Who Is John Galt?


But parts 1 & 2 tanked. It's been said to death, but the market really has spoken.

The filmmakers here have so much in common with their idol, in that they're choosing to work in a median they're not particularly skilled at to carry their (her) message.
This has "career suicide" written all over it.

Unless you're prepared to only work for rightwing nutjob movies for the rest of your life (Kelsey Grammar).
Kelsey Grammer? Was the question "Who is John Bald?"
Kelsey Grammer played a pretentious, condescending know-it-all for about 20 years (!!) between Cheers and Frasier, so he seems like he would be a natural suggestion, but for one problem: in those shows, the character was loveable.
I renew my suggestion that they cast Ben Stein and feature his nonstop talking for the majority of the movie.
It needs to be someone who will be a big Taker, like all Randites.

They love government cheese, whilst railing against it.
Having actors that "deep understanding of, and passion for, Ayn Rand's ideas first and foremost." is prety much impossible and a huge reason these movies sucked. Another reason being that it is a long boring movie based on a long boring book.

But the cliff notes version was not bad.
Oh shit. Epiphany.

Get a black woman to play John Galt. Let the latent and not-so-latent racism/sexism of the Randians bubble forth. And make sure you get someone really, really good, so they can't complain that she's a bad actor, just that she's a black woman.
I'd nominate Mike Daisey. Rather than doing the monologue from the book just let him do his Ayn Rand piece for the middle third of the movie.
I just like the fact that they think anyone with a household name is even going to entertain the notion of appearing in this flick.
Hologram Ronald Reagan or GTFO
Two words: Russell Brand
They need a game changer! No one is gonna watch that crappy movie because of the quality of acting. The acting could be phenomenal, and still no one is gonna watch it. Unless it is a spectacle, a right-wing wet-dream mash up of Ayn Rand and Tea Bagging ideology. Then you might get the curious, not just the hard-core Randians, to see it.

How about casting Scott Walker? Paul Ryan? Rick Scott? Rush Limbaugh? Sean Hannity? Lots of possibilities.
Dude, the only time Cruise is any good is when he's playing a self-satisfied prick. See: Eyes Wide Shut, Rain Man.
Why isn't Mel Gibson starring, producing, directing and re-writing this?
@15 Galt is a self-satisfied prick written by a self-satisfied prick for an audience of self-satisfied pricks. Sounds like Cruise would be so good he'd win an Oscar.
I've always wondered if Galt's john is gold plated.
It should be an amateur who weighs over 400 pounds. Not an actor; a Rob Ford kind of guy.

I do like the constant talking idea, though -- he should be just motormouthing continuously about the nobility of his yadda yadda, not stopping even when the camera leaves him to do something else. Still going when it comes back three days later.
Conservative Actor Vince Vaughn.

He would be perfect playing a self-satisfied prick (doesn't he usually play one in his dumb movies anyway?) with his charcoal stuck in the throat voice. Not much of a stretch for him.
@11: This made me sad.


Mostly because I like his character in Parks & Rec, and I had completely forgot about how much of an asshat the guy is.

He's still not of the type to commit career suicide by being in the flick, of course.
Someone call James Franco! He'd absolutely love another acting-as-performance-art role.
Only if he plays his Spring Breakers role.

As far as "a great self-satisfied prick" you guys made me think of Tom Cruise in Tropic Thunder:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odd8Zdhuj… (lots of swearing).

It's too bad there couldn't be a serious creative go at this. Take the story, shape up the weak writing, give it a huge budget, and toss in Morgan Freeman.
"No pinkos should be considered,"

No sane person should be considered. Who would want to star in such a predictable bomb?
Self satisfied prick? You don't get it. Galt is a strong self assured man, not selfish. He would be soft spoken, confident, and totally aware of what is around him. Handsome would be good, but a slight ruggedness would be better. I liked the movies, I wasn't happy with the character/actors changed out, but the 2nd Dagney fit better. Anxiously waiting for the third movie.
Part 1 had a better looking cast, with more believable roles. However Part 2 had better acting, from uglier (who cares if they WERE older) and less intense of a cast. On the note of John Galt, I SEVERLY believe he should be played by Bruce Campbell. [he is the guy who played Sam Axe on Burn Notice; not only does he kinda look like they showed Galt semi-looking like at the end of part 2, but he is a damn-great actor, end of story.]