Rank these directors according to their visual prowess a) Zack

>>86264283

L) Coen Bros*

>>86264283
James Cameron is boring. Avatar hasn't aged well at all. The Coen Bros are magnificient. Refn's Neon Demon and Only God Forgives are visual masterpieces.

PTA >>>>>>>>>> everyone else

HAHA SNYDER! CAPEKINO!
SNYDSTERPIECE!
DCINEMÁ
MARVELKEKS BTFO AGAIN!!

File: mel.jpg (61KB, 987x555px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 987x555px

>>86264457

>>86264457

Fuck off MCU pajeet , if you don't think Snyder is one of the elite in Visuals after BvS you should kys

>>86264836

Yep Snyder has after Watchmen, BvS , MOS established himself as one of the greatest visual directors in history. I would even say he is far better than the likes of Wes Anderson , PTA , Fincher and is safely in the leagues of Kubrick and Tarkovski .

>>86264836
>muh surface-level symbolism with religious painting references and frame by frame copies of the comics
Literal hack who simply can't make original visuals

>>86264549

Mel has lost all credibility after calling BvS dogshit.

>>86265003
I know right

he should've called it degenerate utter dogshit

>>86264983

Hi Nolan ! Are you assblasted that Snyder has made better movies than you?

>>86265040

Kek what's the matter? are you angry that Zack is working on some of the biggest and most important movies of this era while Mel has to grovel for a mid budget film?

>>86265043
yeah sure, literal degenerate capeshit studio infested CGI shitfests with unironic multiframed character setups scenes in form of emails is better than completely original ambitious films, sure thing buddy

>>86265105
>degenerate capeshit film #5437
>"most important movies of this era"

The truth is that all those capeshit flicks will be forgotten in an instant just like the overproduced zombie movies of the 80s.

File: Alex Thomson.jpg (174KB, 928x598px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 928x598px

>>86264283
I'm just going to rank them according to subjective preferences, visual prowess seems like an arbitrary notion. Ostentatious technical craft but shallow sensibility I find less visually impactful than subtle camera work built around a strong personality. It's always the old balance between style and substance.
>Terrence Malick / he has amazing taste and a profound sensibility, his style is easy to mock but he's the real deal, they're not just gratuitous nature shots, you can feel his warmth and kindness in every shot
>Coen Bros / they rely on writing more than visuals but have that Sam Raimi sense of framing going, plus Deakins always delivering solid work; Barton Fink, TMWWT, Hudsucker or Miller's Crossing have some excellent design aspects as well and are thematically relevant, not just good-looking sets
>Tim Burton / up until Ed Wood, he's dead for me afterwards, a master of visual ingenuity due to his background in animation
>Guillermo Del Toro / more consistent than Burton but less impactful
>David Fincher
>Ridley Scott / like Burton he's dead for me after first few films, but Burton even his shit films I see his sensibility, with Scott I believe his best looking films rely too much on other collaborators, on his own he's bland, lazy and boring. He would be at the top if he had done stuff like BR constantly.
>Nicholas Refn / I hate the look of early Refn, he's great at the urban neon aesthetics but too self-indulgent
>James Cameron / underrated, not a visual master, standard cinematigraphy, design feels generic but his perfectionism makes his films age incredibly well
>Paul Thomas Anderson / excellent taste but too derivative, inautentic
>Wes Anderson / very charming but his 2D, over-designed style is lazy and limited
>Chris Nolan / gets a bad rep, he reminds me of generic British studio craftsmen from the 70's, he's boring but elegant at least
>Zack Snyder / juvenile MTV sensibility, but at least he's trying
>Lars von Trier / rotten sensibility

>>86265149
>>86265192

BvS is the best film of the last decade. It will be the Blade Runner and 2001 of our generation. A misunderstood masterpiece that wiser people of the future will appreciate and unlike Blade Runner and 2001 it actually has deep themes and substance instead of just pretentiousness.

>>86265270

Finally an actual good answer to my question. Thank you.

File: laughing tyrone.gif (3MB, 240x234px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 240x234px

>>86265288
>unlike Blade Runner and 2001 it actually has deep themes and substance instead of just pretentiousness.
This has to be bait, Blade Runner and 2001 are full of deep themes whereas BvS is just generic religious symbolism that's as subtle as a brick to the face.

>>86265288
I sincerely hope you're baiting. Snyder's direct visual symbolism ironically makes the flick even more simple and finite because there is a singular universal answer to every shot, and once you "get" it there's no point in watching it ever again.
Also could you please explain where are the "deep themes" in the absolutely laughable studio intervention multiple framed expositional email character setups? Thanks in advance.

Zack Snyder is like a fresh film student who just converted to Christianity. His themes aren't deep, they're simplistic and obvious. All of the idiots on here who think Snyder is one of the deepest directors of this generation are underage capeshitters who don't know anything about the history of cinema.

>>86265389
>generic religious symbolism that's as subtle as a brick to the face.
This has to be bait or you really didn't understand the movie

refn is superior

>>86265589
You're the one who's baiting.

Lmao all the insecure visionlets who rush into this thread to shit on Snyder because they got confused by his films while not recognizing half the names in OPs list, so all they can contribute is muh symbolism (when it's not actually symbolism they're referring to) Literally two people actually answered the question.
>>86264457
>>86264983
>>86265003
>>86265149
>>86265547

>>86265389
>>86265409

I have typed out essays on this shit but if you guys want better opinions on this you can go to r/DC_Cinematic and ask guys like Eonrion, Heaven_or_Heck, Neodymium6, Kevonicus, Nether7, Black_panther or many others and they will be happy to educate you guys and there are vast sea of threads you spend your time on to better understand the movie.

>>86265794
>r/DC_Cinematic
So Snydercucks are r*dditors. That explains everything.

>>86265818

Don't worry that sub has more intelligence and better taste than tv ever could. That sub is what tv was supposed to be.

File: 1431993361539.gif (319KB, 314x314px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 314x314px

>>86265794
>r/DC_Cinematic

>>86265794
>hey I don't have any arguments, but please go on an another site and look for these users so they can maybe form some arguments

>>86265794
>>86265896
You have to go back.

File: Curb Your Enthusiasm Season 1 Episode 05 - Interior Decorator (00:06:53.446) 0002.jpg (114KB, 576x432px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 576x432px

>>86264283

Malick (unforgettable) > Snyder (you are) > Do you watch the films of (kid-diddler) > (big) Nolan > PTA (aka commie) > Fincher (lol JLaw) > Cameron > Coen (just cut my dick off)> Toro (muh mysticism) > Trier (only here cuz of snagglefu's tits and mommy's sex scene)> Burton (went to shit now desu) > Scott (muh aliums yay) > Refn (eternal foreplay) >>>>> Kubrick

>>86264283
>Rank these directors according to their visual prowess
Just to clarify, the ranking I'm about to give is entirely ignoring all other elements of a director's duties (directing your performers, liaising with writers/composers/editors/etc). This is purely about visuals, as per your question.

a) Terrence Malick
b) Zack Snyder
c) Chris Nolan
d) Guillermo Del Toro
e) James Cameron
f) Lars von Trier
g) Tim Burton
h) Wes Anderson
I) David Fincher
j) Paul Thomas Anderson
k) Ridley Scott
l) Coen Bros
m) Nicholas Refn

Just want to stress again that if you asked me to rank them by their quality as an actual director and everything that encompasses, the order would be very different.

>>86265863
If you knew who Malick or Anderson or the other Anderson were, you could've said something, anything, about them. They're hardly obscure. Instead you can only trash Snyder because your taste is so limited you likely consider Jon Favreau an auteur.

>>86265965

Or is it maybe that I am simply tired of explaining to you retards and I am directing you imbeciles to a repository of knowledge for better understanding.

It's like getting mad at someone of recommending stack overflow for programmers. BvS requires knowledge of a lot literature and psychology for best understanding and the sub and those guys mentioned will help you a lot.

>>86266150
>Snyder ranked that high
>Refn and Kubrick ranked that low
>Cameron ranked above the Coen brothers
>"(just cut my dick off)"
Bait.

>>86266393
>PLEASE FOLLOW THE CROWD OTHERWISE I WILL CALL YOUR POST BAIT

nice try

>>86266356

Snyder and Nolan above the likes of Fincher, Del Toro, Wes Anderson , Refn is absolute blasphemy but please do order them by their actual quality as directors.

>>86266375
Yes that's how it works then. Why even have discussion here, let's just all post links of Aristotle writings and call it a day.

I asked you one simple specific question, could you explain where are the "deep themes" in the studio intervention multiple framed expositional email character setups?
If you are so deep with your knowledge and wrote pages of analysis about it surely you can explain what I didn't "get" in that single scene.

>>86266573
BvS does address 9/11 but it's also a meta on the superhero genra in cinema. Beyond being a meta on cinema itself. You can totally read it as Superman, cbm, save people from painful 9/11 traum(Bruce).Bruce comes out of the movies. His parents get shot. He falls into a hole and bats (fiction) elevate him to the light, this is Plato's Cavern and cinema, a light is projected onto the screen. It's a lie. That is something Snyder already studied in Sucker Punch (which was also a meta and a screen within a screen), people dealing with traumatic events through fantasy. Bruce walks that thin line, a line he crosses in BvS and falls deeper in his delusions. BvS sees the arrival of the Superman, the first fictional character made flesh, the true mythological being. Unlike Bruce's bats that are fiction, Superman is real. He is also the art, spiritual and meaningful, "What we do is we project ourselves onto him". He will save humanity, he gets Lois out of the hole (visual parallelism with Bruce falling in it) and make Bruce process his traumatic experience (let's not even talk about how they related powerlessness and all them sexy things)
It demands us to treat those "ficiton" seriously because we deal trauma with them, an entire nation has been pressing the repeat button creating different outcomes to help them process. Or at least inviting us to be conscious that we do.

We can also note that Bruce associates the 9/11 with a deeper trauma, hinting at something fundamental in the nature of such experience, it's always going deeper and touching certain persons for a reason.

I did some research on 9/11 and superheroes too and that line was quite interesting:

>>86267126

Cont..

"in writing about September 11 and terrorism, many scholars suggest that our popular culture fantasized about the attacks long before they actually happened. He notes how curious it is that we claimed the attacks were totally unexpected given both that the media were bombarding us all the time with talk about the terrorist threat and that our Hollywood disaster movies have been playing out such a masochistic fantasy for years: so that, in a way, America got what it fantasized about, and that was the biggest surprise "
Fantasy becomes reality, and that's all BvS is about.

In the very premise of the film itself: people had an excessive reaction to the destruction in MoS. Snyder blatantly says "you take this seriously? Let's do so", he dives in the traumatic event. And, quite sadistically, makes them delusional men with messiah complex (because why not spit in the face of your audience and assert that Superman, your art, is greater than them and will save them from their trauma (the hole, the cinema)? The seed for the movie is a meta on the reaction people had with the previous movie, that's unique.

>>86267126
>>86267169
Anon I asked a simple question and you just copypasted some whatever autist post about the movie in general, not the question I ask.
I repeat, explain to me where are the "deep themes" in the studio intervention multiple framed expositional email character setups scene? It's a pretty simple and specific question.

File: gone_girl_artemple_vfx_reel_1.jpg (61KB, 1110x624px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1110x624px

I think fincher goes further than people realize

Malick>the rest
Malick is the only one in that list that has actual talent.
>Criteria include art direction(costume design and set design, etc..) , Cinematography(I think this would cover lighting, camera movements?), Good Visual effects(practical and CGI) and editing.
You're a fucking idiot, find a different medium to shit on, faggot.

>>86267169

The above doesn't even scratch the surface.

Here's a small dose of our actual knowledge

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/6mccem/z/dk27ghg

None of you numbskulls can even comprehend this stuff. So stick to your dance offs .

>>86267521
answer the question >>86267316

>>86267521
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>86266515
>please do order them by their actual quality as directors.
Probably something like

a) Guillermo Del Toro
b) James Cameron
c) Wes Anderson
d) David Fincher
e) Chris Nolan
f) Coen Bros
g) Terrence Malick
h) Paul Thomas Anderson
I) Nicholas Refn
j) Ridley Scott
k) Zack Snyder
l) Tim Burton
m) Lars von Trier

>>86264283
Coen Bros
Guillermo
Malick
Refn
PTA
Trier
Burton
Fincher
Wes
Nolan
Cameron
Ridley when he's not behind a retarded flick
Snyder

Knew I wanted coen bros and guillermo at top and snyder and scott at the bottom but the rest probably would change fairly often if I did this again later

>>86267594

Lex made the logos he likes to be in charge and control people. So him making the logos and possibly naming the JL members fits his personality. Not only that it shows that he knows that there are more metahumans in the world but only hates superman because of his standing as a God for many people. We see Lex mention the problem of evil but Lex is smart man so why does he think superman who is evidently not Omnipotent ,omniscient,omnipresent ? and if he considers Superman in that point of view then why not other metahumans? This is what email scene offers to show us that Lex's real motive isn't to see if superman was all good or all powerful because he already knows the answer to that but is motivated by past traumas by his father , his ego and his feeling of helplessness he felt back then , you know like what Batman felt during his parents death and black zero.

So brainlet can you understand?

>>86267594
If it is a "studio intervention" as you say it is, then why should it be pinned on Snyder? You suggest it's out of his control, but then demand that he be held responsible to it. It is a disingenuous request and you should be ashamed.

That said, the role of the metahumans within the narrative of BvS is to demystify Superman while expanding the presence of magic within the universe. In this story, people worship and fear Superman like a monotheistic god who fell to Earth from above, but the revelation of the others recontextualizes him into just one of many and introduces the idea that the "Superman" does not need to come to us from outside, but can instead arise from within the heart of the common man.

Flash, Aquaman and Cyborg represent mankind pushing their limits during the course of the last century. In the modern age, when Nietzsche introduced the concept of the Superman, we saw the earth go through enormous transformation. Our mastery of knowledge and technology has led us on a course to godhood.

Only in the last century did we create vessels that let us move faster than sound. The Flash's introduction represents our relatively recent understanding of physics and spacetime, and our newfound ability to break the barriers of speed itself.

Submarines have allowed us to explore the depths from which all life is descendant. Aquaman is the spirit of exploration that took us to the bottom on the ocean and the surface of the moon, traveling far beyond the frontiers of the imagination.

Machines have not been around long but we now have a symbiotic relationship with them in modern life. Cyborg is the technological innovation that has drastically changed the way we live. Those without limbs can walk, even run again. The sick can recover, perhaps the dead will live again. We have all of human knowledge available in the palm of our hands (the Internet + portable computers/phones). Cyborg stands at the intersection of gods, man and machines.

>>86268653
When Diana sees these metahumans as they are called, she as the last remaining member of an extinct pantheon of gods, sees that magic is returning to the world. But these gods will not visit us from above, we will continue to rise until we become the gods we once prayed to. In an age of nuclear weapons, drone warfare, the Internet, and unending technological innovation and refinement, it's only a matter of time before God or devil become an occupation, if it hasnt already.

>>86267644
>Coens, FUCKING NOLAN, del taco, cameron, anderson, fincher higher than Malick
fucking kill yourself pleb bitch

>>86268879
Malick was my number 1 here >>86266356 when we were talking visuals only.
Take a breath.

File: 1501472982706.jpg (448KB, 951x625px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 951x625px

>>86264457
>>86265040
>>86265192
>>86264983
>>86265389
>>86265818
>>86265911
>>86266066
>Marvel Guatemalans on Damage Control™

>>86265794
AAAHAHAHAHAHAH

File: laughingemoji.jpg (18KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 499x499px

>>86265794
>>86265818
>>86265911
>>86265965
>>86266066
>>86269048
>marlels too stupid to identify falseflagging
Please don't tell me you actually believe he likes DC.
No sensible /tv/edditor would reveal he browses /tv/

>>86268320
>>86268653
>>86268810


Lol looks like the coward ran away? Where are you marvel pajeet? You asked for an explanation and we gave it to in the simplest way possible without using our vast vocabulary.

You're pathetic. As I said go to r/Dc_Cinematic and read some of the users post like Heaven_or_Heck or Neodymium6 , maybe Eonrion's analysis is too much for you. Go on read up expand your knowledge base , improve your IQ and most of all get better taste.

>>86269256
>>86268320
>>86268653
How fucking retarded and delusional can you be.
I didn't ask for an explanation of who is flashman aquafreshman, I asked why show it in the most pathetic lazy writing sin 101 way? Multiframed emails, really? The writers probably had some pistols on their heads by the executives to put that atrocious thing there. It's literal on-screen exposition and the only thing that misses is a big textual sign at the end of the sequence COMING SOON AT A THEATRE NEAR YOU

And that's the biggest problem with you blind autistic Snyderfags, you go on and on on these "deep" thematic essays without ever questioning why is it all presented in the most terrible atrocious way? You talk about the motivations behind it, but you never question why the fuck are you watching multiframed emails with on-screen textual exposition and "epic cool" soundtrack blaring.
The problem is the execution, you can present all of those themes in a million more thoughtful and better ways.

Imagine if 2001 had a scene with the main character getting an email on that computer with fast multiframed videos coming out explaining the evolution of the human kind with literal on-screen exposition while the soundtrack blares and the main character just stares at that. You would defend a scene like that, that's your current argumentative ground. Pathetic and embarassing really.

>>86269696

>you go on and on on these "deep" thematic essays without ever questioning why is it all presented in the most terrible atrocious way?

You think the presentation is bad because you didn't understand the themes behind it. Simple as day brainlet. Looks like you're too afraid to go there and learn, pathetic

>>86269885
No amount of philosophy can redeem the fact that you are watching a multiframed on-screen exposition filled scene that ultimately serves only as a setup for the next films in the money milking franchise, literally the biggest writing sin possible.
Multiframed scenes are only used in cheap comedies, B tier action movies and BvS. But you go ahead and defend it to death.

>>86264283
What the fuck is Snyder even doing in that list.
(Burton and Del Toro are also kinda out of their league there as well).

Scott
Cameron
Burton
Refn
>>>
fags

>>86265288
If you're not trolling. I dunno. I guess just KYs you'reself

>>86265409
That's because most of the time is not symbolism but mere references to other works. Symbolism aims at the subconscious and the few times Snyder attempts at doing that, it's so fucking amateurish it's actually laughable.

>>86269994

Are you sure you're remembering the scene right? It was a single frame scene, we saw different files for each leaguer at the same time in a single frame.

>>86265794
>go to reddit to read pseudo-int "essays" from other manchildren to explain why this capeshit isn't generic garbage to strip manchildren out of $12 apiece

lol, sure