Rating: 
Summary: Surprisingly effective
Review: The film claims to be based on Barbara Branden's book but from what I've seen of it, it also draws heavily on Nathaniel Branden's "memoir" of his symbiotic relationship with Ayn Rand. A previous reviewer complains of words put in Rand's mouth that were not in Barbara's book. They all seem to appear in Nathaniel's. Ayn Rand worshippers probably will hate the film because it does seem to emphasize her hypocrisies. But hey, nobody is perfect and Rand still comes off as a very vital woman and an uncompromising intellect. Well, uncompromising until she starts rationalizing her increasingly emotionally dependent relationship with Nathaniel. I find the story to be mostly balanced and of course the talent in the film is unsurpassed. Put that together with the compelling story and I have to give it 5 stars. The only disquiet I may have is that viewers who may not have read the 2 books will not have an appreciation for the charm that her 2 foremost disciples claim Ayn Rand to have had, despite her often icy exterior.
Rating: 
Summary: Ayn Rand deserves better
Review: The reviewer keeps using the word "controversial" to describe Ayn Rand. Funny, no one uses that word to describe Karl Marx or Adolph Hilter. I suppose if celebrating individual liberty and advocating for individual rights is "controversial," then controversial she is. It's a shame Hollywood has foresaken Ayn Rand. I suppose she's too "controversial" for the authoritarian elites of tinsle town. Of all the movies to make of Rand's life and art, to focus on her libido seems a bit maudlin. This film disappointed me as a Rand fan. I liked the philosophical debates, but still I don't know why her love affair had to be the focal point. If you have never been exposed to Rand before, I reccommend this not be your first Rand experience. If you don't want to read one of Rand's novels, I would suggest watching "The Fountainhead" made in the 1940s and starring Patricial Neal. "Atlas Shrugged" has been in the making for some time. I won't hold my breath waiting for it to come out. I think it would make a great made-for-TV mini-series. I remember hearing that a 1950s Italian film was made based on "Atlas Shrugged" (in defiance of the oppressive Mussolini years), but I'm not sure about this. Regardless, "The Passion of Ayn Rand" is worth watching although it might disappoint you if you are a fan. The average puppet head, however, probably wouldn't find it too interesting, especially if you are some Marxist bloke living in the BBC's Britain. For most Americans, Ayn Rand epitomizes what life is all about, and why it's worth living. For british chumps and many of their fellow europeans, anything that celebrates life only puts them into further states of depression and perpetual gloom.
Rating: 
Summary: First learn, then decide.
Review: The three stars I have given are there only because the Amazon page requires me to pick, so I have chosen a neutral number since this is not really about the movie. To explain... This is by way of a meta-review, that is, a commentary on how to consider the reviews here rather than the TV production or even the book. DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THEM! Not, at least, until you have the information to judge them on your own. This does not mean 'watch the tape or DVD' or even 'read the book', because neither of those will give you the necessary understanding of the central character. Even the Academy Award nominated biographical documentary, "Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life", while very good, still cannot give you enough information since it is only a few hours long and cannot possibly cover the full scope of this remarkable woman. The reviews here range from nasty to quite good, but you can't be sure which is which until you understand what all the fuss is about, and the ONLY way to do that is to read what Ayn Rand wrote. Most people start with her two main novels, "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged", and they are worth reading even if only as examples of great fiction. However, you should not stop there, because she wrote broadly of her views on morality, political theory, art, and the deepest intricacies of philosophy, but she also wrote on a myriad of smaller subjects, like her stamp collecting, or why she liked Marilyn Monroe, or what music she liked. It is in the breadth of her writing that you can find the real Ayn Rand. As I have always warned people, don't believe a thing anyone tells you about Ayn Rand (including me) until you know enough about her. If you are truly interested in what she really was like, you need to first read four or five of her books (you pick). Learn what she had to say and judge for yourself. Then you will be able to understand why some people are so attracted to her and others so hate her, and why some of these reviews are valid and others are not. But you have to do it yourself.
Rating:
Summary: First learn, then decide.
Review: The three stars I have given are there only because the Amazon page requires me to pick, so I have chosen a neutral number since this is not really about the movie. To explain... This is by way of a meta-review, that is, a commentary on how to consider the reviews here rather than the TV production or even the book. DON'T BELIEVE ANY OF THEM! Not, at least, until you have the information to judge them on your own. This does not mean 'watch the tape or DVD' or even 'read the book', because neither of those will give you the necessary understanding of the central character. Even the Academy Award nominated biographical documentary, "Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life", while very good, still cannot give you enough information since it is only a few hours long and cannot possibly cover the full scope of this remarkable woman. The reviews here range from nasty to quite good, but you can't be sure which is which until you understand what all the fuss is about, and the ONLY way to do that is to read what Ayn Rand wrote. Most people start with her two main novels, "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged", and they are worth reading even if only as examples of great fiction. However, you should not stop there, because she wrote broadly of her views on morality, political theory, art, and the deepest intricacies of philosophy, but she also wrote on a myriad of smaller subjects, like her stamp collecting, or why she liked Marilyn Monroe, or what music she liked. It is in the breadth of her writing that you can find the real Ayn Rand. As I have always warned people, don't believe a thing anyone tells you about Ayn Rand (including me) until you know enough about her. If you are truly interested in what she really was like, you need to first read four or five of her books (you pick). Learn what she had to say and judge for yourself. Then you will be able to understand why some people are so attracted to her and others so hate her, and why some of these reviews are valid and others are not. But you have to do it yourself.
Rating: 
Summary: Erratic, but I enjoyed it
Review: This definitely dwells on the "soap opera" aspect of the Rand/Branden relationships, and I doubt that someone who hadn't read at least one of the Branden books would be able to fully comprehend the storyline. So, for that part of the film, I only rate 3 stars. The acting is the best part - Helen Mirren is brilliant, and I can't imagine anyone else playing the part as well. I also found Julie Delpy to be really wonderful - her portrayal was nuanced and very complex, and I feel that Delpy carried the rest of the show when Mirren wasn't onscreen. When both women were in a scene, Delpy definitely held her own, and wasn't outacted by Mirren. Now, I'm a big fan of Eric Stoltz, but I didnt' find him right for the role of Nathaniel Branden. His portrayal of an intellectual was implausible - way too shallow. He was only effective as a sexual being; the erotic scenes between Stoltz and Mirren, and Stoltz and the woman who played Caroline, were hot. Peter Fonda was just way too somnolent as Frank. I realize that Frank was supposed to be a "weak" or soft character, but Fonda overplayed that (or underplayed it, I suppose). I find it hard to believe that he was actually nominated for, or won, an acting award for this. ...
Rating:
Summary: Rent it, don't buy it, even if you're an Ayn Rand fan
Review: This film never showed why Rand was (and is) such a cult figure/iconoclast. It merely was a soap opera about her, her milquetoast husband, and a couple of what today would be considered yuppies. It also missed a huge opportunity to explore a major theme that it brought up: how people who advocate complete selfishness can sustain (or not) long-term romantic relationships.
Helen Mirren was fabulous in her portrayal of Rand, rising above the lacking script, and actually made her rather likable in an odd way. On the other hand, Eric Stoltz' character was totally unlikable and unredeeming, and due to the deficiencies of the script I could never understand what Rand saw in him either intellectually or romantically.
Smooth, cool jazz and gorgeous nighttime views of Manhattan added to the ambiance, but overall this film came up wanting. It began with the Julie Delpy character's voiceover (at the time of Rand's death in the '80s) saying she had "loved" Rand, but we were never shown why this could be so. Just another example of why I regret buying this DVD.
The DVD transfer of this was poor: my copy had a line at the top of the screen, as if it had been dubbed from a VHS tape.
Rating: 
Summary: Why bother with the message, attack the messenger
Review: Those people who hate Ayn Rand's ideas (pro-communist leftists and anti-abortion conservatives) or enjoy watching Jerry Springer will love this movie. Those who want the truth about Ayn Rand should look somewhere else.
| 
