welcome, agag. Many who come to this site are unfamiliar with Rand's works. The movies can only pack in so much. I predict you will enjoy the book, and its important themes, very much. I googled your question and I'll I came up with is a series on you tube Saheed al Gat. I assume that's not it.

I have not read the book. I watched the first two movies and was wondering about the third, which brought me to this site. It was the story behind the acting is what drew my attention. It seems to have taken the legend of the Carnegie empire and futurized it. Anyone who has studied Andrew Carnegie's contributions to steel can see how the Hank Rearden character compares to Andrew. Also the political controls that governments have tried to put on technologies throughout history continue to stagnate inventions (the FCC clamping down on many great inventors like Tesla is a great example). I believe the movie uses the SSI as a parity for government groups like the FCC.
The story has allot of real life comparisons of political corruption that make it very interesting to me. But when they replaced all of the actors of the main characters between the 1st and 2nd movie it made the flow between them a little difficult to follow (could that have been a political influence to quite the impact of this series).
It is because of the movies that I will likely buy the book. Does anyone know Al Gat?

In a nutshell, delightful. The one thing missing from the review which is commonly lacking in most of the detractors understanding, is that not all wealthy industrialists are bad or good; that there are moochers, looters, cronies, and second-handers both in government and business, but government is worse because it has the sanction to use force.

I know I introduced several people to the movies who had no prior interest... the movies are a great icebreaker.

The movie is the only reason I bought the book, which I did read first. Anyone who has an ounce of curiosity will wonder just who is John Galt and a movie is a great way to ask the question.

Mike made a good point in noting it galvanized the fans of AS. It certainly fired me up, and in turn I passed along copies of AS to friends, who in turn read the book and saw the movies. And this venue is a fantastic forum for like minded people to connect and discuss her ideas, and then some!

All hail Raven West "It's the message, stupid."

That was a great article. The movie did bring in new people, even if they were there only because someone drug them to it the first time.

Has anyone else noticed that so many of those liberal Hollywood actors who deride success, especially success in business always demand multi-million dollar salaries to appear in those staid movies? The do as I tell you, not as I do crowd. They always remind me of Jim Taggart and friends.

I have to disagree in a small way. Very minor. I think the movies have brought some new people only because I feel confident that many of the people who went to the movies took along a family member or friend who had not read the book and was not familiar, or as familiar, with the ideas portrayed. Granted the movie wasn't going to portray those ideas as well as the book, but here I think an exposure is better than nothing.

As far as the article goes and why was the movie successful enough to continue, I think it is mostly, as you said, a function of the millions of people who have read the book over the years, wanting to see it brought to life. Even if it's not perfect.

it actually did Mike

You are slipping! ;-)

Did you give it a 'thumbs up', in the upper right corner?

Very nice! congratulations.

point for kinetic

You did a nice job here!

To me, it is not that the movies brought any (or very many) NEW people to the ideas of Ayn Rand, but that the movies galvanized those 24 million or so readers who were isolated, dormant, and happy to see the movie, buy the DVD, or get it on Netflix. In short, the production tapped into a potential energy source with kinetic properties capable of doing work by changing mass over a change in time. In other words, you were right.