Is Ridley Scott a hack?

I think he is.

Alien - good movie, the second mops the floor with it

Gladiator - I think I've said my piece here

Blade Runner - the director's cut is still one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. his best, and the only real gauge we have to measure his talent.

Hannibal - I'm sorry, I don't see it in this one. Ten years from now, Silence of the Lambs is what people will still be renting.

Thelma & Louise - I think this movie's overrated, really. It has its moments though.

G.I. Jane - Apart from Demi Moore's acting, this movie's worthless.

White Squall - enough said.

Legend, Black Rain, 1492: Conquest of Paradise, Someone to watch over me - Raise your hand not if you've seen one of these, but if you've heard of one.

I'm sorry, but why is this man considered to be such a great director? Even with Gladiator, the little power the film had was from Russell Crowe's acting, not his direction. We all have flukes; Blade Runner was his. Everything after that hasn't been very good, yet he holds on to his reputation as an "A-List" director. I've no doubt he's got a little talent, Blade Runner shows that, but his other films are largely impersonal and short on plausible emotions, Thelma & Louise aside. I just don't see what all the hype is about, I read somewhere that they're calling him another Spielberg.

__________________
**** the Lakers!

Alien, Gladiator, and Blade Runner are all very good movies. While it is true that Aliens is better that doesn't make the first one any worse. It is a good solid movie. Gladiator I think was an extremely well done job on Ridley's part (he deserved his nomination, Steven deserved the oscar though). White Sqaul sucked, Thelma and Louise was an ok movie and nothing more. From what I have seen so far Black Hawk Down looks very promising.

I think that for Blade Runner alone he deserves to be at the least recognized for possesing some talent. Give the man his due.

Anyone who makes several good movies, a couple of which are basically classics, is NOT a hack.

"Hannibal - I'm sorry, I don't see it in this one. Ten years from now, Silence of the Lambs is what people will still be renting" -Steve N.


Hehe, I like your little Roger Ebert Likeness :P

__________________
Movies Are Life. Live Alittle.

Ebert? Wha?

Go check out Roger eberts review on Planet of the apes (2001) and go to the very end of the review you'll see what I mean.

http://www.suntimes.com/ebert

I noticed the exact same thing, but the computer I was using at the time was patheticly slow and threatened to freeze up if I actually had the gall to try and load another page.

I don't read reviews, I'll read it after I see the movie. Was it something like "they'll be renting the original in 20 years" or along those lines? I'm confused.

Ebert said that tens years from now, people will still be renting the 1968 version of POTA.

Ridley Scott is a HACK? Puh-leeze!!! (See Commish's succint reasons above.) And if he IS A hack, where do I get in line?

PS. I enjoyed Immensely: BLADERUNNER, GLADIATOR, ALIEN, HANNIBAL & yes, even BLACK RAIN! The only Ridley movie which completely missed the gate is the atrocious 1492, although I have never seen that SQUALL thing. What's that -- THE PERFECT STORM, only littler?

__________________
Pigsnie, Vicar of Fries!

Oh my Gosh, I was gonna say the same thing about your Ebertism. Stop it Steve. Stop pretending you never read reviews. I, also, try not to read them until after I've seen the movie, but not every movie you see has a $2 billion advertising plan. You have to find out about them from somewhere - a friend (essentially an amateur critic), the newspaper, Premeire, Moviemaker. How am I supposed to know there is a movie called BULLY w/out reading it somewhere? nevermind...

Oh, and Ridley Scott's a hack.

I never read them...I look at every trailer I can, either online or in the theater, take friends' recommendations or suggestions, or just wing it and go on the title alone. I refuse to read reviews, because I'd rather have my own opinions than be influenced by someone else's. On occasion I'll read them after I've seen the movie and figured it out for myself. Movies are too rich an experience for me to go in with preconceived notions about what I could/should be seeing. I just can't be bothered with them. I'd rather write my own.

Didnt read other posts but Ive gotta speak on this. Also i have to go to bed now. But Ridley Scott is, if not worse, a heinous hypocrite. I admired him for a long time due to his work on Alien and his declaration that it is good because he didnt use computers and therefore, was more believeable. Recently, his movie Gladaitor became the worst movie ever to win best picture. Question: How did they set up these scenes, with collisseum, crowds, etc.? Answer: TONS of computer work. (Completely fake people)
P.S. Academy, learn from the Nobel Association. If nobody deserves an award, DONT give one! Look back at previous years. Find a year where Pulp Fiction and Fargo were both denied best pictures because Forrest Gump came out the same year. Send Them awards and to hell with Dreamworks' poo.

I don't have anything constructive to say...I just want to take issue with the bizarre notion that computer graphics are some lower form of art than "older" filmmaking. That's really bogus.

i dont think ridley scott is a hack. every director has a few movies that arent the biggest hits of the year or dont become classics. this doesnt mean they are a hack.

Wow, 7 year thread rerive! Nice!

__________________
"Travis Bickle: Loneliness has followed me my whole life, everywhere. In bars, in cars, sidewalks, stores, everywhere. There's no escape. I'm God's lonely man."

First off, I like Alien more than I like Aliens. Both are great flicks, but Alien is the better piece of craftsmanship, hands down. Ridley does most of his own art direction, as well, so most of the dense, energetic frames we see in his films are a product of his imagination.

I don't think he is the best director out there today, but he is certainly not a hack.

Also, I find it silly the guy who created this thread lists films like Legend and then asks if people have even heard of them. Legend was huge back in the 80s...HUGE. Of course people have heard of it, and believe it or not, the Director's Cut is pretty damn good. One of my favorite fantasy films, actually. Tim Curry's Darkness is one of my favorite film villains...

__________________

My favorite from him would be Blade Runner and American gangster - i hated alien when i watched it recently , gladiator wasn't that great when i saw it recently either.

__________________

Uwe Boll, now there's a hack, Joel Schumacher, Brett Ratner, oh I could go on and on....
Ridley Scott is a fantastic director, if he was anything less he wouldn't still be making movies.
The film business is so fickle, and you have to have consistency in order to have longevity as a director.
Alien & Aliens are almost two different type of films, Alien was more of a sci-fi haunted house, chiller type movie whilst Aliens was more like a sci-fi war movie.
Personally Alien had far more tension and creativity to it, and whilst I loved Aliens, my personal feeling was that it was more gung ho in its approach and was slightly more style over substance.
Alien still stands the test of time today as does Bladerunner, and that is mainly due to Scott's vision and directing.
I'm with Sedai on Tim Curry's Darkness, an amazing creation and performance, and despite not having much love for the Cruise-meister, Legend is a fantastic film.

__________________
Hey Pepe, would you say I have a plethora of presents?


Toga, toga, toga......


Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbour?

I tend to like Ridley Scott's stuff. I think numbers is a great show. I love the scene in Legend where she is dancing with the gown and then wearing it. That whole movie has this great fairy tale look to it. I still have the soundtrack. Tangerine Dream, what half decent 80's movie doesn't have them in it.