Railroad owner Dagny Taggart and steel mogul Henry Rearden search desperately for the inventor of a revolutionary motor as the U.S. government continues to spread its control over the nation... Read allRailroad owner Dagny Taggart and steel mogul Henry Rearden search desperately for the inventor of a revolutionary motor as the U.S. government continues to spread its control over the national economy.Railroad owner Dagny Taggart and steel mogul Henry Rearden search desperately for the inventor of a revolutionary motor as the U.S. government continues to spread its control over the national economy.
- Awards
- 3 nominations total
Featured reviews
We all felt the drop off in acting quality was extreme. Unfortunately, this is magnified by an inferior director as well. The plot is for the most part accurate to the book, though the time-line was slightly altered and curiously skipped certain important details while forcing others less significant details into the screen play.
The new Rearden and D'Anconia are painful. The new Dagny isn't as painful but the actress in Part I I felt was far superior.
Its unfortunate that this trilogy is going to fail to transform into film yet again.
I guess somehow they came up with a bigger budget for this one and have re-cast all the major roles with.... well .... somewhat higher level actors. Maybe you could say they moved from D-list actors to C-list actors? Unfortunately in some ways the "unknown" actors in the first movie were much better than the familiar faces you will recognize in Part 2. To call them D-list actors is perhaps unfair...when really they are just unknowns.
The most glaring casting problem here is Samantha Mathis, and I cannot adequately express how much this pains me to say because I have long loved her and think she is a talented actress. But all you can say about her role here is, "What in the WORLD happened to Samantha Mathis?!" First of all physically she is all wrong for the part; too old, too bloated, too tired-looking. Once upon a time she might have been able to pull it off, but that time was past a decade ago. If you've read the novel you know what I mean. Dagney Taggart is a force of nature and Samantha Mathis spends the entire movie looking confused and exhausted. You know who would have been an awesome Dagney back in the day? Someone like a young Lauren Bacall---the body type, the facial features, the intensity....that's Dagney as described in the novel. Samantha simply doesn't have it, and it makes every scene she is in excruciating to watch.
The other thing is this movie is extremely talky, and honestly if you haven't read the book I am not sure you would be able to follow what was going on. The movie is 2 hours long and at times it drags. Blah blah blah, talk talk talk. Works in the novel, but not in a movie. Show don't tell.
I like the other casting choices although the jury will be out on D.B. Sweeney as Galt. They don't show his face in Part 2, but honestly I have seen some of his recent appearances in movies and TV, and he looks about as tired and done-in as Samantha Mathis (maybe this is what they are going for, a matched set?)
I will go see Part 3 if it gets made. I did notice a lot more people at the showing I went to than when I saw Part 1 (literally watched the first movie with one other person in the entire theater). So maybe this one will actually make money? I would like to see them re-cast Dagney although I know that's not likely to happen. Still if they could do it once....
I thought Dagny being portrayed by an older actress was actually more in-line with the way I viewed her when reading the book, and the same goes for the other actors, like Eddie Willers, etc. I'm unsure how I feel about DB Sweeney portraying Galt himself since I never considered him a very strong actor, but that's a moot point in part 2 anyway.
As others have noted, the special effects in this aren't exactly top quality, but they're passable. It reminded me of the type you'd see on a SyFy original movie or something along those lines... not bad, but not great.
Overall, it was a good movie. Let's face it, if you liked the book, you'll like the movie. If you hated the book (or never read it, but hate the very idea of it), you'll hate this movie too. But that hatred would have nothing to do with the movie itself, but about your views of Rand's philosophy.
I'd give the movie a technical rating of 5-6 because it wasn't too bad, and some of the cinematography was actually pretty well done. Content I give it a 9 because I appreciate where Rand is coming from, so let's call it an 8 out of 10 overall.
The acting is excellent and the dark feel and sense of hopelessness really gets inside of you as I realize this is a possible future as being orchestrated by the powers that be. Art imitates life so to speak and being someone who deeply distrusts the main stream media, seeing it as the 100% propaganda that it is and has researched a lot into the darker truths about those running our country, its almost as if Ayn Rand was seeing the way the power structure of the world was setting up the world to achieve its goals of domination and subservience of the US population.
Fear is rampant in this moment and the government uses that fear to take even further control from the people. This movie should hit home and make us take stock of what we have and wake up to what the military industrial complex, bankers and power elite have in store for those of us that continue to stand still with our head buried in the sand while all of our liberties are taken by us one by one.
Did you know
- TriviaAll of the roles from Atlas Shrugged: Part I (2011) were recast.
- GoofsSteam locomotives were still in use back in 1957 when the book was published, however they had long passed from the scene by 2016 which is the year that the movie is set in. Staying faithful to to the crash as described in the novel created what can be considered a possible anachronism.
- Quotes
James Taggart: Here's to my wife, Mrs. James Taggart. Love does, indeed, conquer all. Even social and economic barriers. You know, money cannot buy happiness. Truer words were never spoken. We're no longer chasing the almighty dollar. Our ideals are higher than profit. Instead of the aristocracy of money, we have...
Francisco d'Anconia: The aristocracy of pull. I mean, now, it's about influence. But you knew that already.
James Taggart: What I know is that you need to learn some manners.
Reception Guest #1: If you ever doubted that money was the root of all evil, there's your proof.
Francisco d'Anconia: So, you think that money is the root of all evil. Have you ever asked yourself "What's the root of money?" Money is a tool that allows us to trade with one another. Your goods for mine. Your efforts for mine. The keystone of civilization. Having money is not the measure of a man. What matters is how he got it. If he produced it by creating value, then his money is a token of honor.
James Taggart: Look who's talking about honor.
Francisco d'Anconia: But if he's taken it from those who produce, then there is no honor. Then you're simply a looter.
Reception Guest #2: Señor d'Anconia, we all know that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak.
Francisco d'Anconia: What kind of strength are you talking about? The power to create value? Or the ability to manipulate, to extort money in back room deals, - to exercise pull?
James Taggart: All right... just leave.
Francisco d'Anconia: Hey. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips, chains or dollars. Take your choice. There is no other. And your time is running out.
- Crazy creditsJust before the usual disclaimer at the end ("The events, characters and firms depicted" etc.): Introducing The FISKER KARMA Designed And Engineered By Fisker Automotive, Inc.
- Alternate versionsIn the theatrical release, when John Galt is revealed at the end of the film, his face is fully lit and visible. In the DVD and Netflix release, his face has been darkened and obscured.
- ConnectionsFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 20 Worst Movies of the Century (So Far) (2020)
- How long is Atlas Shrugged II: The Strike?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Atlas Shrugged: Part 2 - Either-Or
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $10,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $3,336,053
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $1,751,572
- Oct 14, 2012
- Gross worldwide
- $3,336,053
- Runtime1 hour 51 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1