Neorandomizer pointed this out to me this morning:
I dunno. My first reaction? Kinda vaguely interested 'meh.' I'll end up seeing it, I actually take it on faith that it'll be as good or better than the book (Which was the subject of an epic review a while back: Part 1 is here http://www.republibot.com/content/book-reviews-%E2%80%9Catlas-shrugged%E... Part 2 is here http://www.republibot.com/content/book-reviews-%E2%80%9Catlas-shrugged%E... and part 3, a sort of philosophical wrapup, is here http://www.republibot.com/content/book-reviews-%E2%80%9Catlas-shrugged%E... Note the massively verbose argument I got into with a Randian in the comments) This is a hugely ambitious project, and I really should be more into it than I am. I suppose it's because I felt the end of the book was rather disappointing, taking three times as long as needed to get to a point that was apparent from a hundred pages in, and a point that was kinda' by definition anticlimactic.
That said, breaking the book into a cinematic trilogy was a good idea, since the novel is structurally three very long parts (A great one, a good one, and...sigh)
Specific observations: Gee, does Dagny look like Cameron Diaz, or what? Rearden seems a little young to me, I always got the feeling he was at least a decade older than Dagny. I always figured Jim Taggart to be fat. The vaguely noirish first scene in the trailer grabbed me, but the the "It's hip, it's here, it's now" modern (Fake) skyline immediately afterwards disappointed me.
The book is set in a somewhat timeless 'ten years into the future' that was already outmoded when it was published, but which gives it a timeless "Somewhere in the 20th century" feel. I would have liked to see it fusing anachronous elements together, but I imagine that would have been distracting and confusing to audiences. So the look probably couldn't have been helped, but still: disappointing.
I'm hoping they'll leave the rough sex out of the film.