...Atlas Shrugged, Part 1 (save us from 2 and 3) is an amateurish enterprise of embarrassing proportions that I strongly suspect would have had Rand herself running for cover. (I also predict its decent limited release box office opening will fade quickly.)
Some writers have defended the film as being under-budgeted. This is the least of its problems. The same script shot for $300 million would have been just as bad — or nearly — as the one shot for $30 million. It would still have had wooden characters delivering wooden lines (that were largely exposition anyway) with an entirely predictable, poorly paced plot set in an oddly anachronistic near future.
Prolly not worth seeing, eh?
1 comment:
Saw the movie....twice....over the weekend.
"...wooden characters delivering wooden lines (that were largely exposition anyway) with an entirely predictable, poorly paced plot set in an oddly anachronistic near future."
I thought there were a few flaws in the movie, but on the whole, it was faithful to the book and the characters fit. Roger Simon is being overly critical of a pretty fair movie. It won't win any academy awards, but it was certainly not the dog Simon claims.
Post a Comment