Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead - BOOK TRAILER by The Atlas Society
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 сен 2024
- Artificial Intelligence meets The Fountainhead in the first-of-its-kind BOOK TRAILER for Rand's masterpiece novel.
Get your copy of The Fountainhead at www.atlassocie...
The Atlas Society was proud to host the exclusive worldwide premiere of this incredible homage to Ayn Rand's classic novel The Fountainhead, with a BOOK TRAILER promoting readership.
Read the full novel of Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead!
Get your copy today!
➡️ www.atlassocie...
Just imagine an entire uncut animated series like this. Imagine if it was on Netflix. I'd watch that over and over! That'd be a great impact on youth culture!
um...obama's peeps run NETFLIX so no, they wouldn't show anything capitalistic by RAND.
Ututrgbnll😅 0:44 uyy 😮😮yj😅😅
😅
@@SulekhaSepai😂 xx GK FB j in v hmm kk
She was bang on about just about everything.
I read fountainhead like maybe 20 years ago. Don't know why or how, yet sure it affected me deeply by developing my stoic and realistic approach in the world. Liberalism - capitalism and many other financial structures & ideologies were new to me back then. Now lookintg to life from AI and blockchain, remembering Utopia by Thomas Moore, and many others like Campanella... I love having heartbeats at this point of time...
Ji
I would gladly donated addition money to the Atlas Society to have a full length animated Fountain Head and Atlas Shrugged created. The movies of both were OK but an unabridged unedited version would be amazing. Would also pay for the audiobooks book of to be re-narrated.. 💲
I would love to see this become a feature. I would definitely buy a ticket. The fountainhead was based on Frank Lloyd Wright's and Louis Sullivan''s careers. Who ironically rebelled against the gilded age and the Beaux-Arts. The heroes of Ayn Rand's books were not compelled by money. Money was a by product of their actions. They were truly motivated by passion and integrity.
😅
Wr
I just read The Fountainhead a few weeks ago actually. Great book; very impactful and disturbingly prescient in many ways. I see Toohey in so much of the world, sadly.
loved it!!
❤❤ looks amazing - I await the full release!
That's EXCELLENT. I re-read The Fountainhead every few years and the quotes like "Who will stop me?" ring in my head/ears all the time.
I would love this completed as a graphic novel.
On RUclips, and a book.
Like Anthem.
The Fountainhead graphic novel is underway.
Fantastic ❤❤❤
Are they making this into a movie?
The Fountainhead was made into a movie back in 1949 starring Gary Cooper, Patricia Neal, Raymond Massey, Robert Douglas and Kent Smith.
It is shown on cable/satellite channels such as AMC and TCM on a fairly regular basis.
One of the best scenes is the Howard Roark (Gary Cooper) courtroom scene.
The screenplay was written by Ayn Rand and was filmed with minimal alterations. Rand was less than pleased with it (criticizing the acting, editing, and production design)
We will, in time. Please support The Atlas Society so we can get there.
Who did this animation? It is 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥!!
The Atlas Society production team.
Let all who have read, "The Fountainhead" celebrate this trailer.
Incredible! I'm only disappointed in one thing: real, human artists did not draw this 😢😢😢. If Ayn was here today, it's possible she would agree.
Not a fan of the execution here but I'm struck by how much I like the idea of seeing this story in this art style. I think a miniseries like this has actual potential, thoigh it'd be quite expensive to make for real.
Maybe now, with AI, it could be made for a reasonable price.
@@mikespalding3622 probably not yet but maybe in a few more years
A few decades ago Pakistan, of all places, did a miniseries of The Fountainhead in Urdu. It was actually pretty good from the little I saw.
If only Albert Ruddy had managed to convince Ayn to let him make Atlas Shrugged just after he'd made The Godfather.
Excited! 🎉
eagerly waitng
Is it on animated film? Where?I want to watch this version.
😂❤😂 2
This came out later than Atlas Shurgged trailer. Why does this one look worse?
Should AI have been better than when you made the atlas shrugged video?
🤮
It would've been better to use this as a blueprint and hired artists to actually create an animation with some level of consistency. The animation and artistic 'style' this abomination has also contains all the traits that Howard would find repulsive, if he were an artist/animator.
It's jarring, and thus repulsive. Ought to be memory holed.
Howard Roark aint that hot
Trash
Really thought that film with Gary Cooper was enough punishment for a film going audience. After all, that film was scripted by Rand herself who made sure every word was used and even picked out the leading man. You want to improve on that? After the premiere Rand claimed it may be the worst film she had ever seen. And we are told she studied screenwriting. It's hard to admire a man who destroys private property that he doesn't own just because his ego has been bruised. He should have been found guilty and made to pay for the new development. Unless you believe in the law of the jungle and the ego.
A man should only work on what he loves. Howard Roark wants to see his designs come to life, exactly as he envisioned them. He didn't ask Peter Keating for money or recognition, and he doesn't care if people think someone else designed his buildings. Yet, you still think Roark has an ego. I don't think you fully understand the book. Let me illustrate: if you designed a motorcycle and your team built it, but someone else received credit, your ego would likely be hurt. But that's not the case with Howard Roark. His happiness comes from creating value on this earth, not from fame or what others think of him.
@@naveenkumar-vb5st Pretty hard to defend the destruction of personal property that you don't own only because what was built did not bear your name. This is the adulation of self and ego. Roark begins his insane speech at the trial with "The first man who invented fire was probably killed by other people setting him on fire" (or something like that). If you think about it for more than one second you realize not only does it not make any sense but it just isn't so. This book and film is a fantasy of a diseased mind.
Roark's price for designing the project was that they build it as he designed it. They took his design and modified it, thereby he was not compensated for his work. So he didn't destroy something that belonged to someone else. If someone orders a pizza from you, and they don't pay the price that was agreed on, if you pitch the pizza in the trash, you didn't destroy their property. Was his actions extreme? Absolutely. Was his actions justified? That is up to the individual and his values.
@@victorriceroni8455 Rand was never one for morals. She had an open affair with a man who wasn't her husband with her husband's permission. So, I agree to write a college report for you. You can use your name but it must be submitted as I wrote it. Before you submit it I find out that you have changed some footnotes and altered some chapters. Can I just go in, steal it out of your dorm room and set fire to it?
@@victorriceroni8455 Your pizza analogy comes up short though because of the fact that Roark's contract was with Keating, not with any 3rd party, in fact, any 3rd party would be entirely unaware of Roark's intentions since he didn't communicate with any 3rd party (cause he assumed he couldn't get passed Toohey), nor did his name come up in the contract between Keating and whoever was hired to built Cortland. So at best he could seek restitution from Keating since he didn't hold up his agreement to Roark, and Keating could seek restitution from any 3rd parties that didn't design Cortland as stipulated in the contract. However, the material wealth that was required to build Cortland was not the private property of Roark, so to then destroy this property should be seen as an obvious violation in any decent philosophy or theory of law.
The notion that Roark has a supposed claim on the property that belongs to others would entail partial ownership, which in itself would contradict the Objectivist position on individual rights, either property belongs to P or to Q, there is no excluded-middle. Obviously in the novel Roark came out triumphant because of Rand being in favor of intellectual property and as such she conveyed this position onto her protagonists.
Technically, the only properties that Roark rightfully owns are the paper and ink that was required for him to make his Cortland design, he had every right to destroy the original design, but not the rightfully acquired property of others. The materials that were used to build Cortland were not his property, he did not put up this capital, so it was never within his right to destroy the materials/capital that Cortland consists of.
The pizza was never his, only the idea of the pizza that was inside his mind, though once communicated with other minds, it ceases to be exclusively his. Despite Roark being one of my favorite fictional characters ever, I see no way as to why his chosen actions (dynamiting private property) can be lawfully justified.
I think that @alg11297 has merely pointed out a flaw within Objectivism that is painfully obvious to those that still aspire to be intellectually honest and logically consistent in the pursuit of truth-seeking. Many share this critique, for good reasons. Rand claimed that her Objectivism is an integrated philosophy, so if there are any flaws in it, they deserve to be pointed out so they can be corrected.