Exclusive: ‘Atlas Shrugged’ Producer Sets Record Straight On Upcoming Trilogy
by John NolteIf there’s a production with a longer and more colorful history behind its troubled march to the silver screen than Ayn Rand’s novel “Atlas Shrugged,” the story of that particular episode of development hell has not yet been told. Published in 1957 and a perennial bestseller ever since (the novel sold a half-million copies just last year), the struggle to realize Rand’s sprawling and epic dramatization of her theory of Objectivism as told through a dystopian tale of the world’s best and brightest, feeling they’ve been exploited by an ungrateful society, putting their talent on strike, eluded even the author herself.
Throughout the decades, stars from Barbara Stanwyck to Angelina Jolie have expressed interest in bringing the novel to life, but it’s going to be producers Harmon Kaslow and John Aglialoro who finally break the curse. Directed by Paul Johansson, who also stars as John Galt, and co-starring Taylor Schilling as Dagny Taggart and Matthew Marsden as James Taggart, principal photography wrapped this very day. Which means…
Yes, there will be an “Atlas Shrugged” movie. Well, at least a part one.
Big Hollywood has enjoyed two visits to the film’s set, which our own Charles Winecoff will be writing more about soon, but due to the fact that much of what we’re reading in the media regarding the film’s production doesn’t coincide with what we’ve seen and heard for ourselves, I asked producer Harmon Kaslow to help set the record straight.
Much has been made of the film’s reported budget of $5 million, especially for a project major studios have shied away from out of budgetary concerns. Like most smart producers, Kaslow won’t talk specifics, but there’s more to the story than the $5 million:
“The amount expended on the movie is far north of $5 million. The movie is based on Part 1 of the book (the book has 3 parts) … so the film is based on about 27% of the book.”
This is the first I’ve heard that this production is only the first of three films, and while I haven’t read ”Atlas Shrugged,” those who have tell me a trilogy is the perfect way to tell the story on screen. Like “Lord of the Rings,” the natural breaks in Rand’s novel practically demand it be told in three parts, and a single feature film, even a long one with a hefty studio budget behind it, would almost certainly short-change the novel’s legion of faithful fans who, regardless of budget, are most concerned about seeing an adaptation that doesn’t compromise Rand’s philosophy. To that end, Kaslow assures the Randians:
“The movie is a direct ‘adaptation’ of the book included using much of the dialogue written by Ayn Rand.”
Assuming we’re talking in the area of $15 to $20 million to film the entire novel, with no big star salaries that’s still a low budget but not a ridiculously low budget. As far as the casting of unknowns, as is the case with any film, budget constraints are a reality and when you’re working in the arena of millions as opposed to hundreds of millions, you’re not going to get a Charlize Theron or Angelina Jolie.
Dagny Taggart (Taylor Schilling)
Kaslow told me, “The talent cast in the movie was selected on the basis of the director’s and producers’ belief in their acting skills without taking on the ‘distractions’ often associated with ‘A-List” talent.’”
I’m sure that doesn’t mean they would’ve turned down the distraction of an Angelina Jolie, Charlize Theron or another A-lister, but as we’ve seen many times before, acting ability, screen presence and the chops necessary to deliver a memorable performance can come from unknowns. After all, like all great actors, at one time Jolie and Theron were unknowns.
In any case, like “Harry Potter” and the “Narnia” films, the real star here is the project itself, Ayn Rand, and Objectivism. If the performances rise to the occasion no one’s going to care that there’s no familiar name above the title.
John Galt (Paul Johansson)
In a Sunday piece for Daily Finance, Bruce Watson took some pretty hard shots at the production claiming it’s nothing more than a desperate and cynical rush job using an inexperienced director in order to allow Aglialoro to hold onto the film rights, which were set to expire last month had filming not begun. I asked Kaslow about this directly:
“John Aglialoro finally decided to marshal the production because it was apparent that a studio would not …
“While the rights would revert back to the estate if production did not commence by June 14, 2010, the goal of the producers is to produce a film worthy of epic nature of the novel that will satisfy the millions of persons who have read the book, but also appeal to a wide audience (so as to introduce them to the Ayn Rand’s work).
“During the course of Aglialoro’s efforts to get the film into production, the project had definitely attracted a number of very reputable directors … however, given Johansson’s passion for the material and desire to execute a faithful cinematic vision of the book, the producers believe they found a director that most will believe is a diamond in the rough.”
Kalsow also took exception to Watson’s description of Johansson’s directing experience as mostly confined ”to the set of the teen-oriented soap opera.”
Director Paul Johansson’s inaugural feature film (The Incredible Mrs. Richie – 2004) won a [Daytime] Emmy as Outstanding Family Special, plus he has experience directing a substantial amount of television.
Johannson did win a Daytime Emmy for writing the “Mrs. Ritchie” screenplay and was nominated for his direction that won Gena Rowlands an Emmy and James Caan a nomination.
James Taggart (Matthew Marsden)
No one, including the ”Atlas” producers, can predict how a project will ultimately turn out, and that’s true whether your budget is $5 million or $200 million. And no one would argue that the challenges involved in bringing such an ambitious and epic story to the screen aren’t made that much more difficult with with limited resources, including taking a chance on a director making his theatrical feature debut. However, from all we’ve seen and from our discussions with the producers, director, and cast, there’s no doubt that everyone involved is passionate about telling this story and most importantly, dedicated to remaining true to Ayn Rand’s philosophical vision — which would’ve likely have been compromised bigtime by a major studio.
As of now the plan is to release part one of “Atlas Shrugged” in theatres sometime during the second quarter of 2011 and start production on the second part the following fall.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
26 Comments
the budget and visual bling are a distant second to the script…
While we would have loved to see Ms Jolie- someone who walks the Objectivist walk, to a certain extent- finally do a film worth her fame, an unknown cast sure beats Julia Roberts or whoever else they wanted to cast. That said, the direct to video quality does mean a limited run- if any- and hopefully word of mouth will save it.
Because to 'bury' one of the single greatest philosophical works of the last century with a Grade D production would be tragic, indeed…
the budget and visual bling are a distant second to the script…
While we would have loved to see Ms Jolie- someone who walks the Objectivist walk, to a certain extent- finally do a film worth her fame, an unknown cast sure beats Julia Roberts or whoever else they wanted to cast. That said, the direct to video quality does mean a limited run- if any- and hopefully word of mouth will save it.
Because to 'bury' one of the single greatest philosophical works of the last century with a Grade D production would be tragic, indeed…
I wouldn't worry too much about not having any A-list stars considering how few of them have made well received films lately.
"you’re not going to get a Charlize Theron or Angelina Jolie."
Thank goodness. The actor playing James Taggart looks way too young and appealing. Are you sure this isn't the Wet Nurse? I always imagined JT as fiftyish and balding. And the one Who is John Galt better lose his merry grin…but this is an exciting project. Unknowns are perfect. And Ayn Rand was a screenwriter with an uncanny sense of satire–her villains come to life more easily than her heroes.
Wonder where they'll film it that will give that sense of time and place? The train is going to be a problem to film…
My greatest hope is that if they get it done, that it's done well. I don't need big name stars, I just need the message to be clear and not PC'd out the yin-yang. I don't know that I can bear another book I enjoy being slaughtered by too many edits or the false assumption that audiences are too stupid to understand an intricate storyline.
The Fountainhead was a fairly faithful adaptation, before the Progressives totally ruled the roost; the mantra of "personal responsibility", especially from the lips of Gary Cooper, rang true. Let's hope that the same will apply to Atlas Shrugged and its cast.
This is a tough call, because there is kind of an epic feel/alternate reality to Atlas Shrugged. I know the film Mongol managed to achieve an epic type of feel on a 20 million budget.
Most of Hollywood spend money like the government anyway, so why not give this one a chance.
In all sincerity, Rearden would not have done this movie because it would be a bad investment at any cost.
There is no way these producers can create a coherent movie that will please die-hard Rand fans AND be palatable to the regular movie goer. Going low-budget is the way to go, but the story is simply too grand and the concepts too complex for a movie treatment.
Hello T_Rav:
Pride is the mental reward for achievement through thought and production. Even if your only achievement is the supporting of your own life by your own effort.
Yes Ayn Rand was an egoist, and proud of it. She advocated the value of your life. She also advocated a spiritual (individual centered) life also, and emphasized spiritual values as being more important (and more necessary) as being the "fountainhead" of material values. Often overlooked, especially by her detractors. It is with the greatest of dignity that we define our proper aims, means and ends. So I don't know how you can define Objectivism as the "highest form of mechanical animal"
My postings on the collectivist morality, where the ends justify the means, was not a condemnation of Christian values, some of which I agree and some disagree with. "Thou shalt not kill, steal, etc. are concrete values, although I think my use of self-defense will allow me to kill to protect my life and others dear to me. So even that commandment, I daresay you would have a qualification with.
But "Sell all that you have and give to the poor"…………; "It is easier for a camel to thread through the eye of a needle………….." "Judge not that ye be not judged" – all I certainly disagree with, as you should understand from my previous posts. (and many others).
The early Christian church practiced communism: Acts 5:32-36. In Acts 5:36, a man who lied about giving all to the church was struck dead, and his wife also: "Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events".
So I am not sure how you can argue with a Marxist. This is the crux of my arguments.
Conservatives are often struck dumb when seeing another particularly idiotic leftist plan or action. Conservatives are amazed at the arrogance and superiority displayed by leftists. But wonder no more, by their moral code and philosophy, their actions and attitudes are perfectly logical.
'Nuff said.
Never did Ayn Rand advocate an "anything goes" morality: "No man may initiate the use of force against his fellow man". (and by extension, fraud). You may only use force to stop the use of force. See the pledge at the end of my first two quotes above.
I have just briefly touched on her moral code…. I have said virtually nothing about the necessity for living a life tied down by reality, nor a proper political code, nor the underlying philosophy of her beliefs. But if you want a shortcut to understanding her philosophy, read "Galt's Speech" in "Atlas Shrugged". It is the shortest declaration of her complete philosophy that she wrote, and well worth the time to study it.
Fight the good fight.
One other point: The moral "code" of Altruism was defined by a Christian philosopher. His stated purpose was the reunification of the material and spiritual world, to meld science and religion back together again.
His metaphysics and epistemology accomplished this, but at the cost of splitting man in two and negating the power of man's mind.
He published this moral theory in 1776, in the book "Critique of Pure Reason". So the year that our Republic was being founded, based upon the principles of individualism, he laid the seeds of Communism, Nazism, Socialism, the welfare state, egalitarianism and environmentalism. His name was Immanuel Kant.
Our enemies know that their battle is a moral one. The Conservatives refuse to know it because it requires reexamining all their cherished beliefs.
Throw a bit of cherry on top and get the rock group Rush to do some tracks for it.
Please, please don't tarnish the memory of Ayn Rand and the important message of her book, Atlas Shrugged. I really hope these are talented folks.
I read Atlas Shrugged in the 70s, and the actors chosen to play Dagney Taggart and John Galt certainly look like the characters I imagined while reading the book.
Unfortunately, Ms. Rand had contempt for religion. She looked at religious institutions as corrupt as collectivist ideologies. I'm not an overly religious individual myself, but I see enomous good in the Judeo-Christisan philosphies. And, I loved the overall theme of "Atlas Shrugged". Her religious attacks in the book just proves that none of us are perfect.
Johannson doesn't look like John Galt. He was blond, cool blue eyes, Nordic-looking. Are they at least going to bleach his hair for the role and give him blue contacts?? Taylor looks like Dagny, lighter hair and eyes, slim physique, sharper facial features. Jolie would not have been a good Dagny, she is too curvy and dark hair & eyes, rounder facial features. Matthew doesn't look like James Taggart at all, either. He is too good looking and young. Maybe they will alter his appearance as well. I guess we'll see.
To bad this won't be a good film. I say that because it's unlikely that the kind of money being talked about here result in good writing. A well written script can stand up to middle of the road actors. But five million is simply not enough money to make a quality film; and this book deserves a serious effort.
Yep. You're right. Mea Culpa. And thanks.
A note to Mr. Johannassen, director of 'Atlas Shrugged':
Congratulations on wrapping up production of the movie, Atlas Shrugged. As the writer of another film in development that was inspired by Ayn Rand, I understand what an accomplishment it is to have completed shooting your film.
However, after watching an interview with you conducted by ‘Libertas Film Magazine,’ I was disturbed to hear you repeat, a couple of times, that ‘Atlas Shrugged’ is about the nobility in man’s spirit.
Nobility? Really?? Is this is how you and your producers are going to frame ‘Atlas Shrugged’?
While Ms. Rand’s novel is about many things — laisse faire capitalism, objectivism, individual rights — I don’t think it’s about the nobility in man’s spirit. Rather, I think it reveals something much darker lurking there.
Consider that Atlas Shrugged repeatedly sells hundreds of thousands of copies each year despite being over fifty years old, and that several years ago it was listed by the Library of Congress as being one of the most influential American books, second only to the Bible. Indeed, many conservative political and business leaders cite the book as being ‘profoundly influential.’
If, as you say, Atlas Shrugged is about the nobility of man’s spirit, wouldn’t we expect those sectors of society that have embraced it, along with many of Ayn Rand’s other philosophies, to reflect nobility?
Places like the floor of the senate where Republicans held up unemployment insurance benefits for cash-strapped families while simultaneously working to extend tax breaks for the rich. Or Wall Street where Goldman Sachs made millions of dollars while selling securities that were secretly designed to fail. Or in West Virginia where a coal mine operator skirted regulations and left 25 dead, or BP, a corporation that did the same thing and left 12 dead along with the worst environmental disaster in American history.
Are these the places where you see the ‘nobility of the human spirit’?
Mr. Johansson, please take back the word ‘nobility’ when discussing Atlas Shrugged. To describe this book and the ideas it has spawned as ‘noble,’ is to do a grave diservice to those things which really deserve the honor of the word.
In the meantime, I truly wish you luck on the post-production of your film.
James Lantz, writer/director
Hide Fox http://www.HideFoxTheMovie.com
Nobility of spirit is in mankind's individuality, courage, enterprise and quest for freedom, not in collectivism and a Borg like submission to the left's vision of a utopia where we're all brought down to the lowest common denominator instead of encouraged to lift ourselves up to our highest potential.
I don't know what the new version of "Atlas Shrugged" will be like or whether I'd want to see it, but I do know that I don't want to see yet another episode in the long running series of Kumbaya being pumped out 24/7 by Kool-Aid drinkers.
There's good and bad news here. Even with NO A-listers, $5 mil isn't going to do much more than run the film set roach coach. I do like the idea of the actors and director being passionate about doing the story true to the book without screwing it up with Hollywood liberal crap. I'm sure there are lots of actors who can act who aren't on the A-list. I guess we're stuck with it the way it is. Hopefully after part 1 they'll have a little more cash to work with and the other two, and most important, segments will be done with the budgets they deserve.
This is such a long time coming.. I cant help to be a little skeptical that they will fall short in living up to novel and more importantly Rands philosophy. One things for sure, If they blow part 1, they might as well scrap 2 & 3.
I totally agree with your positions. It's a little hard to wrap your head around Objectivisim in the context of having only experienced it by reading her fictional novels.
Those who welcome a look at reality objectively (redundancy intentional) should read Objectivisim: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand By Leonard Piekoff
Yes I remember her snapping at Mike Wallace in the 1959 interview for using the term "Randian" She hated that term.
I think the fact that it has taken so long to get this book into a screenplay and on the screen is a testimony to Hollywood, its left leaning actors and money. I have followed the initial attempts to make this movie a reality to this final development and every step of the way has been hammered with the left and its insistence that this is futile and not a worthwhile project. I think this production, if as the producer says, adheres to the novel's intent , will be one of those movies that surprises all of Hollywood and 'those that think they know' as to the unexpected appeal to the masses. I think the public will be clamoring for the remaining serials. I think the whole thing has been underestimated for many years and look for these people that are involved to become very rich and famous for their endeavor.
so, who's playing Antonio(?), the argentinian silver magnate?
You must be logged in to post a comment.