| | If a real Objectivist made this movie, it would be tremendously boring. There are two reasons why The Fountainhead came off as well as it did[1]: Rand wrote the screenplay; and she was not an Objectivist at that time.
This is a change from one medium to another.
Lord of the Rings as a movie lacked all the philology of the books, but how would that have fit in?
Cinema does not consist of a camera on someone reading from a book.
A "philosophical" movie portrays actions.
In The Fountainhead, we learn everything we need to know about Toohey when he says, "I play the stockmarket of the soul... and I sell short..." He said plenty enough. And he did not need to cackle and twist his moustache like Snidely Whiplash because he was not in a grade school play. He conveyed all of that in his delivery of the line. That is what it means to be a professional actor. It is why they get the big bucks.
Citizen Kane said it all in the title: Kane = Cain, get it? But he is honored with the only title our democracy can give, "citizen" and it is not "Charles Foster Kane, U.S. Citizen." Can you not understand how this works on the back of the mind, as intended by the creator, writer, director and star, Orson Welles?
When you look at The Last Supper, do you need a flashing neon arrow over Jesus? (Son of God... Son of God...) Does Peter need a cartoon balloon with words, "Is it I, Lord?" If you do not see it, you must be blind and there are none so blind as those who will not see.
According to IOE perception is automatic. I say that perception requires that the mind be engaged.
If you do not like what you see when the movie is released, get yourself some Simulation Software and an Animation Program and make your own. You can have Marilyn Monroe and Gary Cooper and John Willkes Booth speaking for 1084 pages if that is what you want.
[1] I also point out that as a "cinematograph" The Fountainhead failed. All they did was film a stage play. The scene where Dominique pulls up at the guard shack was a model car, not a real car shot from a height. Rand (and apparently King Vidor) had not yet made the conceptual leap, the paradigm shift, to what film could do. Other movies -- Howard Hughes' Test Pilot, for instance, did.
Wings (1927): "In contrast to co-star Richard Arlen, 'Charles 'Buddy' Rogers did not know how to fly a plane when production began, but he learned how to do so by the end of it. In the close-up scenes where Jack and David (and other characters) are flying, the actors are actually working the planes themselves. To shoot these scenes, the actors had to get the plane up in the air, keep it up, turn on the (motorized) camera and land the plane--and act at the same time. -- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0018578/
|
|
