Legend ruined Ridley Scott's 'creative' phase.

POSTED BY: OPPYH
UPDATED: Thursday, August 21, 2008 03:14
VIEWED: 3289
PAGE 1 of 3

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

OPPYH

Friday, August 15, 2008 9:23 PM

Now listen,
I love Legend, I love Blade Runner, and Alien.
These three films are what I consider Scott's crowning achievements.

He really changed the form of cinema with these atmospheric, and beautiful films.

Alien was a success. Blade Runner bombed, and Legend really bombed.
At the risk of becoming a director noted for failure, I really believe he changed(or became more mainstream) to save his career after his back to back disappointments at the Box Office.
Although it can't be proven, this is what I believe to be true. Anyone else have an opinion?

HUGHFF

Friday, August 15, 2008 9:50 PM

Blade Runner is now recognised as possibly his best movie (IMHO it's no contest). Despite its box office failure, it now appears in many "greatest all time" lists. Leonard maltin changed his rating of it from 2 stars to 4 (I think) out of 4 over the years.

But , yes, it's hard to make good movies if they don't sell.

www.cpfc.org - my life

DEEPGIRL187

Saturday, August 16, 2008 1:05 AM

Legend was one of my favorite movies as a kid; still is. But because it wasn't successful, I can see how Scott decided to move away from those types of films. Not that I'm a big fan of his later work, but a man's gotta eat, right?

The general public doesn't always see genius or creativity when it's shown to them. For instance, even if Citizen Kane hadn't been blacklisted by Hearst, it's likely people wouldn't have seen it for the great film that it is. Some recognition doesn't come until ages later.

****************************************************

"This is my timey-wimey detector. It goes ding when there's stuff. Also, it can boil an egg at 30 paces, whether you want it to or not, actually, so I've learned to stay away from hens. It's not pretty when they blow."

CHRISISALL

Saturday, August 16, 2008 1:07 AM

I believe you have something here.

I'm not as old as I used to beisall

LWAVES

Sunday, August 17, 2008 7:38 PM

Ditto the above.
If something isn't working for you (as you see it) then of course you aren't going to continue with it, especially with such a financial stake involved each time. And however creative a director wants to be the financial side of it always comes into play. So yes I think he changed in the type of movies he made (no scifi or fantasy since those three) but I don't think he's changed his style, of which I am personally a fan. Most of his 'worst' films are still entertaining.

Alien is a classic. Blade Runner falls into the same category as Shawshank Redemption in that it only really gets appreciated by the masses years later.
Legend is a movie that I also like, it's not perfect but it is good. I never got to see it until years after it release but it was one I always wanted to watch.

He has made some fantastic films since then - Gladiator, Black Rain, Black Hawk Down and Thelma And Louise of the ones I've seen. But he's also given us the dubious delight of - GI Jane, Hannibal, White Squall and Kingdom Of Heaven.

Personally I was he make some more Hovis adverts.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

CHRISISALL

Monday, August 18, 2008 2:58 PM

1492 was his only true failure........

Good recordisall

LWAVES

Monday, August 18, 2008 4:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
1492 was his only true failure........

Good recordisall

I liked 1492. It was a lot better than the other Columbus movie that same year. Plus Vangelis on the soundtrack so that's always good.
If I'm completely honest then I even thought White Squall and Kingdom Of Heaven were OK. There just wasn't much to them to seperate them from the masses. I'd have expected more from Ridley. But as I stated they have a certain style to them that Ridley brings to all his movies.

But I stand by my views on GI Jane (what was he thinking?) and Hannibal (another pointless sequel).

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

THESOMNAMBULIST

Monday, August 18, 2008 4:56 PM

Are you including Thelma and Louise as him catering for the mainstream?

I'm going to be play devils advocate here and suggest to you all that some directors have a classic film or two in them, but then beyond that not much more.

I'd place Ridley Scott into this category. I think he is a very good director but I also believe he fluked with Thelma and Louise and certainly fluked with Gladiator.

I don't regard him as a great director. Certianly visionary and extremely stylish, but I think his style idiology has conflicted with his subject matter on several occaisions. Blade Runner most notably.

These days he seems more like a director for hire. I'd love to think he has in him at least one more great film but it's looking increasingly doubtful.

Personally I don't think he was ever better than ALIEN

OPPYH

Monday, August 18, 2008 6:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Are you including Thelma and Louise as him catering for the mainstream?

I'm going to be play devils advocate here and suggest to you all that some directors have a classic film or two in them, but then beyond that not much more.

I'd place Ridley Scott into this category. I think he is a very good director but I also believe he fluked with Thelma and Louise and certainly fluked with Gladiator.

I don't regard him as a great director. Certianly visionary and extremely stylish, but I think his style idiology has conflicted with his subject matter on several occaisions. Blade Runner most notably.

These days he seems more like a director for hire. I'd love to think he has in him at least one more great film but it's looking increasingly doubtful.

Personally I don't think he was ever better than ALIEN

Blade Runner IMO, is a perfect movie. The world, the characters...just brilliant. If I were Ridley Scott, I'd be shattered after the Box office take. Yet he still had the guts to go all out and make the richest FANTASY film I have seen. That is courage. Doesn't help that all the asshole film critics blasted both films. Oh well, you can only hope someday he will return to the sci-fi/fantasy realm that he is so obviously gifted at crafting.

LWAVES

Monday, August 18, 2008 6:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Are you including Thelma and Louise as him catering for the mainstream?

I'm going to be play devils advocate here and suggest to you all that some directors have a classic film or two in them, but then beyond that not much more.

I'd place Ridley Scott into this category. I think he is a very good director but I also believe he fluked with Thelma and Louise and certainly fluked with Gladiator.

I don't regard him as a great director. Certianly visionary and extremely stylish, but I think his style idiology has conflicted with his subject matter on several occaisions. Blade Runner most notably.

These days he seems more like a director for hire. I'd love to think he has in him at least one more great film but it's looking increasingly doubtful.

Personally I don't think he was ever better than ALIEN

He never has topped Alien but then that would take some beating.

I don't consider Thelma And Louise a mainstream movie. It has a lot of elements of one but when put together I think IMHO that it pushes it above mainstream. Gladiator is a tougher call though and one where I'd need to see the film again to give an accurate opinion.

You are right on the mark with him being a director for hire these days. His style is still there but it doesn't seem to get to greatness. I too keep hoping for something better from him but so far it hasn't emerged. American Gangster had potential for this and whilst I haven't seen it yet, the reviews were a little muted over here.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE