+3
I guess we'd all have to be specific on the "visuals" -- before we get to that, if the movie doesn't have great writing, acting, story, it won't be saved by other things... For example, "special effects" will never get me to watch a movie.
I think Mark went a bit far with comparing my movie viewing to listening to a radio. A different kind of zoom can change the emotion, but it's the emotion that's important. Some do it visually, some directors do it with the music, or with a line of dialogue.
"A Clockwork Orange" for example. Like films before in the 60's, style was a bigger factor than it was in the past. It works for some movies, but certain visuals can also distract. Speaking of that film, the people I've personally talked to never emphasize the themes - society, behavior, motivations, the criminal justice system, but instead on the sex and violence ONLY.
I saw a film when I was at a friend's house weeks ago. It was a love scene, and it was so long. In the 50's, the second they kissed, the lights would go down, and you got a dissolve, but your imagination could imagination the next 30 minutes or so, leaving more time to get on telling as much story as possible. Notice how many films are at exactly 1hr and 59 minutes (marketing and business), and with such little time, I think a director should put in as much as possible to communicate with the viewer.
It's not just film either, it's similar with music. Some just repeat and repeat, or wait til a few songs later, and play the same chord structure, changing the root from Dm (a more sad tone) to G for example, or have the same chords but changing the rhythm a bit - I think there are things "artists" of all sorts do that's kinda mugging the audience. Besides performing, I've watched a lot of film, music, comedy, etc., and I'm not talking self-indulgence either, which is fine, an artist should do whatever they want, but a viewer should also say how they feel.