I'm with you on liking the second part better.

There isn't any chance that our Dagny suggestions are being taken seriously...this is a great way to get us all engaged, and bantering about the upcoming film!

1. I'm surprised that you put the selection of Dagny (Part 3) to the community. To me, this is a creative issue that should involve only your team.

2. In my opinion, Part II was an overall better movie.

3. The sets were better in Part 2.

4. Samantha has a much wider range of acting skills and was clearly better. Taylor (I think) could not have pulled off the more complex Dagny of Part 2.

5. Grant Bowler is clearly a better actor (in this role) than is Jason Beghe. Although I like Jason in this because of his more assertive 'attitude', Grant is able to show a much greater range of the nuances of Hank's inner conflict.

6. Esai Morales is clearly a better d'Anconia than is the actor from Part 1.

7. I think Kim Rhodes is great as a more 'confrontational' Lillian, but I also enjoyed Rebecca Wisocky.

8. I think Mathew Marsden does a better job at whining, than does Patrick Fabian.

9. The tone/tenor of Part 2 was of sadness, (which is one reason why I think Samantha is more effective) - but is this the same tone/tenor that you want for Part 3?

All of that said, I think the biggest issue is consistency from one film to another. I noticed that a lot of viewers were taken aback by the change in cast - for me, I know that watching Part 1 and then Part 2 back-to-back is difficult because of the change in cast and the change in sets. For this reason alone, I think it's important to retain the cast (and sets) from Part 2!

I should tell you that I've read only a third of the novel (many years ago), so what I'm saying here is based solely on my viewing of the films (without benefit of the novel).

Thanks for hearing my thoughts/suggestions. I sincerely hope you succeed with Part 3.

Either of the ladies who played Dagny should play the part to maintain continuity . . . the swap of actors and actresses was disturbing to me between 1 and 2. Beyond that, any competent actress could portray Dagny, yet I would lean toward Samatha with a light lead.

I agree, a younger Meryl Streep type would work. When I saw Part I, I thought Taylor was too girly and immature. She didn't strike me
as someone who would actually know how to run a railroad. I felt her character was not capable of coming up with the lines she spoke. Her voice was too whisper-sexy most of the time. She looks 27, and Dagny is 35 and tougher. I'd like someone in between Taylor's youthful energy and Samantha's angst-ridden timid delivery. Neither one was ideal. The personal politics are not important as long as she reads Atlas to understand the role. The role is so much deeper than either of the scripts (I or II) would indicate.

A good movie is about telling a good story, not a political lecture. Who came up with Dagny's line "That's not even charitable" in Part I? Where does she say anything like that in the book? She's a businesswoman, not a philosopher or politician.

I liked Beghe's Rearden of Part II better than Grant, who was too soft for a guy that started working in the foundries as a kid. Grant was a little too average cleancut good-looking, but his acting was ok. I preferred Beghe's rough voice -- breathing iron dust and smoke for 30 years will do that!

Actually, there were only about three years from Part 1 to Part 3. There was a lot of flashback in Part 1, which can be confusing, but there wasn't a 12 year stretch. Everything actually started at Hank & Lillian's anniversary party.

Lots of Taylor fans out there, but I'm not one. Samantha's acting was far more mature and nuanced in my opinion. With that being said, either one would be great in ASIII, just to keep continuity.

I do feel the same as mostly everyone here - the cast changes were far too extreme. If the same level of cast changes had been made in the Star Wars Trilogy, I'm pretty certain it wouldn't be the classic it is today.

You can bring back the entire cast of ASI - with the exception of Francisco and Hank (sorry, I think Jason Beghe rocks - much more manly and taller than Grant Bowler) and you'd be on the right track.

Either of the actresses playing Dagny would be fine, if only for continuity.

I, for one, preferred Samantha's acting over Taylor's, but Taylor did *look* the part. Although I felt her scream at Ellis Wyatt's disaster (considering her low-key performance till that part) was a little over the top and for me, not fully believable. Still makes me cringe when I watch the DVD.

Deborah Wisocky was the epitome of Lillian in A1, by a long shot. The second actress was completely forgettable. I also agree that Esai Morales (although I would have preferred Eduardo Verastagui because he looks like the Francisco in my mind) was better. Jason Beghe was more manly and a little more rough around the edges that I was expect from someone who began working at the age of 14. Besides, Grant was too short.

Michael Lerner was a far better Wesley Mouch.

And thanks for pointing out the Leonard Small/Tony discrepancy. How did they drop *that* ball?

It's to the producer's credit they found Taylor before things took off for her. Listen, it's HARD to make a movie, any movie, let alone two indies going into a third. And, these films are a difficult fit for low budget, not only on scope, but on casting. Your average art indie film will easily attract a quality cast "above market value" if the themes resonate with liberal actors. Craft a role that calls for a drug user, a prostitute, a social worker, or any of the standard heart-tuggers and you'll have no trouble finding an actress hoping for peer recognition. But, put out a unique role where a women is a WHOLE PERSON, smart, passionate and (the worst offender) successful in business without using her sex as a tool and you'll turn that Oscar quality talent pool instantly off. Sad, and ironic.

I think you folks are on to something with any of the lovely conservative FOX ladies out there, Pamela Geller, Mary Katherine Ham, or Michelle Malkin. ( listen, if they're going to start by tweaking Eddie's character from the beginning, forget how they looked in the book) Why not consider Monica Crowley, or either of chicksonthreright?

For that matter, I think Michael Moore fits Wesley Mouch! He would probably think Mouch's script sounded perfectly reasonable! (There are any number of lefty talking heads who might take the other antagonist roles without realizing the irony - They should pronounce it "MOOCH") Bwaaahaaa)

Perhaps the "lemmings" have good taste and individually agree that Taylor was perfectly cast. Why fix it if it 'ain't broke!

Reshoot part II scenes with part I Dagny and Hank and then play as a TV trilogy after its big screen run. Taylor is perfect for the part!

I second this motion, if Taylor is out of the picture.

I liked Samantha from Part 2 as Dagny. I think all of the actors should be advocates of Ayn Rand's ideas.

...Nearly snorted coffee on my screen laughing, the image was too funny. The true low budget approach is to recut old clips from a zillion shows to tell the story. For a moment I saw Hervé Villechaize from Fantasy Island pointing up shouting exultantly- " THE PLANE!...THE PLANE!"
Well, Objectivists, I think AS Productions gets it. News Flash.. Schilling may not be in budget. Hope they can think on their feet & find brilliant choices in casting & screenplay.

Angelina Jolie was interested in the role of Dagny, and that would certainly draw more public notice and hence a larger audience. Perhaps she would do it at a discount?

Likely not an actress issue, but writer. I didn't have a problem with it. She doesn't claim to be something she's not so she has to assume Rearden metal is what it is supposed to be . I think she had one of her engineers look at it first. Maybe I'm wrong.

Taylor, of course.
I have read AS countless times, since back in high school, and was thrilled when a movie was finally made. I always imagined someone like Patricia Neal, on the strength of her Fountainhead performance. Then I realized Hollywood does not have actresses like Neal anymore, so I was pretty skeptical until I watched AS1. Even though she is blond, I found Taylor's performance to be believable. She is very talented, but I do believe she may be too busy now, not to mention PO'd to be passed over for AS2.
Other than Taylor, my short list of actresses that are realistically possible choices include:

Elizabeth Moss
Natalie Zea
Carla Gugino
Debra Winger ( 15 years ago )

Exactly! I've seen some good suggestions that show an understanding of the economic reality of low budget production, but also some absolutely unrealistic ones. Even Samantha Mathis has had summer success with "Under the Dome" (if they don't kill her character off) which would up the stakes in her negotiations. Besides, you can't blow your casting budget with ONE actor, as who would you then surround them with? Imagine Jolie or Theron with the two previous casts playing off them! No, the producers are left with various permutations of the guest star roster from, say, "The Love Boat" (look it up, younglings) and will have to make the best of it.

Taylor Schilling was superb as Dagny and should be cast again in Atlas 3. She portrays a confident self-image, which is the essence of the book and movies.

Taylor gets my vote. I can't think of any of today's actresses that could portray Dagny as Ms. Rand wrote the character.

Dominique McElligott . She is DT even before she speaks.

Taylor was PERFECT!!!!

Taylor from Atlas #1. She just had more life & portrayed more strength to her character. I also liked the Rearden of #1.
I'm so happy that #3 is coming. Have read atlas 3 times and bringing the book to life in a present day scenario shows how close we are to mirroring the same situation today with what government is now up to.

Taylor from part one! I really liked here very much as Dagny!

The Part 2 cast was not bad, but the Part 1 cast really brought the book to life. I have read the book at least 4 times. When I watched Part 1, I watched the book.