I agree. I too want the philosophy to 'soar'. Good phrase! I do wonder if the SF aspect will put the Gulch on another planet...I had not thought of that_. (Your idea of a Bioshock Gulch is also good, but probably not possible to keep secret in the modern world - and it would be very vulnerable if discovered.)

Mr Aglialoro did a fine job of 'getting it right'. If the world had been ready for a shot of raw distilled Ayn Rand, his first film would have done well at the box office (our metric); the next 2 films would have taken off from there.

We obviously need an entry point for the philosophy. A love story is a strong beginning, for one has a choice and can chose to love both the person and his ideals. Dagny's lovers reflect a consistent philosophy, but each has a better embodiment of it, ending with the archetype of John Galt.

The lamentable almost-rape scene is another expression of outdated worldview. In modern times, it is quite acceptable for a woman to be an enthusiastic and physically assertive lover without having had to be raped to give permission for that level of intensity. We are in a different world and this needs to be taken into account.

Jan
_ It occurs to me that the dark energy needed for FTL travel (per the Alcubierre equation) may also be a key to unlimited power generation. Hmmm...

Agree! I am seriously concerned. I thought that the series was going to take place over three seasons. (I could have this wrong.) It was to have been in depth and done justice to the book...maybe including the formative years of Dagny and Francisco. So here we go again with a remake that will probably not stay true to the book.

as i stated before, reading AS does not make one an Objectivist. this tv show will not have the same affect as the movie. those who are Objectivists that have read the book who do look at the first installment will more than likely not recognize any similarity and as a consequence not bother seeing any further programs.

this is a curious path of rejection and permission;;; I really
do not think that Rand would lament what is happening.
I expect that she would desperately want to see more
people knowing her story, as we do. -- j
.

I think the millennials may have a point. Speak to them about visionary entrepreneurs and you'll hear about people like the founders of Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Whole Foods -- most of whom are not American or conservative -- or maybe about Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, who hold themselves out as being creative and entrepreneurs but who are really just investors who love and frequently use cronyist government intervention.

A sort-of-AS story set in the present day could not both keep to the principles of AS and be really believable, both because those businessmen are not especially our allies and because many of them have political and social agendas that are not ours, so they would certainly not participate in John Galt's strike.

I would like to see AR (or someone who can fill her shoes) write such a story, though, because it would teach us how to sell our cause to that type of businessman.

I'm an older generation dude and I bought the first season of Downton Abby because I heard it was a good series. Well, I was surprised to find a WWI era story open with a homosexual sex scene and figured it was just another late 20th century left wing entertainment industry PC propaganda series, so I never watched another episode. If I'm wrong in that assessment, let me know and maybe I'll give another try.

wait, wiggys-thousands have come to AR and reading AS by watching the movies. so I have already proven your hypothesis incorrect.

mr. ruddy was not miss quoted.
what he will do will in no way be a credit to Ayn Rand's philosophy. it will be a disaster and not have a positive effect where some one will say having seen this program i want to read the book. you are right to be concerned.

I thought that I wouldn't like Downton Abbey, but my younger daughter and wife like it enough that I have watched it a few times just to be social. It is a well-done show from England in the early 20's.

Ms. Rand was a pistol, wasn't she, Mr. Ruddy? Based on your vision, she will be swirling curlicues in her grave if you succeed. It is essential, however, the no matter how you present the story, the philosophical premises remain. If not, you're just wasting everybody's time. I think it's possible. In writing school we are taught that plays and movies Move. That they cannot remain static no matter how badly you want to present the words. Shakespeare got away with it -- but I doubt that you'll find another one like him. So...it all boils down to the writing. That is going to be the hardest thing; finding writers who are up to the task of writing your vision while maintaining the integrity of Rand's book.

ok, I could well be wrong. I want the production to stay within the philosophy and soar :)

Quite a few 18-35 year olds watch Downton Abbey. If the production is exemplary, the audience will follow.

AS had its run, I think. Its a great book and I get immersed into it to the exclusion of life for several days when I read it. BUT, today everything is video, and it costs a lot to re-enact on the screen what the brain can do for free with a good book. AS 2-3 previously done were NOT done well (except for AS 1 which was cool). If we want people other than die hard Objectivists to watch it, its got to relate to people today and where they ARE now (socialists). So it might be better to make a movie which starts with AS, but is remade to reflect todays life. Maybe more like Alongside Night

If he wants to build his story around the future, it might be a good idea to begin where AR did - in the 1950s, and go from there. Let Francisco, Dagny, et al be youngsters in the 50s, being heirs and heiresses of industrial firms, and taking a lead in developing the new technologies. That would create some continuity, and even a context for Galt's motor, along with computers, the Internet, smartphones, biotechnology, nanotechnology, 3D printing, Mars and Moon colonization, etc. Just as the "New" Testament refers to the "Old" Testament for its authority, so the industrial age can be the foundation for the information age.

As I understand it, Rand wanted AS to educate people sothey would stop the decline of the society. In case one is not up on current events, the decline already started years and years ago, and has reached a point where it is unlikely to be stopped. Now what we need are video productions which teach people how to reverse the decline in ways that reflect where we are now.

All I have to say is that with the possible exception of AS 1, the previous AS producers/directors didnt do a great job of bringing out the major points of the story in a way that people today would understand (which is why it hardly got any viewers). Switching the actors in the middle of the series was, in my humble opinion, a stupid move. AS3 was the worst, leading us into a gulch populated by modern day appliances and cars apparently moved there without being detected by the government at the time. Not believable.

I'm not so sure about this... Especially when he wanted Angelina Jolie as Dagny originally...? And he wants to turn it more into a love story.... As much as it has the potential to be, it isn't a love story.. unless you say it's a love story between Dagny and her railroad and her love of her work.

I don't know much about Mr Ruddy's views or politics, but I don't believe a raging Hollywood Liberal would make this film very well... as right out destroying the story, the meaning and direction. I don't have much trust in the agenda and words coming from Hollywood in general.

I'd like to know of more of his intentions... if he ruins this wonderful story to spite Ayn Rand, then I think he does a severe disservice for all of the world and the future.

Considering current socialist events and a mental malfunction mindset that thinks Bloody Broom Hillary, Bolshevik Bernie and the reigning imperial presidebt are just peachy keen, we definitely need a new and improved Atlas Shrugged in the works.

I don't have a good feeling about this.....

Can't wait to hear more. Let's have Gulch Producers serve as extra's.

how many 18-35 yr olds are watching period shows? The only one I can think of would be Mad Men and I think for the soap opera aspects, though slick they might be.

There is one good argument I heard for keeping it set as it was and that would be the unique period in time that would allow for a collapse as she envisioned it. The readers of Atlas Shrugged post WWII would have had context to believe such was possible-I think most millennials now won't buy into it. But that is just my opinion. He will want a wide audience and a loyal one. I think he can probably handle both , given his expertise and track record.

I will admit here I am a little concerned with some of Mr Ruddy's history and some of his attitude toward the remake.

Perhaps the old history between Mr Ruddy and Ayn Rand can be considered water under the bridge - the whole world has come a long ways down various paths since then. But his insistence back then on not allowing her script refusal while she was alive is a bit disturbing. Especially with the history of the Fountainhead.

Fast forward to today and this article says that Mr Ruddy sees this rendition as a "love story". Good grief, we all know it is way more than that.

And the wishy-washy characterizations as this being "Ms Rand's insistence on this being a film for the future", and then "redrawing its capitalists and creators" as something newer than an antiquated image of a relic era gone by is eye brow raising.

As reported in this story, Mr Ruddy is apparently quoted as saying "If you can re-imagine the Old Testament and the New Testament, why can't I re-imagine Ayn Rand?" This is absolute arrogance - if reported correctly. I would rather have heard that "No, I have retained numerous Ayn Rand scholars to ensure that the scripts will stay true to the principles and ideals expressed by the author, Ms Rand".

Hopefully, the article is misrepresenting Mr Ruddy's intentions. But, I would also add that his statements of making this only a six or eight hour TV version is very disappointing. This will not do justice to the monumental work for the same reason the 3 movies fell short, and will miss the opportunity of the essential effort becoming an on-going addictive multi-season series so popular these days.

Hopefully, Mr Ruddy has been seriously misquoted in this article.

Al Ruddy is the right guy for this project. Updating the story to be current with today's technology makes sense.
Remember when Ayn Rand started AS in the forties what technology was. Television was rare. Computers were huge machines. Satellites were pure science fiction.
The mini series will sell better with some updates.

I think this is wonderful news.

I am anxiously hopeful I see a multi-million dollar Baby delivered