The elites and industrialists of various industries who promote the progress of human society - the real top-level designers (the masters of human society), if they are unbearable from the bottom of the bottom, the mentally handicapped government uses equality as a weapon, and the collective strike disappears under the annoyance and pressure. Society would then be paralyzed and regressed -- that's what Rand is trying to articulate.
Read Greenspan's memoirs to understand that Greenspan and Rand belong to the same traditional American intellectuals and conservative Republicans on the moral spectrum.
It was only after I learned about Rand that I discovered that some predecessors had systematically formulated my moral philosophy and values as "objectivism".
So even if I didn't read the original book, I know the outline of the story and the author's point of view. It is known that the content and connotation of the film adapted from this are not only the complex plot and story background, but also the discussion of the social economic system and the philosophical viewpoint of social value based on the story.
And this kind of film adaptation with complex stories and deep metaphors has always been a "box-office main force". If the publicity in the early stage is not done well, and if there is a little carelessness, this kind of ambitious behavior of adapting the ideological giant system will become an unpopular schedule in a certain year and a certain month.
At the same time, because the original work is difficult to present, it is easy to become a word-of-mouth poison at the same time.
Compared with the best-selling of the original book, let me talk about my opinion:
First of all, everyone knows that "Atlas Shrugged" is the top 10 best-selling book in the United States. But readers and moviegoers in the rational late twentieth century West—that is, historically—may not count as two cultural consumer groups.
However, no matter where in the world today, it is estimated that the reading consumer group and the film consumer group are basically two distinct cultural groups. To apply Rand's principle: At present, people who read, especially readers like "Atlas Shrugged" It can be counted as Rand's so-called rationalists, or those creators who have disappeared one after another in the film; and the mainstream of the film's cultural consumer groups is the masses, irrationalists and egalitarians in the show.
Secondly, I think there are two reasons for the sales of the original book:
1. The book was published in the 1950s when the mainstream Western media intellectuals were still rationalistic. Even the dissent from a large number of left-wingers made the number more popular.
2. The viewpoints in the book, especially the business ethics part, appeal to the interests of conservative economic groups. As a result, the book may have been a classic reading for expounding the concept of free capital market in the following years, and it has been in constant demand in different eras.
And none of the above two reasons for the original book's bestsellers could make the film adaptation a hit in a contemporary age where trash culture and anti-intellectualism are rampant. Because almost the vast majority of box office contributors probably don't know about the book or even the movie. Their reasons for contributing to fast food culture are completely different from the reasons why the originals were popular.
For the above reasons, I don't know whether the producers fully considered it when the film started, and if so. Then this unsold result should be expected and acceptable.
And this unexpected failure should never change the cast of the first such beautiful cast... Dagny is the perfect type of woman in my mind, intelligent, elegant, rational, perseverance, tenacity, nobility, I believe it is also Rand's perfect idea spokesperson. Taylor Schilling interprets the character well. I haven't seen the second movie, so I can't imagine such a perfect woman being any other way, and that's why I won't go to the second movie.
One more point - about the significance of filming the second film with the original crew at all costs - in fact, it is the same as the original to the skepticism of the Keynesianism after the Great Depression and the Western economy and society until then: the filmmakers are completely skeptical. There is reason to adapt the film adaptation of "Atlas Shrugged" as an adaptation of the original work of the role of the defender of the liberal market economic system from a graphic textbook into a three-dimensional textbook. And vigorously publicize the blockbuster adaptation of the classic blockbuster that XXX influenced the intellectuals of the N generation, and do a good job of gimmicks to promote it vigorously!
What is it used for?
It is used to question and remind the current Obama administration not to overly believe in big government and interventionist policies, and not to support the idea of calling the rich to sacrifice themselves and the universal medical insurance that the people are forced to give them. And Dongdong, let alone learn the social concept of excessive social welfare and egalitarianism in Europe. It is necessary to promote freedom, competition and elite consciousness, which is the foundation of the United States. It is also necessary to believe that the promotion of the progress of human society and the intelligent system design are the contributions of a few elites, while egalitarianism and verbal altruism are just assholes. , diaosi, slobs, hooligans, anti-intellectuals, the likely result of such a policy is social regression and paralysis—as laid out in the Rand book.
View more about Atlas Shrugged: Part I reviews
