As of 4/25/2011

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/
Atlas has expanded it's theatre count by 55% (465 now as compared to 299 in week 1)
The receipts for this weekend were $879k. A 47.9% drop off from week 1.

Also, I noticed that the budget is now listed at $20mil. Since the published cost of the film was $10mil, this suggests to me that they spent an additional $10mil on advertising.

The trend is downward, the reviews are awful and the cost has doubled. I'm afraid I was correct.

>Take a look at Message #1507562
>
>Yes, I saw it. It paled in comparison to the book....movies, even decent movies, often do that.
>
>I also disagree with your speculation. It WILL grow. Atlas has grown with each passing decade.
>
>A novel on the scale of Atlas, but written to glorify collectivism (which would be a contradiction in terms), would have been produced on the screen long ago.
>
>The bottom line is that Hollywood doesn't know it's own business. There have been several big-name directors, writers, producers, and stars who have expressed strong interest in Atlas (including Angie Jolie, Brad Pitt, Gwenyth Paltrow, and going back further Raquel Welch). But the politics of Atlas forced Hollywood out of its comfort zone.
>
>If you've studied Ayn Rand (and I'm not talking about liberal parrots who have read 20 pages and concluded she was a horrible writer), you know that she wrote her novels in a very cinematic style, with stark visuals, sharp exchanges of dialogue, and peaks of high drama.
>
>Rand gave directors everything they could ask for to keep the audience in their seats: visually beautiful settings from the skyline of New York City to the mountains of Colorado, large-scale action scenes set on railroad lines and in steel mills, and big ideas expressed in sharp-witted exchanges of dialogue. But most in Hollywood are chicken-sh__s who don't know their own business.