So long as you get a director and writers who understand the message themselves I would agree the message will come through, but if they do not understand and agree with the message it will not.

I do not agree. While I enjoyed Taylor Shilling I did not care for Grant Bowler to much.

I think in the next movie they need to have a new cast again. The reason being that to attempt some kind of actor continuity for the third movie where the others had none will simply cause the 2nd act to be well invalidated, and it was the much better of the two movies.

I would personally love to see the first two acts redone alone with the 3rd with the same actors for all three, in which case Taylor shilling would be great for Dagney. I preferred Jason Beghe for Rearden as he seemed much more the man that worked his way from a coal miner to a industrial CEO; Grant Bowler was just to much the pretty boy to be that person.

In any case that will not happen so I would rather see a completely different cast for the 3rd act.

There is no question in my mind that B comes before everything else. If the message is wrong everything else does not matter.

In order to insure the message is on target you must have a director that will keep it on target, and cast that understands the message so they stay on target as well. No one should be involved that does not understand the message and agree with it.

I also think that since you changed actors on the second one you should change it up for the third. Do not attempt to gain continuity when there is none (other than the story and ideal) between the first two.

I may have answered B. in the question but, my answer is short and to the point. Just like the movie and the truth of the book.

Answer B.

The first two installments of Atlas Shrugged the movie followed the plot, but lost essence of the message it conveys. Haters of Miss Rand will no doubt hate the movie regardless of who plays what, or how wonderful the special effects are. Unfortunately, you have missed the boat with those who have been waiting to being this message of individualism and the freedom of creativeness for the past 50 years. In the first segment, you missed a perfect opportunity with Francisco's "meaning of love." You should use the film to convey the message just as the book does.

Getting the message of Atlas Shrugged right is paramount! Please please get this message right.

The message is of penultimate importance. The famous Galt speech will be epic or time to go for popcorn. I'm glad I don't have to make that scene.

Don't care about the casting - tell the story right. You could tell it with stick-figures for all I care. Just make sure that Ayn Rand's message about the value of merit, the value of competence, the importance of unpoliticized science, the evil of the moochers and the looters - make sure all of that comes out right. Be sure not to butcher "I Am John Galt." Probably can't do the unabridged form, but you can surely get the real gist of what that message is right. The story is everything. And the morality is the weave of the story. Water down the morality and you have a tawdry story - no matter who you cast.

A. Bring back the actors from the first movie. The change in cast has made Atlas Shrugged II very hard to watch. I own both movies, but only watch Atlas Shrugged I. Please don't make this mistake a third time. Give the audience some continuity. I'm not educated in the techniques of film. I don't know the difference between good and great. I only know that when I watch Atlas Shrugged II I can't stop thinking about how I miss the original cast.

Casting--I am really wondering if anyone has read
Atlas Shrugged--The casting was wrong in both 1
and 2--It's very important that the characters look
like Ayn Rand intended them to look.
Ayn Rand wrote with great passion--there is no
passion in either of the first two installments.
maybe you should all wtch The Fountainhead
that was cast and portrayed perfectly to the novel. Maybe because Ayn was there to oversee it. The role that was portrayed the best, was Ellis Wyatt--I was so waiting to see Atlas,
and was so let down. I went to see Ayn every time she spoke at Harvard--She was a woman of great conviction and great passion in her beliefs. Dagny-Hank-Eddie and Lillian were all nothing like the characters in the book. The message is so important, but without passion it means nothing--just another Hollywood movie.
I pray God will give you wisdom,courage, and passion for no.3. So many readers of her work have waited so long for Atlas to be made into a film. Thank you for your efforts--I will be anxious
to see what you do. Abundant blessings,
Dagny DiBona

Tough one...
A. Casting
Dagny 1 was beyond excellent; Francisco 2 was terrific, as was Rearden 2. Unfortunately, as I understood the rumors, Dagny 1 priced herself out of the market after AS1. Real Shame... try crowdsourcing to pay her tariff in 3?

B. Getting the message of Atlas Shrugged right
Well, what are movies for? Most are for entertainment or escape; rarely for education or persuasion nowadays. Try to take older "movies with a message" as examples...

C. Cinematography
Well, hell, it has to look good, and I have no complaints with the cinematography in 1 OR 2. Some scenes could have been longer; some shorter, but that's true of virtually every movie, eh?

D. Special Effects
Good in 1, excellent in 2, but that train in 2 could not take those turns at those speeds. Please try to obey some of the laws of physics, ok?

E. Hiring the right Director
Of course! One of my major gripes about AS1 was the lame delivery of some of Eddie Willers' first lines. Director Fail. Human beings don't say those things, and if they do, they don't do it that way. Stilted. Would have cost pennies to reshoot those few scenes.

F. Other
C'mon... again, what's the purpose of the movie? Entertainment? If so, lots of special effects, action scenes and bodice-ripping.
If you're trying to put a message across, what is it and to whom, and plot a strategy and stick to it.

And if the purpose is to influence people to change their minds and "see things in a different light," well, A through E plus good screenplay writing all have to be there.
I vote for trying to make the movie a "mind-changer" and attitude-influencer, and I think that means doing less pruning of the original work.

And, if 1 and 2 are never remade to correct imperfections, I certainly pray that some TV mogul will have the cojones to put AS into a serial with at LEAST four or six episodes... maybe eight! Let it all flow. And have the commercials support the message, too!

Looking forward to 3 impatiently... +af in NC.

I am not in the film business, however, I would proiritize as B, E, A, C, and D.

I LIKE that idea... If I were doing it, I'd have scenes from the movie intercut with clips and stills reflecting current events under the monologue.

Remember a few years ago when NY State "legislators" essentially tried to pass a Directive 10-289 to prevent companies in the State from laying off employees because it would be a hardship for the employees?! I do.

B. Getting the message right through good storytelling. Part III is arguable the most exciting and most difficult part to bring to the screen - it's so much darker than part I & II but the message needs to be shared - especially with the current state of affairs in the world around us. Please invest in writing a good screen play and keep continuity with the story. Choose actors from Part I and Part II and make it work. Good luck -- I can't wait to see it!

Message, Original cast,

I believe that ABC was going to do a mini-series, but then got new a new executive producer or someone like that who then nixed the plans.

Good Point, and my point was that Ayn Rand pretended not to be concerned with PR, but was deeply hurt by critics or anyone that questioned her work. Even tho I am an Ayn Rand fanatic, and have read all of her books, including both biographies, we should be careful of the word moocher, because I am such an aficionado that I take umbrage to that word in a sentence referring to me. In any event again, ur point is a good one.

Agreed...and there lies the 'rub'!

Rand's story might have been better suited to a 6, or 7, part mini-series, with installments of 2 hour length. There is so much complexity in her tale, that it becomes a thankless task trying to decide what can be successfully 'trimmed'!

At best we can hope that some of the viewers not familiar with the novel, will be compelled to read the whole story....

"Who is John Galt?"

Thank you for this information: should have been required reading from the start.

B. The message. But in order to do that you need get all of the other A through E right. The message is what it is all about, the reason for the film, and the reason Ayn Rand wrote the book.

Staying true to the book is most important for me. Next is casting. I was VERY disappointed in the new cast for part II and I'm not sure how I would feel about another change. Definitely do not come up with a third cast! I can't believe we have to wait another year for the final segment. I do believe cast #1 was better.

E. Hiring the right director because he can get a-d right. Just look at how hiring a good director launched Star Wars and how lame George Lucas really is as a director when he had 100% control. It takes more than a good story.