I believe the first time I ever mentioned a filmed adaptation of Ayn Rand’s controversial 1957 novel “Atlas Shrugged” was October 18, 2006 when Randall Wallace (Braveheart, Pearl Harbor) was assigned the task of scripting the film with Angelina Jolie attached to star as Dagny Taggart, in a story that follows Taggart’s struggles to manage a transcontinental railroad amid the pressures and restrictions of massive bureaucracy. Her antagonistic reaction to a libertarian group seeking an end to government regulation is later echoed and modified in her encounter with a utopian community, Galt’s Gulch, whose members regard self-determination rather than collective responsibility as the highest ideal.
11 months later “Atlas Shrugged” was back in the news when Vadim Perelman (House of Sand and Fog) was attached to direct as it was said Wallace had finally boiled Rand’s 1,100-plus page book down to a 127-page script. At the time Jolie was still attached to star and the film was being set up at Lionsgate.
I don’t remember hearing much about it for some time after that outside of brief comments here and there concerning Jolie’s attachment. It wasn’t until April 2009 that the film began to bubble up again as Ryan Kavanagh’s Relativity was looking to co-finance with Lionsgate. At the same time a few more potential actresses were listed as possible candidates to step into Taggart’s shoes. Charlize Theron, Julia Roberts and Anne Hathaway were the prominent names listed. Perelman was no longer a part of the picture as director, but Wallace was still hanging around, penning another draft and said to be interested in directing with what was expected to be a $50 million budget.
Three months later, Theron was now the front-runner and instead of a feature film the idea was turning to a miniseries for Epix, the pay-cable network Lionsgate was forming with MGM and Viacom/Paramount with the possibility of a condensed version being released in theaters.
Suddenly, this period of ups and downs and “Will it ever happen?” came to a halt on May 26, 2010 when Deadline reported out of the blue that John Aglialoro, the entrepreneur who 17 years earlier had paid $1 million to option the book rights, was ending the back-and-forth and was going to finance the film himself setting a June 11 production start in Los Angeles for the first of what he said at the time would be four films made from the book.
When the announcement was made no one had yet been cast in the lead roles of Dagny Taggart, Hank Rearden, John Galt or several others. Additionally, no-name-director Stephen Polk was set to helm the picture.
Polk was quoted by Deadline saying, “For more than 15 years, this has been at studios and there has been a whole dance around who’ll play the iconic roles… Making it an independent film was the game-changer. Everybody is saying, how can you shoot this movie without a star? We’re shooting it because it’s a good movie with great characters. We’ve been in pre-production for months, but kept it a mystery. Part of the reason is because there’s so much crap about how you need a great big budget and stars. We aren’t looking for big names to trigger press or financing.”
Less than 16 days later Polk was replaced as director with “One Tree Hill” star Paul Johansson who would not only direct but star as the film’s male protagonist John Galt. Playing opposite him was Taylor Schilling as Dagny Taggart. Yup, a role once eyed by Oscar winners Angelina Jolie and Charlize Theron was now filled by the one-time star of 22 episodes of NBC’s “Mercy”. Other members of the cast include Michael O’Keefe (Michael Clayton), Edi Gathegi (The Twilight Saga: New Moon, X-Men: First Class), Matthew Marsden (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen), Jsu Garcia (the original A Nightmare on Elm Street) and Michael Lerner (Life During Wartime). So while they didn’t get big name stars, they did manage to land a few actors with names some of you may have heard of.
Fast forward ten months later and Rocky Mountain Pictures is releasing the film this weekend under the name Atlas Shrugged: Part I in what is expected to be the first of a planned three films made from the book.
Rocky Mountain Pictures is releasing the film in 300 theaters this weekend all across the country. I was surprised to look at the list and even notice the theater right down the street from me is showing it. Too bad I haven’t received a single email related to the film or I probably would have gone to a screening in an effort to review it. Then again, perhaps I was saved from that fate.
Looking over at RottenTomatoes the film is currently carrying a 6% approval rating from critics with only one tepid review from Kyle Smith at the New York Post serving as the lone positive among 15 other negatives.
Blurbs from the critics that did see it include Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune saying, “This movie is crushingly ordinary in every way, which with Rand I wouldn’t have thought possible.” Roger Ebert adds, “Let’s say you know the novel, you agree with Ayn Rand, you’re an objectivist or a libertarian, and you’ve been waiting eagerly for this movie. Man, are you going to get a letdown.”
As for the planned trilogy, Joe Morgenstern at the Wall Street Journal says, “Don’t hold your breath for parts 2 and 3.” The Hollywood Reporter‘s Todd McCarthy agrees adding, “Flubbed, under-produced representation of the first third of Ayn Rand’s still controversial novel bodes ill for parts two and three.”
It’s hard to tell if those interested in seeing it should really count out parts two and three. In an interview with The Atlasphere.com Agliaro speaks of the film’s budget saying, “I think the production costs for this movie are going to run about $10 million. And then we’ll have the marketing costs and some small return on capital.”
Considering I haven’t seen a stitch of marketing perhaps they saved a bit in that department and moving forward with parts two and three will be easier, especially considering “Atlas Shrugged” is currently the hottest search topic at Google at the time I posted this piece. So someone is certainly interested. Just look at the 86% audience approval rating in that RottenTomatoes graphic above… Though one has to wonder if any of the 5,584 users that rated it had even seen it yet.
But the big question is, does this end any chance of a major studio touching this story? After decades of attempts to get something off the ground it never came to be and now an independent production came in and it resulted in a critically panned feature whose future is in doubt. When I think of other controversial books brought to the big screen that suffered despite big name stars and a massive marketing push the first one that comes to mind is New Line’s The Golden Compass, a film that cost far more than $10 million (a reported $180 million in fact) and had much bigger stars including Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig.
Would a studio major touch this thing now? Now that’s something I won’t be holding my breath for.
If you’re interested in learning more about the adaptation that hits theaters today, I have included the trailer below and you can get much more right here.
