Hollah on Nathan Fillion. Love that guy.

Good choices, all!

What I wonder is whether they'll update the time frame ... For instance, I could see replacing railroads (so 1950s!) with airlines, and the Motor with some sort of anti-gravity device. And with anti-gravity you could move the "hidden valley in Colorado" to Luna ...

I can see at least 2 of those roles that would be a good fit for Alfred Molina (Frida, Boogie Nights, Magnolia, Chocolat) one of the best actors working today.

I would say that it's just not possible to tell this story on the big screen, but then again, I was just blown away by how fresh and light the Kiera Knightley "Pride & Prejudice" film was. The script for "Atlas Shrugged" would have to emerge like a butterfly from the chrysalis of the novel, otherwise you'd be left with something so leaden that no one would want to see it.

I like your cast, although Angelina leaves me cold. I don't think she could pull off a blonde role, and I can't imagine Dagny being anything other than blonde.

I can't imagine Hollywood doing this movie "right." If they do it at all, we'll wind up with another "Starship Troopers".

Like you, I've had my dream cast picked out for so long it's a bit out of date. (And like you, I posted mine on coldfury three years ago) Below are the originals with some thoughts on replacements where appropriate:

Dr. Robert Stadler:
Ian McKellan - Would capture the complexity of Stadler's dilemma and decay.

Lillian Rearden:
Annette Benning. Probably still.

Hank Rearden:
(old) Ralph Fiennes - Leading man looks, a certain detachment, not overpowering and an incredible range of acting ability.
(new) Ralph might be a bit old for this now... maybe Gary Sinise or Linus Roache?

Dagny Taggart:
Tilda Swinton - She's perfect... cerebral, aloof, beautiful... and she's a redhead which matches Mr. Roth. Alternatively I'd go with Cate Blanchett.

Jim Taggart:
Tim Roth - Come on... I *dare* you to disagree with this one.

Cheryl Taggart:
(old) Kate Winslet - Wbe able to get the right balance between despair and naivete. I think she'd work best as someone for Roth to completely dump on.
(new) I actually think Kate could still pull this off, but my back-up choice would be Sophia Myles.

Orren Boyle:
(old) Christopher Plummer... maybe a bit on the old side, but might change the dynamic between Jim and Orren in an interesting way.
(new) Might be too old now... I'd pick Bill Nighy.

Wesley Mouch:
Guy Pearce - I'm less certain about this one. Perhaps someone with less facial definition, but the same level of talent?
Addendum: I'd still go with him.

John Galt: (I am so going to catch flak for this)
Matthew McConaughey - Tall, grave, with great features. Hell of an actor... he could go from serious contemplative to that joyful exuberance that Galt sometimes felt.

Frisco:
(old) Francisco has to be the "stand out" person of the "trinity" of Ragnar, Galt, and Frisco. So I'm just going to go ahead and agree with Banderas.
(new) I'm changing my mind: Andy Garcia might do a better job.

Ragnar:
Viggo Mortenson - Perfect "firebrand" counterpoint to McCounaghey... and good-looking enough for the part.

Hugh Akston:
Robert Redford - I know... way too expensive. But I think his warm demeanor would set off really nicely against McKellan's.

Phillip Rearden:
(old) Jude Law - He's got that smarmy smart-assness about him, plus a vague resemblance to Fiennes, if we use him. It's my dream cast, so I can put A list actors into bit parts.
(new) If Jude is considered too old... maybe Tobey Maguire.

Eddie Willers:
Jon Favreau.

Ellis Wyatt:
Colm Feore - Don't know why, but I can't really picture anyone else playing a self-made Colorado millionaire with the cajones to burn his own fields.

Balph Eubank / Bertram Scudder:
You know these are going to be combined into one role, if they show up at all, so I'm only going to give one name for them: Jon Voight.

Mike G: I agree that some of the tech is a bit dated, and have pondered how it would be modernized, too. One set of changes that (albeit pretty radical) is to change Galt's motor to some form of cold fusion, Rearden metal to mass-producable carbon nanotubes, and the Taggart bridge to a space elevator -- the nanotubes having the same relationship to the elevator as the metal did to the bridge, and the elevator being something that would definitely (as its counterpart the book) be opposed by people not wanting the boat rocked.

Hugh Akston: if deviating from the original character ethnicities is an option, I think Morgan Freeman would be perfect in this role.

Oh, and reading the President Thompson scenes always made me picture Ross Perot -- probably because I first read Atlas Shrugged in '92.

Mike G - they should leave it as is! Other wise as -STEVE- says it will end up anothe "Starship Troopers". I was very unhappy with the movie. They ignored the whole point of the book = What it means to be a citizen of a country!
Given how Hollywood dislikes (hates)both Ayn Rand and Heinlein it seems maybe they fu** their books up when they make them into movies on purpose. And then they wonder why ticket sales have been in a 30 year decline, of course the fact that prices went from $1.5 to $9.5 probably cut down sales too.
*disclaimer* I read Troopers my sophomore year in college and thought(still think) it was one of the best books on philosophy ever written. It is a major reason I joined the Corps and fought the real JFK's war 40 years ago. I am very biased on this book . Also read Ayn's 2 big books at the Pendelton base library and am very biased here as well. I admit my prejudice up front; no lies about fairness here like the MSM/DNC.

>a very large piece of cardboard with a speaker on it

Isn't that just another way of saying Keanu?

I told my 8 year old daughter Dagny about the maybe movie this morning and she cried. She thought that then everybody would start naming their kid's Dagny and she wouldn't be unique anymore.

Sad.

I told her everybody naming their kids Angelina was more likely.

Regarding the technology being dated, here's two words that allow us to keep the railroads and all of the wonderful symbolism that goes with them: magenetic levitation.

Imagine a world where Nat Taggart, convinced that high fuel prices and incompetence were going to bugger the airlines, privately built the first transcontinental MagLev track...

Do you think silly melodrama will do well at the box office?

Oh god, I can't imagine two WORSE people for Dagny and John Galt; the world's most vapid couple. Sorry, I know all you straight guys like Jolie, but as Dagny? Please. And Brad Pitt? Wasn't "Troy" enough torture?

I guess I'll have to read the book... sounds like it comes highly recommended.

I think the only way to do the movie with any integrity would be to make it an alternate-history movie, set in the 40s or 50s. If in color, use lots of sepia tones. Even bolder would be to make it a black-and-white movie.

Check out Barbara Branden's Passion of Ayn Rand which (before and after page 211) notes that Rand had to constantly fight to keep Hollywood from messing up her script, and explains:

"Oddly, [the Johnson Office, Hollywood's self-censoring agency] did not object to the 'rape scene'--but to Roark's courtroom speech. 'Two men came to see me,' Ayn would recall, 'one of whom was a Catholic scholar. He said they objected to the speech because it was "materialistic." I explained and explained--and he kept retreating, he knew he was on shaky ground because the Johnson Office was not supposed to discuss the philosophical content of a movie. Finally, I said, "Are you censoring me on the grounds of what does and does not accord with Catholic doctrine?" He backed up immediately--and I had no more trouble. That's how one should treat any underground pressure that doesn't dare come out into the open: make it open, name what they are implying.'"

Now, imagine how hard someone NOT Ayn Rand will have to fight to keep away the urge to self-censor the philosophical content. I have no trouble with the idea of streamlining the [repetitive] assertions of objectivism, so long as they don't destroy the essence. And I have little confidence that anyone other than Rand could do so. Sadly, I predict we'll get a Starship-Troopers-treatment of the book if it ever makes it to the screen.

By the way, Branden's book was recounting Rand's struggle to make a movie based on The Fountainhead, which didn't do a very good job as a movie. (The sappy soundtrack and lack of authentic Frank Lloyd Wright designs really hurt the effort).

I'm going to go ahead and say that Angelina is no where near brainy enough for the job of dagny.

Granted, rumors in Hollywood are like kelp in the ocean, and very few of them pan out.

On the odd chance that the Jolie/Pitt cast actually goes into production, the script will share nothing but a passing resemblence to the book. I guarantee the likes of those two would never, ever allow Rand's words to pass their lips. They are die hard leftists with bleeding hearts stapled to the sleeves.

Their version will probably focus on the Taggart Family Organic Farms and Dagny's quest to keep the Farm running in the face of evil Republicans and the Corporatocracy that run the country. Rearden pops in with the perfect tomato that will simutaneously end famine, poverty, and dependence on fossil fuels.

But, no! Dirty, dirty Rovian machinations put an end to his plans, wrest control of Taggart farms, forcing Dagny to hire to the Alaskan hinterlands. There she will join a Native American tribe, partake in pot-smoking ceremonies to reconnect her spirit to Mother Gaia, and listen to Big Chief Galt lecture about the diabolical nature of capitalism and the West. Cameos in the wigwam by John Cole, Ted Kennedy, and Noam "can't hate the US too much" Chompsky.

Re-empowered, full of poo-flinging enviro-facism, she sallies forth to assemble dedicated ELF'rs to regain control of Taggart farms, find Rearden and his tomatoes, have hot, sweaty hippie sex, and bring down the evil Corporatocracy with aforementioned tomatoes while marching on the Capitol. Soundtrack curtesy of Rage against the Machine.

The last scene shows D.C. turning into a rainforest wonderland with hippies cavorting hither, thither, and yon, but the camera pans to the dark corner of the forest to reveal slithering Republicans gathering in a festering cabal, seething for revenge. Cue evil laughter echoing annd...we're black, roll credits!

Actually, in the modern of actors, I'd always envisioned Matt Damon as Galt. He just has the right face, and he's a more than passable actor.

I agree with some other commenters that Jolie is a terrible choice for Dagny. She's just too, I don't know, vulgar, I guess. Those large lips just don't look like my picture of the hard-as-nails, practical Dagny.

Natalie Portman could do it, though she has the same problem with possible leftist qualms about the material.

For Lillian, here's a surprise possibility - Jennifer Aniston. I never saw an episode of Friends, and the only thing I'd ever seen of hers was Office Space - until I saw Derailed recently. She can do edgy, I find. And she's got the "pretty but not stunning" looks for Lillian.

I'm less sure about the weaseley parts, but that guy who was Wormtail in the Harry Potter movies ought to fit in there somewhere.

"Matt Damon"

Sorry, I hate him.

Why isn't Christopher Walken in your movie Green?

I think we need to cast this movie with sufficient respect for the source material...

So I say Adam Sandler, Eddie Deezen, Madonna...

Since we're playing, what if they went another direction for Galt? Instead of making him a leading role with a high profile actor, how about making him a complete unknown actor? Not only that, but give him very FEW scenes? Maybe even just a cameo? One of the best parts of John Galt was his mystery.

I remember when I read the book, the build-up of Galt was incredible, and I couldn't wait until we got to meet him. And then the more we got to meet him, I began to think that he was just a juiced-up version of Fransisco.

Then came that 30 page or so rant that he did live over the radio waves. I kept saying to myself, "I agree with you, I like you, STOP TALKING!"

I have to confess: I always skip the speech. I'm always suspicious of people who profess to having read the whole thing. I mean, what's the point? Well, maybe if it was for a college class or something...

It has been over 20 years since I read it. I wonder now if I could stand wading through Rand's prose. I'm not as patient about some things as I used to be.

I just finished reading the book and took it to a used book store today to trade it for something else. An hour after I get home, I hear on the news about the Brad and Angelina thing.

Weird.

Bill Clinton IS Wesley Mouch (i.e. a mealy mouthed creep).

Nobody mentioned the "Wet Nurse" so I will. Eric Smazda from CSI. He a little bit flakey but respectful. Qualties that the "wet nurse" shows.

"I have to confess: I always skip the speech. I'm always suspicious of people who profess to having read the whole thing."

I'm with you. I read it all the first time, though it was a struggle. No need to work that hard on successive readings, not on something that being read for pleasure.

I don't get Angelina and Brad being interested in the philosophy which is what I'm reading, and I don't believe it. They would be completely different people. No fucking way. I say Pamela Anderson and "The Hoff"!

Any ideas for Cuffy Meigs?

Personally, I'd rather see Fountainhead re-made - same message but shorter soliloquies...

And Paul Krugman wouldn’t have to act to play Ellsworth Toohey

Phillip Reardon: IMHO this part MUST be played by the guy on Frasier who played Niles: David Hyde Pierce. I don't think there's anyone else out there who's the right size with the right attitude and tone who could match Pierce for this part.

I'm okay with Angelina as Dagny - she does have great legs - but no way can Brad Pitt play John Galt - not steely-eyed enough. For John Galt, I nominate Edward Burns.

For D'anconia - Andy Garcia, got to be. (and check out his anti-Castro movie, The Lost City, if you haven't seen it.)

For Lillian Reardon - Diana Scarwid, last of Wonderfalls - great ice queen, patrician and bitchy.

What about Frank Whaley for Eddie Willers?

Great to include Nathan Fillion in the cast.

I would suggest Beau Bridges for one of the smarmier character parts.

That's all I can think of right now, but I'll just say this - if Matthew McConaughey is John Galt I'll never set foot in the theater.

Judith

The movie MUST have the "Wet Nurse" character, as he was pivotal in the development of the plot. He was the end product of the collectivist school, who through association with Rearden rediscovered rational thought. He was a great, though minor, character in the book, and needs to be in the movie.

Sorry, no recomendations occur to me.... he needs to be 3-5 years post-college, appear (initially) knowledgeable without intelligence, and be easy to tie into knots.

Hollywood couldn't handle the intellectual content of Starship Troopers. Think they can handle Atlas Shrugged?

Starship Troopers was the result of Paul Verhoeven's misinterpretation of the book as some sort of fascist propaganda, hence a movie that made no damn sense at all. Verhoeven crafts visually interesting movies, but the man's obviously lacking in the intelligence department.

I doubt they'll ever get around to making Atlas Shrugged, simply because there's no market for it. It cries for a big budget but has none of the usual justifications to procure one (Starship Troopers sucked as an adaptation but it was grade A splatterfest).

For the average moviegoer it would seem like a weird, talky movie about a would-be Bond villain and his sidekicks D'Anconia and Danneskjöld. Your friendly neighborhood film critics would produce nice capsule reviews decrying it as some sort of millionaires' circle jerk about rich people going on strike. Add to that the dismal success of any conjoined first name celebrity vehicles and you've got a bomb that will make Gigli look like a firecracker.

But I hope I'm proven wrong. Please no Angelina as Dagny, though.

I vote for Mel Gibson for the director.

Hollywood will murder the meaning of Atlas Shrugged. No way the evils of socialism will be highlighted. And the terms, looters and producers will never make it to the big screen.

And as previously mentioned, wasn't Troy enough. Please, Brad Pitt as Galt??? I see Denzel as Galt. He would be fabulous.

All they're going to do is misrepresent and destroy one of the best books ever written.

Pitt???? He is nice to look at but his acting, boooooring. I would hope they'd get someone cool like Christian Bale and Jonny Depp. Now THEY can act. There's no way I'd buy Jolie as Dagney either, I think it's ridiculous. If this happens I'll definitely give it a miss. I liked the book waaay too much for these dumbasses to ruin it for me.

The movie is being made way too late. If it had come out within a few years of the book's publication, we would have gotten the full epic Hollywood treatment. The world has shrunken since 1957. 1957 was already almost too late.

If they do go ahead and make it with the talentless drudges that are todays so-called stares, I don't think it should be "updated" -- it should be set "somewhere in the 20th Century" (Like "Brazil") with killer 40s-50s era costumes and hairstyles, trains, cars and airplanes all a sort of "futureworld" version of 1948.

Sorry but Christian Bale and Depp are not talentless drudges. They don't clamour for attention like Brangelina but that doesn't mean they should be tossed aside either. Granted Brad is sub-par if not past his prime for the role. I don't recall Galt being a decade older than Dagney. I like your "futureworld" idea though.

Go see a real movie — Go see Flight 93.

I see Johnny Depp as Ellis Wyatt.

How about Peter O'Toole as Dr. Stadler, just so that he can steal another movie from Brad Pitt?

Jennifer Love Hewitt as Cheryl Taggart?

Mekhi Phifer as Quentin Daniels.

And as an alternative to the 'futureworld' concept, we can rewrite Taggart TransContinental as an airline branching out into private space transport, and Rearden metal is actually a polymer from which a space elevator, among other things, could be constructed.

There's something wrong with a world where Depp has second billing to Pitt. Regardless of whether or not he'd be right for Galt. I say cast Depp in one of the roles and impeach-Pitt. ;)

Christian Bale can play any part he wants to, as far as I'm concerned. Go rent The Machinist; the guy goes to the wire for his parts. I'd pick him for John Galt, personally, but that's not a role that had a lot of "face time" (so to speak) in the book.

> Balph Eubanks. Jeremy Piven, who else?

I've not read AS (yeah, I know -- it's on my list, but I keep forgetting to get a copy when I have the chance), but have read The Fountainhead. As such, I can't comment on who would be ideally cast beyond the talents of the actors.

I will say, though, that it's nice to find a fan of Jeremy Piven. I've been ticked off at ABC for going on 8 years for not giving "Cupid" a decent chance. Its 15 episodes can be found on P2P, and I highly recommend it for anyone who loves intelligent Television.

You know, given my above comment, I'm looking at the above and some of you just have no clue whatsoever.

1) "Pitt???? He is nice to look at but his acting, boooooring." What planet have you been on? "12 Monkeys", "Snatch", "Fight Club". Pitt is not just a pretty boy, by any means. No, I didn't see "Troy". How does one bad movie make an actor's entire career bad? If the source material sucked, then anything less than a magnificent actor will still suck, and even there he has to be lucky to rise above it. Look at some of Dustin Hoffman's pix. Cripes, look at "Family Business" -- Hoffman, Connery, AND Broderick - it blew chunks. Does that mean none of them can act?

2) Starship Troopers. This isn't a great adaptation of Heinlein -- it's a WALTZING BEAR. Heinlein's book, while excellent, was filled with massive amounts of direct exposition and philosophical discussion. OF COURSE that's not going to make it into a movie. What IS amazing is how much of the content (and, more importantly, the feel) Verhoeven managed to GET into the movie, using the "click here for more!" mechanism. The film stands on its own for what it is, a decent action adventure picture. If that gets some people who would never have read Starship Troopers to do so, great. It's not like many are going to NOT read because of the movie. I repeat, it's not to suggest that it's a good adaptation of the movie, it's that it's amazing that someone managed it AT ALL.

3) The quality of this movie will depend entirely on the devotion of the writers, producers, and the director, as well as the rights-owners' devotion to the source material. By what I've read, the TWO writer-producer-rights-owners actually do care a great deal about it, which is one reason it's been languishing for about 15 years. I'd suggest everyone give them a chance before they assume it's going to be a piece of crap. It may well be -- but when those people show interest in it, you ought to at least give them a chance to show if they can apply talent to it as well... and let them decide who would do the job best from whatever vision they have of the movie in their heads.

Of the candidates mentioned so far, I can most plausibly picture Uma Thurman as Dagny. And for Hank Reardon... how about Tom Selleck?

Wallace Shawn could be cast in any of several evil/venal/incompetent roles -- he really does have the appropriate politics in Real Life for those parts.

I like the suggested substitutions of carbon nanotubes for Reardon Metal, a beanstalk for the Taggert Bridge, and privately financed transcontinental maglev trains for mid-twentieth-century railroads. Either anti-gravity or cold fusion would be a good candidate for the Motor ... because you'll need it to get to the hidden valley, and the hidden valley pretty much has to be set somewhere other than Earth (no hidden valleys left on *this* planet!).

I don't like the idea of doing the movie as alternate history -- the average viewer will think, "Well, it *didn't* happen that way, so it's all crap!"

Gregory Itzin would be perfect as Wesley Mouch. Itzin is currently playing President Logan in 24. Macy would be good, but Itzin projects the perfect combination of fearful power and utter stupidity.

I'm as Rand-ie as the next person around here, but I think we've got to face it: the plot is too complex for this story to be even adequately delivered in any less than 4 hours. Too many subtleties that would be steam-rolled IOT to compress. Shogun is a good comparison here. Took, what was it, 4 nights of watching, 2 per, to get it all in.

Some other commenter opines that a remake of The Fountainhead is a much better, feasible idea. Gotta second that. Every bit as potent in terms of philosophical impact, less complex, fewer characters, easier to deliver, much more accessible. Probably easier to sell in H-wood also. I've always thought of Fountain as a sort of primer for Atlas, even though Fountain more than stands on it's own merits. In fact, I've always liked Fountain more than Atlas, b/c it's almost a sort of handbook for your day to day philosophical outlook. The soaring macro heights of Atlas are great and everything, but give me something I can use everyday down here in my micro world.

Do the Fountainhead and do it well, and you'll end up with a much, much larger audience for Atlas.

surf-actant

I saw 12 Monkeys and I have seen him in other things like Fight Club and I think there are plenty of actors who could have done a better job. I didn't say he had NO talent but I think there are many more talented people.

I think they should use complete unknowns. The star power being batted around here would ruin the movie. Except I might let in William H. Macy. I had always seen Lauren Bacall as Dagny. Too bad the movie wasn't made when she was young enough to do it. And I agree that Hollywood can't possibly make a movie that stays on message for the book.

"I doubt they'll ever get around to making Atlas Shrugged, simply because there's no market for it. It cries for a big budget but has none of the usual justifications to procure one (Starship Troopers sucked as an adaptation but it was grade A splatterfest).

For the average moviegoer it would seem like a weird, talky movie about a would-be Bond villain and his sidekicks D'Anconia and Danneskjöld. "

On the contrary, Atlas Shrugged could become the most kick-ass disaster movie of all time.

Show the skyline of New York City at night with all the lights off above the 25th floor. Let's see the bleak desolation of Starnesville, and don't forget that factory with the remnants of the motor tucked away in a forgotten lab with junk everywhere. Show some of those blighted areas and let's see corpses dug out of the snow after a blizzard. Don't forget the train wreck in the tunnel.

Show us the disaster. It won't involve fireballs in the sky, but you can still see the slow-motion devastation that unchallenged leftist rule brings.

I just don't see it happening - and if it does happen, I see it being a disaster of a movie.

I read The Fountainhead first, and one of the things that stood out to me about it was how starkly and uncompromisingly the book started out. You just don't see people advocating the things she did so unapologetically; zero sugar coating - it was like being hit over the head with a 2x4. It's possible that a movie could do the same thing and come out of the gates swinging, but I don't see a Hollywood script writer "getting" it.
With Rand, it's not the story - it's the ideas. It's one of the same reasons that Starship Troopers was so badly adapted - adapted? Let's not mince words. The didn't adapt Heinlein, they mauled it and turned it inside out into as near it's polar opposite as you could get. The book and the movie can't be reconciled. At least with The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter, the movie and the books happened in the same freakin' universe.

Atlas Shrugged would be ten times harder to adapt than The Fountainhead, or any Heinlein book I can think of. I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's no way the Hollywood I've been watching for the past two decades can pull it off.

That said, the whole movie would have to be filmed a-la Sky Captain - deliberate grain and old-timey alterna-futuristic. I don't really see it working otherwise.
I'd go with Cillian Murphy as Quentin Daniels, not Ellis Wyatt. Nathan Fillion would be perfect for Wyatt tho.

I don't see how you can leave Clint Eastwood off a list like this tho. Even if they had to invent a character for him, he should be on there. As is tho, he gets Akston - I could see him as Midas too tho. Hell... I'd let him play anyone he wanted as along as it wasn't Dagny.

If Pitt gets a roll, it should be Danneskjöld. I'd want a complete unknown for Galt's role.

Ed Norton would be a great fit for Jim Taggart, but Kevin Spacey could do that pitch perfect too. He might be a bit too old tho, so I'd put him as President Thompson.

Donald Sutherland as Dr. Stadler - and I've been racking my brain trying to think of a better fit for Reardon than Keifer, but can't.

I always pictured Liam Neeson as Reardon. And I like the idea of either setting it in a fantasy 40s/50s or upgrading it to modern times and using the airline industry as a backdrop.

I doubt it will happen, though. Doesn't Rand's will state that you'd need the entire Galt speech? That would go on for an hour, at miniumum.

When I saw Cillian Murphy I said "oooh..." because he exactly fits my mental image of Ellis Wyatt. I know what you mean about dialing down the creep factor, but to me Wyatt exuded a mild degree of creepiness despite being heroic.

I've done this exercise before, but can't find it online at the moment. I'll just try a few:

Dagny: Jill Hennessy--perfect look for the role (read the first scene with Dagny on the train for a description), and can act. Will probably be too old for the role in a few years.

Hugh Akston: Sean Connery. C'mon, every group of world-changing heroes deserves to have Sean Connery as their elder statesman. This role should be his until he keels over.

Jim Taggart: Alec Baldwin--because the role will make him look ugly and suffer a lot. Plus, his lines will be in a language he understands and believes in.

Kay Ludlow: Now *here's* the role for Angelina.

Dr. Floyd Ferris: William Atherton. No further comment necessary.

I want Catherine Keener in there somewhere.

And Chris Cooper.

Good choices there, but you would use up all of your budget on casting....and even if you could get them there with enough money left to do the movie, good luck getting all those egos to mesh.

Great choice, M. Scott--Jill Hennessy! Yes, yes, O God, yes!