Been saying this for years. If you look at Ridley’s body of work, he’s got many more misses than hits. It’s just that those handful of good ones are really good, and the rest aren’t usually bad so much as completely forgettable.
Compare that with his brother Tony, who maybe never achieved the same highs, but every single one of his films was memorable and distinct.
For decades I have taken a wait and see approach to Ridley Scott’s films and Ron Howard as well. Howard’s body of work is similar to Scott. A few great ones and lots of no need to bother ones.
If I see or hear great word of mouth about a Scott or Howard movie I will check it out.
For a long time the excuse for why Scott’s movies are a mess is the great evil studio interference. I bought into that bullshit for a while until I starting thinking about it.
Fool me once, shame on you
Fool me twice, shame on me
According to legend, studio interference is what sabotage Blade Runner and that was released 46 years ago. At what point is Scott responsible for managing that interference?
Also beyond that what exactly is the great evil studio that does the interfering?
It’s my hope that it was simply a case of overreliance on digital filmmaking crutches (background replacement, relighting, etc) that caused him to shoot everything in the same medium zoom, blocked off boring angles to have multiple camera shots on every take to facilitate fx work in post.
Hopefully, the brilliant filmmaker who made Alien and Blade Runner is still in there somewhere.
He’s gotta be playing Long John Silver. Honestly kinda interested in how he’ll play it.
Hopefully Ridley Scott’s cured himself of whatever caused him to make Gladiator II.
Gladiator II is the norm when you look at Scott’s body of work.
Been saying this for years. If you look at Ridley’s body of work, he’s got many more misses than hits. It’s just that those handful of good ones are really good, and the rest aren’t usually bad so much as completely forgettable.
Compare that with his brother Tony, who maybe never achieved the same highs, but every single one of his films was memorable and distinct.
For decades I have taken a wait and see approach to Ridley Scott’s films and Ron Howard as well. Howard’s body of work is similar to Scott. A few great ones and lots of no need to bother ones.
If I see or hear great word of mouth about a Scott or Howard movie I will check it out.
For a long time the excuse for why Scott’s movies are a mess is the great evil studio interference. I bought into that bullshit for a while until I starting thinking about it.
According to legend, studio interference is what sabotage Blade Runner and that was released 46 years ago. At what point is Scott responsible for managing that interference?
Also beyond that what exactly is the great evil studio that does the interfering?
Ah yes, now the details of treasure island come back.
There is no cure for dementia.
It’s my hope that it was simply a case of overreliance on digital filmmaking crutches (background replacement, relighting, etc) that caused him to shoot everything in the same medium zoom, blocked off boring angles to have multiple camera shots on every take to facilitate fx work in post.
Hopefully, the brilliant filmmaker who made Alien and Blade Runner is still in there somewhere.