User Reviews

Let's face it. Every documentary is biased. No matter how objective (forgive the situational wordplay) a documentary filmmaker wants to be in presenting his/her subject, he/she has a point of view, or else why bother making the film at all?

The problem here is not Michael Paxton's bias, although he is clearly an adoring fan of the writer/philosopher. The problem is that in painting a portrait of this equally celebrated and vilified woman, he never shows, and only barely tells of, the vilification. As a result, he doesn't give viewers, not even her most ardent admirers, reason to celebrate her.

The film mentions in passing some of her flaws as a person, and repeatedly talks of the criticism surrounding her ideas. But we never hear any of the criticism, any of the arguments against, anything at all to cast her in the light of "defender of the faith," or defender of anything at all, for that matter. She states her case time and again, in interviews, in excerpts from her novels and philosophical works, etc. But we're left with a feeling of "Great. Why should I care?"

Not many people will see this film -- 2 1/2 hour docs rarely draw the masses in theater, on video or anywhere else -- so I'll make a rather simplistic analogy. Think of "Star Wars". How compelled would we be to root for the good of the force if we hadn't heard Darth Vader expound on the power of evil (the Dark Side)? How can you convince anyone of any point, positive or negative, without at least presenting the counterpoint?

Viewers who already adore Rand will no doubt cheer this film. For them, it's very palatable candy. Her detractors shouldn't waste their time. But a documentary is supposed to educate viewers in some way, and the uneducated will get nothing more than a biography and an unquestioned statement of philosophy. That's not much for any doc, but especially for one this long.

The memorable, and ultimately appalling, thing about Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life,the new film biography of the right-wing novelist-philosopher, is that it is perfectly true to its subject. Just as Rand, who was born in 1905 in Leningrad as it was convulsed by revolution, declared that she had not changed her ideas about anything since the age of 2½, this reverential documentary presents her thoughts as uncontested truth.

The evangelical tone is set by filmmaker Michael Paxton, quoted in the press material as saying that he first found Ayn Rand when he was an adolescent trying "to find a book that would answer all of my questions and give my life meaning." A Sense of Life contents itself with interviewing her friends and acolytes. It acknowledges that she was much criticized, and even considered a crank, but her critics don't appear on screen and their views are not explained.

But neither Rand nor the film should be dismissed, if only because she is widely read and her ideas have been deeply influential. They lie behind much neo-conservative commentary, which recasts democracy -- essentially an untidy contest of ideas and interests -- as a secular religion (she called it Objectivism) where competing points of view are greeted with adolescent impatience.

But more particularly, Rand's influence helps explain the concealed romanticism of much right-wing commentary, which replaces iconic figures from other belief systems with buccaneering businessmen and entrepreneurs. As this film unwittingly makes clear, Rand herself was one of the great romantics. A worshipper of Hollywood, and partly successful screenwriter, she laments that the film version of her novel The Fountainhead "lacked the Romanticism of the German films she had loved as a youth." That these films were the precursors of fascism seems to have escaped the notice of Rand and her disciples.

This appealing simplicity, a charming oblivion to her own contradictions, gave Rand a widespread following among those looking for answers, even as it exasperated intellectuals. She believed that each individual has a sacred core of personal talents and dreams which can be expressed in a free society. People may choose to co-operate, but these choices must ultimately serve their self-interest. If an action is truly selfless, she often said, it is "evil." Her reasoning was that selflessness in one's own life can be enlisted by political systems such as communism that call on human beings to sacrifice themselves for the state.

These views were apparently burned into Rand's consciousness by the horrors she witnessed during and after the Russian Revolution -- a period the film recalls through family photographs and archival film footage. She decided that capitalism was the only hope for mankind. "Capitalism leaves every man free to choose the work he likes," she declares on screen, oblivious to the deadening monotony of most people's jobs, not to mention unemployment.

Like her spiritual successors she prefers the grand and distant vista, and does not approach closely to see the outcasts and victims who are part of every great undertaking. She loved "the view of the skyscrapers where you don't see the details," declares the film, unselfconsciously.

This made her a formidable popular writer. She was seriously able to declare that Marilyn Monroe seemed to have come from an ideal, joyful world, that the star was "someone untouched by suffering." The hero of her last novel, Atlas Shrugged,was the direct descendant of Cyrus, the hero of a boy's adventure story she read at the age of 16. Like most libertarians, she had a deeply childish world view.

Never beautiful, Rand's intensity (and searching black eyes) seduced more than a few men. According to Harry Binswager, one of her academic admirers, "her idea of feminity was an admiration of masculine qualities." This was also Hitler's idea of feminity, and Rand's screenplays invariably include an idealized hero or heroine standing on a distant promontory, Leni Riefenstahl-style, but these fascinating parallels are of course not examined in A Sense of Life.

Rand had a powerful, if not searching, intellect. In many on screen interviews seen in the film, she gives apparently convincing answers to her critics. But the answers are always framed in absolutes -- "man wants freedom, suffering has no importance" -- which are essentially empty postulates. But they have an attractive ring.

A Sense of Life is worth seeing because its naive presentation of Rand is consonant with Rand herself. In fact, it feels like nothing so much as an in-house biography of the founder of some fundamentalist religious sect. It acknowledges its subject's imperfections (her infidelity to her husband of 50 years, for example), but only to declare them redeemed by her quest for truth.

Rand was, of course, a lifelong atheist. But her work is a testament to the yearning for belief. The film concludes on a lingering shot of a poster for Atlas Shrugged,"Don't call it hero worship: it's a kind of white heat where philosophy becomes religion." Or, perhaps, the ashes that are left when you turn up the temperature on a new belief system to the point where human community and compassion are burnt away. Conrad Alton, Filmbay Editor.

I've been interested in Ayn Rand ever since I read "Atlas Shrugged" when I was only 22 years old. I didn't quite get everything Ayn was trying to say in that book at the time, and I chalked it up to my lack of life experience given my youth. When I was 40, I ran across this documentary on public TV. I figured that since 18 years had passed, watching this documentary combined with my maturity would enable me to understand Ayn Rand.

This biography is a very sanitized version of Ayn Rand's life. The biography is accurate if not complete, since there is a lack of balance in the presentation due to the absence of information that shows the flawed and even somewhat "kookie" facets of the woman. For example, she encouraged her followers to smoke to highlight mankind's dominance over fire. The film also makes out her relationship with her husband, Frank, to be an ideal romance that lasted for decades. In fact, Ayn cheated on Frank for years with colleague Nathaniel Branden. To give her credit, she was true to her philosophy in being "objective" about the affair in the sense that she insisted that both her and Branden's spouse know what was going on. She ceased being objective, though, when Branden tired of her and began having an affair with a younger woman. She threw Branden and his research out the door with all of the emotion of any human being whose heart was being "subjectively" stomped on. I bring these points up not for the purpose of character assassination. Instead, I think that that it is difficult to get a balanced view of someone whose life work was pronouncing how life should be lived without examining the both the flaws and triumphs in that person's own life.

The documentary did give me some insight into Ayn Rand's philosophy, though, and I'll have to say that she seems to be someone who threw the baby out with the bath water at every turn. As a youth in Russia, prior to the Russian revolution, she saw the failure of the Russian orthodox church to connect with the parishioners and help their lives in any way. This caused her to become an atheist without causing her to explore if it was in fact that this particular institution of religion was the failure, rather than the concept of God. After the revolution she saw the utter failure of the policies of Communism, and this caused her to believe that pure unadulterated capitalism is the only economic system that works, not bothering to realize that there might be a middle ground that looks out for society's weaker members while also rewarding enterprise and hard work.

The fact that Ayn was what is an "odd bird" in 21st century America - an atheist capitalist - can only make me wonder what she would have to say about today's situation of fundamentalist Christian dogma intertwined with cut-throat capitalism that has become today's Republican party.

If you are interested in learning the main points about Ayn Rand's life, this is a good source for the facts and even some insights - particularly good are the clips from her appearances on the Donahue show shortly before her death. However, realize that this biography is somewhat sanitized.

I find this film to be little more than veneration for a woman who claimed she had no time for veneration but was more than willing to have people worship her. Rand was a hypocrite. At the end of her life she took Medicare for her lung cancer which was due to her lifetime of smoking. Thats not even mentioned in the film. I gave Rand's ideas my full attention for some 3 months a few years ago and was intrigued by them before coming to the conclusion her ideas are badly flawed. I read the Fountainhead and a number of her essays but didn't get far with Atlas Shrugged, by then I'd had enough. I'm a geriatric nurse, and I meet many people near the end of their lives and I meet their families, and see the quality of their relationships (or lack there of) and I can tell you, consistently, its those who live and care for others and open themselves and receive the care of others who have the happiest lives. I see it again and again and again. There's a name for it, its called love. Rands "individualism" is suicidal for the individual, the family and society. I'm rating this film so low because it does little more than promote these ill gotten ideas.

Documentary (narrated by Sharon Gless) about the life and times of author/philosopher Ayn Rand. Movies goes into exhaustive detail about her coming here from Russia, her "objectivism" philosophy, her books, her whole entire life. The film is too long (2 1/2 hours) and gets repititous at times (we hear about every single aspect of objectivism--it's not necessary and really weighs the movie down). Nonetheless, it is interesting and (I think) worth seeing for people who like or are interested in Rand. If you don't like her stay away.

I may not agree with most of Ayn Rand's philosophy, but I do consider her a great fiction writer, and I found this documentary tremendously interesting in all aspects. "The Fountainhead" is one of my favorite books of all time, as it speaks of mediocrity becoming the highest standard by which all is compared - just watch "American Idol" some time and see it in action. She was right. The book was a tremendous eye-opener for me as an artist. I didn't know much about her until I saw this; she was a most fascinating and unusual woman.

The documentary covers Rand's life and work in great detail. It includes her affair with Nathaniel Branden, which didn't seem to keep her from loving her husband - her interview after her husband's death (I believe with Phil Donahue) was remarkable as she speaks about her lack of belief in an afterlife. If she believed in it, she goes on to state, she would have contemplating killing herself in order to join him.

I have to admit that my favorite part of the documentary was a description of the making of the film "The Fountainhead." Rand was apparently a woman first and a philosopher second. She adored Gary Cooper from the time she first came to Hollywood and worked as an extra in silent films. Thrilled that he would be starring in "The Fountainhead," there is a photo of her gazing lovingly up at the tall and gorgeous Cooper. I don't remember how many years it took Rand to write the hero's final speech in the book...but after it was filmed, Cooper admitted he really hadn't understood it. As intellectual as she was, I doubt it changed her opinion of him.

The Oscar category of best documentary feature has been maddening in its inclusions and exclusions over the decades. How can a film like this forever be called a nominee when breathtaking works of art like "Shoah" and "The Thin Blue Line" were never even invited to the party?

"Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life" is a bizarre film in that it carries itself as an examination of a person whose artistic talents and works themselves are apparently beyond criticism. If this documentary is to be believed, Ayn Rand is the foremost thinker, novelist, screenwriter, philosopher and person of all time. The film consists of archival footage and photographs intercut with original interviews with people who are either identified as her friends or who have photographs of Rand displayed around them. You'll be about 30 minutes into this thing before you realize that they are all worshippers of her and the narrator is in on it, too. The whole thing feels like a cult initiation that acts as if her work and lifeview had no flaws whatsoever and anyone who criticized her in her time simply didn't get it.

I'm amazed a film this straightforward in style and completely unentertaining would be nominated for what carries weight as the top documentary prize in the movie business. Thankfully, it didn't win but the fact it was up shows how deep Rand's message that the wealthy and successful have somehow been victimized and underappreciated in American society resonated at the top of The Academy's membership.

This is the type of film that would be fine as an afternoon filler on the A&E channel back in the day but as a serious piece of journalistic, documentary filmmaking? No way.

The only positive things I can say about it are that the archival elements are comprehensive as biographical tools and the new interviews are cinematically shot. But all the subjects are so glowing in their appreciation for Rand that it renders them wholly uninteresting as subjects.

It's all a shame, too, because a serious, critical look into Rand's life and work could make for an interesting film. After all, here was an immigrant who acted completely against most expected notions of femininity of her era and found a way to be successful and reach an audience that continues to grow decades later. A more objective documentary that had more respect for its audience's brain would've been a much more lively piece of cinema than a 2.5-hour commercial.

"Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life" is a substantive documentary on arguably the greatest philosopher since Aristotle. That this bio took so long in coming, attests to the slow recognition of her genius and supreme contribution to 20th century culure. It took a pioneer, a maverick, and a true hero to overcome the obstacles placed in her path. Thanks to her determination she succeeded, and we are the recipients. This bio is a fine chronicle of her life and work. It should be a video staple, and its release is looked forward to eagerly. This is a documentary not be missed on one of the greatest personages of the century--a true leader and hero, if there ever was one. Kudos to all who took part in the making of this outstanding documentry.

screams a newspaper header pictured in this documentary. Finally, the stupid people of the world have their own philosopher & this film covers her life's work & story very well.

Bereft of any intellectual discussions, this film repeats Rand's "philosophy" over & over: individualism over collectivism, rationality above all, humans must heed their inner voice....repeated over & over with exceptionally annoying background music. It's quite obvious that this "documentary" is really a thinly veiled marketing video produced by the Ayn Rand Institute. All of those who are interviewed are her friends. The film never engages critically or substantively ( or is there no substance to "objectivism"?) with philosophical, economic, or political ideas. Hence, the contradictions that crop up (to a person with the capacity to think, anyway) are glaring: Ayn is on the hunt for the "ultimate man" with her fiction yet marries an unassuming dolt, Ayn is preaching individualism from a rarerified life inside a Frank Lloyd Wright castle while the collective masses outside protest segregation...

The film does cover a few details of her life in order to portray her as the classic immigrant to the US who struggles against all odds to become sucessful. But the filmmakers really have to go overboard to do this, hence the ad nauseum repetition. They repeat over & over that she was fascinated with the New York skyline in Hollywood movies & that this shaped her philosophy & novels. But, she had to walk to work to save up enough money so to see a movie (420 movies in 2 years that is).....of course, lots of others emigrated to the US on dreams too & at least they don't have an over-inflated sense of self. So what makes Ayn so special? That she's unapollagetically an atheist? Emma Goldman is more interesting. That she didn't bake cookies....? A lot of housewives have contributed more to

society than this woman. That her books helped many conservatives and libertarians let go of any social conscious they may have had & helped them succeed in business without even trying? Her most popular books were fiction & not self-help or how-to books. That she set up the Ayn Rand institute, an hommage to herself, to keep the cult going. Scientology, Focus on The Family, and UFO abductees are just as successful at this...

The only conclusion I can come to after seeing this film is that Ayn Rand became successful because she is the truest mirror for Americans to bask in their own reflection:

1. act selfishly, it is your true nature 2. self-promotion makes your life's work into a work of art, and the more money you die with, the more staying power your life's work will have. 3. the more you repeat things, the truer they become 4. all of your intellectual capacity, moral guidance & reflection can be summed up on a cocktail napkin.....even if you've had 3 too many martinis.

oh, and repeat after me: "There's no place like home, there's no place like home...."

As someone who spent a lot of time reading and thinking about Rand's ideas many years ago, I found this film very informative and entertaining. It presents Rand with just the right breath of grandeur. It shows her the way I like to think of her.

Like Thomas Jefferson, flaws in Rand's personal life throw a bit of shadow on her intellectual triumphs. This is not to suggest that Rand's achievements come close to Jefferson's. But, like Rand, his lifestyle contradicted his life's major achievement: the Author of The Declaration of Independence was a slaveholder.

In Rand's case, the champion of individualism surrounded herself with a "Collective" of yes-men (and -women) that systematically excluded anyone who didn't toe the line on matters of philosophy, religion, aesthetics, and even cigarette smoking. Incredibly, this champion of "independent judgement based on facts" would actually forbid her followers from reading things written by people she deemed "evil."

But, just as a tribute to Jefferson might not dwell on slavery at Monticello or mention Sally Hemmings, this love letter to Ayn doesn't explore her problematic social life or her peculiar band of followers. But I still think this documentary earned its accolades from the film industry. Ayn Rand probably would have approved of the film herself.

All of the occupations and fields of endeavor to which Ayn Rand devoted her ideas and activities were and always have been dominated by men - and certainly not least the field of Philosophy. It might be seen as instructive that none of the reviews here, before this one, seems the least bit concerned that Ayn Rand, the screenwriter, novelist, and daringly self-appointed "philosophress," was "just a mere woman." If for no other reason, that thought alone should reinforce one's determination to see this documentary, at just about any price (under a hundred dollars, say).

Much critical has been and will be said about this writer; this film's coverage is a fair salvo from Rand's side. As such, it's indispensable in the debate about the relevance of her philosophy, novels and achievements.

Ayn Rand created herself out of whole cloth. This must be acknowledged, and yes it's impressive. Often an immigrant, who had to struggle for freedom, ends up doing more than a rank and file American, who takes it for granted. Rand was definitely a force to be reckoned with. Unfortunately... paradoxically... over-achievers can also be full of cr*p. Any admiration for Rand must be tempered by the fact that her writing is a mono-maniacal, unpersuasive snooze. Add to that the sheer creepy, oiliness of the also-Rands she left behind, and she's a complete wash-out. No college studies Rand's disreputable "philosophy."

Rand didn't have a body of work that became a school; instead she had a lot of hard-won, reactive opinions that became serviceable as a personal philosophy; and a generous segment of the population without rudders came to grovel at her feet, and hear why being selfish was actually a good thing; uniting sociopaths and young capitalists under one umbrella.

She quickly became a self-parody. She hated collectives terribly but paradoxically could only conceive of individualism as a cultish dogma she constrained you with. (!?) As few in America have a philosophical life, an early naive encounter with her material (as with $cientology, and Moonie literature) is apt to derail the development of actual emotional depth or a conscience for five to thirty years, lost in the fog of mystification and hero worship.

Her work follows an absurd tiresome pattern. You could write the next Rand tome by just following this handy template: A vigorously independent industrialist wants to use (insert some industry) to prove he's got big brass ones. For 1,500 pages he must endure a bizarre gang of paper-deep anti-individualists motivated by volition that no one has ever actually encountered on earth (Bad man: "grrrrr... I hate maverick individuals!" Good man: "I hate collectives!"). But with the attention of an impressively miserable woman, who only experiences joy when (pick two: she breaks beautiful things / gets put in her place sexually / she can pursue her erotic fixation with machinery) they stand together in triumph on top of (pick one: his own skyscraper, his train, some other phallic symbol) in the end. Spare yourself a read of Atlas Shrugged and just wait for Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie's self-impressed, half-understood production which should be putting theater-goers to sleep in the next year or so.

The ultimate refutation of her ideas comes from Allen Greenspan, a Rand acolyte who when asked to explain why he allowed the country's economy to run itself into the ground, stated that he couldn't fathom that bankers would act in their own self-interest without concern for the well-being of the nation. Well, I guess that makes me smarter than you Allen. Please go away, Randlings.

As with any biography of a controversial person, the reviewers of this film fall mostly into two categories: those that love her and those that hate her. Their reviews are not based on the film but on the person. So how should it be judged? Did the film entertain? Yes. Did it inform? Was it professionally produced. Yes.

I found the film to be the finest and deepest biography I'd ever seen. I was amazed at all of the personal photos and excellent use of stock footage. There's no question it was overlong. The interview footage got repetitive. And it was hardly balanced about her later personal life. But what do you expect? It was produced by her disciples. But it abstained from making her a super hero. As far as I can tell it was pretty factual. And it gave excellent insight to her character. What more could you want in a biography?

Whether it was altruism, Immanuel Kant or religion, she had no patience for that with which she did not agree. While I'm glad she was as much outspoken about her atheism as she was with her right-wing views, a lot of what she wrote seemed to view man in a sort of vacuum.

Yes, I am proud when I do a good job. And, I think one of the greatest feelings is not only achieving success, but deserving it. However, I work hard to impact the people around me. Whether it's for my customers or for my coworkers, it's why I put in the extra effort.

As for my altruistic efforts (minor as they may be), they make up my "sense of life." On another topic, why she was so appalled by suicide is beyond me.

I'm not a philosophy student, and I've never written about it, so please pardon any juvenile statements in this post. Thanks.

What a horrible woman. I have never read anything by her or about her but was really astounded by this documentary. Basically, she believes that everyone should be selfish and think only of themselves. Government should not take care of anyone. There is no God. she babbles incoherently about the future of the human race and her greatest philosophical achievement is a book about an architect that every selfish conservative in the world has bought next to only the bible. She sounds like a cult. I plan to watch Fountainhead. I wonder how it became the favorite book of Anne Hathoway (The Princess Diary). Wonder what her parents were like? If I somehow come up with a different opinion, I will let you know. Until then, watch this and tell me if you can find any redeeming value. Check out the parts where the audience is watching her on talk shows of the 70's with a collective look of horror as she spouts out her ideas that God doesn't exist, people should not seek help from their government and people who believe in helping others are wimps. Now you will know why conservatives love her and shun Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and other petty altruists. Ugh....

This film was nominated for Best Documentary - Academy Award and has received numerous awards. It is not 'shallow' at all, but is instead a true story of one of the most heroic women of our age. It tells the events of a young girl born in the squalor of Communist Russia who came to America embracing its ideals and becoming one of he most widely read authors and philosophers in American history.

He book 'Atlas Shrugged', according to the US Library of Congress, is rated by Americans as the second most influential book, with only the Bible rated higher. Her books increase in sales each year and sell hundreds of thousands of copies annually. Her early book 'the Fountainhead' was, and still is selling widely and was made into the famous movie staring Gary Cooper and Patricia Neal.

This film is a powerful inspirational one that any one will find informative and motivating as a true story of a great American heroine. It contains commentary by those closest to her, and is considered by most the best presentation of the actual events of her life.

"The highest tribute to Ayn Rand, is that her critics must distort everything that she stood for in order to attack her. She advocated reason, not force; the individual's rights to freedom of action, speech, and association; self-responsibility not self-indulgence, and a live-and-let-live society in which each individual is treated as an END, not the MEANS of others' ends. How many critics would dare to honestly state these ideas, & say "..and that's what I reject?" The above quote was stated by Barbara Branden. Ms. Branden, author of "The Passion of Ayn Rand" knew her best. For an in depth of Rand's ideas read her novel "Atlas Shrugged".

This is one boring overly long documentary. It's nearly TWO and a HALF HOURS long. You'll be bored 15 minutes in and praying to the God she says doesn't exist for it to be over.

You can understand why she was such a self absorbed woman. She was homely as can be and must have been alone quite a bit. No wonder the libs love her.

This documentary should have clocked in at 30 minutes at the most, but it's padded out to five times that length. Truth be told, Rand is nothing more than a footnote. Or a flash in the pan. 50 years from now no one will know who she is. Kids today have no idea already.

Sense of Life is also special in providing perhaps the best available popular synopsis of Rand's ideas... by following her progress through the novels: We the Living, Anthem (novelette), The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged. Paxton's is certainly the best video synopsis of those ideas. What's more, if those ideas mean as much to you as they mean to me, you'll exceed your ration of goosebumps for the month. What a heroic person she was... supremely so for her determination to raise the standard of heroism to such a pinnacle: the union of practical and ideal. Powerful stuff. Every book and movie. To live for.

Finally, Sense of Life is quite a fun view, for anyone with an active mind wanting to know all the tidbits. It ends with reference to Nathaniel Branden, the writing of her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged, and the prosecution of her "movement" of Objectivism. The film even refers to the schism between Branden and Rand that occurred in the late 1960s and its effects. (Since Ayn Rand's death in 1982, more schisms have emerged within big tent of those who identify with her spiritually, artistically, and/or philosophically.

...

For my complete review of this movie and for other movie and book reviews, please visit my site TheCoffeeCoaster.com.

Brian Wright Copyright 2010

This documentary presents a well organized and concise picture of one of the most important thinkers of our time. If you don't know much about Ayn Rand, this film is worth watching, if only to be introduced to her ideas. Even though her philosophy is more aligned with the founding principles of America than that of any other 20th century thinker, she is all but discarded in American public schools. The popularity of twentieth century anti-mind/anti-humanism philosophies, amongst the Ivory Tower, has muted the voice of Ayn Rand in the classroom. If you grew up in the United States, you probably missed out on her side of the debate altogether. Rand's ideas are worthy of your consideration, and they're highly worthy of serious critical review.

I hope you will take the review of this film written by ChrisWN with an entire shaker of salt. The size of the shaker is up to you, but you should know that the immature ranting of ChrisWN is typical of those who despise Ayn Rand. Let the fatuous nature of his writing be the measure by which he should be taken seriously as a film critic or as a critical thinker. And, further, let his ramblings be recorded as representative of the opposite of Ayn Rand's devotion to reason.

I've read a couple of reviews which say that this documentary is biased toward offering a flattering view of Rand. Though that may be the case, I still found the documentary to be very compelling. There are many video clips of interviews with her which gave me a much deeper sense of who she is as a person.

Though she is a self-declared atheist and speaks of reason as being man's highest faculty, I think that those are simply the words that she uses to express something that for me isn't atheism and is beyond mere reason. Though I think that intuition in many ways is superior to reason, I don't know her description of reason and Objectivism necessarily contradicts the importance of spirit and intuition. She simply does not believe in a wishy-washy, New Agey mysticism and in a God who is separate from Man.

Though I'm not sure that I agree with her disregard of altruism and her call for selfishness, I again think that she and I may simply use the words in a different way. She offers a compelling call to honor that which is great within oneself and to honor oneself by being true to oneself. Doing so honors what it is to be human, and that honors all human beings.

This documentary helped me see that I had missed some of the essence of what she is about. Beyond her controversial use of certain words like selfishness and altruism, I share a similar understanding of life, what one might call God, and what it is to be human.

I am reminded to be more true to myself and not to live for others at the sacrifice of what is true for me. One can truly live for others only if one is first true to himself. Listening to Rand gives me a visceral understanding of this idea, not just a philosophical understanding.

This documentary deserves at least 8/10, if not more.

Rand philosopher or Novelist?

Rand seems to exemplify the notion that our unreflected ideas are products of our environment and childhood experiences. The chief force motivating her life was a hatred of left-wing politics from the time when her family was expelled from Russia, and an accompanying acceptance of the glamour of the fascist dictators of the 1930s and 40s.

Is she a philosopher? I have just read a rather good synthesis of the History of Philosophy from Plato to the modern day. "The Passion of the Western Mind" by Richard Tarnas. I heartily recommend it to all. He does not mention Ayn Rand once. In fact he does not mention ANY novelist because novelists do not do serious philosophy. Rand plays no part in Philosophy her ideas are bankrupt and without merit. They are second hand and undigested reflections on the now discredited Vienna school of logical positivism applied to wider society, yet her limited bourgeois effete experiences prove of no use for the sort of pan-social application to which her words are increasingly being used by the neo-cons of the present day. Her ideas are simple and appeal to simple people. The sort of people who glean their philosophical ideas from the back of a Cornflakes packet: homespun red-neck notions delivered by a naive middle-class woman under the spell of the glamour of the fascists of the pre1945 period.

Rand is no philosopher.

Chazwin

Ayn Rand has helped me to have an integrated view of life.

She teaches for reason and trade, instead of faith and force.

She is against mysticism, which rules by means of guilt, by keeping men convinced of their insignificance on earth. She is against the dogma of man's poverty and misery on earth.

She teaches you to face the universe, free to declare your mind is competent to deal with all the problems of existence and that reason is the only means of knowledge.

Ayn Rand states that intellect is a practical faculty, a guide to man's successful existence on earth, and that its task is the study of reality (as well as the production of wealth), not contemplation of unintelligible feelings nor a special monopoly on the "unknowable".

She is for that productive person who is confident of his ability to earn his living - who takes pride in his work and in the value of his product - who drives himself with inexhaustible energy and limitless ambition to do better and still better and even better - who is willing to bear penalties for his mistakes and expects rewards for his achievements - who looks at the universe with the fearless eagerness of a child, knowing it to be intelligible - who demands straight lines, clear terms, precise definitions - who stands in full sun light and has no use for the murky fog of the hidden, the secret, the unnamed, or for any code from psycho-epistemology of guilt.

Her words will help people to free themselves from fear and force forever.

Thanks Ayn for you direction. She has given me an integrated view of life. I hope, by reading her books, you get it too.