First off, let me ask the question: in today’s PC, non-sexualized world, am I allowed to use the word “actress?” I guess I’ll chance it.
My friend Kitty sent me this link to an article about the ongoing saga of turning the 1,100 page book “Atlas Shrugged,” by Ayn Rand, into a feature film:
Rand’s popular but polarizing book — it’s derided by many literary critics but has a huge public following — tells the story of Dagny Taggart, a railroad executive trying to keep her corporation competitive in the face of what she perceives as a lack of innovation and individual responsibility.
A number of stars have expressed serious interest in playing the lead role of Taggart. Angelina Jolie previously had been reported as a candidate to play the strong female character, but the list is growing and now includes Charlize Theron, Julia Roberts and Anne Hathaway.
Although it was written a half-century ago, producers say that the book’s themes of individualism resonate in the era of Obama, government bailouts and stimulus packages — making this the perfect moment to bring the 1,100-page novel to the big screen.
Rumors about Angelina Jolie’s interest in the film have been swirling about for some time, but Charlize Theron? Julia Roberts? Anne Hathaway? What’s up with that? Let’s take a look at these lovely ladies and their left-wing credentials, talented actresses though they may be:
Julia Roberts: During a fundraiser for Al Gore’s run for the presidency back in 2000, she explained her preference for Democrats over Republicans by saying the word “Republican” is right between “reptile” and “repugnant” in the dictionary. Tee hee. She also described former President George W. Bush as “embarrassing. He’s not my president and he never will be either.”
Back in 2006, Roberts was also in favor of California’s Proposition 87, which would have taxed oil to fund alternative energy research. (It ultimately failed at the voting booth.) I guess growing your own kale stamps out the carbon footprint of traveling on private jets.
Charlize Theron: According to this bright light, Americans are just as oppressed as the good folks of Cuba. From a CNN interview:
Theron: No, but I do remember not too long ago some people getting fired from their jobs in television because they spoke up on how they felt about the war.
CNN: Do you think the lack of freedoms in Cuba are parallel to the lack of freedoms in the United States?
Theron: Well, I would, I would compare those two, yes, definitely.
Has she ever heard Dwight Schultz’s story of being called a “Reagan a**hole” by director Bruce Paltrow at Schultz’s audition for the television show St. Elsewhere? My guess would be no. Theron, like Roberts, didn’t have nice things to say about Bush either, calling “him irresponsible and taking exception with politicians in their very expensive suits and air-conditioned buildings, telling us how our soldiers are doing in Iraq. “I wonder what she thinks of her man Obama in his expensive designer suits in a wintertime toasty-warm Oval Office, telling us how our soldiers are doing in Afghanistan.
Anne Hathaway: The young woman whose road to stardom began by playing a princess of a fictional European country, is really concerned about the disparity of wealth in America. “Right now, the disparity between the uber-rich and the uber-poor, it’s worrying and it’s not getting better. We need to focus on a way to just get our economy back, to get it back on track.” By the way, Hathaway earns $5 million per film, and might be on her way to asking for $8 million. Maybe she’s talking about the disparity between her salary and that of Angelina Jolie, who earns $15 million per film…
And what about her support for Obama during the election? Was it due to his policies, his experience, his ability to get the job done? Not so much: “He inspires us to be the best Americans we can be.” Wow, that’s deep. I understand so much more now.
Frankly, out of the three, Hathaway seems to be the most obvious choice, as Theron and Roberts are just a little too long in the tooth to play the young Dagney. Darn it, there I go again with the non-PC stuff. According to the “Today Show,” 40 is the new 20. Sorry.
What’s so confusing here is that Ayn Rand’s writings reflected views that are antithetical to those held by left-wing libs, especially many in Hollywood:
Politically, Rand wanted to provide liberal capitalism with a moral foundation, to take on the prevalent notion that communism was a noble if unworkable idea while the free market was a necessary evil best suited to flawed human nature. In this she succeeded brilliantly (even if the notion that socialism failed because it has never been properly tried is still alive and well among the intelligentsia). Her arguments against “compassionate” redistribution–and persecution–of wealth have lost none of their power in the decades after they were made.
Perhaps they think the script will ultimately “improve” the book to match current politically correct views on life and society.
If these ladies are serious about being in the film, they’d best start reading the book now. Maybe they’ll be finished with it by 2010, which is when producers Howard and Karen Baldwin are hoping to start filming.
As Kitty said in her e-mail, “You’d think they wouldn’t be caught dead in a ‘conservative’ movie. Which only goes to prove that Hollywood lefties do have their price.” Seeing as the movie’s projected budget is currently in the $50 million range but could go up, I can see her point.