The Director's Vision: A Concise Guide to the Art of 250 Great Filmakers

Rating:
Summary: Fine overview and introduction
Review: Although I agree with some of the criticisms raised about this book (no mention of cinematographers; a few bad spoilers--don't read about Nicholas Roeg if you haven't seen Don't Look Now-- excluded directors (No Soderbergh? No Ang Lee??)), some other complaints are unwarranted (any decent film writer is going to be opinionated). It's also one book which manages to blend image and word extremely well; so many film books only contain words, and film is an incredibly visual medium.
The best thing about the volume is being introduced to new filmmakers one might not have heard of--Alexander Dovzhenko ("Earth"), Youssef Chahine, Len Lye, Hans-Jurgen Syberberg... which is not to say that the book is obscure--classic directors like Griffith, Welles, Godard and Truffaut.
It's also fun reading about one's favorite directors and seeing what Andrew has to say about them--Gilliam, Jarmusch, Jeunet & Caro, Antonioni, Kiarostami.
All in all, a fine addition to one's film library.

Rating:
Summary: A great minipedia for directors
Review: I really like owning this book: it just radiates a nice feeling of consistency and completeness. Each of the 250 directors/directing teams is given one page, with a still from a film and the analysis of his/her/their work. All of the filmmakers are treated equally in both the non-segregated format of the book (Todd Solondz is opposite Steven Spielberg; Cronenberg is opposite Cukor; Turn a page back from Orson Welles and you get John Waters) and the text itself. The distinctive styles of each filmmaker is appropriately analysed and critiqued, and those of master filmmakers are never blinded with praise and giddiness. What I respect most of this book is that it is Not a picture book: the text makes it a nice and appropriate tool for filmgoers. "The Director's Vision" in one weekend has become for me a valued companion book for looking into the different styles and cultures of filmmaking.

Rating:
Summary: Brief but good, but we need a Volume 2...
Review: Simply put, this is exactly what it says with one page sections for each entry as well as a still for each as well. Though the comments are great, the filmographies are a bit light. Some glaring omissions however, and I'm going to list a bunch for you so you're forewarned:

Ron Howard, Sam Raimi, Peter Jackson, Joel Schumacher, Robert Rodriguez, Wolfgang Peterson, Chang Cheh, Atom Egoyan, John McTiernan, Tsui Hark, Tony Scott, Michael Bay, Paul Verhoeven, Steven Soderbergh, Robert Wise, Darren Aronofsky, Hayao Miyazaki, Katsuhiro Otomo, Tom Tykwer, David Fincher, Don Bluth, Richard Donner, Blake Edwards, Rob Reiner, Ivan Reitman, Kevin Smith, Alex Proyas, Victor Fleming, the Farrellys, the Wachowskis, the Hughes, John Hughes, Chris Columbus, M. Night Shyamalan, Ken Burns, Paul Thomas Anderson, Wei Lo, the Zuckers, Chuck Jones, Frank Oz, Jim Henson, John G. Avildsen, Kenneth Branagh, Cameron Crowe, Brad Bird, Michael Moore, Neil Jordan, Don Coscarelli, Ralph Bakshi, Peter Jackson and director's making note since publication like Jonathan Mostow, Christopher Nolan, Guy Ritchie, Ang Lee and Bryan Singer and many more, making "Another 250" an easy task I'm sure.

Rating:
Summary: Brief but good, but we need a Volume 2...
Review: Simply put, this is exactly what it says with one page sections for each entry as well as a still for each as well. Though the comments are great, the filmographies are a bit light. Some glaring omissions however, and I'm going to list a bunch for you so you're forewarned:

Ron Howard, Sam Raimi, Peter Jackson, Joel Schumacher, Robert Rodriguez, Wolfgang Peterson, Chang Cheh, Atom Egoyan, John McTiernan, Tsui Hark, Tony Scott, Michael Bay, Paul Verhoeven, Steven Soderbergh, Robert Wise, Darren Aronofsky, Hayao Miyazaki, Katsuhiro Otomo, Tom Tykwer, David Fincher, Don Bluth, Richard Donner, Blake Edwards, Rob Reiner, Ivan Reitman, Kevin Smith, Alex Proyas, Victor Fleming, the Farrellys, the Wachowskis, the Hughes, John Hughes, Chris Columbus, M. Night Shyamalan, Ken Burns, Paul Thomas Anderson, Wei Lo, the Zuckers, Chuck Jones, Frank Oz, Jim Henson, John G. Avildsen, Kenneth Branagh, Cameron Crowe, Brad Bird, Michael Moore, Neil Jordan, Don Coscarelli, Ralph Bakshi, Peter Jackson and director's making note since publication like Jonathan Mostow, Christopher Nolan, Guy Ritchie, Ang Lee and Bryan Singer and many more, making "Another 250" an easy task I'm sure.

Rating:
Summary: Un-informative
Review: The book is not good. It claims to be about the "Director's Vision", but each exposition is mostly made up the authors personal feelings about one film of each director. Hardly any information is given about the directors themselves, aside from one or two brief sentances at the very end of the paragraph. The movie stills, which are of extremely poor quality, take up half the page. In addition, no index had been made. The directors are listed alphabetically but if you want to find a certain movie or genre you have to skim each page individualy. The book is a failure and currently in my bathroom.

Rating:
Summary: You must be kidding
Review: The trouble with most movie books is they're written by people with, at best, questionable credentials. Most of them are written by university film department drop-outs - disenchanted Humanities majors who spent too much time in the rear stalls of some of the seedier art houses. But, if Roger Ebert can make a living at it (and win a Pulitzer Prize for it), then anyone can. Why not you?

Rating:
Summary: Visually Worth Looking At.
Review: The worth of this book is the great visual quality to it. Every page has a film still regarding which director is being discussed. I do agree with some earlier reviewers on the writing's poor quality. The author seems to give his own opinions rather than actually examine the film director. Just read the section on Oliver Stone, he comments on Stone's style, yes, but then the whole writing is just made up of the author's personal thoughts on Stone. There isn't detailed examination of any director's work. But it's still a very interesting book and I recommend it to those who already know their stuff regarding cinema, this will just be a pleasant breeze for them. And the photos are wonderful especially the stills for Fritz Lang, Oliver Stone, Martin Scorsese, Akira Kurosawa and Sam Peckinpah. There are moments when the book is fascinating. There are some pictures you just can't keep your eyes off of which display how beautiful and rich cinema can be and how single images in a movie say a lot. Film buffs will like it, beginners, I suggest you a read a bit more before taking this book seriously.

Rating:
Summary: A Picture Saves a Thousand Words
Review: This book is by no means what it is advertised as: it's not a "concise guide" to the art of 250 directors, it doesn't tell you "how the world's greatest filmmakers create their spellbinding visions" and "the secrets behind their unique styles." In fact, it's rather misguided in my opinion because it uses auteur theory and assumes that the director is the one who creates the entire picture contained in the movie frame, as though the he or she is the "painter" of an entire film's moving image; but in fact a very large part of what goes into the frame is done by the cinematographer, the production designer, and many other people. It surprises me because I don't even think the word "cinematographer" is mentioned even once in the whole book, yet the cinematographer often puts at least as much work into a film's visuals as a director, if not more. The author of this book is also quite opinionated and really ticks me off sometimes when he bashes some of my favorite directors, claiming that their work is "half-baked humanism" and "insubstantial" while giving no real reasons to support his claims because he's only got half a page to tell us about the director, his life, his visual style, and his films.

On the other hand, though, this book is a blast to just flip through. I haven't heard of a lot of the directors in this book, and often one of the half-page frame grabs alone has made me want to go out and get one of a director's films from my local library. Indeed, a lot of great directors such as War-Kai Wong, Takeshi Kitano, Nicholas Roeg, and Krystof Kieslowski were introduced to me through this book, mainly through the stunning visuals of their movie stills; I actually don't value the text very much because of its heavily biased, opinionated nature, and the fact that sometimes the descriptions give spoilers for the films they describe, which is a shame for the films that I haven't seen yet. Rather, if I see a frame I'm really interested in, I'll briefly read the text for some basic information, and then go to the IMDB (Internet Movie Database) for a more objective view of the filmmaker's work.

Anyways, don't get this book if you really want "a concise guide to the art of 250 filmmakers;" *do* get this book if you just want to flip through the pages and see some of the most beautiful images you've ever laid your eyes on, and find out about some amazing directors you may have never heard of. Just make sure you take the author's opinions with a very big grain of salt.

Rating:
Summary: Original premise with excellent observations
Review: This book would be ideal for a college film class, as it discusses the merits of many famous directors as well as some you may not have known were so significant. The brief, one-page descriptions get to the heart of each director's significance. One still from each director's work exemplifies the point the author is making.

These descriptions made me want to seek out films by the directors. I am very interested in researching some of the lesser known ones in the book, based on the author's observations. This book looks at film as an art form and gives a glimpse at each director's personal style and contribution to the art form.

However, if you are looking for an in-depth study or a pop-culture overview, the brevity may leave you wanting. What you won't get is a complete survey of their careers, or lots of sensational stories. Those are best left to tell-tale bios and tabloids. This book is strictly about the art and artists. Highly recommended.