...Seem to remember reading a line like that in a book review once.* Tam and I saw Atlas Shrugged (Part 1) last night and it was, IMO, excellent.
With the exception of James Taggert -- a bit young and not nearly balding enough -- and Franciso d'Anconia having gone brunette, the characters were very much as I had pictured them. (Wesley Mouch is an impressive bit of casting, in both appearance and the skill the actor brings to the role).
The script is an impressive job, especially in light of the short time in which it had to be written. There's a little rearrangement of events and it all moves very quickly, but dialog that could have been ponderous or even dull is instead light, or at least appropriate to the scene.
It is a little dated, though I think charmingly so; it's a slightly old-fashioned film in terms of situations and pace and that's fitting. The book was written in the 1950s, after all, by a woman who'd learned her craft in 1930s Hollywood.
The story's either familiar to you, or it should be (and I will once again remind readers that is is a work of fiction, no matter how much men like Whittaker Chambers, Lew Rockwell and Roger Ebert might wish to construe it a manifesto or blueprint for revolution), so I won't comment on it directly. I do think the movie does a good job of telling it and I am looking forward to Part 2.
* An infamous hatchet-job on the book and the author, a book review to which I have no intention of linking.
CHICAGO RAILROAD FAIR, 1948
4 days ago