This feature originally ran back on September 29, 2015 in the run-up to the “The Martian.” With “The Last Duel” and “House Of Gucci” now in theaters, we decided we’d update this feature and get it up to date as possible. See the original intro below…
So not only has Ridley Scott apparently delivered his best—or certainly most enjoyable— film in years according to reviews (ours included) of this past Friday’s “The Martian,” he’s also apparently way ahead of the news cycle. The director says he knew about water on Mars well in advance of NASA’s recent announcement. That Earth shaking reveal yesterday may simply be a coincidence, or it may be a canny mutually-bolstering ploy that gives his film a boost, which in turn will expose more people to its pro-NASA message. Or there’s a third possibility: Ridley Scott may actually be the Godlike being his fans have long suspected.
If there’s a case to be made for Scott’s cinematic deification, “Alien” and “Blade Runner” and quite a few others would probably figure largely as such. However, there’s plenty of evidence that he has feet of clay —his run over the last few years alone has ranged from the forgettable to the unforgivably dull to the outrageously off-the-chain and possibly cult-inspiring. Which means Scott’s filmography encompasses every type of success in almost every genre, as well as failures of every conceivable stripe. It makes for one of the most eclectic, erratic filmographies we can imagine, yet one that is united by his distinct style and approach. So, we’ve decided to take a look through the many peaks and multiple troughs of Ridley Scott’s filmography to date.
“The Duellists” (1977)
Scott’s first feature, which won him the Camera d’Or at Cannes, feels quite different from anything else that followed: a stripped-down, vaguely allegorical tale adapted from Joseph Conrad‘s short story “The Duel.” It follows the decades-long feud between two French soldiers, D’Hubert (Keith Carradine) and Feraud (Harvey Keitel), as they find themselves continually clashing swords after Feraud takes insult at a perceived slight to his honor. It’s sumptuous and detailed enough to suggest that Scott arrived on the scene as a fully formed visual stylist (even if it’s clearly indebted to “Barry Lyndon,” as Scott himself has subsequently admitted) and it’s relatively lean and compelling, at least when it’s not pursuing redundant romantic sub-plots. But Carradine and Keitel are both woefully, bafflingly miscast —particularly when put up against the supporting cast, which includes Albert Finney, Edward Fox, Robert Stephens and Diana Quick— and never integrate at all into the lavishly imagined world that Scott is trying to render. Still, it’s a fascinating oddity in the director’s canon. [B-]
“Alien” (1979)
As different as possible from his first film, Scott’s unimpeachable sci-fi horror is an exercise in minimalist terror, manifesting in the most unknowable, terrifying extraterrestrial creature ever seen onscreen. Now that it’s part of film history, having spawned sequels great and terrible, has crossbred with other franchises to produce new hybrid film series, and in general has become lodged deep in the cultural consciousness of the past few decades, it’s hard to realize how surprising “Alien” must have been at the time. But just cast your mind back and try to imagine sitting down in the theater, not knowing that Sigourney Weaver would turn out to be the lead, or what happens in that dinner scene, or how little to trust the robot Kane (Ian Holm) or just how insanely chilling those snatched glimpses at HR Giger‘s creature would turn out to be. Yet the now-infamous last voyage of the Nostromo has weathered years of homages, rip-offs and sequels and kinda-sorta prequels, and still retains a large part of its impact. That is all down to the striking economy and confidence of Scott’s filmmaking. No matter how many “Prometheus”s he lumbers us with afterward, Scott will never tarnish the legacy of this piece of pared-back perfection. [A+]
READ MORE: Ridley Scott Says ‘Prometheus 3’ Or ‘Prometheus 4’ Will Finally Connect With ‘Alien’
“Blade Runner” (1982)
We’ve said it before, and now here we go again: If anyone can make a go of the “Blade Runner” sequel, it’s probably Denis Villeneuve (especially in collaboration with DP Roger Deakins). But despite our oceanic goodwill, there’s still only the slimmest of outside chances that his film can possibly stack up next to the original, simply because the original is one of the greatest films of all time, in one of the trickiest but most provocative and exciting of genres. Of course, it flopped on release. Still, “Blade Runner,” based on a Philip K. Dick short story, has proven a massive influence on virtually every sci-fi movie, videogame and comic book since, and remains one of the most complete, coherent visions of a dystopian future ever put on screen. Whichever version of the film you watch —the pulpy Philip Marlowe-y original with the explanatory voiceover and the happy ending, or the existentially introspective director’s cut which of course suggests Harrison Ford‘s Deckard is a replicant— you walk away after the credits feeling like you’ve lived a whole life in an alternate, broken 2019 Los Angeles and, despite the bleak rain-soaked atmosphere, you’d go back again in a heartbeat. It’s not just an exercise in world-creation; the noirish plot is gripping, the performances are uniformly outstanding, and the moral concerning the value of life and the nature of humanity is profoundly beautiful and curious in a way that maybe only the greatest science fiction can be. [A+]
Looks like there are a lot of sad cunts who were left butt hurt by prometheus on here, i especially like the sad twat who goes on and on about scott ruining alien and how he will do the same with blade runner next, get a life you sad hipster pussy
Jessica Kiang, Oli Lyttelton, Rodrigo Perez & Kevin Jagernauth
Please tell me you don\’t get paid to write this crap? continue supporting weirdos like polanski or woody allen, if anybody is interested there are plenty of arse licking articles about them on here.
Pretentious bellends
"Ridley Scott may actually be the Godlike being his fans have long suspected."
patronizing hipster twats
You\’re right. No one should ever write anything that isn\’t positive.
I don\’t know why the playlist or indiewire or whatever it\’s called keep writing pieces about a director they quite clearly dislike. You like arty kitchen sink type movies which is fine but where the hell does scott fit into that? he doesn\’t make "indie" movies.
Secondly @JP, Again you appear to be another moron who spouts nonsense like it\’s the gospel, you write this "If any other director had the run of turgid crap that Scott has had, they\’d be out of a job", i take it you have never heard of francis ford coppola? he\’s the guy who made three classics in the 70\’s and one extremely overrated movie and has largely made nothing but crap since, yet he\’s treated like hollywood royalty.
Thirdly @ gabriel
in response to your comment "So, basically, he made two fantastic movies, in early 80\’s and people start to idolize him.", no he made several good movies like the duellists, alien, blade runner, thelma and louise, gladiator, black hawk down, matchstick men, american gangster and the martian, most of which were either box office hits, won award recognition or were received favorably by audiences. I wouldn\’t say anyone of these movies can be described as terrible, they\’re all in different genre\’s with the exception of three of them and a lot of people consider them good "movies", because that is what scott makes, he makes "movies" not films like whatever indie douchebag or rich new york socialite has made and put out this week about how great it is living in a Manhattan loft apartment. They are just "movies", or entertainment.
fourthly @ jerk diggler "They\’re not wrong, he\’s one of the most overrated directors of all time. Tony Scott was clearly the superior talent in the family. (RIP)", you\’ll probably be kissing his ass when he\’s dead to, as that is what happens to most filmmakers when they die.
fifthly @ harry caul "Mark – If I understand your argument, what you are asserting is that the critics\’ opinions are more or less wholly incorrect. By that reasoning, the scoring should be reversed to show Alien and Blade Runner as D- films and Robin Hood, Exodus & Kingdom Of Heaven as A+ bona fide classics. Your logic, not mine.", critics slagged off the duellists harry, they also slagged off blade runner and many other of scotts movies when they were first released, once they see that the audience liked them and they gain some kind of cultural importance the critics quickly change there tune. The fact is critics know sod all about films, all they are there to do is offer there opinion in much the same way anybody else does. What makes them an authority? well nothing, i studied film and know what many other morons who write criticism know which is a little about film history and a whole lot about my likes and dislikes. Let\’s put it this way film criticism is one of the only professions where a person can get paid for giving his opinion whilst having no experience of the actual job they are critiquing. what they think would make a good film or what a director should have done better is moot because the only experience they have comes from a text book, i can\’t imagine how hard it would be to make a good film let alone a movie as good as alien or blade runner. The way i see it if i try to use logic is film is subjective, which doesn\’t make critics an authority it just makes them people like us, it\’s just they have had access to a pointless education off daddy\’s buck that got them a piece of paper saying they\’re a journalist and free to peddle there worthless opinions, or they can spell a little better then the rest of us dummies.
@ pedro "Truth be told, this overrated director, has now 4 good films to his name: "Alien", "Blade Runner", "Thelma and Louise" and "The Martian". All the rest, polish it as you may, is mostly deeply flawed and mediocre stuff.", how many "masterworks" does marty have? taxi driver, raging bull and goodfellas, i count three but hey he\’s a top notch film maker if ever there was one, i certainly liked boxcar bertha, after hours, the color of money, bringing out the dead, kundun, new york new york and every other movie he\’s made with dicaprio in the last fifteen years, sarcasm detected i hope, i know it sometimes goes amiss due to a lack of intelligent on the part of most movie board enthusiasts.
To anybody else out there who wants a clue just buy a book on scott and read it, it\’s quite clear that after legend he had to change course. He in fact became a director for hire on movies like someone to watch over me, black rain, white squall and g.i jane and he\’s pretty much been working with the studios with a one for them one for me policy ever since. Mainly because his early work was misunderstood by critics and the audience at the time.
Lastly to indiewire/playlist please just stop writing articles about the dude, if you hate his work then it doesn\’t make sense, also look into mise en scene, lens language and visual poetry and you might understand why some film enthusiasts and other film makers like the guys work and please stop insulting his fans. The guy is not god but neither is woody allen who has been putting out one good film next to one shit one since the early nineties, neither is spielberg god with movies like 1941, amistad, hook, A.I, the terminal, war of the worlds or the hugely overrated munich on his resume, never mind other overrated syrupy nonsense like E.T or war horse. And lastly as has been mentioned is scorsese god? it would probably appear so because in your retrospective of his films you give a movie he disowned called boxcar bertha a B and yet you give the duellists a B minus. You have also changed the scores from the original retrospective, i see black hawk down\’s score has been lifted. If i can remember originally you had a problem with the politics of the film, i guess the wolf of wall street and a whole career of misogyny is just brushed aside with scorsese\’s films, but then again he\’s a yank who reflects american culture. All i can say to everybody else is if you don\’t like his movies and this is one for the people on the message boards then don\’t watch them.
I own 10 of Scott\’s 23 films, and I plan on purchasing The Martian as soon as it\’s available. Of those, he\’s made two master works. He\’s not quite Steven Spielberg, as his hit-or-miss record attests, but he remains one of my favorite directors, particularly when it comes to sci-fi.
Truth be told, this overrated director, has now 4 good films to his name: "Alien", "Blade Runner", "Thelma and Louise" and "The Martian". All the rest, polish it as you may, is mostly deeply flawed and mediocre stuff.
Typical comments. Either "he\’s the greatest living filmmaker!!!" or "he\’s a total hack!!!". It\’s either "the writers are idiots!!!" or "this list is amazing!!!". It\’s ok to agree with some things and not agree with some things and have that be ok people.
This is what you get when the list is made by a group of people with no appreciation for the filmmaker. You may as well have just said, "Yeah, I mean, I like Alien and Blade Runner, and that feminist one from the 90s, but I\’m just not into the rest, especially his most recent stuff." Great, who cares. Enjoy Fort Tilden.
While Scott is a great visual dynamist, and he did make two of the greatest films ever in his early career, most of the films he\’s made have been utter garbage. If any other director had the run of turgid crap that Scott has had, they\’d be out of a job, but Ridley still somehow has a career and seems to get any film he wants greenlit. Now he\’s gonna ruin Blade Runner by trying to tell us the how\’s and why\’s of Deckard teh replicant, just as he\’s ruining the Alien franchise by explaining the how\’s and why\’s of that films enduring mysteries. We didn\’t need to know where the Space jockey came from. His presence added depth to the mythology, the sense of mystery was what made the film special. Same with Blade Runner. The ambiguity is one of the films greatest strengths.
@ Christian – spotter\’s badge.
Kane is not the android.
I\’m in the minority, but I loved Prometheus. It does have problems. It\’s not perfect, but I\’d give it an 8/10. There\’s a lot of greatness that gets overlooked, and every review mentions Charlize running from that spaceship. It\’s easy as a viewer to say you\’d simply run to the side, but realistically, I think the normal response would just be to run. If a building was falling apart and you knew it was coming down, I doubt you\’d be able to analyze the direction it was falling before you decided which was the best way to run.
I think you got a lot of these right, but I don\’t think you give enough credit to Black Hawk Down, American Gangster or Prometheus.
Mark – If I understand your argument, what you are asserting is that the critics\’ opinions are more or less wholly incorrect. By that reasoning, the scoring should be reversed to show Alien and Blade Runner as D- films and Robin Hood, Exodus & Kingdom Of Heaven as A+ bona fide classics. Your logic, not mine.
Reading "the picture (Legend) does get a few things right, especially on the soundtrack with a dreamy score by Tangerine Dream" makes me want to throw up. That score was an atrocity. Did you ever saw the original version with Jerry Goldsmiths truly dreamy, powerful and lyrical score? No? Then hurry up and watch it….and then try to type this sentence again.
I also have a completely different opinion on the DC for "Kingdom of heaven", which to me is a phenomenally great picture.
Reading "the picture (Legend) does get a few things right, especially on the soundtrack with a dreamy score by Tangerine Dream" makes me want to throw up. That score was an atrocity. Did you ever saw the original version with Jerry Goldsmiths truly dreamy, powerful and lyrical score? No? Then hurry up and watch it….and then try to type this sentence again.
I also have a completely different opinion on the DC for "Kingdom of heaven", which to me is a phenomenally great picture.
Reading "the picture (Legend) does get a few things right, especially on the soundtrack with a dreamy score by Tangerine Dream" makes me want to throw up. That score was an atrocity. Did you ever saw the original version with Jerry Goldsmiths truly dreamy, powerful and lyrical score? No? Then hurry up and watch it….and then try to type this sentence again.
I also have a completely different opinion on the DC for "Kingdom of heaven", which to me is a phenomenally great picture.
Reading "the picture does get a few things right, especially on the soundtrack with a dreamy score by Tangerine Dream" makes me want to throw up. That score was an atrocity. Have you ever seen the version with Jerry Goldsmiths truly dreamy, lyrical and simply wonderful original score? No? Then hurry up and watch that….and then try to write that sentence again…
They\’re not wrong, he\’s one of the most overrated directors of all time.
Tony Scott was clearly the superior talent in the family. *RIP
They\’re not wrong, he\’s one of the most overrated directors of all time.
Tony Scott was clearly the superior talent in the family. (RIP)
..great article – thanks a lot!!!
@Mark really stfu. I wouldnt even call call Scott an artist like I would other directors. With the exception of Blade Runner and Alien (have seen duelist) all his films are flashy yet generic hollywood films. I enjoyed some (thelma and louise) but mostly he is held high only because of his 2nd and 3rd brilliant films.
Gladiator and Black Hawk are so over rated. Not bad but so not unique
PROMETHEUS was good enough to transcend its bungled script, and THE COUNSELOR was Scott\’s strongest in years (decades?). Can\’t argue with the rest.
So, basically, he made two fantastic movies, in early 80\’s and people start to idolize him.
Does The Playlist have the worst comment section on the internet? You get maybe 1-3 comments at best, and its always some jackass talking about how terrible the article is and how the author should be ashamed.
Almost every opinion is wrong here, congrats! Clearly written by an idiot with no appreciation of cinema or art.