22

"The Strike"

Posted by sdesapio 7 years, 10 months ago to Entertainment
93 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

FUN FACTS
1. Atlas Shrugged took 12 years to write.

2. The working title of Atlas Shrugged was, "The Strike." It was actually Frank O'Conner, Ayn Rand's husband, who recommended "Atlas Shrugged" after the book was finished.

3. We're making another movie.

WHAT!? :)

Working on the Atlas Shrugged films presented us with some of the most challenging moments of our lives. It was rewarding too of course, but Challenging - with a capital C. Why? Those of us on the crew with any knowledge of the material were vastly outnumbered by those with none... by 1 to 100. I could count us on one hand. And at times, one finger.

The result? The movies do not adequately convey the message of Atlas. Period.

And, THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF MAKING THE MOVIES - to accurately convey and propagate the message.

But, what if we had another shot? What if we could do it all over again from the beginning? What if we could put together the ideal team of artisans whose sole purpose it was to finally bring Atlas to life as it was meant to be?

I spoke at length yesterday with John Aglialoro, one of the Producers of the films and sole owner of the movie rights to the book.

If you're at FreedomFest today in Vegas, John's going to be on a panel. You may want to attend.

We're making another movie.


Scott DeSapio
Associate Producer, Atlas Shrugged 3


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by Wanderer 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't need inspiration. I joined this board when the movies came out with the express purpose of rewriting the screenplays to give them more impact.

    Today Rand's prose doesn't suit most people, doesn't suit most audiences. Life changes and people change with it. I realize years ago Atlas Shrugged was voted the 2nd most influential book in the western world, after the Bible but, if you polled people today, neither AS nor the Bible would rank in the top 20. It's a comic book world. I can't think of any literary works that have widespread appeal.

    If we want to get the masses to pay attention to Rand's message it's not going to be through her books, it will be through visual storytelling, it's going to be through appeal to emotion. Once we capture their emotions we can insert the message. AS 1-3 failed to capture their emotions. Your phrase will have zip impact on the masses. The Romantic Manifesto had no impact on me. It's on my shelf and it's going to stay there. It's a polemic. Polemics don't work. Story works. Drama works. Avatar, as silly and unscientific as it was, works.

    If one does not dramatize the message, the message will not have widespread impact.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ shruggerron 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Wanderer:
    Dig a little bit into the "Romantic Manifesto" by Ayn Rand, and you will find that her statement "...art is a re-creation of reality, according to an artist's value judgments..." This little short phrase will suffice to teach a writer, sophisticated ways of putting his character's philosophy and feelings into a great story.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jaynemac 7 years, 10 months ago
    What happened to the TV series? Has that idea been shelved? Atlas Shrugged needs to be a series....Not three or four more movies. Just sayin...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 7 years, 10 months ago
    Scott, Had known you'd be there I may have stayed longer in at FreedomFest. We, my wife and I, left at 2PM (or so) on Wednesday. Bah, hindsight.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Suzanne43 7 years, 10 months ago
    My wish list for the movie:
    1. At least twelve hours long...could be a season series of two hours each.
    2. Some history of Dagny, Francisco, and Eddie's early days.
    3. The Thanksgiving dinner where Hank finally lets his family have it.
    4. And most importantly, Jeff Allen, the tramp who has dinner with Dagny on the train, explains the downfall of the Twentieth Century Motor Company. It's the finest piece of writing against Communism that I have ever read. It needs to be included in the movie in its entirety.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by brando79az 7 years, 10 months ago
    If you need help in AZ I'm here. If you need Kickstarter backing (or an equivalent,) I'm here!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by evlwhtguy 7 years, 10 months ago
    Would work better as a TV mini-series. Here is another idea. license it in Korea. They hate communism they love everything American and they make tons of very good Television serial shows of between 16 and 50 episodes. Their story lines are very engaging and I guarantee they would get the job done on time and in a reasonable budget. You couldn't do distribution in the US as most people wont sit for Korean faces and subtitles, but you would make some money from it, you wouldn't damage the brand and I guarantee you would get some interesting perspectives when the Koreans re-wrote the story line. This may help you with the US production.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Wanderer 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Do you think Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders don't understand Rand's ideas?

    Of course they do. They just don't like her ideas.

    Do you think the millions upon millions of Americans who have never paid a dime of net tax in their lives don't understand Rand?

    Of course they do. They just don't like her.

    We live in a time that mirrors the period of Rand's story so, people will have a gut understanding of a contemporary telling of the story. The problem is to sneak past their dislike of her message and deliver a dramatic story that makes them feel it. We can ignore ideas. We do that all the time. We can't ignore feelings.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ shruggerron 7 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree with some of what you said. But I hold the premise that “Ayn Rand's ideas being unpopular even with those who understand them...” cannot be universal. There must be somebody around that understands her after all these years
    Be that as it may, any story that will be universally accepted, must be written about the people who believe, and of course those who don't believe in Ayn Rand's philosophy. That premise is the basis of conflict.
    The current election cycle is a fantastically practical way of demonstrating philosophical opposites. I compare the Clintons' unbridled lust for power to Shakespeare's General Macbeth and his wife. Of course, today’s good guy is Donald Trump, and I compare him to Shakespeare's Henry V, which I would call in today’s common lingo, a righteous dude. When he defends his goal of ruling France as a result of winning a battle, his men and the audience are with him 100%. He won that ancient battle as Eisenhower, Patton and MacArthur won the World War II. Neither three modern generals inveigled their way into a winning position; they fought for their victory. Can you picture Bill Clinton as a general trying to win a straight up battle? Possibly he might have take a survey to find out what the enemy thought about the whole idea. Or Hillary Clinton as a Mata-Hari type spy trying to keep secrets for five seconds.
    In other words, a story of today must be written about people of today, as living expressions of universal ideas (hatefulness, greed, lust or rational philosophy.) Those concepts and the conflicts they create in a story have thrilled audiences of the past. Therefore, a writer must use words and actions based on a character’s ‘sense and value of life’ rather than any heavy and pendulous philosophical ideas, to wit Ayn's 100 page soliloquy on her philosophy in Atlas Shrugged.
    Paraphrasing Macbeth as he ponders the act of killing King Duncan, by saying, "If it were done when tis done then well it were done quickly. If the assassination should trammel up the consequence and, catch with his surcease, success... That but this blow may be the be-all and the end-all here…" This soliloquy indicates that he's really concerned about that thing called conscious, as it controls his actions, and the possible result of those actions. Of course, he disregards conscience and goes through with the assassination even though it is based on the most heinous of ideas such as killing a king. Naturally, he pays for his intransient actions in the end.
    Compare Bill Clinton in the same scene, agonizing over the repercussions of making advances to his female intern. He might even do just that for about two seconds before he goes in for the attack.
    The audiences in 16th-century England, were not as sophisticated as we are today, but they knew a good metaphor when they saw or heard one; and they could learn from that experience. We don't have to use flowery Elizabethan dialogue today, but it is still possible to show how a character and his philosophy control the art of storytelling.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by joy8995 7 years, 10 months ago
    Dominic Cooper (The Preacher AMC) is my pick for Francisco! If you haven't seen him in The Devil's Double, he plays dual roles and both are Oscar worthy! (oh and he's YUMMY ladies!)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 7 years, 10 months ago
    That's great! BTW, I liked how the movies conveyed the book. The movie can never be expected to be as good as the book. I would welcome more though. They could even make one movie focusing on the love story aspect, another focusing on the philosophical aspects, and another that's a action thriller. They wouldn't be the book, but they could be good.

    What I really want is a TV series that focuses on average people you don't see in the book. They would be living their lives, but having to work around gov't plans to allocate resources along political lines. Average people who are kids playing, young people in love, adults, elderly, all finding ways to help each other in mutual trades while the gov't is on their cases with the master plan. Ideally, you'd see selflessness juxtaposed with seflishness (the good kind) in way that doesn't hit you over the head too hard with the message. You could have a story arc where they hear about the power failure in NYC, not realizing that history would view it as a watershed turning point where people reject central planning.

    I'm happy for any new popularizations of AS.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Tigonheart 7 years, 10 months ago
    I loved the first movie, enjoyed the second, disappointed in the third. The love story did not flow and took away from the mian story...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 7 years, 10 months ago
    It really should be done as a multi part series. But not multi season. The average number of parts in one season would be about right. Or even half as many, but longer episodes. That might be best for continuity.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Wanderer 7 years, 10 months ago
    The timing is right for an Atlas Shrugged reshoot. The oilfield is on its ass, drilling rigs and other equipment stacked right and left. It wouldn't take much money to get small oilfield companies to cooperate with location shooting. The railroads are slack. There are thousands of locomotives and rail cars on sidings. Once again, it wouldn't cost much to access that spare capacity. Manufacturing is slack so, filming inside a steel plant instead of on a set might now be possible. These were all short scenes but, they lacked the feeling of authenticity you get from location shots.

    It should be possible to upgrade the film on the cheap. A character driven film doesn't need a $60 million budget, it needs drama, good dialogue and great acting. Great acting doesn't mean "star" in fact, there are lots of great actors who'll never be stars.

    Damn, this could be fun.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by gpecaut 7 years, 10 months ago
    Perhaps 3 movies per part. It is impossible to cover Atlas Shrugged in 3, 90 minute movies. I know I would see/and buy all 9 movies.
    Atlas Shrugged would make a good TV series too.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by starznbarz 7 years, 10 months ago
    Please advise Harmon that if he needs a stills shooter, I`m interested.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Doug_Ort 7 years, 10 months ago
    I loved all three films of the trilogy. I've probably watched each about 50 times. Yes, there were a few things I would change, like making the end of Part II agree with the start of Part III. I would also include the scene where Dagny is interviewed on radio and the interviewer has no idea what's coming. I never much liked the Cheryl character and thought she played too large a part.

    Among the brilliant scenes were the nature of money speech by Francisco and Dagny's scene with Jeff Allen, both in part II, The second always brings tears--I'm a sucker for discovery scenes.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by MikeM35 7 years, 10 months ago
    The first installment was very well done with fine casting and keeping the basic story line. The subsequent films fell a bit flat because of casting changes and the long interval between releases resulted in a make-shift feel to the productions. I would certainly like to see a more cohesive production and think the idea of a mini-series has great merit.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 7 years, 10 months ago
    Will Al Ruddy be participating?

    Also, a suggestion: Shoot the movie in Venezuela. It's cheaper and much of the script will write itself.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by a59430802sojourner 7 years, 10 months ago
    Great! I would like to see the cast of the first movie used in this and subsequent movies. And i recommend the John Gault actor be used in them.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo