Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

the_prince_of_frogs I have watched this movie several times.I read Ayn Rand's four major works the first time before I was 16 years old = "We the Living" 1936, "Anthem" 1938, "The Fountainhead" 1943 and "Atlas Shrugged" 1957. I have read these four books several times. Actually I have read "Atlas Shrugged" at least twelve times. I wrote a term paper in my second semester at the university entitled "The Abstract Themes In Ayn Rand's Novels." A research paper presented in partial fulfillment of requirements in English Composition 113 submitted November 14, 1966. My grade was an "A." Yes, I earned a bachelor of science in business at the third largest accredited university in Oklahoma.It is my opinion that Ayn Rand was a genius in Leonardo da Vinci and Albert Einstein's class. Ayn Rand was a philosopher. Her works listed above state her philosophy. I think her philosophy of "Objectivism" is the best philosophy and incorporates the principles of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. I do disagree with Ayn Rand's position as an atheist. I think her position as an atheist was influenced too much by the acts, actions and works of "men" in their creation of religion. My faith in GOD and his SON Jesus is total.I think the movie "The Passion of Ayn Rand" is well done and reflects the powerful emotions involved between the four individuals = Ayn Rand, Frank O'Connor, Nathaniel Branden and Barbara Branden.I am 41 years younger than Ayn Rand. I would have loved to have been in her life as her lover and intellectual compatriot.I can relate directly to Ayn Rand. In many ways she and I are a lot alike. From 1993 through 2010 the four significant Ladies in my life are each and every one 24 years younger than me.For me in my life I blend the philosophies of "Atlas Shrugged," 1957 by Ayn Rand and "Stranger in a Strange Land," 1961 by Robert A. Heinlein. Heinlein has stated that his book "Stranger in a Strange Land" is entirely a work of fiction. To those who revel in attacking Ayn Rand I can say only "Look into your own life and spirit to see if you can find any fulfillment." I find fulfillment when I look into my own life and spirit. I believe that Ayn Rand found fulfillment in her life and spirit.I recommend the movie "The Passion of Ayn Rand."I have watched the first two "Atlas Shrugged" movies several times. I think they are well done. I will see the third "Atlas Shrugged" movie when I can buy it on DVD. I do not go to movie theaters or use any movie services.

ebiros2 It's obvious from the story that this is not an objective biography of Ayn Rand. Ayn Rand is portrayed like some kind of a sex maniac in this movie.One thing is accurately portrayed, and that is that Ayn Rand couldn't live what she preached. Her objectivism fell apart in her personal life, and with the relationship with her husband. She was an author with an idea, but what good is an idea that you can't put to practice ? Ayn Rand's objectivism in this sense was a silly effort to intellectualize.The movie focused excessively on Ayn Rand's personal life. She has done more in society than just live her life in the bedroom. Movie is not a good presentation of her life or her career in this sense.The acting and the production was good in this movie, but the contents fell short of giving a balanced view of Ayn Rand's life.

Jack I read Atlas Shrugged in 1964 and thought I'd discovered Atlantis or something. I learned that a friend had seen Ayn Rand speak at Ford Hall Forum was also excited by her ideas. It was a couple years before we learned that there had been a split between Ayn Rand, Nathaniel and Barbara Branden -and many more years before we learned the split had occurred years before we were told about it. (And it was clear that information was covered up, repressed for years.) So when Barbara Branden came out with, The Passion Of Ayn Rand, and it later was made into the movie - I paid attention and compared what was presented with my memories. Most of what is in the movie corresponds to what I remember. I like the movie's frankness for it shows how damaging Rand was to other people's relationships and how disappointed she was with the men in her circle who consistently fell short of her fictional male characters. It is notable that every biography of Rand starts with her terrible experience under the Soviets - but none make much of that experience's role in forming Rand's later attitudes and philosophical stance. Her resultant "anti-collectivism" is completely valid on its face but in practice it becomes an excuse for rank selfishness and coldness toward "inferior people."Rand's fascination with men as fantasy heroes and sexual controllers of women has always been evident and was acknowledged by Rand herself. It is never mentioned how this contradicts Rand's forcefully promoted "principles." She punished all who violated her rules but never thought her own transgressions affected how she should be regarded as one promoting a moral system. The movie should be seen by all those who have read Rand's works and know at least something of her actual history. It provides the balance of her human flaws to offset the alleged purity of her ideals. A balance she as a writer never accomplished.

williamhagerup This television film gives a very light handed treatment of a writer and thinker that has had a great influence on many people. Helen Mirren does, as always, a great performance, and the film is worth seeing for her only. I just get a funny feeling about somebody wanting to make such a short and rather mediocre piece of art, about an alleged affair that there to this day is bickering about whether happened at all. As I mentioned; the film is worth seeing for Helen Mirren, but otherwise I recommend Rand's writing, as time much better spent.For those who still would like to see it, I believe it would be useful to know both sides to the conflict between the Nathaniel Branden camp and the Ayn Rand camp. I have not too much interest in this, but just knowing the basics, such as this film does not give you 100% proved facts of the matter, but an adapted presentation of one side of a deep conflict. I think the film would be much improved by taking Branden's story into account and take the other point of view into account as well, and base the film on that. That way the film would at least be something more than a propaganda tool for the anti-Rand camp.