Memorable, crazy movie

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

When circumstances constantly conspire against our most sincere and best efforts, rest assured, something is dangerously amiss and tragedy is inevitable unless aggressive corrective action is taken asap.Can't blame people for wishing the prophetic reality presented would all go away so as to give this TV series and later Video release a low rating.Don't be confused by feigned incompetence at the highest levels.... that is only part of the story. Corrupt leaders are both corrupt and their own victims of gross incompetence.For solid historical background on this development you can also read CP Snow's best seller book entitled "The Two Cultures + A 2nd Look".... Even before that were signs of trouble ahead..... read about the life of famous Nobel Prize winner and Nuclear Physicist Niels Bohr and/or Robert Oppenheimer from the book about his tragic life entitled "American Prometheus".Now go prepare yourself for what is yet to come.....

There's a comedy of low budget and persistence to this series that belies the essential element of freedom in the mind of the rationalist that all people get to keep the fruits of their labour and contribute as they are able and agree to do for the common good.Rational thought is considered devoid of morality by some yet rationally the common good is worth much to those who intend to be successful forever. Rational thought is Ayn Rand's message and this series is on point though production values are low. I'll buy number 3 as soon as it is available.I find the series compelling as the argument for rational thought to rule our actions is one I appreciate and will buy.comment summer 2014

Though not an objectivist, I have an interest in the philosophy or belief system. Since seeing the 1940s movie "The Fountainhead" some years ago I have been waiting for the movie adaptation of "Atlas Shrugged". Well, my wait was rewarded with the issuance of Part I, but I noticed that this movie did not receive much publicity. Well, Hollywood is full of dreamers and socialists who cannot or will not face reality so I figured that was the reason. It wasn't. This movie goes to such lengths to show the Objectivist philosophy that it, ironically, actually breaks completely with reality. This should never have been filmed.The movie starts by showing the conditions of the American economy of 2016 and the problems faced in this economy. It is a somewhat unrealistic in how grim the economy of 2016 is portrayed but that does not go beyond the bounds of belief. The situation develops into a crisis where a railroad firm that needs to replace some very old track in Colorado. The movie implies that this old track is a century old. I doubt that any rails that old are left in place in real life but that is not the primary problem with this movie. What is the primary problem is that we have a railroad executive and deciding to use a new metal that is advertised as lighter and stronger than the metal used up to that time for rails. This metal is untested and unproved yet the executive goes with her (yes, the executive is a woman and strong willed women are found in Ayn Ryn's works; as can be expected due to the author) hunch. If she is right there is a tremendous improvement in the rail business; if she is wrong the railroad will go out of business. The manufacturer of this metal has a full factory dedicated to its production.This whole situation is insane!! We are asked to suspend disbelief and assume that somebody is using an untried metal in an endeavor with public safety concerns?! That would not even be allowed due to issues of it affecting the good of the people. By even using the objectivist criteria this concept is still insane. A company would go out of business if this metal fails, so would it not be in the self-interest of the owner of the railroad to have it tested before he/she commits to it? Of course it would! Metal or metallurgical testing is a very developed science. To use an untested metal (this is the first commercial use of the metal no less) on a major project that involves public safety is not the decision of a self-interested person with vision but rather that of a deluded individual who probably has visions due to hallucinations! I know of the qualification requirements for use of new materials and everybody (objectivist or socialist) agrees the process should be very thorough. This movie is so far off that there is no way it could be viewed as realistic. There is a limit to suspension of disbelief and this movie goes beyond that limit. Objectivism or socialism or any other philosophy is not proved or disproven by this movie as it is just too unrealistic. Sad.

ALERT: THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SOME SPOILERS Over sixty years ago, Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead was made into a movie, starring Gary Cooper. It would have been considerably easier a task to adopt that book to film than to adopt Atlas Shrugged. Nevertheless, this rendition of the book to film does considerable justice while maintaining a great deal of faithfulness to the themes presented by the original novel.The setting, as in the original novel, requires some suspension of belief, as it consists in an alternate reality and includes some elements from the science fiction genre. Other than some adaptations to bring the story into the present day, it remains a faithful reproduction, and in remaining faithful to the story, I believe that it is only pertinent to review that story to some extent.I read my first Rand novel, Anthem, when I was in high school. I later rediscovered it, and some part of myself that had apparently gone missing when I was in early college in the Fall of 1992. While Atlas Shrugged is a much more dense expression of Rand's ideation, much of that essential spirit is captured in her earlier novel, Anthem. Rand champions rational behavior with the spirit of free enterprise, and for this reason she is still widely embraced today.Although, assuredly, much work went into both the novel and the film, the story is quite straightforward, and, in my opinion, not difficult to comprehend at all. When I read another review, posted on Netflix, that purported that the movie would require a course of study in political science, I was quite surprised. I think, perhaps that the reviewer might have been confused, and neither understood some of the basic themes in the novel, nor the course of study in politics that they so earnestly had recommended. As for those who have never studied political science, both the film and the book are easy enough to understand from an economic perspective, the premise of which is so well depicted by the title of the original novel. Ultimately, to this readership and demographic of movie-goers, the story makes a statement that is designed to make its audience think about the nature of obligation, and to whom and for what one should be obliged. To the latter demographic, the students and professors, both, of political science, Rand's "philosophies" may tender some questions, that perhaps only she would be capable of supplying herself. Nevertheless, from a theoretical standpoint, her ideas are quite intriguing, if for no other reason than that they have had such ample influence even beyond her own lifetime.Some of the criticism of Rand's beliefs could potentially be traced to the abandonment of "civilization" by several of the characters in this very novel. However, Rand was erudite with respect to political philosophy, and one can well recognize her plot device of "Atlantis" as a sort of "state of nature," parallel in function to that of Locke's, Hobbes', etc. Such states of nature are, of course, presented as a type foundation from which to construct social contracts, such as are manifested by the constitutions and legislatures of the governments of modernity. Rand appears to be using this device, borrowed from these social contract theorists, to challenge the modern audience not to take for granted the freedom inherent to the modern liberal state, rather than to be proposing some altogether new form of contract for society. Instead, she addresses the level of freedom that one has within a free state in a kind of sub-context of economic focus.It is within this context that she presents her theoretical state of nature, which is quite obviously set to answer the question of the paradox of the constraint of freedom proportional to individual ability as given in The Republic by the penalty of being ruled by one less capable. While in Plato's writing this concept seems to be confined to the concept of government, it finds pluralistic application within any field of endeavor, and especially with respect to those fields that compete economically, and as such are inherently, to some extent (although they may be hobbies for some), vocational in nature. It would seem, then, that Rand's "philosophy," from "Shrugged," can be encompassed in a nutshell simply by saying that one maintains the freedom to do business with whomever one chooses to do their business. In essence, this is the spirit of free enterprise, a spirit that goes hand in hand with such liberties that are there to protect it.The film, itself, I found to be good, if perhaps recalling to mind a bit closely some of our recent economic foibles; yet it balances this with a call to integrity, both in the context of business and one's personal conduct. What may be a little difficult, initially, for the viewer to grasp is how Rand's concept of integrity devolves to a certain honesty of self-interest, as opposed to any external imposition of in what this conduct should consist.All in all, I enjoyed watching this film, and I believe it presents a reasonably faithful introduction to Rand and her writing.