Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment | Release Date: April 15, 2011
5.7
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 106 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
61
Mixed:
5
Negative:
40
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characteres (5000 max)
5
JoeyKApr 20, 2011
Reading the reviews, it's pretty obviously a love it or hate it film, depending on whether or not you sympathize with the message. Personally, I'm surprised it is so polarizing. It was not well acted or shot, but not so bad that it ruins theReading the reviews, it's pretty obviously a love it or hate it film, depending on whether or not you sympathize with the message. Personally, I'm surprised it is so polarizing. It was not well acted or shot, but not so bad that it ruins the movie. The story was interesting, but it suffers in ways you'd expect from a movie adaptation of a wordy novel. And the dialog was frequently weird. The visual style they went for was great. The sets and costumes looked good, but it was sometimes uncomfortably obvious how often they were reusing set pieces. Bottom line, the critics are right when they say it is not a well made movie, but the flaws didn't ruin the movie. It was interesting and entertaining and completely worth watching. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
5
fredbreakfastApr 15, 2011
Jehkul, I'm gonna say this in as few words as possible: No.

If this movie were about World War 2, it would be bad. If this movie were about the moon landings, it would be bad. If this movie were about the life of Moses, it would be bad.
Jehkul, I'm gonna say this in as few words as possible: No.

If this movie were about World War 2, it would be bad.
If this movie were about the moon landings, it would be bad.
If this movie were about the life of Moses, it would be bad.
If this movie were an adaptation of any other piece of literature from any other time or place, it would be bad.

That's at least what the critics are saying, especially Roger Ebert's review. Never mind the political ideology, this movie is so bad that the philosophical underpinnings are irrelevant and don't need to be brought up to give this movie a negative review.

The irony is that this movie is a perfect exercise of self appraisal, as a critic does not need to ask what he is she is contributing: they are all saying "don't waste money on cinematic crap" and frankly that is a good service to society by telling them to go see something else. I appreciate that contribution to society, and anyone else who says otherwise probably takes such things for granted or are just being obtuse for the sake of salvaging their own beliefs.

If you want to talk about institutional bias, rating a movie a 10 because of its message is pretty high on the list of examples, especially when you admit it doesn't deserve that rating.

Don't care about personally rating this movie, but I have to, so I'm gonna say 5 to be neutral.
Expand
10 of 16 users found this helpful106
All this user's reviews
5
grandpajoe6191Feb 14, 2012
Based on the book written by Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1" doesn't really live up to the book's premise. The actors really have no clue of what they are doing and the background and materials are heavily limited. Even if they had added aBased on the book written by Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1" doesn't really live up to the book's premise. The actors really have no clue of what they are doing and the background and materials are heavily limited. Even if they had added a extra budget, I really think it would be a good movie either though. Some books are left not to be interpreted into movies. "Atlas Shrugged" is one of them. Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews