Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
19 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent character drama, February 2, 2007
Despite the hagiographic-sounding title, this film is not a work in praise of the novelist-philosopher Ayn Rand. Instead, it is a biopic, based on a book of the same title, written by Barbara Branden, an erstwhile close friend and high-ranking follower of Rand.
Two attractive young students, Nathaniel Blumenthal (who later changes his name to Nathaniel Branden) and Barbara Weitman (Eric Stoltz and Julie Delpy), are invited, following an enthusiastic letter, to meet their idol, Ayn Rand, at the home she shares with her husband Frank O'Connor (heartbreakingly portrayed by Peter Fonda) in California. Both are passionate devotees of her ideas of Objectivism, reason and self-interest, and find a willing guru in Rand, played with grim charisma by Helen Mirren.
While Nathan is attracted to Barbara, her feelings for him are closer to friendship - but under pressure from Rand, who argues that emotion is always based on reason and that therefore the young couple's shared ideals make them a perfect sexual match, the two of them marry. Their unsuccessful marriage, already intimately destructive since Nathaniel has taken it upon himself to act as Barbara's psychotherapist as well as her husband, seeking to eradicate the 'faulty principles' that make her uncomfortable with the relationship, is worsened when Rand and Nathaniel begin an affair, insisting that their prospective partners accept this sexual relationship as the necessary consequence of their mental compatibility. The tensions between the characters play out against the rising cult of the Nathaniel Branden Institute and the success of Atlas Shrugged, leading to moral and emotional chaos under the guise of reason and idealism.
Whether or not the film is an accurate depiction of the real situation is much debated, but as a character study, as a film in its own right, it's excellent. Rand, as portrayed by Mirren, comes across as a woman who argues for reason and individual rights, while in fact being ruled, and ruling all those around her, by her own emotions, a toxic and pathetic queen eternally refusing to see how human nature cannot measure up to her image of it. Stoltz as Nathaniel is a fine portrayal of a bright and not-all-that-bad young man, whose faults, a tendency to self-centredness and dishonesty, are horribly magnified by becoming the favourite disciple of an inconsistent guru, to his own harm as well as everyone else's. Delpy plays the confused, idealistic and fragile Barbara with integrity and passion, and Fonda's portrayal of the kind, weary, alcoholic Frank, clear-sighted about what's going on but too dependent on his wife, both financially and emotionally, to speak up, is downright tragic. There are splendid performances from a strong cast, with an involving story that encourages sympathy with flawed people. Rand supporters may not like it, as it portrays Rand, Branden and the Objectivist movement as fundamentally hypocritical and deluded, but neutral viewers will enjoy an engaging and unusual story, intelligently told and skilfully handled. Well worth a look.
|
|
|
42 of 52 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Nice production, no script--read the book instead, December 10, 2001
Barbara Branden's book is a clear-eyed view into the turbulent times when Ayn Rand lead the Objectivist Movement. Rand, a philosopher and novelist, had a circle of disciples around her, drawn by her magnetic and forceful personality as well as her bold philosophy that was antagonistic to liberals and conservatives alike. Despite the fundamental tenet that logic should determine one's emotions, the Objectivist movement was torn apart by the emotional fallout from an affair between Rand and her intellectual heir at that time, Nathaniel Branden. Barbara, his wife, wrote of these events in The Passion of Ayn Rand. Alas, this nicely produced movie lacks a script and relies on the assumption that the viewer will know the events and philosophy and fill in the blanks. That was a wrong assumption. A good script, showing Rand's dream of the heroic man and her inability to reconcile that with reality, plus her denial of facts that twisted her emotions, would have saved this film and given it coherent meaning. Instead, there was far too much Victim-Barbara (which is not how Barbara Branden portrayed herself in her book) and too little of what made Rand and her philosophy alluring to so many. The only thing they got right in Rand's portrayal was her quick wit and rapier repartee when questioned about her ideas. Helen Mirrin was a brilliant casting choice as Rand. Peter Fonda does a very true-to-the-book Frank O'Connor. Both Mirrin and Fonda look remarkably like Rand and O'Connor. But Eric Stolz is merely sleazy as Branden, who was not a sleaze even by Barbara's admission. Branden would have been better played by Kyle MacLachlan (Blue Velvet) and given a role as a deluded, manipulated idealistic young man, not an opportunistic bed-hopper. The jazz score, by the way, is wonderful. Oh well.
|
|
|
25 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Great Woman, So-So Movie, September 20, 2001
I like to think I'm qualified to "objectively" review this film. I am a disciple of Rand who really loved the Barbara Branden book. I believe what Branden wrote about Rand, because her portrait of Ayn is complete and consistent. Rand's passion for ideas made her testy with stupid people and willing to break social norms such as those that govern how married people behave. Those objectivists who wish to dismiss this book and film as slander ought to look in the mirror. You are just as stubborn and dogmatic as she. Which isn't to say she isn't the greatest mind of the 20th century, because she is. Her ideas changed my life. It's the absense of any real discussion of those ideas that sinks this movie. There's are just enough bits of objectivist rhetoric to make Rand sound the leader of a bizarre cult. Only the final scene where she speaks to a group of her disciples and critics does her justice. She sparkles with wit and antagonism while confidently defending every attack on her unique philosophy. Not surprisingly this is the image I took away from Branden's original book which has several hundred pages to flesh out the Rand's complete and at times flawed character. Without much philosophy to lean on for support, this movie seems pretty unbelievable. The acting is great of course, its a dream cast. A better script and a director less attracted to the dirt of the story could have made this truly special, an emotionally powerful film about ideas.Chris Spaeth
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|