RoR: Forum

Mr. Baker and Mr. Dickey, what do you think about posting Objectivist content on YouTube?

I ask because Brandon Cropper's Objectivist monologues on YouTube have become quite popular (his video archive is here).

Post 21

Wednesday, June 20, 2007 - 9:41am

Thanks, Stuart, for the Link.

Ted

Post 22

Wednesday, June 20, 2007 - 7:02pm

Wonderful posts, Stuart. I sanctioned them both.

They leave me wondering, though, do you hold that morality is intrinsic, in that moral truths are revealed rather than discovered?

Its clear that the truth isn't obvious to most people, so its difficult for me to morally condemn those who simply don't understand the alternatives. Even people who have read, and enjoyed, Atlas Shrugged. The book isn't the magic pill some think it is. Those who fail to grasp its shattering depth aren't necessarily critically morally flawed. Personally, I am unwilling to label them as such.

If Jolie is guilty of anything, it's tunnel-vision. What would you suggest to make her gaze turn? Are you convinced she understands the implications, and fundamental principles, of her own convictions? I'm not convinced she does.

Journalists like Stossel do an excellent job of panning out the issues. His focus is persuasive, rather than flatly condemning, like Bill O'Reilly, for example. Stossel understands the fundamentals. My point is that persuasion is key. How is a war of ideas won?
Through persuasion.

Post 23

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 5:04pm

If Jolie is in any way, shape, or form involved in the production of Atlas Shrugged it will NOT do Objectivism any justice.

Post 24

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 5:34pm

Is any actress good enough for "Objectivism," Eric?

Post 25

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 6:34pm

It is not the acting I would have an issue with, it's the fact that her philosophical premises are based on altruism, socialism, and collectivism that is the cancer of most of the Hollywood elite. With that said, how can she possibly be true to the novel and idea's represented therein unless she truly understands and grasps Objectivism and its ethics.

Post 26

Thursday, June 21, 2007 - 9:36pm

I'm one of the few people in this group who at least has my finger on the pulse of show business now and then. I have taken several classes here in Austin and know two people who worked on Quentin Tarantino's Grindhouse.

Atlas Shrugged doesn't need million-dollar actresses to do the movie justice. I could find a good Dagny Taggart here in Austin just by going to some of the parties here in town or by putting an ad out on AustinFilmCasting or maybe by simply making a few phone calls. I could fill all the other roles as well. And many of these people would be happy to do the major roles for probably $5,000 or less.

This can't happen, of course, because Peikoff sold off the rights to a studio which may very well have wanted to pigeon-hole the movie. Peikoff got the money, and that was probably all he cared about anyway.

Peikoff probably couldn't have foreseen that movie-making would be as cheap and easy as it is today. Ultimately, he should have just released the film rights into the public domain. But Peikoff cares about the money, even though he did absolutely nothing to create or produce Atlas Shrugged.

Big movie studios are big business. Like many big businesses, they are also big bureaucracies. These false starts on a film version of Atlas Shrugged come as no surprise. An small studio could do it just as well.

We know there's a market for it. It could go directly to video.

Post 27

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 12:23am

Ultimately, he should have just released the film rights into the public domain. But Peikoff cares about the money, even though he did absolutely nothing to create or produce Atlas Shrugged.

Why, that greedy, capitalist pig! How could he?!!!

Post 28

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 3:20am

With that said, how can she possibly be true to the novel and idea's represented therein unless she truly understands and grasps Objectivism and its ethics.

Probably the same way Tim Robbins was true to the character Andy Dufrense in Shawshank Redemption. Or Robin Williams in Mrs. Doubtfire. Or Patrick Swayze in Ghost.

Or Gerard Butler in 300.

The nature of the story, and the vision of a director, makes it difficult to be anything else but genuine for a talented actor.

Worry about who will direct, not who will act.

(Edited by Teresa Summerlee Isanhart on 6/22, 3:31am)

Post 29

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 10:14am

Teresa, those are excellent movies you mentioned, but they aren't movies about Objectivism, specifically, (though they may have some Objectivist idea's and values in them). Atlas Shrugged is a fascinating novel because it is written as a fictional story to delineate Objectivist philosophy. As I stated in a previous post, it's not the acting of Jolie, but her being involved in the production, which as most people know in film, means creative license.

Post 30

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 11:02am

That is an important point, Erik. It reminds of how the Charlie's Angels movies completely ruined the spirit of the TV series. One way was how Drew Barrymore insisted that the angels not use guns.

Many have pointed out that Hollywood butchers most books it makes into films. I wouldn't want to see it happen either.

By the way, what does everyone think of other film adaptations of her novels, mainly Fountainhead and We The Living?

Post 31

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 4:23pm

Teresa, those are excellent movies you mentioned, but they aren't movies about Objectivism, specifically, (though they may have some Objectivist idea's and values in them).

LOL! Um, I know that, Erik. My point was that you don't have to be an Objectivist, or a fearless ancient Greek king, in order to play one of those people convincingly. Thats what I'm talking about. If you want movies to be religious and dogmatic about how roles are assigned, we arn't going to have many, if any, movies made. At least, not many I'd want to see, that's for sure.

If you have a problem with Jolie's ability, that's one thing, but to claim she'll damage Objectivism some how by playing Dagny because she isn't an Objectivist, well, that's just nonsense.

Post 32

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 5:24pm

CB: "We know there's a market for it. It could go directly to video."

If it comes out as a regular movie soon, that may not happen, but another serious delay of a few years and you will see Sims doing scenes. How about the one where Francisco is about to tell Hank about the Strike but the klazon alarm sends them to the furnace where Franciso throws handsfull of clay at the taphole of the cauldron? How about the opening in The Theme, with Dagny on the train and Halley in her head? Or when she is in the office of the John Galt Line and the shadow torn by indecision crosses her window? Or any of a dozen others. These would be sketches, the kinds of small studies that an artist does preparing for a larger work.

Once computerists start on this, nothing anyone could do legally would be of much avail to stop it. China might (might) do something but suppose the website with it were in Burkino-Faso ... or Venezuela....

Post 33

Friday, June 22, 2007 - 8:45pm

Teresa, PLEASE read my posts thoroughly. It isn't her acting I said I have an issue with, but rather her involvement in production.

Post 34

Saturday, June 23, 2007 - 5:38am

Teresa, PLEASE read my posts thoroughly. It isn't her acting I said I have an issue with, but rather her involvement in production.

Indeed, Erik. The extent of Jolie's involvement is the acting, so either you're worried about the acting, or you're not, but you say you're not, so what the ef?

I can only conclude that you are, in fact, saying that one cannot play an Objectivist, or a king, unless one is, in reality, an Objectivist, or a king. Can't get much more concrete than that.

If its not the acting, I'm trying to imagine what other "involvement" you're worried about. Are you concerned over what Jolie might say about the film to Leno or Letterman? Oprah? Matt Lauer? Is she secretly planning to sabotage the entire production, and her own career, through talk, news show, and print interviews??

Or is Jolie simply so inept at articulating story lines, everyone will be completely turned off from seeing it or reading the book? I just don't understand this religious, Peikoffian exclusion some are expressing here.

I've watched most of Jolie's movies and I'm looking forward to seeing her new film, A Mighty Heart, about Mariane Pearl. I'm stuck by how sensitive she is to her characters and their context.

Post 35

Saturday, June 23, 2007 - 9:23am

Teresa, I'm not sure how many times I would have to repeat myself in order for you to understand what I've stated in all my previous posts, so this will be my last effort. Your ignorance is nauseating.
I am not condemning Jolie's ability to play the part of Dagney Taggart in the least, that is not my primary concern (as you should know by now). My concern would be her involvement in production capacity.
Howard and Karen Baldwin , who hold the rights to the novel, are producing WITH Media Talent Group exec. Geyer Kosinski, Jolie's manager! I find that cozy relationship between "producer" Kosinski and "manager" Kosinski a bit suspect in terms of Jolie just strictly doing the acting without also being involved in production herself. We will see...

Post 36

Saturday, June 23, 2007 - 9:41am

According to an interview in Access Hollywood Jolie reportedly said: "The thing with 'Atlas' is just, WE all feel that it's one of those projects where if you can't do it right, you really can't touch it. So WE have not had all the pieces come together. There's not been a director that's right to come on, or all of those elements. So until it does, you know, I certainly don't want to be a part of something that's just put together to hit 'this date.'"

What's with all this "we" stuff? She sounds very much like a producer and not just an actress.

Post 37

Saturday, June 23, 2007 - 11:57am

I have to agree with Erik on one point at least; most big name actors nowadays have some "producer" involvement with their projects. (Kiefer Sutherland is a "producer" of his show 24; William Petersen, star of CSI, is also a producer of that show, and so on. This is quite common. Actors are not just the "talent" anymore, most of them are smart enough to get involved in much bigger way.)

I have no doubt that Jolie will be a "producer" of the Atlas movie; but as far as what her influence would look like and how it would affect the movie, I have no informed opinion. Erik's concerns may be justified, or not.

She is obviously a fan of the novel, but what if her perception of its message isn't exactly...correct?
This is possible if she is as big a liberal as Erik believes. I knew of a liberal woman (a sister of an acquaintance) who had this comment after reading AS,

"Objectivism is wacky. But Dagny was awesome!"

Talk about not "getting it"... she read Dagny as some strong ultra feminist type, and, in doing so, completely missed the point of every action Dagny took in the novel! (She was just there to show up the weak, loser males, I guess.)

I would hate to think that Angelina Jolie has a similar misconception of Dagny, (and that was never my impression)...but again, I don't know her.

Erica

Post 38

Saturday, June 23, 2007 - 2:59pm

Good grief,

Your ignorance is nauseating.

How typically belittling in a typically Pee-coughish way. You're getting all Pee-coughed about nothing.

Howard and Karen Baldwin , who hold the rights to the novel, are producing WITH Media Talent Group exec. Geyer Kosinski, Jolie's manager! I find that cozy relationship between "producer" Kosinski and "manager" Kosinski a bit suspect in terms of Jolie just strictly doing the acting without also being involved in production herself. We will see...

I have a sense you're going to hate the movie no matter how well it's done.

What's with all this "we" stuff? She sounds very much like a producer and not just an actress.

Geeze, the hand wringing must be killing you. So what? Sounds to me like "they" really care about it. Do you really have such a negative view of this woman, her abilities, and probably everyone else's, to think honesty and integrity is simply impossible without a sip from Pee-cough's challis?

Seriously, what is your big fat beef with Jolie having a hand at production?

Someone needs to write a book called "Leonard is Not Great (How Peikoff Poisons Everything)"

Post 39

Saturday, June 23, 2007 - 3:16pm