SnoReptilePlenty
Memorable, crazy movie
Aiden Melton
The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.
Josephina
Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.
the_prince_of_frogs
I have watched this movie several times.I read Ayn Rand's four major works the first time before I was 16 years old = "We the Living" 1936, "Anthem" 1938, "The Fountainhead" 1943 and "Atlas Shrugged" 1957. I have read these four books several times. Actually I have read "Atlas Shrugged" at least twelve times. I wrote a term paper in my second semester at the university entitled "The Abstract Themes In Ayn Rand's Novels." A research paper presented in partial fulfillment of requirements in English Composition 113 submitted November 14, 1966. My grade was an "A." Yes, I earned a bachelor of science in business at the third largest accredited university in Oklahoma.It is my opinion that Ayn Rand was a genius in Leonardo da Vinci and Albert Einstein's class. Ayn Rand was a philosopher. Her works listed above state her philosophy. I think her philosophy of "Objectivism" is the best philosophy and incorporates the principles of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. I do disagree with Ayn Rand's position as an atheist. I think her position as an atheist was influenced too much by the acts, actions and works of "men" in their creation of religion. My faith in GOD and his SON Jesus is total.I think the movie "The Passion of Ayn Rand" is well done and reflects the powerful emotions involved between the four individuals = Ayn Rand, Frank O'Connor, Nathaniel Branden and Barbara Branden.I am 41 years younger than Ayn Rand. I would have loved to have been in her life as her lover and intellectual compatriot.I can relate directly to Ayn Rand. In many ways she and I are a lot alike. From 1993 through 2010 the four significant Ladies in my life are each and every one 24 years younger than me.For me in my life I blend the philosophies of "Atlas Shrugged," 1957 by Ayn Rand and "Stranger in a Strange Land," 1961 by Robert A. Heinlein. Heinlein has stated that his book "Stranger in a Strange Land" is entirely a work of fiction. To those who revel in attacking Ayn Rand I can say only "Look into your own life and spirit to see if you can find any fulfillment." I find fulfillment when I look into my own life and spirit. I believe that Ayn Rand found fulfillment in her life and spirit.I recommend the movie "The Passion of Ayn Rand."I have watched the first two "Atlas Shrugged" movies several times. I think they are well done. I will see the third "Atlas Shrugged" movie when I can buy it on DVD. I do not go to movie theaters or use any movie services.
bastiaan_t
Having read Atlas shrugged I do not consider the plot contained in this film to be possible to be based on truth. The woman is simply to brilliant to fall so low. The film is completely without meaning and I would like to argue it was made solely by opposers of rand's philosophy to discredit her. I'm not even kidding, I mean that exactly as I wrote it. It's completely obvious as she is displayed as a complete hypocrite to her own philosophy. Seem to preposterous to be true? That's a trick a lot of people use nowadays. The greater the lie the easier it is to cover up because nobody will believe it. Think 9/11. Every now and then a person comes out with something that is so good, bad people feel it poses a threat to them, so they pull these kind of stunts. They just can't face the contrast of the virtue and brilliance with their own depravity. As an example, on wikipedia it says Ayn Rand used to condemn homosexuality as being evil. That's like the oldest trick in the book next to accusation of racism. This film came out in 1999, more then 15 years after the death of Ayn Rand. If she were to be alive she would never have approved. This is so pathetic and it really makes me angry though maybe I shouldn't be because anyone worthy will feel the same as I do anyway.
jazzfantastic
As a casual viewer with a cursory knowledge of Rand and her movement, this film, shown through the eyes of someone who had good reason to bear Rand some resentment, was enlightening about Rand and her background, her circle, and to a lesser degree, her movement and philosophy. It's very worth seeing for those things, as well as the excellent performances of all concerned.I fault the Director for not aging the characters over the 15-17-yr. span, especially the pivotal role of Branden. By the time Branden takes a young student as his lover, he was old enough to be her father, just as Rand was old enough to be his mother when their affair commenced. Not even his weight, attire, or hair were modified, much less his baby face, to show how the passage of time would've affected who he did and didn't find appealing as a lover and life partner by the time he was 40'ish and Rand 60-65.Rand's pain and fury over losing his love and sex and being dumped for a girl young enough to be her grandchild apparently sealed his fate in the Movement, so failing to age the characters was a key error in an otherwise well-done film.Rand had the spirit and confidence to go after a man half her age, and the magnetism to land and hold him. Women past 40 are normally confined to older men, and much older, the older the woman becomes. Refreshing. Rand was shown to find the sexual affair intensely pleasant and intellectually freeing, as creative men do. In fact, Rand acted the traditional male role throughout the film, her husband the female role. Also refreshing.The conscious attempts by all Movement characters to make their actions conform to their belief system was one of the things that consistently elevated this film above a simple adultery drama. Hence, Rand and Branden sought their spouses' consent for their affair, even if they underestimated its duration by a factor of 15 years. Branden and Barbara married as a heroic act despite lack of personal 'fit', etc.Only Branden seemed to be consistently weak and therefore prone to violating Movement principles via lies and obfuscation, and even he proved to be capable of emotional growth by the end. An interesting and enlightening film with superb performances.
Framescourer
A pretty dreadful, made-for-TV look biopic. There's very little character to fire the imagination, let alone any sympathy. The script concentrates doggedly on recording history and trying to explain Ayn Rand's philosophy.We undoubtedly get a horribly disembowelled version of Rand's 'objectivism' - in this film that simply means 'being selfish' and 'uncaring'. Consequently the cast are a bit scuppered. Mirren works fairly hard, with a consistent accent, but the rest are average-to-lame... Peter Fonda's Frank is dreadfully wooden.Further issues: there are lots of close framed shots (which save on having to create period sets); a surfeit of weeping to camera; and there's no big-arc coherence - the opening flashback isn't recalled at the denouement. Cheap and, worse, probably inaccurate. 2/10
