What Happened to Ridley Scott?
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
So Bob is saying Exodus is the worst film Scott has ever made? I find that hard to believe, as I hated The Counselor far more than anything he had made before that point.
He's backpedaling and jumping on the hate bandwagon like he did with Man of Steel and Dark Knight Rises.TristanBelmont said:
"No I didn't!"hermes200 said:
OT:
I often suspect the George Lucas Effect is in full effect. Once you get big enough, it becomes easy for your head to disappear up your ass. Where once you were filtered by things like criticism, you're now a legend in your own mind (and maybe in the real world, too).
TristanBelmont said:
KiramidHead said:
I don't know. This review was overall positive, but not exactly glowing and largely in step with his recent criticism. I don't think that backpedalling is a legit claim here.
Fair point. It's been ages since I watched that review. I just remember that out of nowhere dig at Prometheus in his Oblivion review last year and going- "Wait what?"
Considering Scott's earlier works, yes there's a disconnect in quality. Regardless of what you think of Prometheus, there's a lot of things wrong with that movie, enough that its definitely not his best work. Plot holes galore and awfully stupid situations and very poor dialogue for supposedly highly intelligent scientist folk. I mean as a director did he not see those issues?
Robin Hood wasn't bad, but it wasn't great. I do feel since Gladiator, Scott hasn't seemed to put the same amount of passion into his movies (save perhaps Kingdom of Heaven). In the last two years though it could be due to his brother's suicide. That would make anyone's life a bit difficult.
Robin Hood wasn't bad, but it wasn't great. I do feel since Gladiator, Scott hasn't seemed to put the same amount of passion into his movies (save perhaps Kingdom of Heaven). In the last two years though it could be due to his brother's suicide. That would make anyone's life a bit difficult.
People were piling up the legacy of the Alien franchise on Prometheus a little to much. I liked it, yes it was not perfect but it sure tried. It was a true sci-fi film, leaving us with more questions, then answers like a true sci-fi should. Today's movie going crowed with short attention spans do not appreciate that.
Robin Hood had a MAJOR rewrite in the story, originally it was conceived as Nottingham if I remember and was to be focused on the sheriff of Nottingham as a more complex and justifiable character ala Malificent. Studio execs were scared of that for there pockets and scraped the thing for a ordinary gritty Robin Hood story.
Robin Hood had a MAJOR rewrite in the story, originally it was conceived as Nottingham if I remember and was to be focused on the sheriff of Nottingham as a more complex and justifiable character ala Malificent. Studio execs were scared of that for there pockets and scraped the thing for a ordinary gritty Robin Hood story.
Read Full Article[/quote]
I have to agree with this. While Scott never seemed like a bad director, most of his truly memorable films occurred early in his career. I adored Alien, but if you know about the films production, then you know that most of the intellectual aspects came from the writer and H.R. Giger. The script was as subtle as it was focused, and both it and Gigers work brought the sexual undertones of the film to life. In fact, I'd argue that early drafts of the script were superior to the final version, and that Scott cut key scenes. This is forgiveable for budget constraints, but unfortunate. Scott was by no means a bad film maker, but his best films were a group effort in which he was not the primary creative force. He simply helped focus that creative force.Casual Shinji said:
I don't know if I agree with that. Scott worked his butt off making Alien. He was still fresh, and didn't have much respect yet. He had his hands full keeping the studio off everyone's back. He initially got a lot of shit for spending so much of the budget on the landing gear and Space Jockey scene. He had to deal with Dan O'Bannon running around like a nervous chicken. And he also storyboarded the entire movie himself.Fox12 said:
And the earlier drafts of the script didn't include Ash being an andriod, and honestly he was probably the best character in the whole movie. David Giler and Walter Hill might've been scumbags trying to lift O'Bannon's and Shusett's script away from them, but their inclusion of Ash was gold.
I think Scott's only real flaw is that he's just very hands-off with his actors. In Alien this worked to his advantage, but in his following movies not so much. And I still don't blame him for Prometheus. The fact that he worked on it is really the only reason that makes the movie worth a damn.
There's a gaping chasm of difference between "leaving the audience with questions" in a meaningful intellect-challenging sense, and cavernous plot holes tied together with a silken thread of Fridge Logic.Raidenko said:
Maybe its just because its Sir Ridley that we now expect gold all the time. Despite people saying that Exodus (which I've not seen) and Prometheus (which I did enjoy) being below par, he's still my favourite director out there, just slightly ahead of Tarantino. All the "great" directors make errors of judgement in their careers. Even the once untouchable Spielberg gave us War of the Worlds and *shudder* A.I.
Its Ridleys attention to the little details that make him stand out to me.
Its Ridleys attention to the little details that make him stand out to me.
What happened to Ridley Scott? The thing that brings down great artists, ego. Once one assumes they are good at their art, that they know what they are doing, they will make shit.
It's always better to assume your shit, that way you'll ask for and listen to the opinions of others on your work and you'll critically examine your work. Once you have a big ego, you'll not seek or listen to the opinions of others and you will not critically examine your own work, then you will make shit.
It's always better to assume your shit, that way you'll ask for and listen to the opinions of others on your work and you'll critically examine your work. Once you have a big ego, you'll not seek or listen to the opinions of others and you will not critically examine your own work, then you will make shit.
I have always felt his best movies were the first three--The Duelists is a great, underrated movie--and they're the only things I have in my collection. Pretty much everything else I've seen by him, competent or not, has been missing the 'spark' and unmistakable character of a truly great director.
I saw Exodus. It wasn't bad. I don't have the same critical eye as Bob but as a Christian, I like that they showed Moses the general instead of Moses the pure spiritual leader. I like when stories we have heard a million times before are told from a different angle so we can possibly get a new understanding.
I just bought the Alien Anthology box set on blu-ray and on of the many featurettes someone said that Scott's first feature film The Duelists (FTR I haven't seen yet) was said to be level on or rivaled the visual style of Kubrick. Now back then (and maybe even today) that is a huge reputation to have right out of the gate. So maybe it's the feeling that he is his generation's Kubrick.