Who is John Galt? (hint: he may be played by Brad Pitt) - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

MSD · 10-11-2007, 06:33 PM

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...goryid=13&cs=1

Quote:

Ayn Rand's most ambitious novel may finally be brought to the bigscreen after years of false starts.

Lionsgate has picked up worldwide distribution rights to "Atlas Shrugged" from Howard and Karen Baldwin ("Ray"), who will produce with John Aglialoro.

As for stars, book provides an ideal role for an actress in lead character Dagny Taggart, so it's not a stretch to assume Rand enthusiast Angelina Jolie's name has been brought up. Brad Pitt, also a fan, is rumored to be among the names suggested for lead male character John Galt.

"Atlas Shrugged," which runs more than 1,100 pages, has faced a lengthy and circuitous journey to a film adaptation.

The Russian-born author's seminal tome, published in 1957, revolves around the economic collapse of the U.S. sometime in the future and espouses her individualistic philosophy of objectivism. The violent, apocalyptic ending has always posed a challenge but could prove especially so in the post-9/11 climate.

Howard Baldwin said some people have pigeonholed "Atlas" as better suited for a miniseries. That's why he sometimes pondered turning "Atlas" into two movies. In fact, a two-part script penned by James V. Hart ("Contact") for the Baldwins envisions "Atlas" as two pics, although it's likely to be reworked.

For years, producer Al Ruddy tried to make Rand's definitive book into a movie, attracting the interest of Clint Eastwood, Robert Redford and Faye Dunaway at one point.

But while Rand was still alive, she had script approval, complicating the process. After the author's death in 1982, Ruddy continued his efforts and, in 1999, he inked a pact to produce "Atlas" as a miniseries for TNT. Ultimately, the deal faltered.

In 2003, the Baldwins acquired the film rights to the novel from Aglialoro, a New York businessman, after launching Crusader Entertainment with Philip Anschutz. Hart was hired at that time to adapt.

Anschutz, however, ultimately decided not to make the movie.

The Baldwins then took the project with them when they left Crusader and formed the Baldwin Entertainment Group.

"What we've always needed was a studio that had the same passion for this project that we and John have," said Baldwin,

Generally speaking, Lionsgate keeps production budgets below $25 million. "Atlas" is likely to cost north of $30 million, but the studio will reduce its exposure through international pre-sales and co-financing partners. Actors would likely take less money upfront -- a common practice for the indie.

Rand's individualistic and character-driven stories have captured the imagination of Hollywood before. Warner Bros. made "The Fountainhead," starring Gary Cooper as the maverick architect Howard Roark, in 1949.

Oliver Stone was attached to direct a remake of "Fountainhead" for Warner Bros. and Paramount, but the project has languished in development. Along the way, Pitt expressed interest in playing Roark.

So, after The Fountainhead bombed half a century ago, someone has decided to take a 1500-page book, for which the author had writen a script as a TV miniseries, and cram it into a movie fit for US audiences.

Will it be four hours of John Galt's radio address broken up by 15-minute scenes of Angelina Jolie smoking and/or fucking every male character? Can anyone sit through Galt's radio address without running to the concession stand so they can buy Twizzlers with which they can gouge out their eardrums? Will it be worse than Battlefield Earth, or a mockery of the book like Starship Troopers?

I can't help thinking two things:

1: I'll go see it no matter how bad it is because I can't just ignore something like this
2: Christopher Walken should be John Galt.

ngdawg · 10-11-2007, 07:07 PM

Because of the length of the book, I was always loathe to try reading it, but I can guarantee this:
Hollywood, being what it is collectively, will tromp all over the narrative, claim 'artistic license' and basically release something of little semblance to the original, yet declare that the "essence" of Rand's statement was retained.

They should make Rand's "Anthem" instead. Small book, very few characters(only two main characters, actually) and not a lot of blatant political pontification.

Manic_Skafe · 10-11-2007, 07:43 PM

Maybe John Galt's radio address will be a podcast?

Horrible.

drego · 10-11-2007, 08:28 PM

Hhhhhmmmm......can't see any way possible this is going to turn out good. I love the book, but I don't think even the underlying theme is going to get a warm welcome.

~Drego

Ustwo · 10-11-2007, 09:04 PM

Hehe well starship troopers was a very political book and look what that got turned into.

I can't even imagine the horror they do to Ayn Rand.

My guess is most of Hollywood wouldn't even understand it well enough to twist it.

QuasiMondo · 10-11-2007, 10:20 PM

Hell, look what they did with Asimov's "I, Robot" The land is littered with good books they've ruined.

ziadel · 10-11-2007, 10:33 PM

*sigh*

MSD · 10-11-2007, 10:45 PM

By the way, I doubt this will ever actually happen. The idea has been kicking around since Rand had a script written for a miniseries back in the '70s and nothing has come of it yet. If it is made, I'll see it then regret it immediately.

roachboy · 10-12-2007, 06:55 AM

well, there are a few ways to look at this.

in general, why would you look for or expect--or even really want---a "faithful" adaptation of a novel into cinema?
the forms are entirely different: they do not and cannot do the same things.

one that worked kinda is raul ruiz's version of proust's "time regained"----but it was so close to the book that if you hadn't read and remembered it in considerable detail, the film would not make sense.

michael haneke's version of kafka's "the castle" tried and was ok, mostly (for me) because i liked the actor who played barnabas (the messenger from the castle)...and i love haneke's films for the most part--but this one wasn't so great.

straight narrative books are different--"the getaway" and "the grifters" and "black and white in color" are all great adaptation of jim thompson novels...

films that are among my favorites--like kobayahi's "kwaidan"--use the texts are jump-off points, retaining some elements, tweaking others, adding alot. they aren''t the same---they're kind of loosely parallel, addressing the same kind of questions, that sort of thing.

the forms aren't the same so i dont see the point of looking for, requiring or even wanting a translation from text to film.

i detest ayn rand and i really detest this book.
if you want a self-indulgent fantasy that enables an adolescent sense of one's own superiority to be reinforced and routed through a philosophical framework, read nietzsche's zarathustra.

Ustwo · 10-12-2007, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

i detest ayn rand and i really detest this book.

I for one am shocked, SHOCKED I say

roachboy · 10-12-2007, 03:12 PM

i considered not putting up information that shocking, ustwo...but my inner john waters won out. think "pink flamingos" the last sequence. i do it all the time.

the film adaptation question seemed more interesting than the shock value of my dislike for the purple prose that puts ayn rand in a league that ann rice is these days obviously aspiring to reach...why would anyone want to see a film that tries to very faithfully duplicate a book when they have the book and can read it? film does other things..

JStrider · 10-12-2007, 03:44 PM

I've got very mixed feelings about them doing this movie

I just dont see how they could do it as a single movie and have it work.

if they were to divide the book up into its 3 seperate sections and do a movie on each one then maybe they could have enough of the original into the movies.

I really think that doing the book justice would be practically impossible

Elphaba · 10-12-2007, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JStrider

I've got very mixed feelings about them doing this movie

I just dont see how they could do it as a single movie and have it work.

if they were to divide the book up into its 3 seperate sections and do a movie on each one then maybe they could have enough of the original into the movies.

I really think that doing the book justice would be practically impossible

I agree that the book can't be minimized into a single film. Even though Atlas has a cult-like and political following, I don't see the needed paying customers to make it into three films, as was done with the Trilogy.

I think this project is doomed to failure either by enforced brevity, or the expense of extending the story into multiple films. The book is primarily cerebral in nature and to reduce it to a movie-friendly action driven plot would be a travesty to the intent of the book.

MSD · 10-12-2007, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JStrider

I've got very mixed feelings about them doing this movie

I just dont see how they could do it as a single movie and have it work.

if they were to divide the book up into its 3 seperate sections and do a movie on each one then maybe they could have enough of the original into the movies.

I really think that doing the book justice would be practically impossible

But how would they justify two more after the first one bombed?

You can't make a watchable film out of a book whose climax is a two-hour speech espousing philosophy that most of the audience would find abhorrent.

Seaver · 10-13-2007, 06:56 AM

Quote:

in general, why would you look for or expect--or even really want---a "faithful" adaptation of a novel into cinema?
the forms are entirely different: they do not and cannot do the same things.

I have to disagree, simply look at Band of Brothers. It was not a "film," but the miniseries did the book 100% justice in my opinion. That says a lot, because I absolutely loved the book. The way you get to intimately know almost every one of the original members of the Company, and you follow them throughout the entire war.

Baraka_Guru · 10-13-2007, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

in general, why would you look for or expect--or even really want---a "faithful" adaptation of a novel into cinema?
the forms are entirely different: they do not and cannot do the same things.

This is at the core of the matter. The forms are inherently different. No matter how "faithful" an adaptation, the two products will still stand as vastly different.

Without getting too technical, the reason behind this is based in the function of language. A film tends to simplify things by showing you scenes, whereas in literature, the multiplicity of meaning is rooted in our individual interpretation of words and the values we place on them. There are thousands of words you cannot record on film, especially when you consider utterance as being distinct from symbol. Linguist Ferdinand de Saussure's idea of the sign (sign = signified|signifier) helps us see the relationship between form (signified) and concept (signifier). Consider the variances between the signifiers of film and literature. In film, a signified tree is revealed as a signifier by the filming an actual tree. In literature, the signifier is written as "tree," which brings up all sorts of connotations to various readers. Even in this simple example, we see a disparity in a most common object.

Such is the machine at work when we see the processes that go into filming literature.

pai mei · 10-14-2007, 10:59 PM

I listened to half the "Atlas Shrugged" book. I see they solved the problem of the impossible perpetual growth and prosperity with a free energy machine

Nothing mentioned about the destruction of the planet for profits, and they try to say that all the people have an equal chance to get rich, but some are just too stupid and can only work for the smart ones - not true

MSD · 10-15-2007, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pai mei

I listened to half the "Atlas Shrugged" book. I see they solved the problem of the impossible perpetual growth and prosperity with a free energy machine

Nothing mentioned about the destruction of the planet for profits, and they try to say that all the people have an equal chance to get rich, but some are just too stupid and can only work for the smart ones - not true

Do you really think that there's nobody out there who doesn't have the capability to succeed? People are not equal in ability or intelligence.

pai mei · 10-16-2007, 08:38 AM

It is true for people who start of with equal chances, but people almost never start like that. How many children from the entire world had the chance to play golf ? Few, that means Tiger Woods is not the best of the world, he is the best from those who had the chance

Ustwo · 10-16-2007, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pai mei

It is true for people who start of with equal chances, but people almost never start like that. How many children from the entire world had the chance to play golf ? Few, that means Tiger Woods is not the best of the world, he is the best from those who had the chance

No hes the best golfer in the world. Maybe hes not the best potential golfer, that we don't know, but he is the best in the world.

Not sure what the point of the discussion on this is really, but thought I'd point that out.

LazyBoy · 10-16-2007, 11:53 AM

Christopher Walken is the man....and I digress

-Will

hotzot · 10-19-2007, 10:21 AM

I hated that book!!! I took me forever to get through it!

Telluride · 10-27-2007, 01:09 PM

This movie will suck...as do most movies based on books. There is way too much to the story to fit it into a two or three hour movie. This needs to be a 15 hour mini-series at least.

For the record: I actually liked the Starship Troopers movie. I just wished they hadn't tried to connect it to Heinlein's book, since the two had little in common.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct

Do you really think that there's nobody out there who doesn't have the capability to succeed? People are not equal in ability or intelligence.

Some people take the "we're all created equal" line too seriously. Some people are smart. Some aren't. Some have athletic ability. Some don't. Etc, etc, etc.

biznatch · 10-29-2007, 10:18 PM

I have never read anything from Ayn Rand, but I do know that not all movies based on books suck. However, I agree that making a good movie adaptation based on a book with everything told the same way would require a really dumb book (as dumb as those novellizations of movies).
If you're making a movie out of a book, you almost have to change things, but it's not necessarily for the worst. Look at Jurassic Park. Excellent book, good enough movie, even though so much was lost in the process of adaptation.
I want someone to make a faithful-enough adaptation of "The 39 Steps", by John Buchan.

Manic_Skafe · 10-30-2007, 03:11 PM

Yeah, not every movie based upon a movie is terrible. From the top of my head I can think of a few that were at least decent: Minority Report, The Virgin Suicides, Blade Runner, A Scanner Darkly, Factotum and Marquez's Love In The Time Of Cholera seems promising. Certain authors writing styles definitely help towards creating movies and adaptations out of their works but it has been done before and in some cases - it's been done pretty well.

The idea that you could produce a good movie by taking a book that took me over a month to read and condensing it down to 2-3 hours doesn't seem like a good idea to me - but even I have some hope.

FallenAvatar · 10-30-2007, 09:05 PM

I really don't know what to say. I really liked Atlas Shrugged but I think a movie about it would bomb.

10-11-2007, 07:43 PM	#3 (permalink)
Manic_Skafe More Than You Expect Location: Queens	Maybe John Galt's radio address will be a podcast? Horrible. __________________ "Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian

10-11-2007, 08:28 PM	#4 (permalink)
drego Upright Location: WA......somewhere....I hope......	Hhhhhmmmm......can't see any way possible this is going to turn out good. I love the book, but I don't think even the underlying theme is going to get a warm welcome. ~Drego __________________ There is no such thing as "Bug Free" software....there is only software with an acceptable (and documented) level of failure. Hack the Planet!!!!

10-11-2007, 09:04 PM	#5 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Hehe well starship troopers was a very political book and look what that got turned into. I can't even imagine the horror they do to Ayn Rand. My guess is most of Hollywood wouldn't even understand it well enough to twist it. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

10-11-2007, 10:20 PM	#6 (permalink)
QuasiMondo Wise-ass Latino Location: Pretoria (Tshwane), RSA	Hell, look what they did with Asimov's "I, Robot" The land is littered with good books they've ruined. __________________ Cameron originally envisioned the Terminator as a small, unremarkable man, giving it the ability to blend in more easily. As a result, his first choice for the part was Lance Henriksen. O. J. Simpson was on the shortlist but Cameron did not think that such a nice guy could be a ruthless killer. -From the Collector's Edition DVD of The Terminator

10-11-2007, 10:33 PM	#7 (permalink)
ziadel Myrmidon Location: In the twilight and mist.	sigh __________________ Ron Paul '08 Vote for Freedom Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

10-11-2007, 07:07 PM	#2 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	Because of the length of the book, I was always loathe to try reading it, but I can guarantee this: Hollywood, being what it is collectively, will tromp all over the narrative, claim 'artistic license' and basically release something of little semblance to the original, yet declare that the "essence" of Rand's statement was retained. They should make Rand's "Anthem" instead. Small book, very few characters(only two main characters, actually) and not a lot of blatant political pontification.

10-11-2007, 10:45 PM	#8 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	By the way, I doubt this will ever actually happen. The idea has been kicking around since Rand had a script written for a miniseries back in the '70s and nothing has come of it yet. If it is made, I'll see it then regret it immediately.

10-12-2007, 06:55 AM	#9 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	well, there are a few ways to look at this. in general, why would you look for or expect--or even really want---a "faithful" adaptation of a novel into cinema? the forms are entirely different: they do not and cannot do the same things. one that worked kinda is raul ruiz's version of proust's "time regained"----but it was so close to the book that if you hadn't read and remembered it in considerable detail, the film would not make sense. michael haneke's version of kafka's "the castle" tried and was ok, mostly (for me) because i liked the actor who played barnabas (the messenger from the castle)...and i love haneke's films for the most part--but this one wasn't so great. straight narrative books are different--"the getaway" and "the grifters" and "black and white in color" are all great adaptation of jim thompson novels... films that are among my favorites--like kobayahi's "kwaidan"--use the texts are jump-off points, retaining some elements, tweaking others, adding alot. they aren''t the same---they're kind of loosely parallel, addressing the same kind of questions, that sort of thing. the forms aren't the same so i dont see the point of looking for, requiring or even wanting a translation from text to film. i detest ayn rand and i really detest this book. if you want a self-indulgent fantasy that enables an adolescent sense of one's own superiority to be reinforced and routed through a philosophical framework, read nietzsche's zarathustra. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-12-2007, 03:12 PM	#11 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i considered not putting up information that shocking, ustwo...but my inner john waters won out. think "pink flamingos" the last sequence. i do it all the time. the film adaptation question seemed more interesting than the shock value of my dislike for the purple prose that puts ayn rand in a league that ann rice is these days obviously aspiring to reach...why would anyone want to see a film that tries to very faithfully duplicate a book when they have the book and can read it? film does other things.. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-12-2007, 03:44 PM	#12 (permalink)
JStrider Poo-tee-weet? Location: The Woodlands, TX	I've got very mixed feelings about them doing this movie I just dont see how they could do it as a single movie and have it work. if they were to divide the book up into its 3 seperate sections and do a movie on each one then maybe they could have enough of the original into the movies. I really think that doing the book justice would be practically impossible __________________ -=JStrider=- ~Clatto Verata Nicto

10-14-2007, 10:59 PM	#17 (permalink)
pai mei Insane	I listened to half the "Atlas Shrugged" book. I see they solved the problem of the impossible perpetual growth and prosperity with a free energy machine Nothing mentioned about the destruction of the planet for profits, and they try to say that all the people have an equal chance to get rich, but some are just too stupid and can only work for the smart ones - not true

10-16-2007, 08:38 AM	#19 (permalink)
pai mei Insane	It is true for people who start of with equal chances, but people almost never start like that. How many children from the entire world had the chance to play golf ? Few, that means Tiger Woods is not the best of the world, he is the best from those who had the chance

10-16-2007, 11:53 AM	#21 (permalink)
LazyBoy Insane Location: Memphis Area	Christopher Walken is the man....and I digress -Will __________________ Life is nothing, everything.....and something in between...

10-19-2007, 10:21 AM	#22 (permalink)
hotzot We're having potato pancakes! Location: stalag 13	I hated that book!!! I took me forever to get through it! __________________ The Bully Boys are here!

10-29-2007, 10:18 PM	#24 (permalink)
biznatch Junkie Location: France	I have never read anything from Ayn Rand, but I do know that not all movies based on books suck. However, I agree that making a good movie adaptation based on a book with everything told the same way would require a really dumb book (as dumb as those novellizations of movies). If you're making a movie out of a book, you almost have to change things, but it's not necessarily for the worst. Look at Jurassic Park. Excellent book, good enough movie, even though so much was lost in the process of adaptation. I want someone to make a faithful-enough adaptation of "The 39 Steps", by John Buchan. __________________ Check it out: The Open Source/Freeware/Gratis Software Thread

10-30-2007, 03:11 PM	#25 (permalink)
Manic_Skafe More Than You Expect Location: Queens	Yeah, not every movie based upon a movie is terrible. From the top of my head I can think of a few that were at least decent: Minority Report, The Virgin Suicides, Blade Runner, A Scanner Darkly, Factotum and Marquez's Love In The Time Of Cholera seems promising. Certain authors writing styles definitely help towards creating movies and adaptations out of their works but it has been done before and in some cases - it's been done pretty well. The idea that you could produce a good movie by taking a book that took me over a month to read and condensing it down to 2-3 hours doesn't seem like a good idea to me - but even I have some hope. __________________ "Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian Last edited by Manic_Skafe; 10-30-2007 at 03:16 PM..

10-30-2007, 09:05 PM	#26 (permalink)
FallenAvatar Psycho	I really don't know what to say. I really liked Atlas Shrugged but I think a movie about it would bomb. __________________ Fetch me the spirit, the son and the father, Tell them their pillar of faith has ascended.