"atlas shrugged" will change the face of american politics

[Immanuel]

Okay, I finally finished reading it.

Y'all can go ahead and post any spoilers you want now.

Long book but worth the read. I'm not sure how good of a movie it is going to make, but I enjoyed the book.

Immie

 

[Truthmatters]

Boy I hope the right plans on filming every Rand book.

its a good right wing fund drainer

 

[Big Fitz]

Again, the box-office results are in and again, Atlas Shrugged took a nosedive. The box office collapse continued in the third week of release. Instead of the 1000 screens the producers promised, the film ended April playing on 371 screens, with total sales on the third Friday down 58% from the previous Friday, marking the second consecutive week in which Friday ticket sales dropped more than 50% week over week.

The film dropped over 50% of its total weekend audience for the second time in a row as well to finish with less than half a million dollars ($403,000) and a drop in its per screen average to a pitiful thousand dollars a pop ($1,086).

After three weeks, the film has made back just $3.8 million of its $20 million dollar budget and plans to release it wider have been canceled due to its poor performance on even a limited number of screens. With the film set to recoup less than 25% of its budget, it's already one of the biggest flops of the year.

So, are the people who predicted a colossal success finally able to admit the film is dead and they were dead wrong, will you cling to the idea that I'm pronouncing it dead long before it's had a chance, or will you simply continue to avoid and ignore the thread like embarrassed cowards because things didn't go your way?

Well you can sleep soundly now. you're prediction of this films lack of commercial success seems to have come to pass.

Clutch your stuffed Che all the tighter and have pleasant dreams.

 

[konradv]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

 

[Big Fitz]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

 

[Bern80]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

I will say this. You haters with your shear idiocy and lack of anything reflecting a constructive argument and what it reduces you to is definatley more entertaininig than the movie. Immaturity? Look no further than what you just wrote.

 

[rightwinger]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

I will say this. You haters with your shear idiocy and lack of anything reflecting a constructive argument and what it reduces you to is definatley more entertaininig than the movie. Immaturity? Look no further than what you just wrote.

More entertaining than the movie?

Thanks for tipping us off. No wonder it flopped

 

[Bern80]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

I will say this. You haters with your shear idiocy and lack of anything reflecting a constructive argument and what it reduces you to is definatley more entertaininig than the movie. Immaturity? Look no further than what you just wrote.

More entertaining than the movie?

Thanks for tipping us off. No wonder it flopped

If you take being so stupid you're funny as a compliment, I guess I won't argue with you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Konrad couldn't get past "I am Sam. Sam I am."

 

[Smash_Hits]

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Konrad couldn't get past "I am Sam. Sam I am."

And Uncensored can barely read books that don't pander to his idiotic world-view.


All of Rand's work (with the possible exception of Anthem; that book could be considered good under some circumstances.) is shit, both from a philosophical and from a literary standpoint (and this is coming from someone who has read a fair amount of her books, as well as a fair amount about her philosophy). Her characters are essentially cardboard cutouts of what every immature conservative wants to be, her books advocate rape and domestic terrorism, and her philosophy is poorly conceived and effectively faith-based (not religious faith). The woman also worshipped sociopaths (including a serial killer who butchered a 12 year old girl), she demanded extreme devotion from her followers (while still "advocating individualism), controlling everything they read and listened to, and she was a racist.


But Anthem is still a pretty good book.

 

[konradv]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it. Picked it up 30+ years later to find out why. It's a terribly written book, with caricatures instead of characters, repeating the same mantras over and over. All in all a really terrible book, not to mention a political screed full of more holes than swiss cheese.

 

[Big Fitz]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it. Picked it up 30+ years later to find out why. It's a terribly written book, with caricatures instead of characters, repeating the same mantras over and over. All in all a really terrible book, not to mention a political screed full of more holes than swiss cheese.

Thanks for proving my point. Now if you were only able to GET my point.

 

[Bern80]

Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it. Picked it up 30+ years later to find out why. It's a terribly written book, with caricatures instead of characters, repeating the same mantras over and over. All in all a really terrible book, not to mention a political screed full of more holes than swiss cheese.

Of course they're caricatures. All kinds of works of fiction use the people in them to fill certain arch types. What is inherently wrong with that? Seriously, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the main 'heroes', Dagny, Hank, Galt, etc. are doing wrong. What is it you think they owed this fictional society? How did they wrong society at large through their actions?

 

[Uncensored2008]

All of Rand's work (with the possible exception of Anthem; that book could be considered good under some circumstances.) is shit, both from a philosophical and from a literary standpoint

Considered by whom? Uneducated and unthinking cretins such as you?

Another partisan blowhard spouts off about what he cannot grasp and therefore hates.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it.

So just like college itself, huh?

 

[editec]

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it. Picked it up 30+ years later to find out why. It's a terribly written book, with caricatures instead of characters, repeating the same mantras over and over. All in all a really terrible book, not to mention a political screed full of more holes than swiss cheese.

Of course they're caricatures. All kinds of works of fiction use the people in them to fill certain arch types. What is inherently wrong with that? Seriously, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the main 'heroes', Dagny, Hank, Galt, etc. are doing wrong. What is it you think they owed this fictional society? How did they wrong society at large through their actions?

In the framework of the artifical reality Rand created they're not doing ANYTHING wrong.

In fact, within the framework of the supended disbelief that every read must assume to get involved in any fiction, THEYRE HEROIC CHARACTERS.

Our objections aren't that the characters in the book are bad.

Our objections are to those of you who imagine that Rand's world in AS is descriptive of the world we live in.

Hell, if I lived in the fantasy world Rand created (one which I thoroughly enjoyed, I might add, when I read in the early 60s) I'd be trying to follow John Galt, too.

Such is the nature of FICTION.

 

[konradv]

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it. Picked it up 30+ years later to find out why. It's a terribly written book, with caricatures instead of characters, repeating the same mantras over and over. All in all a really terrible book, not to mention a political screed full of more holes than swiss cheese.

Thanks for proving my point. Now if you were only able to GET my point.

Since your points are pointless, who cares? Seems that you're the one that doesn't GET IT. The book was boring, sets up a scenario that has very little to do with and reality, but pretends to be a look into the future. You can't make that kind of leap when you're basing your thesis on caricatures than have very little relationship to the way people actually act and think. If THAT'S your point, bravo. If not, then I can only go back to may opinion on the chronic immaturity of the Randists.

 

[konradv]

Couldn't get past "Who is John Galt?" could you?

Just barely. Started it when in college but never finished it. Picked it up 30+ years later to find out why. It's a terribly written book, with caricatures instead of characters, repeating the same mantras over and over. All in all a really terrible book, not to mention a political screed full of more holes than swiss cheese.

Of course they're caricatures. All kinds of works of fiction use the people in them to fill certain arch types. What is inherently wrong with that? Seriously, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the main 'heroes', Dagny, Hank, Galt, etc. are doing wrong. What is it you think they owed this fictional society? How did they wrong society at large through their actions?

Fine, if you're only talking about the self-contained world of the book. If you're trying to make a statement about the real world, however, you'd have to do better than basing it on caricatures.

 

[Smash_Hits]

All of Rand's work (with the possible exception of Anthem; that book could be considered good under some circumstances.) is shit, both from a philosophical and from a literary standpoint

Considered by whom? Uneducated and unthinking cretins such as you?

Another partisan blowhard spouts off about what he cannot grasp and therefore hates.

Considered by, you know, INTELLIGENT people? Anthem is an intelligent book about the tendency of society to turn people into demographics and numbers.

I don't know why you'd call me uneducated; I wasn't aware you had access to the history of my education. I also realize that you failed to address the majority of my post. You can't really even seem to produce any argument for the philosophy, so maybe it is YOU who can not grasp the subject matter. I understand the the philosophy and intelligently disagree with it, while you just spew shit about how liberals can't understand it. Rather ironic, isn't it?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Considered by, you know, INTELLIGENT people?

What would a dolt such as yourself know of "intelligent people?"

Anthem is an intelligent book about the tendency of society to turn people into demographics and numbers.

How nice.

"Atlas Shrugged" is an intelligent book about the consequence of predation on the productive in a strike by self-same.

"We, the Living" is an intelligent book about life in Lenin's USSR including the mass starvation on 1923 and the adoption of the NEP when real communism utterly failed.

I don't know why you'd call me uneducated; I wasn't aware you had access to the history of my education.

Those who label political ideas they don't agree with as "stupid" are typically uneducated and pontificating from a position of ignorance.

If you oppose the ideas of Rand, fine; elucidate the flaws in her logic. Blanket condemnation as "stupid" merely reveals you as an unthinking partisan, blindly attacking the opposition.

You can't really even seem to produce any argument for the philosophy,

I have no need to do so.

If you have valid criticism, then offer it. The onus is upon you to support your argument, not upon me to disprove it.

I understand the the philosophy and intelligently disagree with it,

You offered nothing approaching intelligence in your post. Perhaps you would care to try again?