TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Wiki Headlines
We've switched servers and will be updating the old code over the next couple months, meaning that several things might break. Please report issues here.
Total posts: [642]  1 ...  9 10 11 12 13
14
15 16 17 18 19 ... 26

Atlas Shrugged getting several movies:

 326 Jordan, Wed, 27th Apr '11 9:33:59 PM from Westeros
Azor Ahai
There already was a good film of Atlas Shrugged made- two of them actually- Iron Man One and Two

edited 27th Apr '11 9:34:19 PM by Jordan

Hodor
@Deboss
And capitalism triumphs once again.

But if the movie had made money, then capitalism would have triumphed too, because that's sort of the point of the whole thing, making money, they decided to make the movie, because they expected that there was an audience that was willing to pay money to watch it, and were so confident in this idea that from the beginning they decided to divide the story in three parts, because they were expecting to make money, out of the money that people would have paid, and fund the project on said money, if the sceneraio they were hoping for had actually happened.

In a nutshell, capitalism wins regardless of the outcome of the movie.

Also, I'm suspicious of someone who is willing to label a whole form of entertainment as useless, just because said person is not too fond of it. I mean, I'm not a big fan of Shakespeare myself, but I can see why others are, and I'm capable of appreciate the contributions of his work to western literature.

And it's true, his work is far more enjoyable on stage that being read.
You know, we're living in a society! We're supposed to act in a civilized way!
Burn
Capitalism triumphs in every situation because entertainment is a jungle, where survival of the fittest is the rule.
Cold comfort for all the people who whine about the state of pop music.

Or the video game industry

Or children's cartoons

Or breakfast cereal...

I have no idea what I was thinking when I started this post.

edited 27th Apr '11 10:56:57 PM by Pannic

[up] Would this video of a kitty riding a tortoise make you feel better?

You know, we're living in a society! We're supposed to act in a civilized way!
"Or breakfast cereal.."

I c wut u did thar.
 
[up][up]That is the most adorable thing I have seen in a long time.
You will never love a women as much as George Lucas hates his fans.
 333 Deboss, Thu, 28th Apr '11 10:54:16 AM from Awesomeville Texas
I see the Awesomeness.
But if the movie had made money, then capitalism would have triumphed too

Sort of the point. Unfortunately, capitalism has been defeated before, see Oreo O's.
^ As far as I can recall, Capitalism has survived the discontinuation of a breakfast cereal.
Okay, no. Iron Man is *not* an Objectivist superhero. The very idea of an Objectivist superhero is contradictory. Objectictivism is *not* code word for "pro capitalism anti government." Its a specific philosophy that centers on the glorification of individual selfishness and talent used solely for personal benefit. Objectivism explicitly rejects enlightened self-interest, on the grounds that positive externalities are a kind of theft.

If Tony Stark were an Objectivist, he would have used his ARC reactor technology to put everybody else out of business, and gradually gobble up the entire business community. And if anyone objected to having to pay him whatever he wanted for his technological services, he'd kick their ass with powered armor. IOW, he'd have been a *villain*.
Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com
Also known as Katz
[up]Thank you!

I've heard the "Tony Stark is an Objectivist" thing before, but it doesn't work. Sure, he's a rugged individualist who doesn't let government squares get in his way, but then he does the least Randian thing possible and uses his technology to help defenseless people. A true Randian would have seen militia groups using his weapons to kill innocent villagers as a great sales opportunity.

What about Ditko's objectivist superheroes? The Question? Mr. A?

Okay, Mr. A seems less concerned with helping people that he does with preaching to the audience, but still...
 338 Deboss, Thu, 28th Apr '11 7:44:36 PM from Awesomeville Texas
I see the Awesomeness.
I didn't say destroyed I said defeated. It's possible to lose battles but win wars.
^Only capitalism never "lost" any "battles" to begin with.

To repeat the message Dream Huntress already made earlier, "Capitalism wins regardless of the outcome of any single product on the market, " be it a movie or a breakfast cereal.

edited 29th Apr '11 9:07:06 AM by SeanMurrayI

 340 Jordan, Fri, 29th Apr '11 8:36:18 AM from Westeros
Azor Ahai
Yeah, you have a point. Iron Man has a libertarian or conservative ideological bent, but calling him an Objectivist is probably not accurate. Come to think of it, Objectivist!Iron Man would have refused to help people who were less than grateful or would have been more like a super-villain.
Hodor
Burn
Iron Man is the leader of a large corporation; why wouldn't he be libertarian/conservative economically? Generally, you don't get to that job and stay there unless you do everything in your power to make sure you stay there. Those sort of economic policies are what he likes because, you know, he's a fucking company owner.
^^ Objectivist Iron Man would refuse to help anybody, regardless of how grateful those wanting to receive help may be. After all, Ayn Rand didn't write of altruism (something we'd take for granted in just about every traditional superhero) as a virtue but as an evil flaw.

People would only get "help" from Objectivist Iron Man if his actions taken in helping somebody were to somehow directly benefit his own self-interest.

edited 29th Apr '11 9:08:16 AM by SeanMurrayI

Also known as Katz
And he only becomes a hero once he helps people. That's his evolution as a character:

Selfish CEO (Randian, non-heroic) => guy who helps people (non-Randian, heroic)

 344 Buscemi, Fri, 29th Apr '11 9:16:48 AM from a log cabin
I Am The Walrus
Objectivist Iron Man wouldn't believe in world peace.
[up][up] And even from the getgo, Tony Stark wasn't completely selfish. He had a belief that building weapons for the US was a net good for the country ( and to a lesser extent, the world ), and also had general, if uninterested, philanthropic instincts. After becoming Iron Man, Tony's overall moral system didn't really change in its underpinnings; rather, what changed was his desire to bring his morally-significant actions up close and personal. By taking a hands-on, attentive attitudes towards what he did, he could ensure that his actions had the effect he intended.
Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com
 347 tricksterson, Sat, 30th Apr '11 10:11:34 AM from Behind you with an icepick Relationship Status: I made a point to burn all of the photographs
Never Trust
Tony Stark is somewhat libertarian which is why people often call him an Objectivist because in the public mind the two are synonymous. Which is no truer than that all pagans are wiccans but most people seem to think this too.
If it's an authority figure and it's breathing it's guilty
 348 jewelleddragon, Wed, 4th May '11 7:41:53 PM from Pasadena, CA
Also known as Katz
On a vaguely related note, I'm drawing a short Atlas Shrugged parody comic, so if you have any ideas for 4-panel gags, post them.

 349 Deboss, Wed, 4th May '11 7:59:50 PM from Awesomeville Texas
I see the Awesomeness.
Tries to rebel now about the trains and somebody shouts "no body cares about trains" but that's kind of weak.
President of a company announces that he's leaving to "strike."

Board of Directors just appoints a new president, business continues as usual.
Total posts: 642
 1 ...  9 10 11 12 13
14
15 16 17 18 19 ... 26


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy