This entire series is awful. It is as bland as baloney on white bread without any mayo. The actors are like zombies, the director doesn't have a clue, the storyline is convoluted, and the capitalist philosophy borders on the hilarious. The film also grossly exaggerates the possible impact of socialism in the United States as well. Hello! Bullet Trains in China travel at 300 MPH, why would anyone get excited over trains that travel over 100 MPH?The new engine idea comes from a GM prototype invented in 1974 by Frank Guida, a super-cleaned coal dust which reduced harmful emissions by 600% and increased fuel efficiency by over 400%, but was never used by the company (one of the reasons they are always lagging behind the competition).But this is about the three TV episodes; I really wouldn't classify them as movies. They are box office poison, as evidenced by the minute sales of their showings. The production values are about the only thing to praise in the film, but that is not nearly enough to rescue this string of turkeys. Save your time and money and take out the book from the library.Arthur H Tafero AskMrMovies.comPS This trilogy is going straight into my Turkey Farm on the site

This is one of the WORST movies I have ever seen as to the performance of the actors and actresses. I have been a fan of Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged for over fifty years. This movie is ONLY for fans of Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged. As movies go, it is my opinion it is a total failure.There was not one scene or one performance by an actor or actress that was worth watching. I think Ayn Rand would totally disown this total failure of any form of entertainment. I found it painful to watch all parts of this movie. It would have been better if this movie had never been made. Unfortunately, far too many will form totally wrong opinions of the novel ATLAS SHRUGGED and Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism.Atlas Shrugged: Part I (2011) and Atlas Shrugged II: The Strike (2012) are great. Maybe not as great as they could have been if well know stars could have been in the movies.The Passion of Ayn Rand (1999) (TV Movie) is a terrific movie.

Unfortunately, this third installment is probably the weakest. One and Two are absolutely compelling, the realism and effects astounding, and the blending of current TV 'reporting' as part of the plot masterful! The book is very lengthy, dissuading some from tackling it, so bravo for the effort in bringing it the screen! Some drawbacks: since this project lacked major studio support and the undertaking was so huge, the budget seemed to dwindle and major characters had to be played by differing actors in each episode(which makes continuity a little confusing). Yet the plot is compelling and chillingly current. Nothing suffers here due to the age of the original story! My big gripe--in this 3rd episode: Galt's speech to the citizens of America squandered the earth-moving climax. In my mind (in the book), I 'heard' a Charlton Heston...a James Earl Jones...a commanding Shakespearean voice from a well seasoned, almost crusty veteran with vast life experience. Here, Galt is a youthful love interest for Dagny, too young to have been the great creator from Century Motors of decades before, and lacking a commanding presence. He is underwhelming. I would have loved to have rated this higher; the first 2 episodes were in the 8,9 range. This concluding episode pulls it down, unfortunately. BUT, this is a tough project, and the other reviews show the difficulty in trying to please all tastes.

Another reviewer mentioned capturing the philosophical essence and that's why I enjoy the series. There are a few speeches in each of these, the third included that really demonstrate Libertarian thought.Let me say these are "bad" movies in that none are ever going to win cinema awards but you don't watch this for popcorn thrills or to be amazed at the dramatic performances or directorial excellence or whatever.Given that you're watching a bad movie, the high points are that they present the point of view well and there are elements which for me were funny. The Utopian "Gulch" where everyone is a high functioning engineer or wizard of some kind, where materials and factories and everything can be done in the blink of an eye, "It's amazing what you can do without the red tape". This was funny. Dagny being paid 3 gold coins as an advance on her job as a maid in the Gulch was hilarious. I've never met a Capitalist so eager to hire, so easy on negotiation and so loose with money with an employee. But then Galt is in love with Dagny so I guess there's an excuse.The failure of the train trestle is presented in a single photo which looks like sabotage and I expected it to be so yet they say it was Socialism that destroyed the bridge. Very lame moment in the movie.A lot of narration is a sure sign of a lack of funding and/or screenplay writing.I wasn't really satisfied at the end as I wanted more conclusion, more closure with the world at large.Still as an expression of the Libertarian mind espoused by Ayn Rand in her Objectivism philosophy, I think all 3 are right on the money.