Written October 13, 2012
Excellent film. Directing, acting, etc very professional. Would have preferred the same actors from part 1 for the continuity, but understand the variables that can get in the way of making that happen. Those of us who are aware of what is really happening today - who are smart enough to think for ourselves - who are not fooled by the barefaced spin and "new speak" - who possess a moral compass and a strong work-ethic watched the screen with our hearts in our throats. We knew we were watching the future if we can't get the brakes applied to this runaway train in time. Ayn Rand was a true visionary. One could almost be convinced she is alive today. Not just because of the accurate depiction of the US, but of the rest of the world as well. If this movie doesn't make you think, you are probably among those of us who will experience the greatest suffering and will wonder what happened.
Written June 26, 2016
Atlas Shrugged Part II removed a lot of the problems of Part I. They've smoothed out the somewhat choppy editing of Part I. The story comes through sharp and clear, now. Critics claimed in Part I that everything happened at one cocktail part after another. That was never true, but there's almost none of that now. What appears in Part II is a strong story that supports the producers and not the consumers, the innovators not the parasites. The essence of the novel shines through.
I think they got it right this time, and Part III should be very strong as long as they don't try to show Galt's 100-page speech.
I didn't have any problem with a different actress playing Dagny. Samantha Mathis does very well, and Esai Morales is very compelling as Francisco D'Anconia.
This is definitely worth seeing.
Written June 25, 2016
At first I was upset with all new actors. However, after getting to know the new actors, some of them did a better job playing their characters than the previous movie. I really miss Dagny though. I really enjoyed the story and can only say if you are a Ayn Rand fan, then you NEED to see this. I am going to see part 2 again this weekend and cannot wait for the third installment.
WHO IS JOHN GALT?
Written October 22, 2012
I loved the book but dividing the movie up into three or more parts separated by months to years is a total disaster! I know it's a long book but why three (or maybe more) parts? This movie deserves the same treatment as Gone With The Wind and other lengthy films. They should have made it one 3 to 4 hour movie with an intermission and you'd have a classic.
I did enjoy Part 1 as it followed the book closely and I thought Part 2 would finish the book with the same cast. Why would you change all the actors for Part 2? Big mistake! They were not as good, and the plot line was sophomoric at best. Maybe the original cast wouldn't do Part 2 when they realized what a bomb the producer was creating.
Don't waste your time with this loser. Read the book instead.
Written October 13, 2012
I missed Part 1; but for sure I'll see Part III when it comes out. This movie was well done. Now I'm interested in reading the book.