What is Digg?147 Comments
- glenshaw26, on 02/16/2009, -6/+137Yes.
visionary (n)- a person given to fanciful speculations and enthusiasms with little regard for what is actually possible
I wasn't the biggest fan of 300, but it looked like no movie ever made did, so why not "visionary"? - LiquidSpark, on 02/16/2009, -2/+61OMG! So movie studios are using hyperbole in their advertisements!? It's BS. I've never heard Zach call himself a visionary.
- cquinnd, on 02/16/2009, -3/+56Technically, every Director is a "visionary" because that's part of the job description; taking a script or storyboard and extending the vision of how the scenes in the actual movie play out.
Being a visionary doesn't mean everything they do has to be great. But in this case we can hope so. - SaladCactusKing, on 02/17/2009, -1/+42An exaggerated marketing term in an advertisement. Shocker.
What a ***** stupid article. - seantubridy, on 02/17/2009, -2/+34Is it that hard is to write a headline?
- DrCyclops, on 02/17/2009, -2/+34Uwe Boll is a visionary director.
His vision happens to be crap, but hey. - adith, on 02/17/2009, -1/+31What the hell is the headline saying?
- kgsullivan, on 02/17/2009, -3/+30his vision is reproducing someone else's vision
- Kinsbane, on 02/16/2009, -1/+26Why is this an issue, suddenly? Does it not make sense to have a director, when doing re-make films, to be as passionate about the source material as Snyder?
- nascentia, on 02/17/2009, -0/+22You can't really knock a director just because he's only made 1 or 2 movies previously. Let's look at some other director's I'd personally call "visionary" or fantastic...
David Fincher - his second movie was Se7en.
James Cameron - if you count Xenogenesis (his first film, and a short film) as his first, then The Terminator was #3 and Aliens #4. If not, #2 and #3.
George Lucas (let's ignore the new trilogy?) - his first three, in order: THX 1138, American Graffiti, and Star Wars. I think all 3 are fantastic, and I personally think THX is his best directed film.
Danny Boyle - Trainspotting was #2
Sam Mendes (who has yet to do wrong in my books) - #1 American Beauty, #2 Road to Perdition, #3 Jarhead.
George Romero - #1, Night of the Living Dead
I'm sure I could go on and on, but you get the gist - a lot of great directors (IMO) had amazing first, second and third films. - LilRabbitFooFoo, on 02/17/2009, -6/+28Actually, 300 is just the same technique as SIN CITY, but in sepia tone...
- rebotfc, on 02/16/2009, -4/+23You guys must have the attention spans of goldfish.
- yocouchdigga, on 02/17/2009, -1/+19To answer the question: Yes and why not?
- TheRedeemer, on 02/17/2009, -12/+29............................................________........................
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,..................
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,............
.........................,/...............................................”:,........
.....................,?......................................................,.....
.................../...........................................................,}....
................./......................................................,:`^`..}....
.............../...................................................,:”........./.....
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../.....
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../........
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`........_/...........
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/....}...........
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../............
...,,,___.`~,......“~.,....................`.....}............../.............
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”...............
............/.`~,......`-...................................../...................
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__...........
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|..............`=~-,....
.....`=~-,__......`,.........................................................
...................`=~-,,.,......................................................
................................`:,,...........................`..............__..
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``.......
........................................_..........._,-%.......`...............
..................................., - MrBabyMan, on 02/17/2009, -3/+19Citizen Kane was Orson Welles' third movie as a director. Unfortunately that was also his peak.
- philomatic, on 02/17/2009, -0/+16Exactly, what does visionary have anything to do with experience???
- HappyScrappy, on 02/17/2009, -0/+14Somehow you missed Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and Sin City?
300 was not the first of its kind, but it sure had the most SPAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTAAAAAAAAAAAAA! - wmute, on 02/17/2009, -1/+15Why not. Other movies are being called "BEST (INSERT GENRE) I'VE SEEN IN A DECADE"
- handheldchimp, on 02/17/2009, -0/+12Is a movie is fun to watching?
/s - leamanc, on 02/17/2009, -0/+11While I agree that Kane is Welles' best film, there are plenty that will disagree with us. A strong contingent would go with The Magnificent Ambersons (yes, even though RKO butchered the ending). There are many who think The Trial is his strongest film. Some even go with The Lady From Shanghai, and sometimes I'm inclined to go that way too after viewing the "house of mirrors" sequence.
And then there's Touch of Evil, which I pull off the DVD shelf more often than I do Kane. Any of the French New Wave directors would probably pick that one over Kane. - dn11, on 02/17/2009, -0/+9I think 300 was a faithful interpretation of the source material - which is pretty much paper thin plot and characterization, one dimensional characters with lots of bloody action. Let's hope the much more substantial Watchmen is just as faithfully dealt with. So far, it looks and sounds promising.
- Commonwealth, on 02/17/2009, -0/+9Is It Unusual A Headline of Is Grammatically Incorrect On Digg?
- wedges, on 02/17/2009, -0/+8well, he has made two movies that both had a very stylized and ambitious look and feel. he certainly has proved that he has "vision"
- masamunecyrus, on 02/17/2009, -0/+8I'm not sure if I'd call him a visionary, but why can't he be? Tim Burton's first three films were Pee Wee's Big Adventure, Bettlejuice, and Batman, and all three were spectacular. George Lucas's third film (ignore that he sucks, now) was the original Star Wars. Just because three films isn't a LOT of experience doesn't mean it's not enough.
- inactive, on 02/17/2009, -0/+8You could say the same of James Cameron - if you negate his first low budget feature.
- aviazn, on 02/17/2009, -0/+7We're not talking about technique here, we're talking about vision. Sky Captain, Sin City, and 300 all used the same green/bluescreen technique but to totally different effect. Sky Captain was steampunk Golden Age swashbuckling, Sin City was noir-extreme...300 was historical epic-as-completely-realized-glorified-oral-propaganda.
- rukeypoo, on 02/17/2009, -0/+7I've seen a lot of hype about McG being a visionary director as well. And I'm not sure why.
Charlie's Angels? - neonoodle, on 02/17/2009, -0/+7from that list you could even conclude that a director is only good for his first 3 or 4 films.
- taylorr05, on 02/17/2009, -0/+6Piranha 2? That's one of my favorites!
- harronoob, on 02/17/2009, -1/+7Title should read: How is vissionary formed? How director get titel?
- Ekkers, on 02/17/2009, -1/+7Visionary director or not this movie is either going to blow chunks or create a horde of flavor of the week movie goers who swear by it but refuse to spend a couple nights of their life reading it because books just don't compare to high speed camera slow motion sequences scattered over a generic orchestral score.
Read the graphic novel. It's genius. And it has pictures. - GawtMilk, on 02/17/2009, -3/+9"regarded as one of the best modern literary works"
Uh, come again? Truly a landmark comic book / graphic novel, but I don't think it is "one of the best modern literary works". Watchmen is great because it really sets itself from the cliché comic book action scenes and focuses more on character development and a realistic theme (that's why there is only one superhuman hero, Dr. Manhattan). To call it one of the best modern literary works is, in my opinion, an insult to many of the more complex and enjoyable novels, screenplays and transcripts out there. - orlyfactor, on 02/17/2009, -1/+6Since visionary is a term that's based on an opinion, you can call him whatever the hell you want.
- crossmr, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5Can't quite figure out that grammar yet? My guess is your script that you used to submit this article doesn't taken into account sentence structure. Adding a question word on the front doesn't usually work if the title is already a question.
You want to spot power users scripting? Spot the ones screwing up basic grammar like this. - DrCyclops, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5Thank you for standing up for Welles. Touch of Evil is my personal favorite.
- tmonsta1, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5that's why he's a director... and not a writer
man, reading some of these comments makes me wonder... have any of you ever actually seen the original Dawn of the Dead
the remake bears very little resemblance to the source... and really was a unique take on the idea
give the man some credit for the 2 films he has made - kingmanic, on 02/17/2009, -1/+6but with bigger budgets.
- faswich, on 02/17/2009, -2/+7Heads up, I don't know if you consider Time Magazine a reputable source on things literary, but they consider it awesome. In fact, they have a list of 100 works that they consider to be the best english language novels since 1923, possibly qualifying it as a modern literary work.
http://www.time.com/time/2005/100books/the_complet ...
Guess what, an outstanding graphic novel can be on par with those novels, screenplays, and transcripts you love. Just the facts, Watchmen is highly regarded, even by those haughty critics. I guess you may have words with them if you are still insulted. - holmcross, on 02/17/2009, -0/+5300 was decent enough, yet so horribly over-rated/over-exposed that I don't think I could stand to watch it a second time.
Transformers has the same problem for me.
I didn't even realize that he directed the Dawn of the Dead remake. I thought that was a fantastic movie, much better then 300. Though I can't think of anything too 'visonary' about his DotD remake: it was just a solid movie. - bleutuna, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4300 is based on the comic. Not based on the story.
That's like complaining that Amadeus could have been soooo much better if only it had focused on the truth of the situation, rather than Peter Schaefer's play. - charlie55, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4"visionary" is a totally subjective term and can be applied to anyone by anyone without me caring.
- ChrisshEnzo, on 02/17/2009, -2/+6Zack Synder earned his adjective. Why is he getting backlash before the movie has even been released?
- inactive, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4He seems to have a gift for taking a graphic novel and movie-izing it. Isn't that exactly what he needs to be doing here? From what i can tell in all the random stuff they keep releasing about it, there seems to be a whole lot of attention to detail.
- darthdusty, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4300 had the plot a James Bond movie, with the action of a God of War video game, and the art style of a style of painting I can't even comprehend. And personally, it seemed like it was almost directed like a music video. But it was a lot of fun, and I think that is what it ultimately was set out to be; just a fun movie. Snyder is strictly business with Watchmen, and I believe it will end up being his masterpiece. (Unless the rumors are true that he agreed to direct Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns sometime way into the future, then THAT could be his masterpiece).
- mcalica, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4Hey, those two movies were better than 90% of the ***** released from hollywood within the past decade. 300 was probably one of the most visually stunning films of all time...Dawn of the Dead was just AWESOME; without a doubt, it is the zombie flick in which to compare all others. So would I call him a visionary? Hell yah, he just may become one of the best directors in Hollywood if he follows through with Watchmen.
- crossmr, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4You could understand that question?
- SteveIsTheDude, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4I agree, in fact, I think Time Magazine is Visionary.
"Visonary" does not mean *****... and the studio can say it about whatever they like. I am looking forward to Watchmen and I hope people write lots of puff pieces like this so we can get the word out. - SaladCactusKing, on 02/17/2009, -1/+5"Sylvester Stallone IS John Rambo."
NY Times: Is an actor known for playing various action movie roles actually indeed a disgruntled Vietnam vet with a passion for decapitating Asians? - Ekkers, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4Why would you burn the book?
- nodo8, on 02/17/2009, -0/+4I think that is bull *****, especially for the New York TImes. When you have directed movies like "Dawn of the Dead" and "300" inexperience has not been anywhere around you, for a very long time. The author bases his argument on the directors feature movie resume, not how much experience he has overall in his career as a director. This article strips "Watchmen" down into something that only involves money and public interest. He completely ignores that filmmaking is an art, and movies especially like "Watchmen" are above anything else, a piece of art. Even though studios try to sell films to us as a product, they are really a directors vision. So yes, Zack Synder is a 'Visionary Director'.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 150 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is