Ridley Scott

Tools    





I've seen most of his films, and most are mediocre at best.

Black Hawk Down is his most solid film, Blade Runner too, but the rest just lack good filmmaking: Gladiator, Hannibal, G.I. Jane, Thelma and Loiuse, etc.

Black Hawk Down is one of my favorite films, and what I'm trying to get at, is I'm not sure what to think of Matchstick Men. Ridley Scott is a decent director, his films just don't do anything for me. Matchstick Men looks ordinary at best, but reviews have just been amazing, for a film like that. So chances are, I think I'm going to be surprised by Ridley Scott when I see this film today.



Registered User
I think he is overrated. Gladiator existed in a year of weak competition, it was not that good of a movie. Yet suddenly Ripely Scott is a genius for casting an australian as a spainard in a movie about rome.

Russell Crowe also did not deserve that Oscar. Not to say Russell hasn't deserved an oscar -- he just got it for the wrong movie.

Black Hawk Down was good though, and much of its quality can be attributed to its director since there wasn't really a "star" or anything like that in the movie. Most of the time it was hard to even recognize the actors.
__________________
Chris Beasley
CB Swords - Get LOTR replica swords.
Coupon Codes - Get deals on Amazon, Dell, Gateway, and more.



what no mention of alien here either? i always thought that one was a rather slick low budget piece of suspense/horror/scifi [probably in that order too] film-making. rather, even... seriously it's my fave by the guy.

it's been too damn long since i saw bladerunner to say anything about it, and i didnt see black hawk down at all unless you count the commercials on tv [and i certainly do--that's how i watch the vast majority of my movies, 30-60-second blurbs on the teevee].

black rain [the one with michael douglas, not to be confused with the totally rad imamura film of the same name/year] was a slick but by-the-numbers [de]moralizing copper blowfest.

gladiator was just snore-iffic! i mean totally, dude! a real plasterpiece! so hard hitting it massaged my temples and i got knocked right the "f" out! effin-aay, MAAAAAN! what a sphinkteresting movie!

shoot, i dunno if i've seen anything else by the guy, mannit. i guess he's okay, there are worse directors out there.



Originally Posted by linespalsy
and i certainly do--that's how i watch the vast majority of my movies, 30-60-second blurbs on the teevee
You're trying to be sarcastic I hope, b/c come on how can you love movies and not give any time to watching them?
__________________
Make it happen!




Only for the weak
The guy has never impressed me really. He lacks the innovation to be a 'great director' in my opinion.

When you watch a movie by guys like Kubrick, Scorcese, Tarentino, or even Spielberg those guys can move the movie along with camera shots. Scott is just too plain, seems like he always opts for the most basic shots. I can't say I've saw all his films, and I'm not saying he's a bad director...Just that their are better ones.
__________________
Early morning moments, a glimpse of joy. But soon it's over and I return to dust. As I try to be, everything everyone. I shrivel up and, waste away.



Of course, innovation is not limited to "camera moves". In any way, shape or form.
__________________
www.esotericrabbit.com



His movies don't get overly technical with the camera movements. He likes to allow his actors to have more freedom to act so it seemes. He doesn't just tell them where to stand so he can frame them the way he wants to. So he may not be the most innovative director but I don't think he can be considered bad by any means.



Only for the weak
Well yeah, both points well taken.

I'm definetly not saying he's a BAD director so to speak. Just he seems a bit too traditional to really cross over into the league of great directors.



ive always been a huge fan of his movies and his directional skills when it comes to pure vision and ambition. On the other hand his downsides are also obvious, no one has really mentioned the fact that his ability to work with the cast on a one to one level is simply non existent.

Alien is certainly one of my all time favs, but the quadrilodgy does reveal that Scott on many occasions yells/argues at his cast as a way of venting his frustration. I understand that the director and especially in this particular production is pressured an awful lot by the production company who are constantly breathing down the directors neck (Fox). But i thinks its the directors job to shield his actors from this kind of pressure as best he can.

Anyway, Ridley now deploys people to try and discover actors who can work without much directional skills so he doesn’t have to coax performances out of his cast, this allows ridley to concentrate on other elements of the movie. / you may say this is all fair enough, though ive always stood by the fact that one to one cast handling is an essential for all good directors



Ar3d's Avatar
BANNED
So is there any new updates for this man, i mean is he has a new film to direct?



The casting for Body of Lies looks either like a stinky, iconic, sack of crap or a brilliant move. I wonder how much input Scott had in the casting department? I think most of it was his call. I hope it pays off as I know it could, but I am leary I am.




Seems he is doing a Robin Hood flick also with guess who in it?

__________________
“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton



Seems he is doing a Robin Hood flick also with guess who in it?


Not as Robin I hope....
__________________
You never know what is enough, until you know what is more than enough.
~William Blake ~

AiSv Nv wa do hi ya do...
(Walk in Peace)




7thson, have faith mate. I have a good feeling about body of lies.

anyway, not to worry, The robin hood flick is more 2009 anyway so we have an entire year to dread the return of captain hammy salami. On the other hand. Russel and Ridley have a great relationship with each other on set, cant really be a bad thing + i cant say for a single second that Crow is not a fantastic actor.

Not really my cup of tea.... but for Ridley i atleast try to give it a shot. ive been a fan of his work for a long time now.

Anyway. as regards my previous commenst this is an extract i found on the web. The key phrase comming rite ant the end. Just in case i came accross a little harsh about ridley. I am after all a huge fan

Extract ""Actors who have worked with Scott often consider that he puts more emphasis on the sets or lining up shots than on them. Such criticisms have come from Harrison Ford, who complained that his relationship with Scott left a lot to be desired. Paul M. Sammon, in his book "the making of blade runner, commented about this in an interview with Brmovie.com, stating that Scott's relationship with his actors has improved considerably over the years""

lol "more empahasis" i guess actors just like attention. The best ones are versatile and can adapt and mold there charater as they please.



Here's my ranking of films I've seen of his (need to rewatch Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood, Blade Runner, and give Gladiator a proper consecutive viewing):

Thelma and Louise
Black Hawk Down
Alien
American Gangster
The Martian