Rating: 
Summary: "Lifestyles of the Rich and Fascist"
Review: The late Ayn Rand was the supreme proof of George Orwell's comment that only intellectuals can come up with certain ideas, because no ordinary person could be so stupid. This film, which is, quite simply, the most unintentionally funny movie I have ever seen,is valuable only because it shows clearly why so many people who ranted (her name really should have been Ayn Rant)about the (very real) horrors of Communism in the years after World War One eventually wound up snugly in the grasp of Herr Schicklgruber and his little elves. (And, yes, I know that Rand wasn't herself a Nazi; she just played one in print -- and here, on screen.) Cooper's architect is an embodiment of the way Hitler saw himself: a Promethean creator, rejected by the Establishment that didn't know a genius when it saw one.It's hard to know which of the film's many inanities is the choicest. The idea that a "yellow"(i.e.,tabloid)newspaper could get the masses of New York worked up into a riotous frenzy over -- ARCHITECTURAL STYLES????? The proposition that, even after years of getting high-profile commissions, Cooper is STILL helplessly at the mercy of unfeeling mediocrities, who can kill off his entire career with one press release? The notion that one can be put on trial for the crime of not following mass taste?(In AMERICA????? -- where the biggest problem has always been ESTABLISHING a tradition, not breaking free of one.)And, of course, like any good fascist, Miss Rand never concerns herself with corny old concepts like right and wrong. ("Beyond Good and Evil", doncha know.)Cooper actually DID commit the act of vandalism for which he is tried; yet his acquittal is treated like a triumph of justice(presumably because no one Miss Rand cared about happened to get caught in that explosion he set off).And the homosexual subtext of this film -in the relationship between Cooper and his former enemy the publisher-is nothing short of hilarious.(When the boys plan their around-the-world cruise together, you don't need to wait for the dialogue to tell you that Patricia Neal won't be coming along).Finally, what makes this whole enterprise even wackier is that Rand doesn't even have the consistency of her own idiocy. The idea that a man like Cooper - proud, rugged, the ultimate loner- would allow a no-talent rival, WITH HIS BLESSING, to take one of his most prized concepts and pass it off as his own makes utter nonsense of everything we have been shown up to that point.In sum, if you want to do justice to "The Fountainhead", invite over any Patrick Buchanan and David Duke supporters you may happen to know, put some bratwurst on the grill, pop this gem into the VCR, and have a ball.
Rating: 
Summary: NOT A BAD ADAPTATION - BUT READ THE BOOK FIRST...
Review: THE FOUNTAINHEAD's protagonist, Howard Roark, is loosely based on the life of maverick architect Frank Lloyd Wright, and many of Roark's buildings are patterned after Wright's works. Howard Roark is a fiercely independent architect who would prefer obscurity and anonymity over wealth and popularity by not conforming to the common expectations of a collectivist society. Hollywood likes to make films based on best-selling books because they come with a built-in audience. However, in the case of Ayn Rand's epic; "The Fountainhead", translating a novel replete with lengthy didactic speeches into a Hollywood blockbuster proved extremely difficult, especially since Rand wrote the screenplay herself and insisted that no dialogue be changed without her approval. The result, while a failure at the box office, continues to be one of the most noteworthy of American films. The lasting power of the film lies not in the quality of acting or cleverness of plot, but in the power of Rand's message: that all progress and achievement come from the independent mind; and that NO one should be forced to work for the "common good" or conform to the wishes of others. It is this message to which all other elements of the film are subordinated. MOVIE SYNOPSIS Roark meets architecture critic Dominique Francon while she surveys her father's stone quarry. The two fall in love but Roark suddenly leaves for New York to take a commission. Dominique decides to marry Gail Wynand, the arrogant, rich publisher of " The Banner", a newspaper that delivers to the public what they want to hear. Within these pages Roark is initially attacked for his radical designs. Eventually Wynand realizes Roark's talents. Peter Keating, an unscrupulous architect, hires Roark to ghost-design a public housing project for him. Roark agrees on the condition that the building be built *exactly* as he designed it and never to be altered from his designs. When it becomes clear that the plans were modified, Roark blows up the unfinished buildings, preferring to go to jail than to see his vision and his integrity compromised. In the end, Roark heroically and symbolically rises above society as the final shot zooms upward with the architect perched above all else: his direction comes not from the opinions or values or expectations of others, but from the integrity of his own inner vision, values, and commitments; and to keep faith within the best of oneself at all costs. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rather than define her characters, Rand makes each one an analogy for different parts of her thesis the conflict between individualism and society's need for order and conformity: Roark symbolizing freedom of choice, reason, human ability and achievment through individual rights, political and economic freedom - while the ruthless reporter Ellsworth Toohey represents the collectivist-socialist who preaches self-sacrifice, altruism and charity as a means to power over other human beings. Other characters represent varying degrees of the theme; their role is to challenge Roark's strength and courage of mind. As such, this film is a useful teaching tool for a discussion of Rand's theory. But behind the primary theme of individualism versus collectivism, Rand also presented her readers and viewers with two other topics to consider: the nearly absolute power of the media in a free capitalist society, and the intricacies of romantic relationships between uncompromising people. IN CLOSING Despite its failure with audiences and critics, "The Fountainhead" takes its place among the literary classics as it forces us to confront and examine the role of the individual in our society. Henry David Thoreau's famous line, "If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away."
Rating: 
Summary: Captures the essence of the book.
Review: Given the constraints of a Hollywood 1940's production, this is a masterful condensation of the novel - one that deserves a mini-series. It's a stylistic production with an excellent Max Steiner score. The sense of Rand's heroic individualism comes across in Cooper's performance. However, it's time for a remake. I suggest reading the novel first.
Rating: 
Summary: stark, beautiful, inspiring
Review: This is a masterpiece that gives people of independent minds hope and reason to go on with its message of "don't compromise...follow your ideals". As an artist working in a medium that is unusual, I LOVE this movie. I put it on whenever my determination gets a little wobbly ! Strong and handsome, the fabulous Gary Cooper is perfect as Howard Roark, and Patricia Neal and Raymond Massey are also wonderful. The cinematography by Robert Burks ( who did a lot of Alfred Hitchcock's best films ) uses sharp contrasts and is brilliant in its use of shade. This film deserves 5 stars just for how it looks. Don't miss it !
Rating: 
Summary: Dated
Review: The one trait, in my mind, that keeps movies from being the greatest of art forms, in that they date so quickly. If you read a Tolstoy novel, or a Hemingway novel, or see a Van Gogh painting, or listen to a Bach concerto, and someone told you it was created last year, it would be believable. But movies date badly, as does the "Fountainhead." The emotions of those who saw it when it was released, are not the same for those who see it now. And even if it were filmed today, it's a very contrived movie. Howard Roark is an architect, for God's sake. But the movie treats him like he's saving the world from the Ebola virus. That his one-man crusade is THAT important. Read Tom Wolfe's FROM BAUHAUS TO OUR HOUSE for an overview of the architectural movement this movie's plot is taken from. I do like Patricia Neal in this. I didn't read the book, so was not disappointed by Gary Cooper's age. For me his being so long in the tooth helped me believe he really felt his convictions. I mean, he's not far off from retirement age in this movie, and he's still refusing to compromise for the sake of financial security. Incidentally, Gary Cooper and Patricia Neal had a real-life love affair as a result of this movie. So the passion she shows for him on screen is real. (Gary Cooper was incapable of showing passion!).
Rating:
Summary: Perfectly casted, wonderfully stylized
Review: To those who say that Rand's novel is unfilmable--remember that films and novels are two entirely different media. Gary Cooper, like it or not, is the PERFECT Howard Roarke. Raymond Massey is the PERFECT Gail Wynand. Some unforgettable shots (Peter Keating walking into Roarke's office, the shadow of the window frame behind him; Cameron and Roarke in the ambulance, the hospital behind them, Cameron saying, "I built that"; Dominique dropping the statue down, down, down the building courtyard; the last sequence at the construction site--"Who shall I say is calling?" "Mrs. Roarke"). Not surprisingly, the movie is ignored by the thoughtless.
Rating:
Summary: A disappointment for those who love the book
Review: This movie adaptation of Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead" does not do the power and beauty of the novel justice. Although Rand wrote the screenplay herself, the important philosophical speeches are not as eloquently presented in the movie as they are in the book. I felt like I was being hit over the head with the heavy handed presentation of the themes. I was particulalrly disapointed in Gary Cooper's performance as Howard Roark. He just didn't do the character justice. I found him much too old for the role. Overall it was worth watching, but not nearly as fascinating or moving as the novel.
Rating:
Summary: It Gets Better Every Time!
Review: The first time I saw this movie, circa 1969, I was disappointed. I felt it was melodramatically presented, in black and white, and in two hours it was an injustice to the novel's power and grandeur. The actors did not seem to measure up, or buy in, to the characters they portrayed. This movie review, thirty years ago, would have rated "The Fountainhead" as, at best, two stars. It was a definite embarassment to most Ayn Rand devotees at the time. The five star rating I give the movie today, thirty years and numerous viewings later, is a very personal, indivdualized one. Through these eyes, "The Fountainhead" is enormously moving, well-cast and very well portrayed, if you're the kind of person who relates to: (1) the struggle between integrity and conformity in our private and business lives (2) the travails of entrepreneurship and perseverance in the face of spirit crushing adversity (3) the belief that there is definable difference between good and evil, and that it is really possible for the former to prevail. Several of Gary Cooper's scenes as Howard Roark are profoundly memorable: (1) when he refuses money from Peter Keating after showing him he was down to his last few cents (2) when he walks out on the munificent offer from the bank board to build a mutation of his bank design (3) the party scene when Dominique discovers the quarry worker she had obsessed over was Roger Enright's architect, Howard Roark. There's more. Great camera angles, strong dialogue from the supporting cast, especially Ellsworth Toohey. Summarily, the director, screenplay people and actors did a magnificent job within the two hour confines of making a riveting movie. But if you're looking for a verbatim reproduction of the book, or you have an aversion to Ayn Rand's message of individual creativism and freedom, this one's not for you!
Rating:
Summary: The Supremacy of Reason? Not In This Movie!
Review: This movie is one of those adaptations that fails on pretty much every level and ends up even making the source material seem pretty specious; as soon as you hear Rand's dialogue spoken aloud here, all you really can do is laugh: "I wish I'd never seen your skyscraper!" Patricia Neal (miscast) pants to Gary Cooper (miscast). King Vidor directs this as a melodrama, not as a film of ideas, and it's pretty much an unintentional laff-riot from beginnning to end (Vidor's also responsible for giving the world that bottomless pit of camp "Beyond the Forest" the same year-the movie famous for Bette Davis' declaration "What a dump!" A double feature of both movies is probably more laughs in an evening than statistics has laid down for our guidance). It's hard to take Rand-or anything else-seriously when you watch Neal slash Cooper across the face with her riding crop. Rand's books really aren't filmable because their impact is solely dependent upon the point of view of the author and movies are never the work of just one person. Also, much of what of works on the page for Rand could never work on screen, as this movie so hilariously makes apparent; any true advocate of Objectivism, Rand included, could never flourish in committee-think, studio controlled 1940s Hollywood to begin with.
Rating:
Summary: The Sap Head
Review: This l949 black and white movie still looks good. It has a screenplay written by ultra-individualistic Ayn Rand, based on her classic novel. But other than everyone being complete miscast and the film looking nothing like the book, this is a major dissapoint to this faithful Randist. Director King Vidor initially wanted Greta Garbo as Dominique but of course she refused. John Garfield was mentioned as Howard Roark. He would have been fantastic. Instead, they got laconic, low-keyed, much too old Gary Cooper who always made you think of a straw-sticking-out-of mouth cowboy. Patricia Neal simply ain't no Dominique Francon. Edward Carrere was the production designer, capturing nothing of hte grandeur of over-the-top architecture described in the book. William Cameron Menzies (who had designed Gone with the Wind, King's Row) should have designed this flick. Art direction should have been genius Anton Grot, instead of insipid william Kuehl. (Grot was the genius who designed the now legendary, nearly surreal sets of the Bette Davis/Paul Henreid camp classic, "Deception" with its football sized penthouse of the supposedly poor, struggling Bette--"I had to take in piano students!") Miles Anderson costume designs for "Fountainhead" were uninspired. Why didn't they get--again from "Deception"--the fabulous Bernrd Newman? Max STeiner actually did the film score but you'd never know it? He also created a masterpiece with his musical of Bette Davis' greatest film, the l949 "Beyond the Forest." They should remake this film today, have mature actors in the roles, not the MTV brat pack. Rand supposedly had a bloody time trying to keep her screenplay from being watered down--which it was.
|
