@@MrGoblin1000 He also told that he will explain client, why that design would be perfect, in detail. Cause the choice of client is unconscious , Howard Roark prefers the truth.
This is one of my mantras; it's inspirational not a straight jacket. By the way this is a movie, based on a novel inspired by a political ideology. No single ideology has all the answers, but they can make suggestions. Rand also said; "Reason is not automatic, those who deny it cannot be conquered by it." She meant it for one political group she disagreed with, but it can apply to anybody.
Hollywood has always been the same, that was its purpose all along. The world wasn’t quite ready for the potency of the collectivist ideals, like the ending of the book, so their messages were more subtle. Time has progressed and more and more people have become tolerant or ignorant to the idea, whilst those who can see a little clearer recognise the farce. Be very wary of the romanticism of the past.
Replacing the mere "stilts" on the first floor was a good idea. How would deliveries be made? Where is the lobby, on the second floor? What about the wind blowing though the stilts in the middle of winter, the fictional setting of this book/movie was the east coast. How would the water systems & electrical system be maintained, through the stilts? Where would be the elevators? In the stilts? You're going to have a 1st floor gap between the basement - usually home to the heating and electrical systems - and the rest of the building. BTW, those stilts would be a death trap in earth quake prone California.
@@tamaracrawford7698 Greek architecture works in the Parthenon. The ideal American skyscraper should be American architecture, like the Chrysler building in NYC.
@@joep8787 Sure. The customs house is certainly not the "ideal american skyscraper", I doubt anyone would claim that it is. However, personally, I think that because of the buildings around the tower, and because it follows its original intended plan (that is the main issue with changing Roarks building, its purity becomes corrupted) it looks good. But yes, the Chryser building looks much better.
Brilliant everyone has a different personality and we must cherish it. Understand it, and respect it's standard, if we can't respect his personality then we also should not disrespect him.
FLW would have never walked away from a commission. He would have convinced the client to keep the building the way he designed it. Wright once had a client named Edgar Kaufman, who hired him to build a small weekend home in Pennsylvania. Kaufman wanted the home to overlook a waterfall that he and his wife loved. The result was Falling Water-which was built on TOP of the waterfall. Kaufman was furious, but Wright sold him on the idea that the home was "One with the waterfall." Selling and the art of persuasion are the true keys to success.
@Heavy Metal Pulp okay, so in this context, you see how Roark did not sacrifice, right? In fact he explicitly says so. So I'm not sure what your disagreement is, if any.
Roark isn't obligated to accept the commission on their terms. He's free to refuse it. Why make hm out to be a jackass because he turns it down? The bankers can still have their building. It just won't be designed by Roark.
They don't make him out to be a jackass in the book. I'm surprised they didn't omitted such a powerful exchange from the movie. “It's sheer insanity!” Weidler moaned. “I want you. We want your building. You need the commission. Do you have to be quite so fanatical and selfless about it?” “What?” Roark asked incredulously. “Fanatical and selfless.” Roark smiled. He looked down at his drawings. His elbow moved a little, pressing them to his body. He said: “That was the most selfish thing you've ever seen a man do.”
I find it more profoundly beautiful to take ownership of your own destruction, than from somebody else's taking ownership. Ayn Rand is indeed the most free spirited writer of all times. Although I actually prefer Emperor Palpatine's 'No... No... NO!' answer more than this.
I still can't believe that Rand left dialog out of this scene in the movie that is some of the most important dialog in the entire novel. As the scene in the movie continues in the novel, Roark is asked, "How can you be so selfless?" To which Roark responds before he walks out, "Selfless? Why, that is the most selfish thing you have ever seen a man do."
Hmmm.. I don't think Rand had the kind of control she wanted over the script. I think there are details concerning this in her biographical documentary titled "Sense of Life".
@@sonic-fm1gw No. It's actually the heart of the matter. When you understand that you will understand the reason the book is called "The Fountainhead."
he's right, and thats whats wrong with building today. I see so much crap going up, and broken old systems being duplicated. if he stands behind his design, it's cause he's looked at all aspects, a true innovator does not compromise.
It is their building,their money and they gave him 90 percent of what he wanted almost like it was his pet project,but financed by others. Now i am not and never will be a big fan of thoso who have their toungs permanently in the southern back doors of thoso with financial prestige,but surely this is the other extreme end of human spectrum.. Nothing innovative about turning your nose up at a very reasonable request. It's like burning bridges to hide one's competence on one end and brown nosing 2 extreme levels to compensate for the lack of competence on the other end Neither one has any sustainable value in the real world.
Me ? I Like to consider myself A very reasonable man. In a very unreasonable world. No matter the romanticism of turning your nose at world beacuse one has some talent that is in demand. I think Roarke here hit upon the most reasonable capitalist ever recorded on film and written and he still managed to a screw it up. Personally I think the book has wonderful idea about suffering and finally achieving success I know I know it does tingle abit down there that narrative but am afraid things don't work that way in the real. There is no such thing as self mad man. Even if you made the money there was system that educated you nursed you to healthy and host of other things that most forget about and try to destroy after they made abit of money so they can say thoso awful words self made person. Pity there ait such reasonable capitalist anymore. You be lucky if you get paid for your work these days let alone get 90 percent of your way on their project that they are paying for. So yeah Roark was moron written by highly a sensitive person who encounterd the rough edges of a authoritarian state when growing up and decide the whole cart is was rotten instead of seeing the whole picture. And I like my freedom just like anybody eles and would fight tooth and nail for it but I also know when to look at the grand picture instead of just my experiences with authorities and trust me they can be cunts when in the hands of not dime light bulbs but the good thing is lightbulbs get changed when they no longer bring light. So let's us hope thoso in charge know it is in their best interest to change the ever dimming lightbulbs befor they consign us all to the dark ages again. So yeah a very level headed and reasonable man.
@@yonisali3879 “I think Roarke here hit upon the most reasonable capitalist ever recorded on film and written and he still managed to a screw it up” Demanding that Roark destroy the integrity of his work was not “reasonable”. It was the Marxist Toohey who suggested the changes. The changes would have screwed it up. “Even if you made the money there was system that educated you nursed you to healthy and host of other things” Meaning what, exactly? There’s no such thing as individual achievement? That’s utter nonsense. Peter Keating was also educated by the “system”, and was an utter mediocrity incapable of creating anything remotely as great as Roark’s designs.
What I mean by system that nursed you is When you were born there was probably doctor a nurses that was educated by system the school that taught you how read and write i can go on and on Down to the road you drove on your way to making you frist million was not self made it didn't appear out of no where and after you made a bit dough all of sudden you are self made man what if at snap of fingers like Thanos everything disappeared I wonder what the strutting and chest beating of all thoso self made ppl would look like all the.. Also ppl like peter Keating are dime a dozen in any system you know the type that was never weened of sucking on mother's milk so when he becomes a adult he just sucks on anything and everything for nutrition there are ppl like in every industry and from every walk of life. Still not reasonable idea to throw away the whole cart just make harder for thoso who bring nothing to the table to eat less then then thoso who by the efforts filled that table. By the way I don't know if you know this but all them big companies and individuals who are anti state are all sucking on the tit in multiple ways and sneaky ways undercover of course. I am of the thought that says if I am gone talk shit about you and undermine you and tell everybody how self made I am I won't take single grain of rice from you plate. By the way when I wrote thoso were reasonable captilist back then. Today I am sure you would get elected in to the highest office in the land without ever paying taxes and screwing all your architects out if their pay .. And still have the audacity to call yourself a self made man.
The original building design had an open space in the lower levels. That would have been sheer misery for access in the middle of winter. Can you say "Wind Tunnel"?
That price does not include my soui and it is 150 million but if you want to buy my Soui too. The Cost needs to be Tripple per revision. What would you say? Mr. Don't need money.
(4 years go) And here, encapsulated, is the dilemma, the ongoing tug-of-war, between the (supposedly) conflicting motivations of Art and Commerce. (To find out why I use the word "supposedly" here, find me, buy me a really expensive shot of bourbon, and and a really expensive pilsner beer with which to wash it down, give me ten minutes, and I'll explain it to you.) (Addendum, 4 years later:) At 0:28, note the directorial brilliance of King Vidor who, as the subject of "compromise" comes up, has the Dark Angel of Collective Mediocrity, Ellsworth Toohey, slink into the scene, in the background.
@@puppetsock lol. Quite the opposite. After graduating high school, I moved to NYC with $200 to my name. I got a job with a multinational real estate developer and worked my way up into the top 5% of income earners without the benefit of higher education. The closest I got to a university was going to Objectivist Club events at NYU and Columbia in my first few years here. Honestly, what clued me into the B.S. of Objectivism was the amount of pseudo-science nonsense spewed forth from its advocates. Without a formal background in philosophy, it was hard for me to challenge Objectivism. But I'm scientifically literate, and once I started noticing it contradict hard science, I called bullshit.
Many visionaries seem to have more unwavering faith in their vision. And then we admire them for how they inspire us. The rest of us, for better or worse...bend.
Those "stilts" would have been massive but you point out some real issues. Dumb question, do the elevators start at the stilts? Do all the power and water lines go through the stilts? In theory the buildings of this movie are on the East Coast so what about winter and storms? The wind tunnel effect of under the building would have been massive.
@Heavy Metal Pulp Google is your friend. BTW, if you live in a FLW designed house it's priceless, provided you don't mind a leaking roof. Form follows function but often not very practical in the rain.
She wanted Wright to design the buildings and sketches, but he asked an outrageous fee and was not surprisingly given a 'no, thank you' by the studio. I don't think it really mattered much to the film. Rand and Wright were very different in many ways, and I think she lost a lot of respect for him as a man when he visited the Soviet Union and came back praising it. She said she had lived there, he hadn't.
I know I''m looking at this from a future viewer perspective, but am I the only one who thinks that the modified building model looks more original than the actual original model?
If Roark were a rational character, he would have taken this commission and similar ones any way just so that he gets experience building things and he doesn't have to go to Dominique Francon's quarry. Also he can save up his money, and when he has an F-U Fund, he can design the kinds of buildings he wants without having to deal with the financial pressure from Ellsworth Toohey's theorizing and Gail Wynand's newspaper to conform to vulgar standards.
Rational can sometime looks like savage he wont get any experience he need from them man like him consider money at low he consider the respect and teatment the buliding material want more than anything, the conpect thats high
If Joe rogan were to have compromised he would never have been successful. He took on a famous comedian who was stealing others jokes. He was nothing at the time. And nobody took the thief on. Only Rogan. Nobody remembers the thief anymore. Because Rogan had the integrity he grew and attracted people of like integrity to him. Same for any brilliant individual.
What you wrote would mean thinking with the head Beacuse If the heart gets what it wants all the time then nothing would ever get done. I don't about everyone else but to me the heart is all emotion and emotions do not know how to compromise. No dissrespect but this was written by woman who probably had tough uppbringing and she wrote down the values that she thought the prefect man should have. As Nobel as thoso values are this ait a neither prefect or Nobel world . Got to forfeit somthings to gain more important things that are non negotiable. Nice to watch for the dialogue but nothing to base policy on.
Just like brilliant engineering, brilliant architecture happens when people stuck in the past, aren't the ones making the financial decisions. I believe there was a line that illustrated that. Roark was asked about the greatness of classically-styled buildings, and he says something like: Well, sure they were great, 2000 years ago, when the style was new.
My late mother, who would have seen this movie when it came out, always said that Cooper was too old and leaden in this role, and that he underplayed the part.
Totally different from the book. Tooey had absolutely nothing to do with this building at all. Just read the book. You are missing far more than you realize if you watch the movie.
This is so hilariously funny...In the Soviet equivalent of "Its a Wonderful Life" (i.e. The Irony of Fate) the individualistic cartoon architect character in the opening credits proposed the exact opposite of the building proposed by the anti Communist Gary Cooper's character Rourke in the SUPER ANTI COMMUNIST Ayn Rand film "The Fountainhead"This means Rourke the individualist in The Fountainhead EQUALS the Communist establishment in The Irony of Fate., and...The Left Wing establishment in The Fountainhead wants the same thing as the Soviet architect in The Irony of the Fate.DO NOT BELIEVE ME???? THEN WATCH THIS FROM THE OPENING CREDITS OF THE IRONY OF THE FATE AND HAVE YOUR BRAIN EXPLODE: th-cam.com/video/iHdFd2RKRSIL/w-d-xo.htmlogically, Rourke and the Soviet Architect should agree if they are about anti Communist freedom and the Wall Street Bankers in The Fountainhead should have the exact opposite tastes as the Communist review board.
So they accept his design because it's unusual and different and then ask him to change it to something already accepted by the public. Too mad the public never notices archetecture anyway. This is must absurd scene in any movie I've ever seen. The characters are archtypes and the acting is staggeringly bad. Read the book....it's even worse.
Huh... What a pointless endeavour, what a pathetic scene. Clearly born out of a childish imagination of what it takes to express individualism, the necessity to be smug and uncompromising instead of arguing and debating towards the a shared objective.
Seems that there was a shared objective until the very last moment when the clients unilaterally changed that objective (by standards that were not even theirs, no less). So, I disagree with your appraisal of the scene.
"I don't build in order to have clients,
I have clients in order to build"
liked it
💯
But to get clients he needs to compromise with them because it's their building.
@@MrGoblin1000 No, he just needed to find clients who wanted HIS designs. And he does find them.
@@MrGoblin1000 He also told that he will explain client, why that design would be perfect, in detail. Cause the choice of client is unconscious , Howard Roark prefers the truth.
This is one of my mantras; it's inspirational not a straight jacket. By the way this is a movie, based on a novel inspired by a political ideology. No single ideology has all the answers, but they can make suggestions. Rand also said; "Reason is not automatic, those who deny it cannot be conquered by it." She meant it for one political group she disagreed with, but it can apply to anybody.
This scene basically sums up everything going on with Hollywood movies right now.
Hollywood has always been the same, that was its purpose all along. The world wasn’t quite ready for the potency of the collectivist ideals, like the ending of the book, so their messages were more subtle. Time has progressed and more and more people have become tolerant or ignorant to the idea, whilst those who can see a little clearer recognise the farce. Be very wary of the romanticism of the past.
How to see the full movie pls help
Exactly
I set my own standard. Best 💯👍
God, I’ve been in these situations and said yes. Ugh, it’s tough sometimes. I’ve been saying “no” more lately, thank goodness.
Man, when they put the front and the base i was almost under the impression that i was watching a monty python sketch :D
lol, it was beyond horrible
My stomach turned when they placed the changes
You and me both, it's sickening.
Replacing the mere "stilts" on the first floor was a good idea. How would deliveries be made? Where is the lobby, on the second floor? What about the wind blowing though the stilts in the middle of winter, the fictional setting of this book/movie was the east coast. How would the water systems & electrical system be maintained, through the stilts? Where would be the elevators? In the stilts? You're going to have a 1st floor gap between the basement - usually home to the heating and electrical systems - and the rest of the building. BTW, those stilts would be a death trap in earth quake prone California.
Never Compromise.
This is the main point of this scene.
Integrity too.
Zack Snyder and WB studios
Yup bro. That's his new project
he put that as an easter egg too
If anyone has ever seen the Customs House Tower in Boston, you will see a skyscraper Greecified in exactly this way.
Joe P Does it look phony?
Yes, and that was how the building was originally intended to be. That is why it works in Boston, but not in this movie.
@@tamaracrawford7698 Greek architecture works in the Parthenon. The ideal American skyscraper should be American architecture, like the Chrysler building in NYC.
@@joep8787 Sure. The customs house is certainly not the "ideal american skyscraper", I doubt anyone would claim that it is. However, personally, I think that because of the buildings around the tower, and because it follows its original intended plan (that is the main issue with changing Roarks building, its purity becomes corrupted) it looks good.
But yes, the Chryser building looks much better.
@@joep8787 The ideal anything is kinda dumb. Architecture especially is filled with a ton of nonsense like this
Brilliant everyone has a different personality and we must cherish it. Understand it, and respect it's standard, if we can't respect his personality then we also should not disrespect him.
FLW would have never walked away from a commission. He would have convinced the client to keep the building the way he designed it. Wright once had a client named Edgar Kaufman, who hired him to build a small weekend home in Pennsylvania. Kaufman wanted the home to overlook a waterfall that he and his wife loved. The result was Falling Water-which was built on TOP of the waterfall. Kaufman was furious, but Wright sold him on the idea that the home was "One with the waterfall." Selling and the art of persuasion are the true keys to success.
Rand had to show that Roark would sacrifice an opportunity rather than compromise.
@@denisenoe1534 Why would you use the word sacrifice if you understand what Rand is trying to show?
@Heavy Metal Pulp what do you mean by sacrifice and do you know what Rand means by it?
@Heavy Metal Pulp okay, so in this context, you see how Roark did not sacrifice, right? In fact he explicitly says so. So I'm not sure what your disagreement is, if any.
@Heavy Metal Pulp okay, thanks for the clarification. I just don't think his principles are weird.
Roark isn't obligated to accept the commission on their terms. He's free to refuse it. Why make hm out to be a jackass because he turns it down? The bankers can still have their building. It just won't be designed by Roark.
They don't make him out to be a jackass in the book. I'm surprised they didn't omitted such a powerful exchange from the movie.
“It's sheer insanity!” Weidler moaned. “I want you. We want your building. You need the commission. Do you have to be quite so fanatical and selfless about it?”
“What?” Roark asked incredulously.
“Fanatical and selfless.”
Roark smiled. He looked down at his drawings. His elbow moved a little, pressing them to his body. He said:
“That was the most selfish thing you've ever seen a man do.”
Oh how I adore strong men!
Thanks! Favorited.
Brilliant !
I find it more profoundly beautiful to take ownership of your own destruction, than from somebody else's taking ownership. Ayn Rand is indeed the most free spirited writer of all times. Although I actually prefer Emperor Palpatine's 'No... No... NO!' answer more than this.
GREAT MOVIE.
The irony is that pretty much all banks look like his design now.
'If you want my work' BABY!
I like this scene more than the courtroom speech
agree
Pailhead, I ABSOLUTELY could not agree more!!!
This is Zack Snyder's arguing with WB regarding JL. He sneaked this Easter egg 🥚 in the movie and those idiots didn't even notice. LMAO.
WB: "Add more jokes! Add more bright colours! Make it 2hrs long! Be more like the MCU!"
@MultiFortunatus which one, thier design or his?
"id rather wrk as a day labourer" ::: :
The Bellagio in Las Vegas?
And now it's the opposite. Corporates wants souless boxes. Funny how the future turned out
I still can't believe that Rand left dialog out of this scene in the movie that is some of the most important dialog in the entire novel. As the scene in the movie continues in the novel, Roark is asked, "How can you be so selfless?" To which Roark responds before he walks out, "Selfless? Why, that is the most selfish thing you have ever seen a man do."
Hmmm.. I don't think Rand had the kind of control she wanted over the script. I think there are details concerning this in her biographical documentary titled "Sense of Life".
Though, Rand did almost quit helping the making of the film when they tried to shorten Roark's speech in the court scene
Took 10 years to write...
because its a stupid line and makes zero sense.
@@sonic-fm1gw No. It's actually the heart of the matter. When you understand that you will understand the reason the book is called "The Fountainhead."
Of course today it would be all in reverse.
Matt Smith can play Howard roark, and Gary Oldman as henry Cameron , they'll look amazing💥
"I set my own standards"
he's right, and thats whats wrong with building today. I see so much crap going up, and broken old systems being duplicated. if he stands behind his design, it's cause he's looked at all aspects, a true innovator does not compromise.
It is their building,their money and they gave him 90 percent of what he wanted almost like it was his pet project,but financed by others.
Now i am not and never will be a big fan of thoso who have their toungs permanently in the southern back doors of thoso with financial prestige,but surely this is the other extreme end of human spectrum.. Nothing innovative about turning your nose up at a very reasonable request. It's like burning bridges to hide one's competence on one end and brown nosing 2 extreme levels to compensate for the lack of competence on the other end Neither one has any sustainable value in the real world.
@@yonisali3879 Who are you to decide what Roark should consider reasonable?
Me ?
I Like to consider myself
A very reasonable man.
In a very unreasonable world.
No matter the romanticism of turning your nose at world beacuse one has some talent that is in demand.
I think Roarke here hit upon the most reasonable capitalist ever recorded on film and written and he still managed to a screw it up. Personally I think the book has wonderful idea about suffering and finally achieving success
I know I know it does tingle abit down there that narrative but am afraid things don't work that way in the real.
There is no such thing as self mad man. Even if you made the money there was system that educated you nursed you to healthy and host of other things that most forget about and try to destroy after they made abit of money so they can say thoso awful words self made person.
Pity there ait such reasonable capitalist anymore.
You be lucky if you get paid for your work these days let alone get 90 percent of your way on their project that they are paying for.
So yeah Roark was moron written by highly a sensitive person who encounterd the rough edges of a authoritarian state when growing up and decide the whole cart is was rotten instead of seeing the whole picture.
And I like my freedom just like anybody eles and would fight tooth and nail for it but I also know when to look at the grand picture instead of just my experiences with authorities and trust me they can be cunts when in the hands of not dime light bulbs but the good thing is lightbulbs get changed when they no longer bring light.
So let's us hope thoso in charge know it is in their best interest to change the ever dimming lightbulbs befor they consign us all to the dark ages again.
So yeah a very level
headed and reasonable man.
@@yonisali3879 “I think Roarke here hit upon the most reasonable capitalist ever recorded on film and written and he still managed to a screw it up”
Demanding that Roark destroy the integrity of his work was not “reasonable”. It was the Marxist Toohey who suggested the changes. The changes would have screwed it up.
“Even if you made the money there was system that educated you nursed you to healthy and host of other things”
Meaning what, exactly? There’s no such thing as individual achievement? That’s utter nonsense. Peter Keating was also educated by the “system”, and was an utter mediocrity incapable of creating anything remotely as great as Roark’s designs.
What I mean by system that nursed you is
When you were born there was probably doctor a nurses that was educated by system the school that taught you how read and write i can go on and on
Down to the road you drove on your way to making you frist million was not self made it didn't appear out of no where and after you made a bit dough all of sudden you are self made man what if at snap of fingers like Thanos everything disappeared I wonder what the strutting and chest beating of all thoso self made ppl would look like all the..
Also ppl like peter Keating are dime a dozen in any system you know the type that was never weened of sucking on mother's milk so when he becomes a adult he just sucks on anything and everything for nutrition there are ppl like in every industry and from every walk of life.
Still not reasonable idea to throw away the whole cart just make harder for thoso who bring nothing to the table to eat less then then thoso who by the efforts filled that table.
By the way I don't know if you know this but all them big companies and individuals who are anti state are all sucking on the tit in multiple ways and sneaky ways undercover of course.
I am of the thought that says if I am gone talk shit about you and undermine you and tell everybody how self made I am I won't take single grain of rice from you plate.
By the way when I wrote thoso were reasonable captilist back then. Today I am sure you would get elected in to the highest office in the land without ever paying taxes and screwing all your architects out if their pay ..
And still have the audacity to call yourself a self made man.
The original building design had an open space in the lower levels. That would have been sheer misery for access in the middle of winter. Can you say "Wind Tunnel"?
That price does not include my soui and it is 150 million but if you want to buy my Soui too. The Cost needs to be Tripple per revision. What would you say? Mr. Don't need money.
We always complaint that Roark is too young but I dont think an young actor can undertake this role
He could if he understands the character.
(4 years go)
And here, encapsulated, is the dilemma, the ongoing tug-of-war, between the (supposedly) conflicting motivations of Art and Commerce.
(To find out why I use the word "supposedly" here, find me, buy me a really expensive shot of bourbon, and and a really expensive pilsner beer with which to wash it down, give me ten minutes, and I'll explain it to you.)
(Addendum, 4 years later:)
At 0:28, note the directorial brilliance of King Vidor who, as the subject of "compromise" comes up, has the Dark Angel of Collective Mediocrity, Ellsworth Toohey, slink into the scene, in the background.
zack snyder vs Warner Bros in a nutshell
This seemed so profound... when I was in high school.
Jacob Timmons It’s still profound. Come back to us.
So, you went to university and let communist professors work on you for four years. And, surprise, you come out hating individuals.
@@puppetsock lol. Quite the opposite. After graduating high school, I moved to NYC with $200 to my name. I got a job with a multinational real estate developer and worked my way up into the top 5% of income earners without the benefit of higher education. The closest I got to a university was going to Objectivist Club events at NYU and Columbia in my first few years here. Honestly, what clued me into the B.S. of Objectivism was the amount of pseudo-science nonsense spewed forth from its advocates. Without a formal background in philosophy, it was hard for me to challenge Objectivism. But I'm scientifically literate, and once I started noticing it contradict hard science, I called bullshit.
@@NewRocJacob Objectivist clubs......that explains a lot
Many visionaries seem to have more unwavering faith in their vision. And then we admire them for how they inspire us.
The rest of us, for better or worse...bend.
A big thin box with windows on small stilts; architects really need to get over themselves
Those "stilts" would have been massive but you point out some real issues. Dumb question, do the elevators start at the stilts? Do all the power and water lines go through the stilts? In theory the buildings of this movie are on the East Coast so what about winter and storms? The wind tunnel effect of under the building would have been massive.
This is one of the most unintentionally hilarious scenes I've ever seen. Talk about Straw Man scripting.
Who knows? Most of them go broke.
Sadly, Ayn Rand's wish to pattern Roark's work after Frank Lloyd Wright was not followed.
@Heavy Metal Pulp Modernist architect.
@Heavy Metal Pulp Google is your friend. BTW, if you live in a FLW designed house it's priceless, provided you don't mind a leaking roof. Form follows function but often not very practical in the rain.
This is what a man should be…..this is what a man ought to be
Ayn Rand was a Frank Lloyd Wright fan. The architecture in the film is in a modern style she did NOT like.
funny they were kind of ideological opposites right?
She wanted Wright to design the buildings and sketches, but he asked an outrageous fee and was not surprisingly given a 'no, thank you' by the studio. I don't think it really mattered much to the film. Rand and Wright were very different in many ways, and I think she lost a lot of respect for him as a man when he visited the Soviet Union and came back praising it. She said she had lived there, he hadn't.
@@luiscolin7775 She took from Wright his dedication to modern architecture, not his personal philosophy or his politics.
I know I''m looking at this from a future viewer perspective, but am I the only one who thinks that the modified building model looks more original than the actual original model?
+AlbinoTanuki its probably just from the future
Modern architecture took over and we're in the post-modernist period. At the time Rand wrote the book, modernists were still struggling.
Just because everyone is doing it doesn't make it true. The case of ESG in the 21st century world.
It's an attractive myth that capitalism is a Meritocracy.
Oh right. We never did anything exceptional, like say, Cuba. Smh.
Capitalism is an aristocracy masquerading as a meritocracy
We're living in an aristocracy masquerading as a meritocracy
If Roark were a rational character, he would have taken this commission and similar ones any way just so that he gets experience building things and he doesn't have to go to Dominique Francon's quarry. Also he can save up his money, and when he has an F-U Fund, he can design the kinds of buildings he wants without having to deal with the financial pressure from Ellsworth Toohey's theorizing and Gail Wynand's newspaper to conform to vulgar standards.
Rational can sometime looks like savage he wont get any experience he need from them man like him consider money at low he consider the respect and teatment the buliding material want more than anything, the conpect thats high
A cut and paste approach often just doesn't work. The product looks phony.
He doesn't want to create 2nd rate buildings that are a mix and match of conflicting forms.
If Joe rogan were to have compromised he would never have been successful. He took on a famous comedian who was stealing others jokes. He was nothing at the time. And nobody took the thief on. Only Rogan. Nobody remembers the thief anymore. Because Rogan had the integrity he grew and attracted people of like integrity to him. Same for any brilliant individual.
What you wrote would mean thinking with the head
Beacuse
If the heart gets what it wants all the time then nothing would ever get done.
I don't about everyone else but to me the heart is all emotion and emotions do not know how to compromise.
No dissrespect but this was written by woman who probably had tough uppbringing and she wrote down the values that she thought the prefect man should have.
As Nobel as thoso values are this ait a neither prefect or Nobel world .
Got to forfeit somthings to gain more important things that are non negotiable.
Nice to watch for the dialogue but nothing to base policy on.
Just like brilliant engineering, brilliant architecture happens when people stuck in the past, aren't the ones making the financial decisions. I believe there was a line that illustrated that. Roark was asked about the greatness of classically-styled buildings, and he says something like: Well, sure they were great, 2000 years ago, when the style was new.
I don't fault Roark for leaving but I really like the changed building way more
So do I. I would have been all aboard if I were Roark
So what?
Reminds me of the executives at Warner Bros. seeking to destroy the character of Superman with that crap fest "MOS" movie they put out.
Interesting you picked that example, since it was directed by an objectivist.
Watching this after trump's law for "beautiful" buildings
No sane architect would ever design him a beautiful building cuz they would know they would get screwed out of their pay one way or the other.
Gary Cooper does such a poor job as Howard Roark.
Dreadful. If I'd had my way: A young Gregory Peck
My late mother, who would have seen this movie when it came out, always said that Cooper was too old and leaden in this role, and that he underplayed the part.
Totally different from the book. Tooey had absolutely nothing to do with this building at all.
Just read the book. You are missing far more than you realize if you watch the movie.
I’ll be perfectly honest, I prefer the revisions…
This is so hilariously funny...In the Soviet equivalent of "Its a Wonderful Life" (i.e. The Irony of Fate) the individualistic cartoon architect character in the opening credits proposed the exact opposite of the building proposed by the anti Communist Gary Cooper's character Rourke in the SUPER ANTI COMMUNIST Ayn Rand film "The Fountainhead"This means Rourke the individualist in The Fountainhead EQUALS the Communist establishment in The Irony of Fate., and...The Left Wing establishment in The Fountainhead wants the same thing as the Soviet architect in The Irony of the Fate.DO NOT BELIEVE ME???? THEN WATCH THIS FROM THE OPENING CREDITS OF THE IRONY OF THE FATE AND HAVE YOUR BRAIN EXPLODE: th-cam.com/video/iHdFd2RKRSIL/w-d-xo.htmlogically, Rourke and the Soviet Architect should agree if they are about anti Communist freedom and the Wall Street Bankers in The Fountainhead should have the exact opposite tastes as the Communist review board.
Please try using punctuation in order to communicate something resembling a complete thought.
Could you be a little more confusing please?
So they accept his design because it's unusual and different and then ask him to change it to something already accepted by the public. Too mad the public never notices archetecture anyway. This is must absurd scene in any movie I've ever seen. The characters are archtypes and the acting is staggeringly bad. Read the book....it's even worse.
That's a lot of cringe on a single movie or a book
Huh... What a pointless endeavour, what a pathetic scene. Clearly born out of a childish imagination of what it takes to express individualism, the necessity to be smug and uncompromising instead of arguing and debating towards the a shared objective.
Seems that there was a shared objective until the very last moment when the clients unilaterally changed that objective (by standards that were not even theirs, no less). So, I disagree with your appraisal of the scene.
My sentiments exactly.
Real individualism is about safe keeping the things that are personal.
Not business..
I think this is a thoughtful and eloquent comment.
The above, directed to @yonisali3879, I meant to include.
Am I the only one who can see Roark's design is f****ing horrible?
right? not that i dotn want to root for him, but its so plain and drab