Sorry, this movie sucks

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

The new casting is just too distracting. I sat through Dagny's awful makeup and fake eyelashes and the "hey, look at my boobs!" outfits (not to mention her suddenly taking on 20 years) for as long as I could, but I can't take it anymore. Hank Rearden is decent, but he too is too old and he sounds like he has to cough something up. He and Dagny's scenes together are cringeworthy. Lillian was--disappointing. Absolutely nothing like the original or the book. Her acting wasn't bad, however. Poorly executed and horrible follow-up. Would not recommend. The only person who has aged gracefully in this film is Francisco; he lost that hair. Ayn is probably choking on a wad of dollar bills in her grave

Sure I'm not an Ayn Rand sycophant. Ayn Rand had wanted to write a book where the rich went on strike. Well it seemed like a childish (no childlike) premise from the start. But let's leave all that behind. At it's core, it's an apocalyptic future America. That's every other movie nowadays anyways.They have recast all the roles. Samantha Mathis is now Dagny Taggart. She's a capable actress who could hold the movie together. The scale of the movie has marginally improved from the first installment. There is still too much talking, too much posturing, and not enough action. It's as if the filmmakers want to explain philosophy rather than make a good story.And there is too much that screams 1950s. How puritanical do you have to be to sign away your pride and joy to preserve your lover's sexual reputation? This and many other little things demand a rewrite.And this whole thing of refusing to sell steel to the government. It makes Rearden look petty and silly rather than a Real Capitalist. Isn't capitalism dependent on the philosophy of "Money Rules All"? Capitalism shouldn't be selective. I'd rather have the government jackboot their way into the factory. It would make more sense for the story.

i feel strongly about the book, so my review is tinted, or biased in that respect. it's worth a watch, and good follow up to part one, which was just interesting enough for me to check out this one.i liked the beautiful visuals, and nice lighting, although the occasional "sci-fi channel sped up shot" ruins a lot of it. not to mention the occasional crooked shot. what's up with that? the rearden steel bracelet looks awesome. esai morales for francisco d'anconia is perfect casting. 20th century motor company appears on a baseball cap. jumpjets are cool.i didn't like the disaster movie elements. dagney shouldn't have crashed the plane. those trains didn't crash. did they? a large part of it is thereby reduced to a common disaster movie, with cheesy jokes. and characterize francisco d'anconia as a proper playboy, will you? wesley mouch is pretty disgusting person in the book, here he's almost handsome, and doesn't come across as an evil character.i also think that this movie is pretty much been made for people who read the book, and are anxious to see an adaptation. without prior knowledge it's probably unwatchable. if your read the book it holds attention, is somewhat faithful, but leaves you wanting for something better to come out down the line. it deserves a five out of ten stars for it.TLDR: if you like the book, watch this. if you don't know the book, stay away from this movie.

Even more soap operatic than Part I, Part II also lacks the few scattered exciting moments and variations in scenery we had in Part I (to which I gave three stars).Regardless of one's political persuasion or stance on America's current economic problems, I can't see how anyone could regard this film as anything but ludicrous. Example: The corrupt sell-out CEO James Taggart encounters a fawning groupie of a sales clerk in a bargain store where he's stopped to purchase a tie and immediately marries her. One of the dumbest confrontations in Filmland history takes place at the wedding, where mining mogul Francisco d'Anconia engages Taggart in a heated philosophical debate about the basic function of money in human society.Additionally, most of the acting and script are even more stilted than those in Part I. Still, I must give ASPII an additional star because it's quite funny --albeit, unintentionally--in a number of places. So, maybe watch it as a comedy (?) Nothing really gets resolved here, so I assume we're in for a Part III.