DUers, I know this news will disappoint many of you. I hope you can deal with the pain....

[LynneSin]

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-quick-20110427,0,7726389.story

Quick Takes: 'Atlas' shelved?

Twelve days after opening "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1," the producer of the Ayn Rand adaptation said Tuesday that he is reconsidering his plans to make Parts 2 and 3 because of scathing reviews and flagging box office returns for the film.

"Critics, you won," said John Aglialoro, the businessman who spent 18 years and more than $20 million of his own money to make, distribute and market "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1," which covers the first third of Rand's dystopian novel. "I'm having deep second thoughts on why I should do Part 2."

<<<<snip>>>>

"Why should I put up all of that money if the critics are coming in like lemmings?" said Aglialoro, who is chief executive of the exercise equipment manufacturer Cybex. "I'll make my money back and I'll make a profit, but do I wanna go and do two? Maybe I just wanna see my grandkids and go on strike."

Damnit, now how will we know how the book ends

:crazy:

[edbermac]

1. Oh yeah, it's all the critics fault.

Here's a book you might consider reading next time, Mr Aglialoro.

[dawg]

2. He has a point. Movies never make it big if the critics don't like them.

[LynneSin]

4. You just wanted an excuse to post Megan Fox's chest

admit it!

[dawg]

5. Nope.

I thought she was way hotter before the chest came along. Now, she's just generic action babe.

[rurallib]

3. Well, there goes my weekend plans.

[petronius]

6. Predictable. The guy doesn't have the courage of his convictions, so he weasels

out by blaming the 'liberal elite' for stifling his art. No matter what he says though, it was pretty obvious from the beginning that this was going to be another RW exercise in faux-martyrdom. Ironic that he describes himself as going on strike... :rofl:

I do wonder what he really thought, however - did he honestly believe that there was a non-trivial segment of the population eager for a low-budget dose of propaganda? Did he truly think he was providing a spark for conversation and introspection? Did he think he'd be raking in the bucks? Nobody else thought those things... :shrug:

[kentauros]

7. Only $20 million?

I'd say this guy has no clue what it costs these days to make a movie. And if he believes in the source material (very likely) then why doesn't he do as any Hollywood producer would do and enlist the help of outside monetary sources? I would think the Koch Brothers would happily get behind funding their little film-making hobby ;)

Then they can release the subsequent sequels direct to videodisk :P

[regnaD kciN]

8. "Critics"...? I don't think so...

Check out the post I wrote on another thread here. This film's release was designed to be as "critic-proof" as possible. The highest per capita release densities were in predominantly rural Rocky Mountain and midwest states with strong libertarian leanings, places where the main news source would be Faux Noise, and the main "critical voices" Beckkk and Flush, both huge supporters of the book. Not only would the opinions of prominent movie critics matter little to audiences there, they probably wouldn't even have normal access to them. Furthermore, the release was aimed at the "true believers" -- Rand fans who would come to see anything that promised to be an adaptation of her book, not average film-goers looking for a "cool movie" to attend on Friday night.

So, what happened? It wasn't that the film disappointed the Randroids -- just look at their rave reviews in contrast to the critics' opinions. Devoted Randians were talking up the film, and even buying tickets when they couldn't attend, just to support it. Maybe, rather, there turned out to be a lot fewer Randroids than the producer thought? Perhaps he was fooled by the "huge spike" in sales of the novel after Obama's election, and assumed that every sale of the book meant another fan of Rand and her thought...whereas, while lots of copies of the book may have been sold due to its being touted by right-wing talk-show hosts, most of those who bought the book either a) never read it, b) read it and found it boring or ridiculous, or c) were Religious Right types for whom Rand's outspoken atheism and hostility to Christianity were utter turn-offs. In any event, one has to conclude that the failure of the film is more a matter of the Rand cult turning out to be smaller and less-powerful than assumed, rather than anything nasty the critics may have said.

[KamaAina]

9. NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

:cry: :cry: :cry:

:sarcasm:

[MrScorpio]

10. Somebody call the Wambulance!

[Rabrrrrrr]

11. But if Rand WAS philosophically correct, he wouldn't be in this pickle unless it was HIS OWN FAULT.

Come on, asshole - JohnGalt-up and make it work.