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.
