Movie Theater Atlas Shrugged

[theinvisibleheart]

Re: Atlas Shrugged

it's not even in RedBox's top 20 rentals.

Lack of popularity of this movie has very little to do with poor movie critiques or anti-Ayn Rand establishment.

There are movies which got poor review but did well on DVD and/or theaters and vice versa.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Ultimately, to do well, successful movie has to deliver what the general public wants, not what ONLY THE IDEOLOGUES WANT, but what folks who pay $$$ out of their own pocket want.

You can't SELL a movie just because it panders to WHAT ONE WANTS TO HEAR or CONFIRMS ONE'S POV.

Movie market doesn't work that way, unfortunately.
</span>
BTW, there are EXCELLENT low budget B movies such as 1997 "Cube." It all depends on content and how it's presented in visual, cinematic form.

If you read the reviews on this movie, reviews tend to fall into 2 categories: folks who didn't like it based on content/presentation and folks who loved it because it confirmed their ideological POV.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AlliedMarine</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Movies are first critiqued by a critic, for then a General Manager/Owner of a theater will read/watch previews of critiqued movie so that he/she may critique it as well as other regional/continental critics do for their regions or countries. Movies are usually fully made before any preview hits the public. Decisions are made to put movies out or b rate them and kick them thru before you and I ever get a chance to put an opinion in. </div></div>

 

[theinvisibleheart]

Re: Atlas Shrugged

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tigerbikes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Apparently the "professionals" hated it, while the audience liked it:

<span style="font-weight: bold">Rotten Tomatoes</span>

Dogtown, you are WAY off track. I suggest you read <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">Capitalism</span></span> by Ayn Rand for a better understanding... </div></div>

it did poorly both in theater and DVD market, both with professionals and general public, inside and outside of Hollywood.

But the movie did well with ideologues and people who already desired the movie before or around the time of release(basically follower of Ayn Rand/Objectivism).

By Ayn Rand's own philosophy, this movie was a total flop if the free market was the final arbiter of the value of the product.

As of November 2011, it grossed $4.7M in box office and $1.4M in DVD sales, way BELOW actual production cost.

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2011/ATLAS.php

 

[theinvisibleheart]

Re: Atlas Shrugged

The term "socialism" refers to (total or close to total) collective state ownership of goods/services. Old Soviet Union/China had it.

Even going back centuries in US history, US government and for that matter, most government, socialist or democratic or republic, almost always owned some goods/services. That doesn't make US government socialist or communism by any stretch of imagination.

The term "fascist" usually refers to single party authoritarian government. It can't be really applied to US government as it exists right now because for one, we have 2 party system, and for another reason, votes do make a difference(it's not fixed).

As for Ayn Rand's books being a good primer on capitalism, books and writings by Joseph Schumpeter are considered seminal in the arena of capitalism/role of entrepreneurship.

Ayn Rand's work is mostly at the level of popularization of basic economic theory/philosophy and was most probably shaped by her early upbringing in Communist Soviet Union(after she immigrated to US, she was for a time, involved in anti-Communism and pro-free market activism).

Ayn Rand's understanding of market and human nature has long being surpassed in peer reviewed fields due to advances in cognitive psychology and role of institutional structure in how market work.

Today, Rand's understanding of human nature and free market economics would be considered too simplistic and naive(to put it kindly). For example, we now know that emotion and intuition have their places in acquiring knowledge(Rand advocated reasoning based on what is known as the sole/supreme means of acquiring knowledge).

Due to advances in cognitive studies, we now know that much of what we think we know is wrong and highly biased, to say the least. In fact, just reading the posts on this thread praising the quality of the movie should give you a clue on that.

As for her advocacy of free market model, there are various highly successful economic model in the world that are a mix of both free market and heavy government involvement(e.g., Singapore model).

You can read it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Singapore

Government involvement in market economy doesn't equate to socialism or Communism or Fascism.

Lastly, evidence is emerging that the fall of Communism in Soviet Union may be due less to hard line push by Pres. Reagan and more due to Soviet equivalent of crony capitalism.

Apparently, starting with Brezhnev in 1960s, various arms industry segment of Soviet Union started buying influences w/in the Soviet government and Communist Party, and by 1970s, actual defense spending by Soviet Union had very little to do with actual military need, both in terms of amount of spending and direction(what the money is being spent on).

Defense industry w/in Soviet Union had became the equivalent of tail wagging the dog, starting the economic downfall of Communism(by spending too much) that culminated in the fall of Soviet Union in 1990s

As for China, China is an excellent example of how market works (DYSFUNCTIONALLY) when government fails to regulate and stand on the side of business against consumer(this is changing).

It's not unknown in China for companies to poison their customers and/or slowly kill their workers/folks living in the area through highly toxic industrial pollution and contamination.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: brutus1776</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: theinvisibleheart</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The main theme of the book(fictional exposition of Ayn Rand's Objectivism, property/individual rights being squashed by regulations/central government) made more sense during Cold War when there was fear that Soviet Union would crush the West.</div></div>


i gotta disagree on that one. the book never made more sense than today. the US government has never ceased its push for central planning, nationalization, fascist and socialist controls over the economy. every day congress and the US government churn out thousands of pages of new regulations and taxes.

but you are generally right about other parts of the world, like china moving toward a free market and away from socialism.

this aside.. the movie was great. i was really impressed. i went into i thinking it was going to be horrible acting, horrible quality, but i was honestly impressed.
the movie theater crowd was just as described, mostly older folks, and everyone burst out clapping at the end.

cant wait for 2 and 3 to come out.
everyone should see it if they want to understand capitalism and the effects of governments suppressing it.


</div></div>

 

[theinvisibleheart]

Re: Atlas Shrugged

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dogtown</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I never understood why a book that promotes selfishness and a class level elitism as policy is so lauded by the faux populists of America? </div></div>

Ayn Rand is considered to be one of the founders of modern Conservatism, along with John Stuart Mills and Francis Schaefer.

If you are liberal, you want to read and understood books on conservatism and if you are conservative, you want to read and understand books on liberalism, that is, if you want to have a balanced POV.