perhaps. I like the unafraid part-but not if ignorance is thrown into the equation. I see Galt as strong but not a steroid body builder who spends all day in the gym. He is fit to fly an airplane not wield a club. His power comes from his mind. As a woman, I can tell you, attractiveness in a man comes from how he engages you, the intelligence in his eyes,how he is comfortable in his skin. How he controls his physical strength, yet you feel it all the same. He is also not devoid of emotion (which is not consistent with AS). He feels love, anger, great joy, sorrow-and he shows it. He also protects with his life those he loves.
There are thousands of physically attractive men who are vapid as the Saharan, yet are bold. Their boldness is stupidity and their looks do not disguise the emptiness in their eyes

From a woman's standpoint he has to have great hair, intelligent, probing eyes, and have the physique of someone who is physically active. He also has to have the ability to (as a day worker) be able to easily converse with someone like Eddie and Dagny as well as being able to fly under the radar when the big Galt dragnet starts. Eckhart's a little too old, but that's a great start. Not a pretty boy, but still great eye appeal.

I vote for A. When this actor starts to research his role, he will become B and will be changed forever.

A. As long as the actor looks and acts like John Galk, I don't care what his personal beliefs are. Atlas Shrugged Part 3 should focus on getting well-trained actors who will make a well-made movie. If the script is 100% reflects Ayn Rand's ideas, then a well-trained actor regardless of his personal beliefs will make the character come to life in the movie.

Hmm, why not ?

Perhaps. : ) But I think John Galt needs to be a stud who knows it and loves it. Someone not broken by the world. I have known a lot of actors and they just don't have the goods. They are mostly all broken men.

If it was my decision it would be someone like this.

http://www.nakedcowboy.com/

A dude who can play the guitar in Times Square nearly naked is a guy who understands a bit about what being John Galt is. Unafraid, enterprising, talented, and holding the whole potential of the world in their mind.

Plus, I bet he would sell tickets to a younger audience................I'm just saying.

No real comments except both actors in previous seemed a little emotionless and cold ... when the "bad guys" do what they do, there should be a little anger and emotion!

Omar Epps! In the '80s I would have said Denzel Washington (opposite Jodie Foster as Dagny!), but he is obviously too old for the role.

I know Galt is supposed to be a blond, but think about it. He is described as "self-made in every sense, out of nowhere, penniless, parentless, tie-less". He succeeds without any support from society, purely on the content of his mind and his character. To me that is a perfect descrioption of a black non-Liberal.

Epps has already proved himself a competent actor and his stint on House has gotten people used to viewing him as no-nonsene, intelligent and ruthlessly moral.

The black culture in this country is just screaming for a self-reliant, intellectual role-model. My theory is that Obama succeeded in gaining the presidency partly by tapping into this need by refusing to play the typical black victim. Yes, it was a scam, but it was a highly successful one. Black people deserve the real thing.

I would love to see Simon Baker in the role.

B

or writers

Unfortunately Harrison Ford is an economic p.......

Have there been any of the actors who are not in fact "true believers?" Better yet have any of the actors so far just suddenly disappeared?

"B" It takes more than an actor to play John Galt. I would look where nobody else has, and give a philosopher a paying job who can just happen to act because he is good at everything. I would say the person would have to "BE" John Galt. A faker won't work with the core audiance. If we were talking 40 years ago, I'd say Clint Eastwood, but there aren't people like that now working in films. But they are working as mechanics and oil riggers all over the world.

B. The actor must be a true believer

welcome to the Gulch vido.
uh, no to Rand Paul.

Hugh Jackman only understands the American dollar, not the ideology of or definition of an American. In case you are unaware Jackman is not an American, the only greencard he understands is the green backs.

Maybe AS3's producer may want to just ask him, maybe, who knows, he would be happy about that.
Even physically, I think he would fit the role quite well. Of course, there's the little issue that he's not an engineer, so he probably doesn't have the "engineer" behavior of always thinking of some problem in the background... But the speech part in the novel is definitely a political speech he would with no doubt perform with perfection...

A. As long as the person can act like they have that passion, it doesn't matter so much whether it is true. However, both B and A would be ideal.

B. The actor must possess a deep understanding of, and passion of Ayn Rand's ideas and the American U.S. Constitution, not the living, breathing, morphing, perverted clinton/obama marxist version. tom Selleck comes to mind.

Brendon Fraser is my choice. He is tall and authoritative looking. He has experience in diverse roles and can pull off drama as well as action or comedy.
This is a role that an actor plays. Acting is just that. It does not have to be a reflection of philosophy or politics or anything. It is someone pretending to be the person the writer creates meeting the vision of the director's interpretation.

I think there's 0 chance of him doing it, but it would be great.

I think someone committed to the cause would do a better job hyping the film off-screen.
One person who came to mind is Vigo Mortensen. Star of Hidalgo and Lord of the Rings. I don't know if he requires a lot of money or what his politics are but he seems right in every other respect.
I also like Gary Sinese but not as much, but he is committed politically.

I guess you guys are saying Brad Pitt, who already expressed interest in the role, won't work cheaply enough?

I do have to say that DB Sweeney is one of my favorite unappreciated actors. So, I was pleasantly surprised to see him cast for pt 2. Why wouldn't he be in part 3?

I have no idea about his politics, but if he's not too expensive, one of the best actors for this role I can think of would be Guy Pearce.

All good comments.

He should be...
1) Unknown or relatively unknown.
2) A dedicated Objectivist.
3) Good looking enough that his appearance does not detract from from the message.