks so much.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by livesimply 13 years, 2 months ago
      Yes!!! Let's meet Ragnar, an essential character not seen yet.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Morry 13 years, 2 months ago
        I think he adds color, adventure, and a glimpse of the whats and hows of implementing the book's economic ideas in practice -- kinda like a bit of the icing on a cake. I would call him valuable, but not essential. Dagny, Rearden, Francisco, and Galt were the essential characters. True, everything is essential to the book, so by "essential" I'm assuming you mean relatively a lot more important than most of the other characters, and that I would not agree with. If I had to choose between Ragnar and Eddie Willers, I'd say Eddie's role adds more to the book. A sea pirate could have been replaced by any of numerous other characters to make the same point and make the same contribution to the book which Ragnar's character does. (BTW, I wonder why none of the critics of Ayn Rand has pointed out that "Ragnar" consists of 6 of the 8 letters in "arrogant.")
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • -1
    Posted by Freedom2 13 years, 2 months ago
    LET'S HOPE there are no more cast changes! How will a 3 set version EVER explain changes between 1 & 2!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ brewer37 13 years, 2 months ago
      I don't mind the cast changes at all. In fact, I loved seeing all the new and familiar faces in the second one. I almost think you HAVE to have a new cast in the third one in order to have some consistency in the structure of the film making. It will be great either way.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by livesimply 13 years, 2 months ago
      As I posted earlier, Taylor Schilling IS Dagny Taggart—beautiful, strong, intelligent, determined. Samantha Mathis really disappointed me as Dagny. I actually preferred the Part I cast much better than Part II—maybe they'll all come back! But definitely Taylor Schilling.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • -4
        Posted by Freedom2 13 years, 2 months ago
        No question about it, Part I cast was far superior, AND the people putting the film together were VERY illogical, shortsighted, non-capitalist and general JERKS for not getting commitment from actors to be in the other PARTS and at established pay rates-- this would have been valuable to BOTH SIDES when first signing. [Of course a release clause could have been included IF the actor was strongly rejected by the public or if a long term' commitment was already in place for the actor, so he/she was not available -- other than that, the actors should have continued!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by khalling 13 years, 2 months ago
          hey there. you put up your personal fortune and we'll take a look at the cast you can assemble. capitalists would understand the constraints involved. This is not Lord of the Rings backed by Big Hollywood.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • -2
            Posted by Freedom2 13 years, 2 months ago
            NO, that is VERY POOR logic. To sign initial actors to a commitment for all 3 parts [if made] would have been the most rational thing to do, and BOTH sides would win, PLUS the public and posterity. It does not take big bucks or Hollywood magic to plan for tomorrow. Dagney did it, as did all the other major characters. IF you had the actors committed to come in on Tuesday, after Monday's work, you should have had them [and the picture] committed to come in after Part I and then after Part II.This was NOT even a case of a 'surprise secqual' - it was known from the start and should have been SOP..
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by khalling 13 years, 2 months ago
              The producers have said in here that the capital was not available to make the commitment to the actors. It was not clear the second movie would be made. Many of the actors had made commitment already .My hope would be for II they either get some of the original cast back, but likely whoever they get to direct will want their own new cast. I agree that it is difficult to watch the movies back to back for continuity.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by rainbowrider 13 years, 2 months ago
          If it is the same cast as Atlas II, I may not even bother going to see it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ kathywiso 13 years, 2 months ago
            This reminds me of the scene in AS I where Dagny tells the union thug, I would never force anyone to do anything, I will ask for volunteers... personally, I don't understand the big deal of changing the casts. The movie is out there for new people as well as those of us who live by AR principles and know her work and also know it is impossible to portray all the knowledge in the book into a movie. Our country is falling apart around us. Arguing with like minded people is a waste of time and detrimental to the outcome..
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Freedom2 13 years, 2 months ago
            I must admit I will see it if anyone but sean penn,steisand,jim carry or a few others are in it, BUT I agree it would be better with first cast although I STILL wonder how this is to be explained -- both to viewers and to those following production!
            Steve
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • -2
    Posted by tim2013 13 years, 2 months ago
    wow what an amazing video! So full of passion and content, I especially liked that half of it was just music, what a great use of time. How about making the movie represent the point of the book, teach people about capitalism and don't worry about appealing to the average sheep.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo