Posted 14 Sep 2014 · Report post Really bad, at every level. The first two movies were good to OK in my opinion; this one damages the franchise, in my opinion. The characterizations were implossible, the relationships between the characters were poorly drawn and so very many things were completely unexplained. Why did the Taggart Bridge collapse? Just because several characters said it would? What are they, closet Post Modern Progressives? (You know, Reality is whatever we say it is when we say it.) Much time devoted to the Galt's Gulch travelouge could have been devoted to subsatnce, to adding coherence. Was the Francisco character plausible as having been one of the few of Dagny's great loves? Well, maybe that dagny. AAAAARGH!I've been a defender of getting the movies made and believe, as Amity Schlaes said in an interview on Frank Beckman's show, they weren't great but they got the message out. But, as I said above, this one is so bad it damages the franchise.Who picked these producers? By what standards? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted 24 Sep 2014 · Report post What was the "message" projected by the movie? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
