All things Ridley Scott

[EXO]

He's probably the most influential movie maker of the modern era. Just look at his track record.

Alien - spawned a number of movies that was about a crew trapped in an enclosed space with a killer creature. How many can you name?

Blade Runner - set the tone for almost all dystopian future cityscapes and all other directors acknowledges the fact. Batman begins director Chris Nolan says he watched Blade Runner to inspire him for his Dark Knight movie. Even Terry Gilliam admits that his grimy futuristic city in Brazil took after Scott's Los Angeles. Anime and mangas also borrowed a lot from Alien and Blade Runner.

Black Rain - great movie but didn't really influence anything but Rising Sun, the Sean Connery/ Wesley Snipes movie... but far superior to it.

Thelma and Louise - not really influential except for the fact that at the time strong women lead roles were scarce in Hollywood. Seriously, we need more women with guns movies... someone make a Gunsmith Cats film!

Gladiator - Well I would say that Glory and Braveheart were first on the scene of the new movies with massive battle scenes. But it didn't really take off until Scott made Gladiator. This movies spawns a whole line of clones that kills the genre.

Black Hawk Down - Again i would say that Private Ryan beat Scott to the punch of influencing a genre. But Black Hawk Down is the model of the perfect modern combat film making. The new series Battlestar Galactica uses this film as a reference to make their space battles seem more real. I'm pretty sure that when all the Iraq war films come out, Black Hawk Down will be the standard they will use.

[Graham]

You are missing 'The Duellists', his first movie from 1977. Great movie as well.

Graham

[Isamu Atreides 86]

I loved Black Hawk Down. Alien Was great, and I loved Gladiator despite the historical inaccuracies. Scott is the man. Can't wait to see the new movie.

[Ladic]

I liked matchstickmen

[Sarensaas]

He also directed Legend, which a lot of people don't like, but was interesting to me for the visuals and the colors used, an I still am amazed that was little Tim Curry in all that Darkness make-up and prosthetics. Made for a nice fantasy/romance/action movie; the tone and mood was really unique.

I can't wait for Scott to release the ultimate Blade Runner DVD he has been talking about.

[Guest Bromgrev]

I can't wait for Scott to release the ultimate Blade Runner DVD he has been talking about.

Best film ever made, ever. Said it before and I'll say it again. Duellists, Black Rain, Gladiator, Alien, great films. 1492, Thelma & Louise, OK.

But then, IMO, he's made some duds, too. Legend is the love-child that should never have been, apart from Tim Curry. I've never been able to take Tom Cruise seriously since. Come to think of it, though, I couldn't take him seriously before ...

[EXO]

I'm a huge Legend fan. It really captures the feeling of reading the dark fairy tales that were written before Disney bleached them white. It's the closes you're gonna get to a movie based on Charles Vess's fairy tale comic books.

[Duke Togo]

and I loved Gladiator despite the historical inaccuracies.

I was never under the impression it was supposed to be historical. I wouldn't put it in the same category like Braveheart, which claims to be historical yet is wildly inaccurate.

[Blaine23]

I'm a huge Legend fan. It really captures the feeling of reading the dark fairy tales that were written before Disney bleached them white. It's the closes you're gonna get to a movie based on Charles Vess's fairy tale comic books.

Legend fan here too.

So many people hate this movie and I'll ask why and it can usually be summed up by them despising the idea of Tom Cruise running around with faeries.

Come to think of it... that's a pretty good reason to hate Legend.

But if you get past that and appreciate the visuals, the tone, the sheer artistry involved in making the film... and it's pretty awesome. The whole sequence when the world goes dark after Tom retreives the ring from the lake is one of my favorite film moments around.

It's a great movie, you just gotta get past Tom and the faeries.

[F-ZeroOne]

Don't forget the "Hovis" ads...!

[EXO]

Don't know what the Hovis ads are but those BMW driver films were pretty decent.

[Isamu Atreides 86]

and I loved Gladiator despite the historical inaccuracies.

I was never under the impression it was supposed to be historical. I wouldn't put it in the same category like Braveheart, which claims to be historical yet is wildly inaccurate.

I always thought if you set a movie in a historical setting, then its historical. Sure, maybe Maximus Decimus Meridius never actually existed, but Marcus Aurelius did, and so did Commodus. Marcus Aurelius was not killed by his son. He did not want to give power to the senate. Rome never conquered all of Germania. Commodus died wrestling in his residence. He was actually a pedophile, not incestuous (although, both are really disgusting).

If you look at a movie like Master and Commander, it is plausible that these things could have happened. Again, Jack Aubrey never existed, but he could have at least fit into the story. On the other hand, movies like Braveheart are an example of how not to do a historical movie. Like i said, I loved Gladiator, but there were somethings i saw wrong with the background of the story.

[EXO]

I guess historical movies, especially Ridley Scott's, are not there to teach you history, but definitely strive to mimick a realism of whatever time period he's trying to do. Even Blade Runner seem like a more plausible future than most other futuristic movie. Especially against those that came before it. One of my favorite shows right now, deadwood, strives for realism, but gladly sacrifices accuracy for the sake of the story... As long as they try to make me believe it while I'm watching I'll skip on the historically accurate events.

[F-ZeroOne]

Don't know what the Hovis ads are but those BMW driver films were pretty decent.

They are sort of part of Birtish cultural heritage... basically, he did a very nostalgic kind of advert about a bread delivery boy pushing his bicycle up a very steep cobbled hill, set to some classical music (can't remember the composer, but whatever it is, basically in Britain it is the soundtrack for bread...!)

Didn't Scott also do the famous Apple ad? (the hammer-throwing one?)

[Jemstone]

Legend fan here too.

So many people hate this movie and I'll ask why and it can usually be summed up by them despising the idea of Tom Cruise running around with faeries.

Come to think of it... that's a pretty good reason to hate Legend..................

It's a great movie, you just gotta get past Tom and the faeries.

I don't hate the film. I just hate that Tom Cruise was in it. Can't stand the guy. Ruined the whole film.

[Agent ONE]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

[Duke Togo]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

You're right, Ridley's better.

[Mr March]

Hey, nice thread >EXO<! I was very sad when the last one closed down. I felt the Ridley Scott discussion was just starting to get interesting.

Ridley Scott is probably one of the first directors I really admired as a young kid and have followed ever since. His amazing ability to create a vibrant visual motif in every film he directs is really unrivaled in the careers of any other filmmaker I can imagine. Whether he is on a good film, or he makes a dud, the visual vibrance is unmistakable. Ridley's strength as a visual artist is not just a definiable monolithic style either, but he has shown the ability to diverge into several styles; almost a thematic dichotomy if you will. I've also always been amazed at how Scott can jump from genre to genre, displaying great finesse and talent in the smallest personal story or the grandest epic. As one of the filmmakers of modern classics, I found many of his films not only challenged the conventions, but he revisits his own contributions successfully time and again, proving the merit of his own innovations. His love for strong female leads in stories traditionally considered impossible for a leading lady is just one example of such reaffirmation of his film concepts.

My personal favorites are certainly Alien, Blade Runner, and Gladiator. I also very much enjoy Black Rain and Matchstick Men (wow, what a performance by Nicholas Cage, especially after the duds he had done for so long). I am also nearly embarrased to admit my fondness for Thelma and Louise. So many special interests groups treat the film like the national flag of feminism (ironic given Ridley's role) but even such political baggage can't keep a great film down. I never once felt insulted by the film and instead empathized totally with the female characters. Imagine a film that makes men empathize with the mindset of women...Ridley should win a Nobel

Alien was more than just the spawn of endless creature features, few of which have even matched the original Alien's impact on film. More importantly, Alien was a breakthrough into creature special effects and new path into science fiction. Ridley was inspired and even shamed by the amazing power of Star Wars, yet at the same time he used his amazing skills to create a film his own. He could have easily fallen victim to the urge to create a clone, but instead he contributed to the late 1970's creative explosion of science fiction...and he enriched the genre with a worthy artistic contribution.

Just when one thought Ridley Scott's amazing contribution to science fiction film could never be exceded, the guy makes Blade Runner. Science fiction and film noir together? Impossible it was thought, but realized with great success it was. The gun, the picture, the dark and gritty tone; Blade Runner took all the elements of classic french film noir and married them with a dystopic future world. The amazing combination of these elements didn't end the greatness of Blade Runner, for the film then created a story in which the character endures trial and revelation, leading to a personal tale of deep existentialism. To praise the structure and narrative of Blade Runner doesn't even begin to do the film justice.

OF course, how could I not talk about Gladiator. Initially an epic film of the largest scale whose structure then turns into a personal story without loosing the grandness of scope. I was totally blown away by the concept! Not only did Ridley Scott once again claim the crown of a master cinematographer but the film remains to this day one of the best sword fighting epics ever made. The combat sequences have arguably yet to be matched, and this is placing the film up against the best competitors like Jackson's Lord of the Rings or Lucas's Star Wars. Yet with all the visual impact of the film, it's the tragic story that restrains the viewer, like the chains that bind the emotive characters. Every piece of dialogue felt like an explosion; every verbal conflict felt like a clash of armies; every tear that fell was a great loss. The film was a reinvention of the classic greek tales on film and a shining example of the way in which Hollywood ought to remake old ideas.

Edited May 10, 2005 by Mr March

[Mr March]

I loved Black Hawk Down. Alien Was great, and I loved Gladiator despite the historical inaccuracies. Scott is the man. Can't wait to see the new movie.

Gladiator used a historical context only as a setting and to grant the film some dramatic grounding. The film was intended to be period fiction only, never a biopic or historical retelling. Very important distinction.

[Isamu Atreides 86]

I loved Black Hawk Down. Alien Was great, and I loved Gladiator despite the historical inaccuracies. Scott is the man. Can't wait to see the new movie.

Gladiator used a historical context only as a setting and to grant the film some dramatic grounding. The film was intended to be period fiction only, never a biopic or historical retelling. Very important distinction.

granted. but if you make a movie about the American Revolution, and start off about how George Washington and Alexander Hamilton wanted to form a workers utopia to escape from the clutches of Bourgeoise Great Britain in accordance with the writings of Marx, which hadn't happened yet, its not a good setting. Nothing against Gladiator, but the concept of "freedom" and "democracy" were not things that a Roman Emperor, especially Aurelius, would have been talking about.

[EXO]

"Wake up! Time to die!"

Blade Runner was probably the film that made me notice Scott's genius. I saw Aliens and I think I was too busy being scared out of my wits to realize how real the film felt. It wasn't until I saw the directors cut two Halloweens ago that I noticed how perfect that film was. I still prefer the original cut, but seeing Alien in the big screen again was so overwhelming that I was glad they released that new cut.

But I remember when they released the director's cut of Bladerunner. I knew after years and years of watcing it on my worn out VHS copy that I had to go and look at it at the theatres. And again, thinking that you know what to expect and still being blown away by the visuals, makes you appreciate Scott as a director. It's the first movie that actually snatched me from my seat and made me believe that it wasn't done with special effects. That they actually went some wild futuristic city and filmed on location. My favorite scene is when Deckard rides to the Tyrell Corporation, right up to where they introduce Rachel, Sean Young's character. The flight seemed like it was a familiar thing. It made me think that that's how it is to fly across a city looking at huge buildings. Then it moves right into a nice conference room with a great view of the city. Everything looks like it should. And Sean Young, she fit right in. The characters were so much part of the environment that they needed little introduction before you knew who they were.

"Is this test to see if I'm a replicant? Or a lesbian, Mr Deckard?"

[Agent ONE]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

You're right, Ridley's better.

NO SCHWARZENEGGER = NOT A GOOD MOVIE.

[Duke Togo]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

You're right, Ridley's better.

NO SCHWARZENEGGER = NOT A GOOD MOVIE.

Star Wars doesn't have Schwarzenegger in it. The Godfather doesn't have Schwarzenegger in it. Batman & Robin DID have Schwarzenegger in it, though.

Edited May 10, 2005 by Duke Togo

[Agent ONE]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

You're right, Ridley's better.

NO SCHWARZENEGGER = NOT A GOOD MOVIE.

Star Wars doesn't have Schwarzenegger in it. The Godfather doesn't have Schwarzenegger in it. Batman & Robin DID have Schwarzenegger in it, though.

The Star Wars series is awesome, it has the greatest vilan ever created, that being Darth Vader, who was played by James Earl Jones. Darth was never defeated, even when he died it was more of a suicide to save his son. In fact James Earl Jones has never been defeated in any movie, except one... Conan the Barbarian where SCHWARZENEGGER chopped his head off and threw it down the stairs like a bowling ball... Thats right Arnold killed Darth Vader, therefore: SCHWARZENEGGER OWNZ STAR WARS.

The Godfather was a pretty nifty series too, it was about an Itilian mob family, the Corleones. The Corleon family was kinda tough but they were nuthin compared to the mob family that stared in the movie Raw Deal... Now THAT family was tough as nails. Of course Arnold killed them all, like 75 of em, then got the chick and smoked a cigar. Therefore SCHWARZENEGGER OWNS THE GODFATHER.

As far as Batman and Robin go, eh, everybody makes mistakes.

[EXO]

You guys play six degrees of Arnold somewhere else...

actually that was pretty cool... A1 dig up your Arnold thread and we'll suggest movies and you can figure out how Arnold ownz them.

[Agent ONE]

You guys play six degrees of Arnold somewhere else...

actually that was pretty cool... A1 dig up your Arnold thread and we'll suggest movies and you can figure out how Arnold ownz them.

DONE!

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...ndpost&p=293224

[Mr March]

I loved Black Hawk Down. Alien Was great, and I loved Gladiator despite the historical inaccuracies. Scott is the man. Can't wait to see the new movie.

Gladiator used a historical context only as a setting and to grant the film some dramatic grounding. The film was intended to be period fiction only, never a biopic or historical retelling. Very important distinction.

granted. but if you make a movie about the American Revolution, and start off about how George Washington and Alexander Hamilton wanted to form a workers utopia to escape from the clutches of Bourgeoise Great Britain in accordance with the writings of Marx, which hadn't happened yet, its not a good setting. Nothing against Gladiator, but the concept of "freedom" and "democracy" were not things that a Roman Emperor, especially Aurelius, would have been talking about.

That's not exactly an accurate analogy. Marxism had no historical basis in the early period of the American formation. In contrast, the early concepts of democracy, representation, and participation all had historical precedent in the Roman Republic (and Gladiator is set after this time).

Like I say, the characters and events in Gladiator are historically similar only in as much as they grant the fictional film some legitimacy as a proper period piece. Gladiator used liberally from the history of Rome, but preferred to use composites for its story rather than rigid, established people and places from history. Marucs Aurelius was generally considered the last Emperor to hold power before the decline of Rome and his son successor Commodus was considered responsible for beginning of that decline. This is similar to the film, but not exact. Rome was also relatively peaceful, except for scattered wars it fought against Germanic tribes. Again, this is similar to the film but different.

Rome itself would most certainly feature characters that spoke of freedom and democracy. Rome was one of the earliest examples of democratic ideology in the ancient western civilizations. The Republic was ruled with a two-seat consul, with more than one person sharing power and controlling veto. The Republic also featured the concept of terms for their officials, including the appointment of the dictators and censors, both of whom served defined terms. The various assemblies of the Roman Republic actually elected officials, such as magistrates and the greater plebeians were responsible for electing the officials that formed the republic assemblies.

Granted, Rome never became a Republic after it became the Empire (in contrast to the film, which never showed Rome becoming a Republic, but hinted the surviving characters would perform such a dying request). However, the political realities were certainly there at that time and Gladiator certainly followed the historical precendents of Rome.

Hopefully this helps your suspension of disbelief.

[fmac]

Wow. Blade Runner. That movie is perfection. I'm not trying to be subjective here, I really mean it.

Incredible performances, from Rutget Hauer to Daryl Hannah, some of the best lines EVER heard in a film, special effects that 23 years later still look believable, wonderful soundtrack that doesn't get annoying anytime, some of the best images ever seen on a screen, and best of all: a script that brings forth phylosophical and ethical dilemmas without getting carried to being totally explicit in a lame way or going astray to a self-masturbatory exercise by the director (you know, the last episodes of Evangelion and stuff like that). And the story is so well crafted that there are tons of food for thought, like the stick figures made by Gaff or the final lines of Roy Batty.

And then there's the people that think it's boring but liked the flying cars.

And yes, it's unbelievable that a movie with NO SCHWARZENEGGER reaches perfection. I still wonder why.

[Jolly Rogers]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

You're right, Ridley's better.

NO SCHWARZENEGGER = NOT A GOOD MOVIE.

DYRL = not good movie?!

[Agent ONE]

He is cool, but still no John Milius.

You're right, Ridley's better.

NO SCHWARZENEGGER = NOT A GOOD MOVIE.

DYRL = not good movie?!

Actually the character Vrlitwhai Kridanik (I feel) was based on The Austrian Oak, so he really IS in DYRL.

[Graham]

I can't believe it, am I the only one here that has watched his first movie 'The Duellists'?

Nobody else seen it and think it's a good movie?

Graham

[Opus]

I can't believe it, am I the only one here that has watched his first movie 'The Duellists'?

Nobody else seen it and think it's a good movie?

Graham

Is it the one where Harvey Keitel(sp?) is a Napoleonic officer hell bent on killing Keith Carradine? If so, I remember it being pretty good.

[Mr March]

I can't believe it, am I the only one here that has watched his first movie 'The Duellists'?

Nobody else seen it and think it's a good movie?

Graham

Like so many of the directors I love, I've yet to see every single film they have made. Sadly, I've never seen the Duellists. I beleive last count was I had seen 12 of his 15 films, so I'm close

[Mr March]

"Wake up! Time to die!"

Blade Runner was probably the film that made me notice Scott's genius. I saw Aliens and I think I was too busy being scared out of my wits to realize how real the film felt. It wasn't until I saw the directors cut two Halloweens ago that I noticed how perfect that film was. I still prefer the original cut, but seeing Alien in the big screen again was so overwhelming that I was glad they released that new cut.

But I remember when they released the director's cut of Bladerunner. I knew after years and years of watcing it on my worn out VHS copy that I had to go and look at it at the theatres. And again, thinking that you know what to expect and still being blown away by the visuals, makes you appreciate Scott as a director. It's the first movie that actually snatched me from my seat and made me believe that it wasn't done with special effects. That they actually went some wild futuristic city and filmed on location. My favorite scene is when Deckard rides to the Tyrell Corporation, right up to where they introduce Rachel, Sean Young's character. The flight seemed like it was a familiar thing. It made me think that that's how it is to fly across a city looking at huge buildings. Then it moves right into a nice conference room with a great view of the city. Everything looks like it should. And Sean Young, she fit right in. The characters were so much part of the environment that they needed little introduction before you knew who they were.

"Is this test to see if I'm a replicant? Or a lesbian, Mr Deckard?"

The dialogue was fantastic in Blade Runner. Some of the quote are now such classics of film.

"It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"

"All those moments will be lost in time...like tears in rain"

A friend of mine had a great discussion about whether Deckard was a replicant. He basically saw the film for the first time not but a few months back, while i had been a fan for years. It was plenty of fun going through the exploration of all the details in the film, the opinions of the actors, and Ridley's own comments on the matter. When he was done, he remained convinced Deckard was human, but it sure was fun to talk about it

[Akilae]

I can't believe it, am I the only one here that has watched his first movie 'The Duellists'?

Nobody else seen it and think it's a good movie?

Graham

Saw the Duellists on recommendation from "By The Sword". Then saw it again right after. It's one of those gems that never really hit mainstream. IMHO one of the better swordfighting films around.

If you like it, buy the DVD! The movie has yet to recoup its initial production costs! Ridley Sott's commentaries on the DVD are worth the price.