Adventures in Netflix: Atlas Shrugged: Part I *

There are two types of people in this world, those who love Ayn Rand's landmark novel Atlas Shrugged and those that hate it.  I think the vast majority on both sides would agree, however, that it shouldn't have been made into a movie.

Truth be told, I fall more in the "love it" category, though I understand the arguments of those who don't share that view.  As a narrative, it's slow, clunky with a climax that comes in the form of a hundred-or-so-page monologue about economics and the morality of individual achievement.  The characters are, by and large, selfish jerks and the fact that Rand celebrates them for being that way turns a lot of people off.

As a bible for personal living, it's pretty terrible.  But, as an argument in favor of free markets and illustration of the catastrophic potential of a government that designs policies by notions of feel-goodery instead of efficiency, it's extremely effective.  And, I suppose that's why I like it.

Like many, I had my college libertarian phase wherein I read Atlas Shrugged and felt justified in being a jerk to everyone for about month.  That eventually wore off when I couldn't argue that drug companies should be completely self-regulating with a straight face.  But, I remain a small government conservative who believes that taxes should be relatively low and that, with some exceptions, government regulations should be designed to enhance the productivity of the marketplace and not to prevent every possible negative outcome.  And, in general, I believe that the government shouldn't be in the business of legislating morality.

In other words, I am more or less the target audience for this movie.  Yet, while some people will naturally hate this movie because of its subject matter, I hate this movie because it sucks.



The fact that the story Atlas Shrugged revolves around the railroad industry means that it's impossible to retell it in a modern setting without being ridiculous.  But, this is not a movie that lets ridiculousness stand in its way.

Instead of simply setting the movie in an alternate universe, they've set it in 2016.  After an oil embargo sends gas prices through the roof, trains once again become the preferred alternative to road and air travel.  Of course, given the fact that modern trains run on diesel and not on coal, that idea is just stupid.  But, whatever...perhaps they're saying that, by 2016, ethanol or biofuels will be sufficient, but I doubt that they thought that much about it.  Oh...and apparently, for the purposes of this movie only, conservatives are into high-speed rail.

Sweet.

Taylor Schilling (no, you've never heard of her) plays Dagny Taggart, Vice President of the Taggart Transcontinental Railroad.  After realizing that company's rails are in disrepair, Dagny decides to replace their entire line with Rearden Metal, a new material manufactured by one Hank Rearden, played by Grant Bowler.  The metal is lighter, stronger, and cheaper than any steel on the market.  So, naturally, people are afraid of it because it has the potential to put other companies out of business and make Rearden Steel too powerful.

Basically, this first entry in what is apparently intended to be a trilogy revolves around Dagny and Rearden's efforts to build this new rail line with this new material despite the efforts of the government and special interests.  The idea being that, though the world relies on the brilliance and ingenuity of people like Dagny and Rearden, it will stop at nothing to keep them from achieving too much.

There are, of course, other brilliant people in this world, but they are mysteriously disappearing.  If you've read the book, you know where they've gone.  If not, you'll have to wait for Atlas Shrugged II: Electric Boogaloo.  


I can't blame the filmmakers for the crappy production values as that's more a function of budget than anything else.  But, aside from the cheap look of it all, the movie's biggest problem is that it robs it's characters of anything resembling a backstory or inner monologue.  In the book, though the main characters are not always likable, they are understandable and occasionally admirable.  Here, because the script is more focused on moving through the events of the story than giving any depth to the characters, Dagny and Rearden are just a couple of a-holes who hate everyone and talk in pithy, unnatural sentences.

Relationships that take chapters of flashbacks to build are summed up in two lines of dialogue.  Motivations that are complex and, in many respects, completely justifiable, are simply glossed over in favor of character declarations that all they care about is money.

Of course, I understand that it's difficult translating Rand's ideas and characters from book to film.  But, that's precisely the point.  Several years back, Angelina Jolie was attached to a much higher profile effort to make an Atlas Shrugged movie.  At the time, rumor had it that Clint Eastwood was interested in directing.  Even then, I thought the movie was a bad idea.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trashing this movie simply because it failed to accomplish an impossible task.  I definitely think it's possible to make a poor Atlas Shrugged adaptation that is still objectively a good movie.  This is just not that movie.

During Atlas Shrugged's brief run in theaters, I remember being invited to some screenings hosted by conservative groups in DC.  People attending those screenings, from what I gathered, tended to enjoy the movie, which boggles my mind.

I know that it's rare that a movie with an overtly conservative political message ever sees the light of day, and I'm sympathetic to those that wish it was otherwise.  But, I'd hope that my fellow conservatives would refrain from evaluating "their" movies on such a patronizing grading curve.  As a movie, Atlas Shrugged fails in almost every respect -- from script to acting to visuals.  That being the case, I think it does disservice to the conservative worldview.

Ultimately, I'd argue that having no conservative movie is better than having a bad one.  And, sorry folks, this is a bad one.