Talk:Atlas Shrugged

Misleading...

"The working title throughout her writing was The Strike. According to Barbara Branden, the change was made for dramatic reasons––Rand believed that titling the novel 'The Strike' would have revealed the mystery element of the novel prematurely."

She did this with all of her novels, giving them titles that would help remind her what the central theme was, but then changing the titles to something that would not be understood by the reader until after the novel had been read. This is explained in Anthem Centennial Edition with Introduction by Ayn Rand (ISBN-10: 0452286352 ISBN-13: 978-0452286351), at least.

The above sentence makes it appear it is a quality of the book, while it should emphasize it was really a quality of the author's style.

For example: Airtight became We The Living Ego became Anthem Second Hand Lives became The Fountainhead

Small suggestion to an excellent article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.80.142.62 (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2009

Missing box office data on the film version

On the film's reception there is only this sentence: "The film met with a generally negative reception from professional critics - e.g., an aggregate rating on Rotten Tomatoes of 13% 'fresh' as of 4 June 2011 - but strong positive responses from audiences, e.g. a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 81% audience approval."

That's a highly misleading way of putting it. The film was a box office flop, $4.6 million on a $20 million budget. 81% of those who saw it and posted their review on Rottentomatoes, gave it a positive response. That is not a "strong positive response from audiences". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dnwwn (talk • contribs) 00:04, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The $20,000,000 figure is itself misleading. As mentioned in the WP article on the movie, that 20 million is inclusive of everything spent on the project over a period of 20 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.2.161 (talk) 19:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC) I can't locate that citation. WP ?=? Washington Post? Measure for Measure (talk) 03:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Why is this article so confused?

Why is this article so confused in its presentment? It is all over the place. Also, is the chaotic box with which it is presented, a product of limited exposure of the Wikipedian authors who crafted it? It is probably in dire need of a rewrite. Stevenmitchell (talk) 15:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

South Park citation

In the episode "Chickenlover", number 3 of season 2 of the South Park cartoon, the book is stated to be boring and to steal from readers the will to read books in general. This is the opinion of an almost an-alphabet police officer though, so maybe the authors of South Park intended this opinion to be stupid. Should we add a trivia or citations part for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.48.99.60 (talk) 22:51, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

No. Being mentioned in a cartoon is not an important fact about the book, and trivia sections are generally a bad idea. --RL0919 (talk) 23:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Input wanted at Talk:List of Atlas Shrugged characters

I am looking for other editors' input on a question at Talk:List of Atlas Shrugged characters#Danneskjöld: Pirate or Privateer. Since that page gets relatively little traffic and no one has responded yet, I'm posting a pointer here. Please reply on that talk page. Thanks. --RL0919 (talk) 21:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Would someone please comment? The IP will not stop. --RL0919 (talk) 06:17, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you know what would happen if the ultra rich took their money and disappeared? The world would not shut down. There will always be someone there to take their place. They fail to realize this and it will be their downfall.