Having read her book Atlas Shrugged, her Playboy interview, and subscribing to the Objectivist Newsletter for a time, I was familiar with Ayn Rand's philosophy. Let me first say that if you haven't read any of the above or her other works, this movie will not have as much meaning for you and you will not understand the significance of some parts.
Since I had delved into Rand's works and was influence by them, even if only temporarily, I have to admit that this film was truly shocking in its portrayal of her. Don't get me wrong, the acting in this film with all of the characters was A+. However, the way they cast Ayn as a character, making her just as human and just as given to her emotions, was quite appalling. You see, in Ayn's work, she stresses the ideal in life, that which is held to the highest, noblest, and greatest - the achievements of the mind. She communicates this in such as way that she appears above others in society, as if sitting amongst that ideal that she preaches. Therefore any other portrayal of her ideal diminishes the viewer's perspective.
**Below there are a few spoilers included to show the flaws of this film to followers of Ayn Rand's Objectivist philosophy.
Strangely, this movie doesn't seem to be primarily about philosophy, but rather the torments of an extra-marital affair. The film intermingles and blends her philosophy as a backdrop to this. Granted, in her Playboy interview she does not necessarily agree that sex has to be between a married couple, however, this film almost portrays her as some of the villains she describes in her books. I suppose the most obvious reason for this is because it is an account of the non-fiction work of Barbara Branden. She was a close friend and disciple of Ayn Rand. Her husband, Nathaniel (an egotistical and sex-hungry psychologist), has an affair with Ayn Rand. The film begins to get gray here in that it doesn't fully the develop the reason for Barbara Branden's non-sexuality, which in part fosters Nathaniel's cheating on her. What is odd also and perhaps the glorified self-image of the author, is Barbara's depiction as really the only character that held truest to the Objectivist philosophy. Her love for Nathaniel seems mistaken for great admiration and respect of his intellect. Her lack of any sexual expression appears to substantiate this as she has passion for only the intellect and not the physical. Her singular defiance of Ayn's teaching is displayed with her agreement and subsequent self-immolation in allowing her husband to have an affair.
Ayn and Nathaniel, on the other hand, share the same act of uncontrollability in their affections for one another. While this is displayed as logical, they ask their spouses to sacrifice themselves for their pleasure by agreeing to the affair - a big no-no in Ayn Rand's teachings. Ayn's husband, Frank, appears in a fog during most of this, washed up and washed out as he hides in his hidden anguish.
But Nathaniel commits the ultimate travesty in his cheating not only on his wife but now also on Ayn herself. He begins an affair with a young woman he is counseling, while still juggling his wife and Ayn in the mix. This, of course, comes to a head and Ayn is as furious with Nathaniel as if she were his wife. She vows to destroy the man she believes she has made (what happened to the self-made hero she saw in him, the man who did not rely on others?). Strangely, Barbara once again appears noble as she defends her husband's destruction before Ayn.
If I haven't explained it to you Ayn Rand's fans clearly enough, this movie is full of holes in her philosophy. I'll quote a line from Nathaniel Branden in the movie, "A philosophy should not be judged by the actions of its teachers." This statement surely applies to this film! However, I wonder just how "objective" a testament Barbara Branden gave when she wrote the book this film is based on. Because if the teachers can't follow the philosophy and remain true to it, then either the philosophy failed or the teachers never fully understood it in the first place.
Since I had delved into Rand's works and was influence by them, even if only temporarily, I have to admit that this film was truly shocking in its portrayal of her. Don't get me wrong, the acting in this film with all of the characters was A+. However, the way they cast Ayn as a character, making her just as human and just as given to her emotions, was quite appalling. You see, in Ayn's work, she stresses the ideal in life, that which is held to the highest, noblest, and greatest - the achievements of the mind. She communicates this in such as way that she appears above others in society, as if sitting amongst that ideal that she preaches. Therefore any other portrayal of her ideal diminishes the viewer's perspective.
**Below there are a few spoilers included to show the flaws of this film to followers of Ayn Rand's Objectivist philosophy.
Strangely, this movie doesn't seem to be primarily about philosophy, but rather the torments of an extra-marital affair. The film intermingles and blends her philosophy as a backdrop to this. Granted, in her Playboy interview she does not necessarily agree that sex has to be between a married couple, however, this film almost portrays her as some of the villains she describes in her books. I suppose the most obvious reason for this is because it is an account of the non-fiction work of Barbara Branden. She was a close friend and disciple of Ayn Rand. Her husband, Nathaniel (an egotistical and sex-hungry psychologist), has an affair with Ayn Rand. The film begins to get gray here in that it doesn't fully the develop the reason for Barbara Branden's non-sexuality, which in part fosters Nathaniel's cheating on her. What is odd also and perhaps the glorified self-image of the author, is Barbara's depiction as really the only character that held truest to the Objectivist philosophy. Her love for Nathaniel seems mistaken for great admiration and respect of his intellect. Her lack of any sexual expression appears to substantiate this as she has passion for only the intellect and not the physical. Her singular defiance of Ayn's teaching is displayed with her agreement and subsequent self-immolation in allowing her husband to have an affair.
Ayn and Nathaniel, on the other hand, share the same act of uncontrollability in their affections for one another. While this is displayed as logical, they ask their spouses to sacrifice themselves for their pleasure by agreeing to the affair - a big no-no in Ayn Rand's teachings. Ayn's husband, Frank, appears in a fog during most of this, washed up and washed out as he hides in his hidden anguish.
But Nathaniel commits the ultimate travesty in his cheating not only on his wife but now also on Ayn herself. He begins an affair with a young woman he is counseling, while still juggling his wife and Ayn in the mix. This, of course, comes to a head and Ayn is as furious with Nathaniel as if she were his wife. She vows to destroy the man she believes she has made (what happened to the self-made hero she saw in him, the man who did not rely on others?). Strangely, Barbara once again appears noble as she defends her husband's destruction before Ayn.
If I haven't explained it to you Ayn Rand's fans clearly enough, this movie is full of holes in her philosophy. I'll quote a line from Nathaniel Branden in the movie, "A philosophy should not be judged by the actions of its teachers." This statement surely applies to this film! However, I wonder just how "objective" a testament Barbara Branden gave when she wrote the book this film is based on. Because if the teachers can't follow the philosophy and remain true to it, then either the philosophy failed or the teachers never fully understood it in the first place.