Hi. My name is...Mike Rael
Posted by MikeRael 11 years, 11 months ago to The Gulch: Introductions
I'm glad to be here, since I've been into Rand for, oh, 40 years or so. Unfortunately, I rate the Galt movies, thus far, at about a B- for various reasons. In Galt 1, there were a number of spots where Rand's own words would have been more dramatically effective than what I saw. In Galt 2, long stretches of action came on that made it seem more like a typical action-adventure movie rather than something that expresses philosophy by cinematic demonstration.
Glad you are here, and enjoying the conversation.
Regards,
NMA
Mike
I am an artist residing in CT, and I carry.
Wait, your name's *not* NMA?
You're an artist and you carry. I'm almost afraid to ask: what do you carry?
Mike
I'm sorry to hear that your copy was not returned, and surliness followed your queries. There are,unfortunately, sucky people everywhere. Less so here. Usually :-)
What kind of subjects do you paint?
I feel the same, I hope deviations from original themes come out as good commercially.
The point you make (below) about Rand's language is interesting. I think it is not a translation from a language she thought in but words and speech patterns from rather earlier in the century than 1950s when the book was published.
So Lucky, what is your opinion about the AS movies? And what is your first name? I dislike using monickers instead of actual names. That feels more chummy to me:)
Rand's language- but your point was good. There is a certain stiffness which could be explained by translation. I reckon it took decades in concept so she was planning it out, words as well as plot, well before publishing.
My opinion about the AS movie- As I am busy/lazy at the moment may I suggest you take a look at earlier posts? I have given some brilliant insights (self praise is no praise - bah!) other people here have also made great comments.
Yes, that scene in the book where ALL the train drivers ignore the union advice and volunteer, great drama, good message too.
Suggestions, use the search box near the top right hand side under the word, history. You will get pages of responses probably, it would be good if they can be limited to the category Movies but I cannot see how. The search facility is a bit basic.
If you want only the posts of person XX. Put XX in the search box, press, search. You may, or may not, get a screen with a view box which allows choice of, submitted, or, comments. It seems to be inconsistent when I try it, may depend on the person.
How about you, Miss? What were your thoughts about the pictures thus far?
Best always,
Mike
Mike
-J.R.
I looked at both movies through Netflix. The second movie has too many spots for my taste as purely action adventure. I recall more of what Rand actually said in the first installment, though there could have been many changes, usually with Rand's own words, that would have improved the movement of the movie. When Francisco first met Rearden at the party in movie !, I'd have graded the conversation at about B. Wasn't bad! In movie 2, as I recall, Francisco gave the money speech and it sounded artificial. I'm wondering if the director was out to lunch or smoking some weed:( I'm also curious about movie 3 to come. I have no great expectations though. I dunno, JR. I wish I were a director helping out the regular one.
It always interests me how different people can pick out different aspects of movies. It must be incredibly difficult to make a movie (or movies) based on such a respected work as Atlas Shrugged. There are just so many people who are passionate about the novel and in my opinion Ayn Rand had such a way with words that any translation might be difficult to compete with each individual fan interpretation in their imagination.
Actually, more folks are passionately opposed to Atlas than are for it, I believe.
A translation? That makes me feel that Rand was talking in Russian, rather than in good, old-fashioned American English:)
You mean a translation to a different genre, as from book to movie, I guess. I don't think it's an issue of selective focus, J. It's more *why* a person likes or dislikes any part of the movie.I've tinkered mentally with writing a book that details all the problems I've had with the movies, so far. But frankly, I'm rewriting Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" currently, for clarity but also as part of a long-term project in self-development. Shakespeare was a master psychologist, generally unrecognized as such by folks who think of him strictly as a playwright. It'll be fun to see the light in people's eyes as I read. Going back to Rand, I know that Branden doesn't think of Rand as a psychologist, but compared to many of the psychologists out there, I think Rand is light-years of ahead of them in theoretical knowledge.I love the way Rand develops how folks acting upon definite premises must act. The resulting actions sound much like what Dr. George Weinberg has detailed in "Self-Creation."
I was speaking from a perspective point of view, not from a written language standpoint. What you are saying makes sense, as the "why" is important when considering a book, movie, or anything else for that matter. I just thought our differing perspectives were interesting - I recall the first movie didn't really resonate with me, but felt the second one did. It wasn't 100% but felt closer to what I was expecting. I can't really nail it down to a specific scene, but mainly just the overall feel of each film. This conversation was the first I've had about the movies with someone who had read the book, so I found your perspective intriguing, although different from my own.
Agreed that many out there are opposed to Rand. I recall hearing when she released Atlas Shrugged that she had isolated herself from nearly the entire population - she had offended the left with her anti-collectivist themes and the right with her views opposing mysticism and altruism. Critics were bashing her from both sides. Although the book sales speak for themselves, this criticism and condemnation from both sides continue to this day.
It seems like you are doing some interesting work. In my opinion Rand is absolutely brilliant. She has a way of taking really deep philosophical themes and imparting them on fictional characters, which in reality exist in the real world, albeit under different names. I am making my way through a course for The Fountainhead and it's absolutely amazing the level of depth for each character and the interplay between each.
It is nice to meet you and I look forward to further discussions with you here.
About the problems with the right:I think it's more an issue of atheism than mysticism. I've met folks who believed in God who believed deeply, passionately I haven't met such who were into mysticism with that same kind of deep feeling. Actually, thinking about that, I would argue that, while our emotions have been learned earlier in life, it's nonetheless super-important for us to take them seriously. Rand had problems in that area, as I recall, resulting in paranoia as she excluded maybe 90% of her original "collective" over time. That is the primary issue of "Julius Caesar" I might add, though it is not brought up as something to be studied as intently as folks are when they talk about studying the Bible. Caesar was assassinated, you may recall, because he dismissed the fears of his wife and having such fears apparently tarnished his self-image as the Great Courageous Warrior. The dismissal of such fears led, over time, to emotional repression, resulting in his not being able to distinguish between true friends as Anthony and pseudo-friends like Brutus who envied his position, one moment, while praising him the next.
Since you are studying the Fountainhead (is it from ARI's online course?), have you considered that Dominique's motivation for destroying the career of her lover rings false? It's a fun characterization, and one that reflects those days that Rand felt despairing about the culture, but I believe that Dominique was motivated by repressed hostility, rather than the desire to spare Roark from future pain!
I think I like Toohey's characterization the most. I don't recall seeing in print before the Fountainhead a villain who was super-evil, but was at the same time super-conscious of his own motivation! It was also interesting to me to think of Wynand who, though a brilliant newsman, had the same motivation of a Toohey. Both of them wanted power over others. Toohey, though, knew that he could only exist as long as he led the crowd along the road they wanted to begin with. Wynand actually believed he had the power to influence them to his ideas when they were counter to that of the crowd.
Anyways, time to go now and exercycle. I got some excess weight to lose!:)
Best always, John,
Mike
The interactions of the Julius Caesar story seem fascinating and it is indeed true that one must consider their feelings to some extent. After all, some judgement may based on a "gut feel" which is really just a culmination of experience.
The Fountainhead course is from ARI. I literally just finished the section on Dominique, she is a really interesting character! I haven't considered the alterior motivation of Dominique being out to destroy Roark. My impression was that she believed that greatness could not survive in the world and wanted to put him out of his misery. Once she saw Roark triumph over the world she learned that she was mistaken and that greatness could survive in the world, and thus gave up her quest.
Toohey really is a fascinating character, as is Wynand. It's interesting how Toohey represents collectivism in the flesh and is basically an anti-Roark. As you mentioned the Wynand plot was interesting as he thought he controlled the masses, although it was really the masses that controlled him. I could practically feel Roark's pain as he was trying to save Wynand even though he was beyond salvation and reverted to his former self.
The Fountainhead was really an excellent book and I am enjoying the ARI course nearly as much.
Have a great night!
Yes, Rand used the term "mysticism" generally. I'm just saying that I haven't heard the Right talk about her as being evil because she is down on faith. It's all the time that she's evil because she doesn't believe in the Lord:(
John, our feelings often have within them cognitive information not otherwise available to us. When we repress our feelings, it also cuts down much or even all the information associated with that feeling. That's why Caesar got assassinated, actually. The main assassins were his "best friends"!!
I like what you said about Dominique's appreciating it when Roark finally was successful. There were no lines in Fountainhead about Dominique's anger towards Roark going away!
I wanted to check out ARI's course on the Fountainhead but the video stalled about every 20 or 30 seconds. I contacted ARI about this, and they said they would get it fixed. Never happened:( I don't have this problem with netflix nor with YouTube.
I really appreciated it when you felt Roark's pain, John. I would talk more about this, but not on a public list such as this. If you'd like to exchange thoughts more personally, I'm at mikerael30@yahoo.com
I am really enjoying the ARI course. They really provide an in-depth analysis of the book, each character, and the themes. My comments on Dominique were based on the change in her actions - mainly going from sabotaging Roark to assisting him with destroying Cortlandt Homes and defending him in court. It wasn't something overtly stated, yet there was an underlying current. The ARI course identifies many of these nuances that are not really available at first glance. It's like reading the book again with a deeper appreciation. My guess is it's similar to what you are doing with Caesar.
I'm sorry to hear that you are having technical glitches with the video. I have had the choppy video experience myself, although it was intermittent so I assumed perhaps my connection was spotty. Glad to hear you reached out to ARI and they are addressing the issue. I started their courses earlier this Summer and have noticed a significant improvement in the quality of the courses and the user experience since that time. So it seems like they take such feedback into account and iterate on their product.
Thanks for providing your address. I will reach our in the next day or so and look forward to continuing the conversation.
Right this moment I really don't know what to say. I want to sound very knowing and smart, but it's not how I feel.
best always,
Mike
Pirate women = that would be a no.
So, when you talk with her, you are talking to a pirate woman.
Learned a lot about the movie making business. Chat with other producers as they are filming live.
Hope to see you there or here in the Gulch.
Bill PS I hope AS III is more to your liking. They say it will be the best one yet. But I am pushing for a Netflix original series to go in depth.
What do you want to do now, Bill? Do you want to eventually make a movie of your own?
And now with the Gulch, you the writers have all the help you need to make the content AMAZING. In the little time I have been here, I think this is the best mix of ideas writers could find. These Galts Gulchers are amazing, they would keep the scripts and storylines on track and on message teaching young and old. We need to write an article to post a new topic. Get this rolling. There will be lots of new interest when AS III is released in September. Need to move on this to catch the wave. Mike, I think this is very doable. John and Joan Aglialoro own the book rights and I am sure would be interested. I am 62, had a hardware business and have left the business to work with a Chinese engineer on some new lock ideas.
I am not a producer or in the business. I am a dreamer, an early adopter....
Naive to the mechanics of getting it done, but one who asks how we can get it done?
There are thousands of talented people here. Need to get them excited.