Brian Wright Believe me, I'm not kidding about how silly/scary some of these sessions could be, even out in the Hinterland. In the movie, they show a young woman, in front of Rand and Nathaniel Branden (Eric Stoltz), coming to tears for not having the correct interpretation of some behavioral peccadillo. It reminds you of a party-loyalty session on the collective farms in Russia and China. But the story is largely autobiographical for Barbara Branden. We see a very important part of Rand's life, Rand's husband, Frank O'Connor (Peter Fonda), as well as Barbara and Nathaniel. The plot focuses a lot on the relationships among them. It starts with Barbara and Nathaniel coming to meet Ayn Rand at her home in California... after Nathaniel had written a most perceptive letter to Rand when he had read her book, The Fountainhead. Ayn and Nathaniel hit it off at first syllogism, then, in a few years, start "getting it on" above and beyond the call of reason.

Qanqor I once had a music professor who, on assigning us a biography of Beethoven, commented thusly: the story of the life of a master is necessarily the story of what they were NOT master of. This perspective is particularly apropos to the The Passion Of Ayn Rand, both the film and the book.The original book is actually a full biography of Ms. Rand, and includes the good, the bad, and the indifferent. Through it, one discovers and comes to know this remarkable woman, a brilliant mind who achieved so much against such long odds. Through it one also gets to see the dark side, when her fame and success ultimately brought her adulation and worship that, sadly, went to her head. Even her staunchest supporters must admit that she really went a bit loopy there after she made it big. Certainly any serious admirer of her philosophy (such as myself) is almost painfully struck by the ways she violated her own philosophy during this period. And this too is a fascinating insight and, to my mind at least, doesn't diminish her philosophy one bit.The main difference, though, between the film and the book is that the movie doesn't have the time to tell Ayn's whole story, nor does it even attempt to. It is not surprising to find that it focuses exclusively on the sordid, albeit fascinating, romantic affairs that marked her relationship, and ultimate severance with Nathaniel Brandon. And granted, this certainly is one of the most, uh, *interesting* parts of her life. But the down side is that, by focusing exclusively on this part of her life, it really tends to show both the woman and her philosophy in a pretty poor light. This is really not a problem for those of us who already know her work and understand what Objectivism is really about, and for this audience, the movie is indeed a treat. The performances are excellent, especially Helen Mirren as Ms. Rand, and it really brings to life what the whole thing must've been like.But one really does worry what the uninitiated come away thinking. Ayn really does come off like some cult-leader tyrant of some crack-pot philosophy. It's really not that the movie is trying to do a hatchet job on her, it's just that, because it doesn't have the time or interest to actually go into her philosophy, there's no way you could really figure out what Ms. Rand was really on about, from the few stray comments she makes out of context.Mind you, some people who DO know her work still think she's a crack-pot. And that's fine, so be it. But I do encourage anyone who hasn't actually read Rand to do so and judge for themselves, rather than being negatively influenced by this film. I would recommend The Fountainhead as a good place to start (the novel, not the movie).

lurch-17 Having read almost all of Rand's works and considering her a brilliant philosopher and writer, I was apprehensive about seeing her personal side in a movie. I was not disappointed. I understand her work very well and was able to completely separate her personal conduct from her philosophy. Was her personal conduct in conflict or harmony with her philosophy? An esoteric question, and I don't care.She was once quoted as saying that the character Kira, in her book 'We The Living', was the closest thing to an autobiography that she would ever write. Kira was a pure character with heroic characteristics. Ayn Rand in real life was probably not. Again, I don't care. None of this detracts from her philosophy. By the way, don't miss Rand's book-turned-into-film 'We The Living' starring Rossano Brazzi and Alida Valli filmed in Italy during WWII without Rand's knowledge or blessing. It is a cinematic feast. Italian actors, Russian setting, English subtitles and well adapted. Reportedly, Hitler had it canned after one showing because it criticized totalitarian dictatorships.Back to this movie. It is reasonably well done and very interesting. Hoving subscribed to her newsletter, 'The Objectivist', I will never forget the short column she wrote therein, something to the effect "Nathaniel Branden is no longer associated with me, etc" (after she had dedicated Atlas Shrugged to him).There is a human side to every hero.Above all, read 'The Fountainhead', her greatest work. Forget the film, it was poorly adapted (by Rand?) and Cooper/Neal did not do the book's characters justice.

enthusiast WARNING! POSSIBLE SPOILERS!!This is not the best movie or work made about Ayn Rand. That is because it comes from the viewpoint of a person who is (was) personally bitter about the founder of the Objectivist school of philosophy. She does not see the entire point about this movie as she is obviously quite bitter, and such people quite frequently are not very objective and miss their own shortcomings. The sad fact is that had she provided sexual fulfillment for her husband; he certainly would never had strayed from her. Ayn was having problems being fulfilled by her husband, Frank (probably due to his age). Ayn soon discovered that Barbara was not fulfilling the sexual needs of her young husband; therefore as Barbara seemed not to care about her husband's sexual satisfaction and Ayn needed a young man, Ayn quite rationally reasoned there was justification for the affair. Controversial, yes, but I do not believe that it should be immediately condemned. If Barbara had really wanted her husband she should have immediately (upon hearing of the proposal ) called Ayn a "bitch" and grabbed her own husband and said "Honey, let's get out of here. I love you too much to share you with this woman and I will do the best I can from now on to satisfy you." As Barbara did not do so I can only conclude that she did not actually love her husband (enough) and should stop complaining about what happened afterwards. Ladies, stand by your man!