Movie Review: “Atlas Shrugged: Part 1”
By JIM BROOKS
The Nelson County Gazette
Sunday, April 25, 2011, 11:45 p.m. — As someone who discovered Ayn (rhymes with “mine”) Rand only 20-some years ago, I long wondered why there hadn’t been a film version of her blockbuster 1957 novel, “Atlas Shrugged.” After all, Rand’s earlier novel, “The Fountainhead,” became the 1949 film of the same name starring Gary Cooper and Patricia O’Neal.
Why not “Atlas?”
One reason is the complexity of the book and its sheer size: Depending on the printed format, “Atlas Shrugged” easily runs more 1,300 pages in length. Condensing “Atlas” into a script that would fill 110 minutes was an impossible task.
I have been a fan of the novel since I first read it; the points it makes struck a chord with this writer. In this era of the expansion of Big Government, the idea of making money as a rational, moral and honorable goal is refreshing.
The movie covers the first third of the book, and while it at times has a rather rushed pace, it stays very close to the source material; almost too close. That’s why the actors who portray the main characters (industrial heroine Dagny Taggart, her brother James Taggart and steel magnate Hank Rearden) seem to lack dimension, emotion and warm-fuzziness – Rand wrote them that way.
That’s not a slam at Rand’s novel or the actor’s who portrayed these characters in the film. Like the novel, the characters are focused and driven to make things happen. Dagny Taggart needs steel rails to rebuild her railroad in the wake of her brother’s incompetence; Hank Rearden is the man who will deliver.
In this film version of the near future (2016), Dagny, Rearden and other industrialists who dare to build, create and earn profit from their labors find themselves facing criticism. Lobbyists, politicians and corrupt businessmen pool their resources to try to drain from these entrepreneurs the fruits of their success by regulating and appropriating their businesses, by taxing their profits, and nearly legislating them out of existence.
One of the problems a movie faces is that it can never be as complete or as complex as a book. The millions of people who have read “Atlas Shrugged” have created in their minds the image of how the characters “should” look. From my perspective as a Rand fan and “Atlas” devotee, the movie still did an admirable job of getting it right.
Taylor Schilling does a credible job of portraying Dagny Taggart, while Matthew Marsden’s version of her brother, James Taggart, didn’t quite fit the mental image I had of the corrupt, sniveling railroad president. Marsden’s version of the character showed more originality and ambition than I recall from the novel. Grant Bowler’s casting as steel magnate Hank Reardon was excellent; Bowler comes across as a credible, hard-driving entrepreneur and businessman.
My wife – who hasn’t read the book – said the characters seemed to lack warmth and humanity. While Rand did write them this way, the book affords the reader a greater sense of the characters’ humanity with its use of flashbacks of their childhoods and early careers. Without the benefit of that background, the character of unscrupulous South American playboy Francisco D’Anconia has much less mystery in the movie than in the novel. But even with the fast pace of the movie, my wife picked up on the important points of Francisco’s character, and why his actions were a mystery to former love Dagny Taggart.
Dagny is an executive at her family’s railroad, Taggart Transcontinental. Her brother James is president, though his mismanagement has cost the railroad millions. Dagny spends her time cleaning up his messes and keeping the railroad profitable.
A major derailment of a Taggart train in Colorado puts focus on the lack of maintenance of Taggart’s track. In order to serve Colorado – an area that in this future world has become home to an industrial renaissance – Taggart must rebuild its rail line. Her brother’s backroom dealings have been unable to get the job done; Dagny knows the Colorado line is the only thing that can save her company and she turns to Hank Rearden’s steel mills for the rail.
Rearden, while a married man, finds in Dagny Taggart someone who shares his values of individualism, personal responsibility and profiting from your labors. The sparks that fly aren’t only limited to the scenes in Rearden’s steel mill.
The conflict – man’s economic freedom vs. an oppressive government being wielded as a weapon against its own citizens – creates more drama than you might suppose from reading the first third of the book. Credit goes to the writers for framing the story well; they had a lot of material to cover. Despite the limited appeal of the main characters, you wind up wanting them to win.
On the Brooks rating scale, “Atlas” gets five stars out of five – partly because this is a movie that’s been a long-time coming; partly because the writers and director were smart enough to do no harm to the core of Rand’s message; and partly because of the difficulty in crafting a movie from the philosophical subject matter.
The movie is a must-see for Rand fans, and recommended for those who might be curious. It won’t entertain young children; proponents of Big Government; or those whose idea of a great film includes ninjas, pirates or vampires.
My wife and I saw the film at Cinemark Tinseltown USA, 4400 Towne Center Drive, just off the Gene Synder Freeway at Westport Road. The seating there is fabulous, and the ticket prices – particularly the matinee – are very reasonable.
-30-
