I agree. The original cast had better chemistry. However, i do believe one of the original cast recently died. I am in no way trying to be disrespectful to him; but that is unfortunate for a remake.

As a follower of Ayn Rand for years and a reader of Atlas Shrugged multiple times and an owner of the original movies I do think it can be done better! At least 4-5 movies and not much can be skipped. I applaud the original attempt but it did fall short of the Gold Standard Ayn Rand would have expected. The philosophy needs to be developed entirely since philosophy is not taught in our schools. The cast needs to understand the book and the philosophy also. Please make the next attempt the Gold Standard for book to movie/mini series standards as the industrialist's in the book would. It needs to be a labor of love of the work!

I agree with the preceding comments. The entire story is extremely powerful. Make as many movies as it takes to tell the entire story. A miniseries makes sense. Understandably, budgeting is always a challenge, and the crowd funding certainly helps. Budgeting for a mini series for television may be less challenging than for a feature film. The literary work is not CG heavy, so that would make it less expensive. What are your current limitations? Keep all the parts of the story. If Ayn Rand thought she could tell the tale in fewer pages, I'm sure she would have. If it was as important to her to keep every word to communicate the message of her story, then you should too! Great idea to add more character to the villains. Ms. Rand certainly provided back stories on villains in her books, especially the Fountainhead. I have family in the movie business in California, so contact me if you want to connect with them.(Corman, Runyon, and Drain-CG)

Speaking as someone first exposed to Ayn Rand via the AS trilogy, I think a miniseries is the only way to go to hold the attention of newbies easily distracted by oodles of tech toys.
Hopefully halfway through, some actor for a vital character won't shrug the Shrug because he's not being invited to Hollywood libtard shindigs any more.

I don't think that any movie can truly do justice to the book. Wouldn't a mini-series be better? Better yet, a full season of perhaps 12 episodes?

First, since you asked what parts of this book I would consider leaving out: none of them. They are all equally important. I would also restore the Eddie Willers-John Galt dialogues in the Taggart Terminal commissary.

Second: I would put in at least one scene in which someone comes to Eddie's rescue--or expand on Eddie's last trip to make clear that he will join that wagon train and give them a place to head for: Phoenix, Arizona, the home of Dan Conway. You see, the other end of the Phoenix-Durango RR--Durango, CO--is not far from the Uncompahgre River Valley that is the nearest real-life suggestion for Mulligan's Valley. In fact, the town of Ouray, CO, had a narrow-gauge track running into the valley from Durango, CO.

Agreed. In fact this could last for thirty episodes.

I would love to see an approach (and some have already posted to this fact) of using a mini-series to drive the story of Atlas Shrugged and leverage a full production movie to drive it home! There is an abundance of real world stories happening right now that could be leveraged to not only entertain but educate in a way that will be easily consumed.

I vote mini series.

I have always thought the movie could only be done properly as a mini-series. No less than 10 hours. This is a teachable moment for the uninformed to watch and learn. you can't leave much out.

Like many, I also believe a mini-series may be the best way to address something with the length and depth of Atlas Shrugged.

Think of the recent John Adams mini-series put out by HBO. Can you imagine something like that condensed into a movie, or spread out into 3 movies a year or more apart?
I think a movie, or trilogy of movies, will only work if you have a huge budget.

A mini-series is much more workable. Also, you can make the entire series at one time, to ensure that you have the same actors portraying characters throughout, for one thing.

The 1st attempt at making the movies was at least an attempt. But if we are honest with ourselves in true objectivist fashion, fell way short of the mark. Those films felt much more akin to several of the "christian" films and christian programs of recent years - poorly produced productions that only "true believers" will want to see, programs that preach to the choir but will never generate interest or be seen by outsiders.

This time lets be sure to get it right, and to put some real money into this. It's better to do this fully-funded, or not at all.
Someone should approach Peter Thiel this time to fund this.

I was recently commissioned to write a comparative analysis of the Atlas Shrugged Book and the Movie Adaptations by a fan of both who wanted to understand why the films had not been as effective as he had hoped they would be. He has generously allowed me to post my resulting report publicly for all other fans, and has specifically asked me to post a link here in the hope it may offer some beneficial suggestions for the new movie. Here's the link: http://storymind.com/content/page608.... . I look forward to any responses from the community and am happy to discuss any of the points made in the report.

I agree with AC1 as the only way to do real justice in coveying the message is through a mini series. I also liked the idea of two or three seasons. Casting is also key. That said, maybe the best way to tell this story on the scene is not to tell it the way it is written. If the title is going to be "Who is John Galt," then tell it through his eyes. Tell it through John's perspective. Doing this you can convey the development of the philosophy and his plot to go on strike and how it unfolded. This way the players to the story and their personal stories and interactions with one another become less intrusive to the overall movie giving the scene writers much more latitutde. Does this make sense to you?

I agree with Mike G. But I hope it could be available on a set of DVD's, as well! I am delighted to have been able to purchase and view all three of the earlier “Atlas Shrugged” DVD’s. I do hope we can be able to purchase the entire series on a set of DVD’s!

Whatever way it can be equally great and/or greater than additional great and the greatest cinemas.Bring out heroism. Reasons good is good and less is less.It's where heroes and heroines are toward what are good.Noting who, innocents, benefit. Where villainy is resembling villainy "in" additional novels, cinema, and the world.Also distinct.Pro-good and right American.An America not an enemy directly of various people not born in America.There are American loving people not born in America.The book's about certain good things in America and on Earth.To start at the start, including the tree, similar to one documentary, but to be a new one.One way:noting the possible cinema length. Noting by one cinema. Up to 240", or 180".Maybe up to 150". Note book divisions, too.With 240", what's possible per 60". Maybe 25% of the book.180", maybe each of three portions, or 33.33% of the book.Up to 150", each portion per 50" or,separately, 33.335 of the book per 50".Possibly hire the greatest "stars" and/or thespians.Who will answer to what amount of money?Look toward the possibility of a blockbuster.One cinema, or X number. A right start,middle, and finale to each.Note additional cinema series. Note also originalities of Atlas Shrugged and possible influences upon various subsequent novels and cinemas.It may be where numbers of things start.The characters are great. They are by more than one reason and trait. Coordinate toward the screens.Note the order of the book. Keep the order, or shuffle.Knowing the order of the book. Comprehending it.Correct to the book.Right with the characters and characteristics. What they are to the book. What they are toward the cinema.Correct and high cinema making.

A parallel may be additional cinemas of larger novels. Gone With The Wind is one example.

Toward the larger screens in cinema theaters, or most television screens?

I don't understand what happened to the idea of the miniseries. The book and ideas are too big for a movie that can't run much more than 2 hours. And multi-part movies without huge special effects are not likely to bring in large audiences; especially when they are asking the viewers to do a lot of thinking.

Since the book is divided into 30 chapters , it could be filmed in 3 seasons of 10 chapters each.

In my opinion, the setting should be kept as late 40s/early 50s. Trying to translate the metaphor of the railroad to a contemporary or future setting wouldn't have the impact. Filmed as a "period piece" gives enough psychological distance for the viewer to think about the ideas. It also provides a certain "romantic" atmosphere that draws people into the story (Think Casablanca or more recently, The Man in the High Castle).

There is obviously a big job in translating the novel with its long monologues into something more suited for the screen ("show don't tell), but I am guessing that there are any number of writers up to the task. And I am certain that there are good writers who are students of Rand so that the script could be written to be less didactic while still maintaining the essence of the philosophy.

This is the golden age of long-form TV and I have waited for this day since the late 70s when there was a rumor that Ted Turner was going to back a miniseries during the first flowering of multi-night television. (Think Roots and Shogun).

I am hoping that I won't have to wait 40 more years to see another attempt at bringing a high-quality version of Atlas Shrugged to life.

I bought the paperback years ago. There was a little over a thousand pages. I have read it six times. A couple of years ago I was able to buy it from Audible. At the time it was offered for $4.95. Cost less than the book. I have listened to it five times now. A series is the only way to go. Remember the Fountainhead. The studio wanted Rand to shorten the summation Roarke gave. In answer to that "request" she added more lines. Don't cut it short. Do it the way Ayn Rand would.

An unorthodox approach, but I would do a “reverse onion peel” on the storyboard. Instead of taking the whole book and stripping out subplots until the time constraints disappear, start with what you would leave in if you had to tell the whole story in 20 minutes. Then restore what you consider the most useful subplot that was left out. Repeat as needed until the movie (or miniseries) is the appropriate length for your purposes.

What vital organ would you leave out of a body? That's the question you are asking. As one of the lucky "voices of John Galt" in III, I feel close to this issue. No one part could be left out without endangering the message. The only way to slim it down would be to spend less time on each major point without touching the meat of each point. As a one time Thespian, I know this would put a lot more on each actor to express more with less time and words. To say nothing about needing VERY good directing. I still hope for a mini-series, but if not possible, I would still help promote it(I still have some John Galt stickers) and spend my money on a kickstarter campaign again. Questions?

The New Movie: A combination of course. Try to use the "original" cast members. It was a bit confusing when the main characters changed on the 3 Movies. Must make the point that Freedom is not Free and we must all be alert to the socialist agenda.

"I think would help a new telling of the story would be to give the adversaries more realistic dimensions."
I like this idea. I'm not sure how well it would fit into a movie, but suppose the script writers consulted with people who believe in self-sacrifice and altruism. Suppose they left it open so that supporters of altruism could watch it and think the altruists were right and it was just mismanagement that caused the gov't-managed system to fail.

I clearly do not agree with the altruists, but it's nice to have villains whose motivations you understand and some points you can sympathize with them on.

This would be a wide interpretation of AS. What I got from AS was "look at what happens if you take these bad ideas to an extreme."

I really like your idea of less 2-by-4 to the head, but I would not know how to make it work for AS.

Maintain storylines for the major players. Eliminate the others. Edit tight. No preaching. Figure out where the "big" events are. Do them full justice. Sort the good scenes from the bad. Only keep the great ones. No matter what the movie must "entertain" If they do not they will fail. Try to use humor to make a point. People like humor when it is properly delivered. Good luck.

The question is the purpose of the movie. Is it to enlighten others about the objective philosophy or to share a great story about objectivism. I love the idea of a mini series to encompass all of the aspects.