Science Chic wrote: But will Rand fans really love it,
Yes, they really love it. I hang out on a libertarian thread on another site.
"business has been brisk enough for producers Harmon Kaslow and John Aglialoro to expand from 299 theaters to 425 this weekend and to 1,000 by the end of the month, they told The Hollywood Reporter on Tuesday.
The two said they fielded 500 inquiries from theater bookers Monday but didn't have enough film prints to fill orders."
The thing I always find amusing about the modern-day Randians is that most of them don't seem to realize that the great Ayn would almost certainly see them as part of the "moocher" class, not the "producers" they imagine themselves to be. Ayn was an incredible intellectual snob who believed that the smartest 1/2 of % should rule the rest of the morons, who in her mind barely deserved to exist.
Of course, I've observed over the years that at least 50% of the population imagines themselves in that 1/2 of 1%.
Rotten Tomatoes critics give it a low 7% rating and the unwashed masses give it a 85%.
So, in reference to AV, the elite hate a movie about the elite shrugging off the yoke and the rabble love it. Or at least the Randian Kool-Aid drinkers love it. lol
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
SS109 wrote: Rotten Tomatoes critics give it a low 7% rating and the unwashed masses give it a 85%.
So, in reference to AV, the elite hate a movie about the elite shrugging off the yoke and the rabble love it. Or at least the Randian Kool-Aid drinkers love it. lol
Doesn't surprise me in the least. But I wonder what Rand herself would make of the "unwashed masses" casting themselves as the heroes of her story? They seem to have quite missed the point that she had as a little love for the middle class as she did for the underclass. All of them were beneath her contempt.
AspenValley wrote: The thing I always find amusing about the modern-day Randians is that most of them don't seem to realize that the great Ayn would almost certainly see them as part of the "moocher" class, not the "producers" they imagine themselves to be. Ayn was an incredible intellectual snob who believed that the smartest 1/2 of % should rule the rest of the morons, who in her mind barely deserved to exist.
Of course, I've observed over the years that at least 50% of the population imagines themselves in that 1/2 of 1%.
The thing I always find amusing about the modern-day Randians is that most of them don't seem to realize that the great Ayn would almost certainly see them as part of the "moocher" class, not the "producers" they imagine themselves to be. Ayn was an incredible intellectual snob who believed that the smartest 1/2 of % should rule the rest of the morons, who in her mind barely deserved to exist.
Of course, I've observed over the years that at least 50% of the population imagines themselves in that 1/2 of 1%.
The above statement is total fabrication. Rand grew up with the communist revolution in Russia- she believed that her moral philosophy was better for society as a whole- and she was right. If we practiced what she preached- we would not have anywhere near the kinds of problems we face today. Her philosophy is more in tune with the natural order of things- not some socialistic, altruistic pipe dream that we seem to keep trying to impose on humankind.
She was right about another point though. Most people are morons- and can't see through their blinders to the truth!
The thing I always find amusing about the modern-day Randians is that most of them don't seem to realize that the great Ayn would almost certainly see them as part of the "moocher" class, not the "producers" they imagine themselves to be. Ayn was an incredible intellectual snob who believed that the smartest 1/2 of % should rule the rest of the morons, who in her mind barely deserved to exist.
Of course, I've observed over the years that at least 50% of the population imagines themselves in that 1/2 of 1%.
The above statement is total fabrication. Rand grew up with the communist revolution in Russia- she believed that her moral philosophy was better for society as a whole- and she was right. If we practiced what she preached- we would not have anywhere near the kinds of problems we face today. Her philosophy is more in tune with the natural order of things- not some socialistic, altruistic pipe dream that we seem to keep trying to impose on humankind.
It's no fabrication. Rand bought into and helped shape an insanely elitist view of the world. She thought only the very smart, very wealthy, and very powerful had any real merit. The whole premise of Atlas Shrugged is that the whole world depends on a handful of Superhuman smart, wealthy, powerful people.
And as far as her advocating a more "natural order" of things, yeah, you may have a point if you think narcissism, selfishness, and a sociopathic lack of empathy for your fellow human beings, especially those you perceive as "lesser" than you, should be the natural order of things.
You might study a little anthropology to enlighten yourself on that topic. The consensus is that altruism, far from being a pipe-dream, may be the thing that allowed us to flourish as a species.
Well I didn't come away with that impression at all- in Atlas Shrugged- leaders of industry once they withdrew from the looter economy were running small shops- a Banker who controlled major banks was now running a small bank.
Yes they were all leaders of industry- that's what the story starts with, but they end up all running small businesses and trading with each other in a small town. It would have been a totally different book if she would have started with the local baker, the plumber, the scientist.
