The Fountainhead movie with Gary Cooper
Posted by Dobrien 7 years, 3 months ago to Entertainment
The book was tremendous .The movie left a lot to be desired. The best part was the courtroom scene with Roark speaking in his defense. I just watched it for the first time and am curious what you all have to say about it.
It is, as most movies are, a poor substitute for the book. Still, I do own it on DVD and watch it every few years. It is a pleasant way to spend a couple of hours reviewing and refreshing my recollection of the essential elements of the story. It was a movie that Rand had input on and some editorial control of.
Regards,
O.A.
I agree and am glad I read the book before seeing it.
Another scene I liked was when Roark told the board no when they tried to add columns and other nonsense.
Granted, in the case of "The Man in the High Castle," the TV series only loosely resembles the book. But that need not be the case for "The Fountainhead" (or "Atlas Shrugged, for that matter). There is plenty of material in "The Fountainhead" to make for a compelling series without having to drastically reimagine or augment the story.
All in all, it lived up to Ayn Rand's theories on the integration of plot and theme.
Yes I also liked the surprise Dominique received at that moment. I thought she looked crazy in the scene where she threw the sculpture.
Regards,
DOB
That said, I did not approve of Patricia Neal as Dominique Francon. I would have suggested Barbara Stanwyck as Dominique--and Fred MacMurray as Gail Wynand, and George Sanders as Ellsworth M. Toohey.
But I was just thinking that William Holden would have made a good Henry Rearden.
I would have loved to see Atlas Shrugged as a 2 part epic in the early 60's With ,Audrey Hepburn as Dagny, Lee,Marvin as Hank Reardon, John Wayne as Ellis Wyatt, Raymond Burr as John Galt, Paul Newman as Ragnar and Marcello Mastroianni as Francisco, Charles Durning as Wesley Mouch, Henry Fonda as Dr Stadler
According to Ayn Rand's theory of objective aesthetics, you have to take the movie as it is delivered, as a work of art in its own right, independent of anything else. Consider the statue of Laocoon and His Sons Attacked by Serpents. The statue depicts a scene from a myth with several variations. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laoco%C...) An aesthetic judgment of the statue must be independent of the stories behind it. So, too, with the movie version of The Fountainhead.
Since Ayn Rand wrote the Fountainhead screenplay, chose the director, and clearly intended the movie to be an adaptation of her novel (the cover of which appeared prominently in the opening credits), it is certainly legitimate to compare the movie to the novel on aesthetic grounds.
And now the recent 3 movie attempt at Atlas Shrugged. Even though that effort suffered from many of the same defects of condensation, the turnover of characters really hurt the effort.
These lessons should be used as a guide towards future treatments of both of these novels. In this era of the popularity of extended mini-series, even across seasons, the opportunity exists to do the best possible job.
Imagine binge watching 39 episodes of Atlas Shrugged!
I tried the book and put it down as I felt it might be to depressing. I will need to try it again. The movie was an Italian Production is it in English or subtitled?
For instance, that scene where Philip Rearden
tries to get a job with Rearden (most likely to
get himself installed in the place as a spy),
Rearden turns him down, and Philip makes a
not-so-subtle threat to have the government in-
stall him; Rearden looks at him; Philip sees the
industrial dangers right in front of him, and breaks out into a cold sweat.
In a mini-series, that Winston Tunnel incident
could make an excellent morality-play episode
all by itself; of course, dialogue or some sort of
flashbacks, or both, would have to be added to
explain the motivations of the road foreman,
trainmaster, etc. Also maybe some written ma-
terial across the screen identifying the guilty
passengers who deserve what they get.
That said, those who appreciated read the book will never think that condensing it into a movie is a good idea.
Atlas Shrugged suffers the same dilemma.
I enjoyed watching it even though it was very condensed. A lot was missing from the book.
A good remake would be great. It won't likely happen as it would bomb at the box office.
Plus most of the popular box office stars would sabotage the message as it is opposed to their collectivist philosophy.
Regards ,
DOB
(2) Actors act under direction. While some of the actors in Atlas Shrugged 1,2,3 were familiar the works of Ayn Rand, most were not. They just read their lines.
(One who did was Armin Shimerman who played Dr. Ferris. He was Quark and the Ferengi in DS9. At a Trekker con, I asked him about Ayn Rand and he said that he read The Fountainhead in college and was going to read more before shooting the next season in order to get a better understanding. Also from that series was Robert Picardo who played the Medical Hologram. He was Dr. Robert Stadler in 3.
I've also read that actors, writers and artists are never truly satisfied with their products.
Work must have come easy to him. I couldn't imagine being a lead character or any character for that matter and not reading the story 1st.
Your contribution is appreciated. I will have to check out Razor's Edge.
regards,
DOB
I really can't think of the right man or woman for the part today, that could project with honesty the objectivist beliefs. We have all these childish male actors today, and the limited talent females. Not too many Myrna Loys, Cagneys or Gables. Joseph Cotton and Charles Boyer always could project what was needed.
Thanks for sharing. I have not seen the Blue Gardenia. Do you recommend it?
Ayn Rand that she agreed with a letter-writer that
the movie was not as good as the book, but that it
was good enough, and she was pleased with it.
Have a great day!