Archive | Literature RSS feed for this section

Movie Review: Atlas Shrugged Part 2

Underwhelmed by last year’s unsuccessful Atlas Shrugged Part 1, I attended the premiere of the independent sequel Atlas Shrugged Part 2, scheduled to open on October 12 in 900 theaters according to its backer, with low expectations. The upshot: it is both better than the first film and inferior in quality to what Ayn Rand’s epic novel deserves.

Still lacking understanding of Atlas Shrugged – which is a work of great literature ingeniously seeded with a philosophy for living – the filmmakers overstate, overact and generally overdo aspects of the novel and they minimize or omit key developments. For example, Rand’s brilliant tunnel scene, in which heroine Dagny Taggart’s transcontinental train is heading toward disaster due to incompetence caused by government control of the economy, is depicted with all elements in place except the most crucial: passengers on the train that are indicative of the population’s consent to slavery. Instead, passengers are condensed into a composite character – Kip Chalmers – leaving out that, on the story’s terms, there is a sense in which everyone on the train deserves what’s to come. In the novel, the scene is a gripping, horrifying moment of truth for people who have ignored, evaded or aided the rise of tyranny. In Atlas Shrugged Part 2, it’s a plot point to punish a smarmy politician and a transition to Dagny’s character arc.

In fact, the independent filmmakers, who are not Objectivists, not that they’d have to be to do justice to the book, make a point to portray the public as kind and supportive of the story’s heroes, the opposite of what Rand intended and wrote. Her heroes are individualists who happily but wearily carry on under enormous burdens; from brakemen to titans, they are lonely and alienated from a nation that’s lost its way and turned them out. But, here, when industrialist Henry Rearden (Jason Beghe) stands before the Unification Board, having violated the government’s new economic dictate the Fair Share Law, an assembled audience cheers for him. So it makes you wonder how the country ended up in the grip of looters. Depicting merely the politics, but not Rand’s morality, egoism, the movie doesn’t dramatize how society – falling apart with the cost to fill up the gas tank over $800 – is reduced to a vast wasteland. In other scenes, public reaction to the dictates is divided between Tea Party type opposition and Occupy-type anti-capitalism. The result is confusion with regard to what world Dagny inhabits.

The sequel continues the plot that the great minds are disappearing due to state-sponsored coercion, that Dagny and her lover Rearden – both more sexless here than in the first movie – take on the mooching and looting government and that Dagny, played with a more serious and plausible sense of purpose this time by Samantha Mathis, hires someone to solve the mystery of a potentially revolutionary motor. Facing the reality of total dictatorship, the men and women of ability – Dagny and Rearden, Eddie (Richard T. Jones), a coal producer (Arye Gross), Dagny’s machinery detective (Diedrich Bader) and, possibly, her childhood friend Francisco (Esai Morales) – race against time to keep the West in action before the bureaucrats and parasites, such as Mrs. Rearden (Kim Rhodes) and James Taggart (Patrick Fabian), destroy what’s left of what they know and love. The story is framed within an impossible aviation race and it achieves an exciting conclusion touched by science fiction.

Objectivists and those who have read and like Ayn Rand may find value in seeing certain beloved scenes on screen at last but Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is absent Rand’s mastery of thought, language and theme. The novel’s political plot points serve the story of a lifetime – a woman who runs a railroad longs to worship a man worthy of her admiration and wants to be happy here on earth – in a breathtaking tale that’s larger than life and, here, as in the first picture, it’s the other way around. Do not expect this movie, which is more deliberate, more purposeful and more compelling, to honor the grand literary foretelling of our dark and disturbing times which is Atlas Shrugged. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 is satisfying as political drama only if you know why capitalism is moral and only to the extent that you do. It’s the little things – Rearden’s razor-minded secretary Miss Ives reduced to office eye candy, Cherryl Brooks without a proper introduction, Dagny in hideous earrings – that keep you from mistaking a cable TV-ready warning about what’s wrong with the world for an epic tale of the men who move the world and what it takes to be one of them. Atlas Shrugged Part 2 may mean well – and in this rotting civilization, that is something – but Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged means, and still deserves, much more.

MSNBC Gets Ayn Rand Wrong

Microsoft’s media venture with NBC Universal’s NBC News, MSNBC, is at it again, propagandizing for the Obama administration and distorting the news, which it does nearly full-time with its roster of former Democratic Party operatives (Chris Matthews, Lawrence O’Donnell), most favored former government spouses (Mrs. Alan Greenspan, Andrea Mitchell, who never discloses that fact), and lying Christian preachers such as its new host, the Reverend Al Sharpton. Now, they’re lying about Ayn Rand.

In yesterday’s broadcast of the cable news channel’s Rachel Maddow program, the hostess, who had railed against Tea Party Republicans for refusing to compromise with the Obama administration, calling the nation’s imminent so-called default an “apocalyptic deadline”, interviewed an old Washington Post journalist named E.J. Dionne and promptly missed her cue by mispronouncing the name Ayn Rand. The pompous hostess makes a habit of snorting and sniffing her way through all sorts of other people’s mistakes, so one would think she would be more careful. It’s Ayn, pronounced like the word mine, not Ann as she stated. Then Ms. Maddow proceeded to let her guest completely misrepresent Rand and her famous novel, The Fountainhead. In the video segment, linked here in its entirety with the errors contained at approximately 14:00, Dionne falsely stated that the 1943 novel by Ayn Rand is her first. The Fountainhead is not her first novel. That was We the Living.

Dionne, in a set-up segment which was clearly discussed if not rehearsed in advance, proceeded to falsely assert that, in The Fountainhead, when the main character doesn’t get his way, he “blows up a building”. Wrong, E.J. Dionne. Not only is the insinuation that the novel’s protagonist, architect Howard Roark, cavalierly acts on a whim when he doesn’t get what he wants, a total misrepresentation of the novel; to state that Roark “blows up a building” is to distort the plot and theme of Rand’s literary masterpiece, a bestseller still in print which has sold millions of copies and is taught in schools across the country. What E.J. Dionne (and Ms. Maddow and MSNBC by refusing to correct these errors) fail to grasp is that it’s his building, in every sense, and that’s the point of the novel. Roark created the building, contracted for its exact design and construction on simple, narrowly defined terms and one basic condition, and it is essentially his to destroy.

Expecting the lowest standards of journalism from this corrupt media outlet, which I have defended, even praised, in the past, is too much. Errors and distortions are routine in MSNBC programming (Dionne’s error originates in his commentary in the similarly slanted Washington Post), though welfare state and status quo advocate Dionne’s failure to grasp the concept of property ownership comes with the territory. It took eight months for Newsweek to correct MSNBC pundit Howard Fineman’s smear against Ayn Rand following my blog post about his mistake. With any luck and the help of an MSNBC or Post intern or executive with integrity and a mind of his or her own, Maddow’s and Dionne’s attempt to disparage Ayn Rand and the Tea Party movement won’t stand uncorrected that long. Don’t count on it and get used to the lies and distortions. The rich and powerful intellectual fusion of the press and the state, best exemplified by MSNBC, more than state-sponsored NPR and PBS, knows that they’re fighting the philosophy of Ayn Rand. The contest is just getting started.

[7/24/2011 Update: No response to my request for a correction from E.J. Dionne at the Washington Post]

[12/08/2011 Update: Still no response to my request for a correction from E.J. Dionne at the Washington Post]