Visioneers (2008) User Reviews

Satire on Modern American Suburban/Corporate Life

[angry127 · 7/10 · 3 January 2011]

If you made a movie about the abuses of a meat packing industry and your audience was the owners of several meat packing firms, you wouldn't get good reviews. That mostly explains the unusually low score for this movie. Its not likely to bring glee to the eyes of those that usually adorn the walls of the local multiplex.

The film is pretty good satire. Its satire not only comes from the situation, but the foreboding mood that lurks throughout the film. It takes on multiple dysfunctions in American life. These would include corporations, Oprah Winfrey, Junk Food, Televangelists, Suburban Households, Materialism, etc.

The film does this all pretty well. There are some occasional flat notes; this would include Zach Galifianakis going into overly long star offs. Most of the staring he does is within bounds, but sometimes he crosses the line. Some of the satire was lacking any subtlety; I'm thinking of the life coach who tries to cure Zach.

Many people have compared this to Brazil, its a fair comparison. In terms of quality, this movie is light years away from Brazil; that is very important however. The one plot point that greatly diverges with Brazil is the ending. I liked the ending to this and thought it fit very well with the rest of the movie. If it ended another way, the film may have come off to much as a wet rag.

"Eat more butter!"

[rooprect · 7/10 · 27 January 2014]

There are comedies, there are dark comedies, and then there are comedies that are so dark that you're not sure if you're even supposed to laugh. I'm not using the word "dark " to mean "morbid" or "frightening" but instead I'm using it to mean sarcastic, very satirical, and without the usual jokes, levity & gags that usually accompany comedies. "Brazil", "Dr. Strangelove", "The Trial" and "Catch-22" are perhaps the greatest films of this category, and if you've seen any of them you probably know what an odd experience they are. You also probably know how hard it is to find films like them.

"The Visioneers" fits squarely in that darker-than-dark category. While this movie is categorized a dark comedy, there are no jokes, zingers & knee-slapping punchlines like the word "comedy" might imply. Instead the humor comes from the sheer bizarreness of the situation, in the satirical presentation (very tongue-in-cheek), and in the odd, mostly emotionless reactions the characters have to preposterous situations. In that respect, it is indeed similar to the classic "Brazil" which is mentioned on the DVD cover. It also has a cold, brooding vibe similar to a Charlie Kaufman flick ("Being John Malkovich", "Synecdoche NY") or the great offbeat comedies "Punch Drunk Love" and "Joe Vs the Volcano" and maybe even a hit of Truffaut's 1966 "Fahrenheit 451" (especially concerning the mind-numbed wife constantly watching TV).

Insanely funny minor characters, like Missi Pyle (one of Hollywood's funniest second-fiddles) playing the neurotically unbalanced talk show host who becomes obsessed with butter, or Ryan McCann playing "Mac Luster" the Zoolander-Meets-Rambo action hero, or Matthew Glave as the Nazi health trainer, keep the comedy rolling even though there isn't a big focus on zingers and not really much action at all. A love story develops in the second half which is surprisingly sentimental and touching despite the outlandish circumstances surrounding the characters.

The plot itself is a straightforward dystopian nightmare: in a not-so-distant future (though very reminiscent of the cheezy 1980s with laughably bad propaganda commercials), a mid-level manager played by Zach Galifianakis begins to "suffer" from the phenomenon of dreaming. At the same time, a weird epidemic is hitting society whereby people spontaneously explode. And the tyrannical corporation he works for seems to have an unhealthy interest in what's going on.

If you immediately sense echoes of "Brazil" (the story of a corporate nobody who begins to develop a conscience) and perhaps similarities to "Joe Vs the Volcano" (same type of story), you're on the right track. "Visioneers" is a little more low key than those two, meaning there's not as much action, drama or overt comedy. But it has unique personality of its own, somewhere between the aforementioned classics and a small town satire like "Edward Scissorhands". This movie forsakes the customary surreal city setting in lieu of a more intimate suburban middle-America setting. Indeed a notable difference between this flick and the others I've mentioned is its lack of grandeur. It doesn't try to impress us with enormous sets and infinite labyrinths of skyscrapers, office desks and bureaucracies.

Budget constraints are probably to blame for the lack of grand visuals, and usually I don't hold it against a film for having a low budget. But still I have to dock the film a star or two because I feel like the grand approach is the way to go when dealing with a subject like this. Going all the way back to Orson Welles' masterpiece "The Trial" or even wayyy back to the beginning with Fritz Lang's "Metropolis", powerful visuals stun audience into feeling the weight of the crushing enemy: organized society itself. But other than that minor, subjective preference of mine, I thought this movie was fantastic.

The ending, if I read it correctly, is much more than meets the eye. Be sure to consider it carefully before interpreting it.

If you like any or all of these films I've mentioned, don't hesitate to rent or even buy "Visioneers" (by the way, if you live near a Dollar Tree store, you can find this great title brand new for exactly $1 which will leave you plenty extra to buy some popcorn (skip the butter... that's a reference to a bizarre woman's butter obsession in the movie).

When you consider it's been years, if not decades, since there's been a good absurd satire like this which is unafraid to dive boldly into the bizarre, this flick has all the makings of a modern classic. So count search your couches for change and run down to the Dollar Tree to grab this one. Or even if you just Netflix it, it'll be time well spent.

So deep into non-existence

[hireegy · 7/10 · 27 March 2015]

Let's say I did not expect this movie to be that simple and true. And yet rich, with so many ways people can go wrong. You can even read the scenario your own way, somehow. Imagine it if it stretched endlessly instead of being forced into less than two hours. And you would see what your life could become if you don't pay attention...so true...it did surprise me, and there are unfinished moments, some moments in which the "resolution" hangs in the air, and you fill in with your own end to the moment, and then see that the movie turns another way instead...it could have been done in an even more "true" way though, especially more on the "dream" side, which seems kind of empty...even though it's there!

The future of us office folk

[chapsmack · 7/10 · 15 August 2009]

I guess my review is kind of biased - if I had never seen the Hangover, I would have probably not enjoyed the movie as much as I did. Somehow ZG seems to be exuding the right kind of vibes for this year or something. Visoneers reminded me of a plethora of American movies - Hudsucker, Brazil, 1984 - all mixed into one in a somewhat subdued, indie approach. If you haven't seen any of those movies this movie would strike you odd as it is one to convey a meaning much similar to the J-horror of Kurosawa. Considering the strangeness of the movie I expected the end to be somewhat living up to it, but this is where it kind of veers back to normality which I think may have been done for a proper distribution. If you want to watch it for ZG or have a penchant for movies that make you think go ahead full steam, otherwise just wait for the next ZG one, now that he's almost famous. For attempting to make a movie like this and picking ZG before he was famous, this movie gets my 7/10.

Not good...what movie did you guys watch?

[kevinwild · 1/10 · 18 October 2008]

I don't get it. I just read the reviews here on IMDb and can't imagine these are people who actually watched the movie who are not friends of the filmmakers.

This movie was absolutely terrible, imo. I just got out of the screening at Austin Film Festival and the crowd walking out seemed to agree with me, that this was NOT good.

The whole thing feels like a short story that goes on forever. I can't even begin to say what's wrong with it, as nothing is right. The lead character is not likable...he barely speaks. The wife is extremely unlikable as are most characters in the story. The brother is a little funny, but the whole "Garp-like" idea of the backyard being a messiah for happy people is a serious stretch and barely explained...the FBI attacks them? WTF?

The office scenes were WAY long. The whole finger idea and the voice announcing the number of minutes left of productivity until the weekend was funny the first two times. By the 20th or 25th time (seriously) we see them, they are NOT FUNNY any more.

Sorry guys. It is the first movie. But I can't stand when bad films get a lot of hype.

Not a dystopian society. Possibly entropic.

[mononuke · 2 March 2010]

I put in the spoiler alert just because I talk about some major themes, though not necessarily the entire plot. I don't really give anything away though.

I've read some reviews of this film that call say it presents a "dystopian" society. I don't think that's accurate. Here's are definitions of the two words so you can decide for yourselves... http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dystopian http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/entropic

In fact, I think the directors go to great lengths to achieve a sense of open space throughout the film. It is only when they do a scene in the offices of the corporation that things get crowded. I think the word that better describes the world in this film is entropic. It's a society that has reached a state of entropy. There is no better corporation, and emotions have all sort of leveled out. The sameness of everything really allows Galifianakis to have amazingly strong and effective reactions to "chaos" when it starts to enter his life. I've also read that some describe this as a black comedy. I think that's closer to the mark, but it's not exactly that either. I think this movie is a really unique experience that will be particularly poignant to anyone that works, or has worked for a major corporation. Especially if they were ever in a management position. (I was.) Towards the end of the film things start blowing up, so to speak, and this is where Galifianakis really shines. I highly recommend this film to everyone, but I think there's only a certain group of people that are going to appreciate it. A must see for Zach Galifianakis fans.

Wow!

[ahamefuleoluo · 7/10 · 13 June 2008]

I was at the Seattle premiere and I have to say that this film exceeded my wildest expectations, I've been a fan of Zach's for a while but I never expected this. I was skeptical of what seemed, from previews, like a plot that reached too far and relied on shock value but I was wrong, the film is beautiful and the absurdity comes from a real and painful place. Zach's performance is beautifully understated and he accomplishes so much with very few lines and the rest of the cast was really well constructed on what seems like a shoestring budget. Having grown up in Seattle it was really great to see cast members from Almost Live, it was just a really great experience over all (except the audio in the theater sucked) and I highly recommend it.

Completely Unendurable

[kaedon · 1/10 · 19 July 2009]

I have never seen a less commercially viable film in my life. I watched this film with 7 other people and we were all dying from boredom within 30 minutes, but the film just kept going. It manages to feel feel Titanic long but despite being only an hour and a half. The "quirky humor" stops being quirky or humorous almost immediately. The trailer for this film features every bit of actual substance, yet retains the feeling of "I have no clue what is going on" that the film seems to master. The symbolism in the film just hits you over the head again and again. It's obvious what they are trying to say, yet the filmmakers keep revealing bits of it as if you don't know.

I watched this film for Zach Galifianakis, as recently I've come to love him and his humor. It is almost absent from this film. His form of acting manifests in just staring blankly at the camera for long periods of time without saying or doing anything.

Avoid at all costs. One of the worst films I have ever seen.

Darker than you might think.

[reuben-18 · 8/10 · 17 July 2012]

Trailers are strange beasts that often hugely misrepresent the tone of a film. I'm not sure if I enjoy the mischievous manipulation involved, or hate the mistrust that it generates. A little of both, I guess.

Visioneers is one such example: the trailer comes across as a fairly light-hearted, quirky romantic comedy.

In reality, however, this film deserves to sit beside 1984 and Blade Runner as dark and disturbing visions of dystopian futures. While it starts out with the uncomfortable humor you'd expect from a Zach Galifianakis film, the atmosphere of oppression builds over the course of the movie to become almost unbearable. This film makes Requiem for a Dream seem like an episode of 'friends'. The central character, George, lives robotically both in his dull office job and at home in a loveless marriage. The world around him is full of deadpan absurdities, a parody of drab offices and mid life crises, with an undercurrent of hopelessness that rings a little too true to sit comfortably.

The way the theme of dreams is turned into a literal threat is done with obvious self-awareness, but it comes across like a bad cinematic pun. Its more carefully constructed distortions of reality are where it really shines, with its vapid self-help infomercials, eccentric mentor figures, and the mega-corporation as a cult. And the way George seems to communicate through much of the movie semi-telepathically instead of verbally may be strange and unsettling, but also mesmerizing. Thoroughly worth watching.

Quirky, hilarious at times, with more compassion than I was expecting

[xxxneon · 7/10 · 14 July 2008]

MasterMath® Reviews ... Visioneers If you work at Jeffers Corp., your life's a mess even if you DON'T explode. The first fifteen minutes of this film are absolutely hilarious. If that had been sustained throughout the entire film, this would've been the best comedy I'd seen in years, hands down—Monty Python-esquire, but more consistent in quality. And yet, it gradually becomes apparent that isn't what this film is really about. It goes off in a direction I wasn't expecting. Not a bad direction, mind you—one that was just softer, compassionate, more introspective, though rather less focused. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

George Washington Winsterhammerman (Zach Galifianakis) works as a Level 3 tunt at the Jeffers Corporation, in the same room as Cindy (Fay Masterson) and Todd (Chris Coppola). No, I'm NOT going to tell you what a tunt is. Jeffers is the friendliest, most profitable corporation in the history of mankind. You'll love the 'Jeffers morning' greeting. Charisma (Mía Maestro) on Level 4 sends the day's workload to George via pneumatic tube, on which is a Post-It® with a smiley face. The PA system then announces, 'Mike won't be in today, he exploded last night in his garage, there will be an announcement.' Cindy's reaction is, 'He didn't seem like the type to explode.' The PA system has further announcements, each more bizarre than the last. After Charisma leaves, Cindy gets promoted to Level 4 goob. That's largely the extent of the scenes at Jeffers Corp., other than the large teddy bears on everyone's desk, after the exploding becomes an epidemic. All the tunts have to fill out a questionnaire on their relationship with their teddy bear.

George becomes increasingly disillusioned with work and with the meaning of life itself. His wife, Michelle (Judy Greer), becomes obsessed with a TV talk show and a self-help book, 10,000 Things to Be Happy About. Then his brother Julien (James LeGros, of Ally McBeal fame) arrives. His primary activities are pole vaulting in the back yard and assembling a Woodstock-esquire band of misfits. Jeffers (D.W. Moffett) himself stops by to find out what is wrong with George and how / if he can make it right. Charisma is now a waitress in a coffee shop WAY off the beaten path. George begins spending a lot of time with her, and less with his increasingly distant wife. I can't quite put my finger on precisely what the latter part of the film is about, but it's certainly worthwhile for you to give it a shot.

Galifianakis is outstanding as a man trying to fit in, both at work and at home, who becomes more and more desperate in his efforts to maintain the status quo. Maestro gives a quiet yet mesmerizing performance as the dark-haired woman with an unknown past and uncertain future, whom we want to learn more about. And Moffett is ably authoritative as the head of a large corporation, yet kind and personable when circumstances dictate.

During the Q&A after the film, Jared said there were eighteen days filming primary and four second unit. On working with his brother on the film, he said, 'We love working together, but it's hard—we argued, but we trusted each other.' According to Moffett, 'This is the kind of script that doesn't get made.' Obviously, he was glad it was made. Jared to Coppola at the audition, upon the latter asking which scene he should read: 'Let's just work on the walk.' Coppola thought he was getting punked. Not! MasterMath® is a registered trademark of W. G. Raley.

Galifianakis' dryly disengaged work compensates for the film's weaknesses...

[moonspinner55 · 5/10 · 14 July 2010]

Orwellian comedic-drama from director Jared Drake and writer Brandon Drake pares civilization down to a desperately stress-free society filled with self-help gurus and innocuous television shows. Zach Galifianakis, an unhappily married family man who works in Level 3 of a major productivity corporation (where the company logo is the middle finger salute), attempts to avoid combustible stress as it is causing citizens to literally explode. There's no passion left in his marriage, yet the sound of a co-worker's voice on the phone reminds him of a happier time--when love ruled his heart. Nearly-ingenious bit of offbeat satire, infused with deadpan black comedy and Galifianakis' sly performance (he keeps a straight face almost throughout, though there's always a naughty twinkle in his eyes). Some of the situations fall flat, the dialogue is a bit crude, and the film runs too long at 95 minutes (cut the crusts off this material and it may have made for the perfect short). Still, the surge of feeling (and redemption) at the finale is worth waiting for, and the picture has an intriguing look and ambiance that could garner cult status. ** from ****

Misunderstood & Underrated Masterpiece

[slateofmind · 9/10 · 26 September 2009]

A Jeffers salute to all of you! Visioneers opens with a stale, lifeless office environment on the 3rd level of the Jeffers corporation, which is the "friendliest and most profitable corporation" ever. The story follow George Washington Winsterhammerman (Zach G.) as he floats through his day-to-day life without any real passion, all the while trying to avoid "exploding," which the world around him continually claims to be able to prevent by following various self-help books, buying the latest gadget or toy, and staying productive; basically, not truly living in any real sense. None of this stuff truly works for George; he has dreams, but he is afraid to follow them, because he is lead to believe that if he does he will definitely explode.

The almost-too-subtle tone and style of the film can be hard to interpret at times, especially if you're trying too hard to understand it, but I believe it suits the film well and allows for a truly contemplative cinematic experience. I don't believe the film carries any one particular agenda, although it takes several shots at America and capitalism in general, there are also a couple of scenes that show the "hippie" response to that way of life and how it is also flawed in many ways. There are so many underlying themes and messages about life at the heart of this film that it is impossible to list them all here, and I don't know if I even could, because I probably missed a few of them the first couple of times I watched it. Turn the negative, cynical and egotistical part of your brain off before you sit down to watch Visioneers and you will truly appreciate the message of the film. Yes, it has a few flaws here and there, and may also seem preachy and pretentious at times, but that could very well have been intentional; meant to convey the message of the film in a different way.

It wrestles with what it truly means to be alive! I won't spoil the conclusion for anyone, because if you truly grasp it while watching it, there is so much more to be had from it. Go ahead and make some popcorn, grab a soda and your loved one (or a buddy) and really dive into this film. It may just change your life.

Zach Galifianakis is the reason I wanted to see this film and was the reason I enjoyed it...

[lafinnegan-1 · 7/10 · 20 June 2008]

I enjoy the unknown. That which is so cleverly left out invokes thought and wonder that makes this movie thoroughly enjoyable. I felt actively engaged with the multifaceted story and development of the characters. Even the characters that were mentioned and not seen kept me hoping for a glimpse, yet served a brilliant critique by being absent. This film is for those who enjoy satire and are willing to cheaply laugh at simple repetitious witticisms and the occasional human foible. The vast absurdities which the characters are blind to are blatantly ridiculous. The movie has a simple message that serves a sweet ending to the fun that has been had and though the tribulations of George were at times harsh, the humor reigns supreme. A feel good film that I hope you get the chance to try.

A Poor Man's "Brazil"

[MesaHead · 5/10 · 2 August 2009]

I love good black comedies. The best example of a true black comedy is "Dr. Strangelove". Although it's plot revolves around the possibility of the complete destruction of humanity it still manages to be funny from beginning to end. The problem with many black comedies is, although they have an absurd basis, they are just to bleak to be deserving of the description "comedy". "Visoneers" does manage to supply a handful of mildly humorous moments. Most of the real humor is generated by Zach Galafianakis body language. But, overall, this one fails as a comedy. That might be forgivable if the film turned out to be as original as it's synopsis implies. Unfortunately as the story progresses it degenerates into a low budget clone of Terry Gilliam's "Brazil". "Visioneers" also borrows way too heavily from other films such as "Fahrenheit 451", "Network", "1984" and even "Idiocracy." Although "Visioneers" is not without some merit, there are much better ways to spend an hour and thirty-five minutes

Lopped off a few stars for the (spoiler!)

[trescia-1 · 7/10 · 25 March 2016]

Spoilers ahead. The ending of this fine film is a big problem. They pasted "true love (i.e. good sex) conquers all" on the end of a really, really well-done surreal exploration of employment in Amerika. I have to take points away for that horrible decision. I'm going to assume that some corporate nitwit pasted it one there. Too bad. This coulda' been a contender.

But until that ending you have something good. It's not really a comedy and I don't blame anyone for being upset that this "funny" movie wasn't funny, but Hollywood is so brain-dead that if it isn't "drama" it's "comedy." So this is called a "comedy" but it's really an example of surrealism. The stuff in here reflects the real world in insane/stupid/hopeless Amerikan corporate-land where every good deed is punished and all power belongs to the group of seventeen.

God I hate this reality. The film fishes around in it a little and you end up wishing that David Lynch (or somebody) would really rip a new one out of corporate rat-racing red-white-and-blue nasty old smelly McMansion SUV scummy middle hopeless class Amerikan Nightmare Land. Where Fred and Barney compete to see who wins the ultimate sneaking around behind management's back award for Snitch of the Year and Ultimate Ninja Brown Nose-san. Disgusting. If you do not understand what's wrong with this culture, and do not like or understand this movie, then you fit in well with unthinking, unliving, unknowing business as usual for dummies. Glad somebody is having a good time! Enjoy! A Jeffers day to you!

I just wish they hadn't put that miserable ending on this great film. Really, really a bad thing to do. Double plus ungood.

You know brilliant, inspired casting? Well, making Zach Galifianakis a stoic mute is pretty much the opposite of that.

[MBunge · 4/10 · 12 July 2012]

In Visioneers, filmmakers Brandon and Jared Drake have made an extended observation on how corporate, materialist existence is emotionally and spiritually dead without the slightest realization that is one of the most shallow and oft-repeated clichés of the modern age. They think they're being all subversive and such but fail to understand that requires having a point to your argument. As far as I can tell, the Drakes' only coherent message is that it's great to be the idle rich and sucks to be just one or the other. Throw in a conviction that people flipping the bird is way funnier than it is and the casting of Zach Gallifianakis as an impassive and mostly mute stoic and there's all the evidence here to indicate the Brothers Drake should pursue careers in non-cinema related fields. Perhaps running a cell phone kiosk in a grocery store or selling bicycle tires door-to-door?

George Washington Winsterhammerman (Zach Galifianakis) is a Level 3 employee of the Jeffers Corporation, also known as a Tunt. He sits in a room all day with 2 other Tunts, receives phone calls from his Level 4 superiors and wears multi-lens glasses in order to do his paperwork. George's wife (Judy Greer) is a numbed drone who's preoccupied with the latest route to happiness prescribed by her TV guru (Missi Pyle). George's son never comes out of his room in their McMansion and George's ex-con brother (James LeGros) is enthusiastically taking up pole vaulting in George's massive back yard. The only good things in George's life are his own dreams of being George Washington and the calls from his Level 4 supervisor (Mia Maestro), who speaks to him with shuttered affection and sends him little smiley face notes on his daily assignments. Of course, tens of thousands of people are randomly exploding in George's world and dreams are one of the symptoms of that, so maybe there's only one good thing for him. Aside from the lovely Judy Greer and Mia Maestro, there's nothing all that good here for any viewer.

Visioneers is boring, pretentious twaddle created by two guys who can barely tell the difference between a metaphor and a 2x4. Take the whole "people exploding" bit of the story. Do people explode because they suppress feelings? Do they explode because they express them in an emotionless world? In this movie, sometimes it's one and sometimes it's the other and sometimes it's apparently neither. That kind of confused unclarity is rampant throughout the picture. The Jeffers Corporation is an almost surreal place, yet it exists side-by-side with relatively normal people and places and ways of life. When George's Level 4 superior gets fired, he tracks her down and finds her waiting tables at her father's bookstore café, a place that is so entirely normal that it shouldn't be on the same planet, let alone the same city, as the Jeffers' offices. That dichotomy, however, is hardly acknowledge and never explained or examined. George and everyone else at Jeffers are weird and maladjusted. His Level 4 superior is completely normal. Why? How? Again, those questions are neither asked nor answered.

The bottom line is that Visioneers is nowhere close to being as smart or insightful as Brandon and Jared Drake clearly believed it, and likely themselves, to be. A refusal to be conventionally entertaining is not, in and of itself, a mark of quality. Sometimes it's only a sign of people who aren't talented enough to make an entertaining film.

There are better things to spend your time on than this motion picture. Maybe not selling bicycle tires door-to-door, but something.

Pretty good, but not fully baked.

[poor_artist · 7/10 · 6 October 2008]

A slice of "Brazil", a slice of "Fahrenheit 451", a slice of "Monty Python" sandwiched by Hollywood. It begins with those rhythmic rude credits that arrogantly rip through establishing shots like flash cards. A very annoying, and too common, artistically insensitive technique that basically amounts to career promotion commercials. A real turn off for me. But the film recovers, ultimately redeeming itself searching for truth in corrupt, false society. It comments on the failings of the 60's and almost provides a continuum to present societal illusion. ...Until the last cheap cliché Hollywood ending where the noble pursuit of the film is betrayed. Mostly good stuff though, despite commercial influence, and well worth seeing.

Tiresome...

[sstapf-1 · 4/10 · 27 July 2009]

The moments of fleeting enjoyment in this film are so few and far between it is simply a burden to make it from one to the next. I've read many posts that praise "Visioneers" for it's originality. I suppose if you consider an Orwellian world where employees give each other "the finger" as a greeting because of the power and status of the Jeffers company and logo, then sure, it's original. Not exactly genius.

I suppose that if you've never read "1984", or similar, and never seen any of the other 40 "Modern society has brainwashed us and will be our demise!" films made over the last 40 years, it will be easy to view this film as original and valid socioeconomic commentary. The acting is good, but the film is terribly unoriginal in my option and while not necessarily predictable, because of it inherent strangeness, follows a formulaic approach to a topic that has already been done masterfully many times in the past.

Brazil on a smaller budget!

[kjarrett-1 · 10/10 · 13 June 2008]

I just saw this at SIFF tonight, and I must say that I'm very impressed. For a first time director, this film is very well done. It's both funny and original, which is rare to find. I'm a big fan of dystopic future stories, and to see something like this executed so well on a (relatively) small budget is very inspiring. The themes of the movie, such as unhappiness, stress, and the death of dreams are all very relatable. Zach Galifianakis does quite well. I love him as a stand up comedian and goofy comedy actor, but was admittedly skeptical about his role in this. However, he did an amazing job, playing the character, rather than playing his comedy persona. The movie does have quirky and odd elements that may turn some people off, but for many others, those things make it all the better. I highly recommend this movie. Please go see and support it so that we can get more movies like this in the future!

Man...

[FearOfABlankPlanet · 7/10 · 20 December 2010]

The movie has a lot of solid points, zach throws in some of his well known physical comedy, but also shows that he has some chops in the movie. Overall I really enjoyed the movie, if it wasn't for his dreams... I would have rated the movie at least an 8.5. The last scene was ruined, I acknowledge that it was a comedy, but they had a chance to make a really good ending, but they tainted it with some goof ball scenes that were absolutely unnecessary. Change the ending, and the movie becomes fantastic.

I did however like the whole premise of the movie (the main premise, not the dreams etc...). A political satire of sorts, and Judy Greer has some really good lines at the end, after doing virtually nothing all movie.

a few jokes don't make up for 2 hours of boredom

[spimpernel · 3/10 · 14 June 2008]

What is this movie about? I watched the credits roll after 94 minutes and I still have no idea. This is the most boring movie I have ever sat through. I should have walked out 30 minutes into it, when the idea first occurred to me. OK, so the Jeffers Corporation rules the world (or something like that), its official salute is the middle finger, and there is an epidemic of people randomly exploding into tiny pieces. George deals with all of this with a mixture of denial/apathy, anger, and an obsession with George Washington. His marriage is rocky, his son is never on screen, and his brother is pole-vaulting in the backyard. But still, there is no plot and no explanations of the movie's bizarre world. The only redeeming values of this movie are its leading ladies, entertaining Judy Greer as the wife, and ethereal Mia Maestro as the co-worker and love interest. Also, the sound engineer must have been asleep on the job -- I often could not hear what was being said.

Excellent Movie

[XanderXVI · 10/10 · 3 August 2010]

Visioneers is a fantastic dark comedy about the monotony of the day to day. It shows how absurd society has become by taking the things that are wrong with it and super sizing them. The humor is very subtle at times, but very good. This is not your average slap stick, one liner comedy. It requires a bit of attention to fully grasp everything that is going on and what this film is trying to say. The cast does a remarkable job of bringing each character to life, so that you can empathize and feel what the characters are feeling. If you take the time to watch this movie, you will not walk away disappointed. Visioneers will leave you pondering deep thoughts and reminiscing about all of the great moments in this masterpiece. A definite must see.

Anyone barely living could have written and directed this movie.

[jupehr · 6/10 · 4 December 2020]

Topic is great and deserves more movies. But this was nothing new. Equilibrium movie did much better job ant giving some angle to human suffering. Suffering makes us go "forwards". Hard times create strong men, Strong men create good times, Good times create weak men, Weak men create hard times.

the song in the end credits was catchy

[paul-77558 · 1/10 · 6 June 2021]

Terrible movie, horrible. Yeah, no doubt the reviewers giving this 10/10 loved it and saw something in this, unfortunately i didn't, junk, start to finish. The only reason i'm typing anything further than "junk movie" is imbd has a minimum word count that needs to be reached before a review can be submitted. I thought by now i'd be there however it appears i still need to write more before i can submit this review. Did i mention the movie was terrible? I seriously thought this would be enough wor.

Just weird.

[neshiikinz · 9 November 2009]

I have no idea what is going on in this movie. Totally weird and sometimes just creepy. I don't like any part in this movie. I kept thinking they would reveal what this "explosion" is, or somehow make an interesting plot, but it never came. I enjoy weird movies and this was not on my list of enjoyable movies. This movie lacked, well, almost everything.

I'm happy I managed to sit through the entire thing and didn't shut it off. I feel I gave it a chance at least. I watched it once and never again!

They must of really ran out of things to make movies about huh.