Ridley Scott

[jaykays hat]

Originally Posted by fortunesfool

Andy Lowe has lost whatever credibility he might have had after that statement. It's to be expected from a magazine who named Star Trek, the sci-fi film of the decade. To laud that and then dismiss Robin Hood and the work of Ridley Scott is frankly, embarrassing.

Andy Lowe gave Crank: High Voltage more stars than Robin Hood, says it all really.

[MrSilly]

Well, I plan on seeing Robin Hood either tonight or tomorrow afternoon, so I'll be able to fully comment on Scott then.

Jaykay, I'm probably one of the biggest Crank: High Voltage fans you'll ever see, so beware, I may just explode with rage if you're implicating that it's poor.

...

Nah, not really, I'll just take comfort in the matter that you're entitled to your opinion, but that I'm right.

Anyways, I'll be back soon with my thoughts on the film. Also, thought of a comparison to Scott. Scorsese. Made some classics (arguably more than Scott as far as I'm concerned) but recent work has been lacking in comparison to older material. The Aviator and The Departed were enjoyable films and did have a certain flair to them that made them stand out from other films of the time, however I wasn't overly impressed by them. Shutter Island was utterly masterful though, and really reminded me that when Scorsese delivers, he's the dogs bollocks.

I hope that Robin Hood can make me think of Scott in a similar fashion.

[Kiba.]

Scorsese may have produced more classics but if it's the last ten years we're talking about, his track record isn't much better than Scott's. (I haven't seen Shutter Island yet so must reserve judgement on that one). The Aviator and The Departed were good films but Gangs of New York was boring and a mess.

I'm hoping to see Robin Hood on Wednesday.

[Jonesy]

Silly - you like Crank: High Voltage and Adam Sandler, but you don't rate Bladerunner. I think you need to go and join the reception class, along with HH94.

Scott is a class director. Alien and Bladerunner were seminal pieces, and okay, even if they're not the most exciting narrative wise, they are superb pieces of film-making (I've yet to understand the modern-day backlash against Bladerunner). Scott has rarely not delivered, and as many of you have already acknowledged, even his failures (excluding GI Jane which was unforgivable) are better than a lot of directors' successes. I've yet to see Robin Hood, but Scott's vision is always beautiful. He understands framing better than most, and technically, he is extremely adept. Scott has made the odd two star film, but his output over all has been excellent.

[fortunesfool]

I think the reason for the backlash against Bladerunner is one of the same reasons people are saying Robin Hood is boring. There are scenes *gasp* where actors indulge in dialogue in order to forward the story, explain whats going on and enjoy each others company. A lot of this is necessary to understand the film and most of it doesn't involve banal childish jokes, swearing or fart gags.

[MrSilly]

Originally Posted by Jonesy

Silly - you like Crank: High Voltage and Adam Sandler, but you don't rate Bladerunner. I think you need to go and join the reception class, along with HH94.

Well, I like Sandler, doesn't have anything to do with rating him. I'll never be able to view everything with a professional eye, but if I were to turn it on Sandler I'd be able to admit that it's largely pablum with a sprinkling of good comedy once every few films (Happy Gilmore et cetera).

Crank is wonderful, incredibly innovative filmmaking that I could watch endlessly.

Now then, Bladerunner. This is where I have to point out that I can understand the significance, if not be wholly appreciative of the film. In terms of design and scope it's monumental stuff, an absolute joy to behold. But it's dull. And that has absolutely nothing to do with the downright retarded argument of kids today don't realise that dialogue is used to further the plot. I found it dull because the chatter was meandering, and presented in a hollow fashion. I'm not a fan of Harrison Ford and he was a crushing bore in it, Rutger Hauer lifted it up slightly but the end result was still dull. That and I went into it with nothing but absolute praise, declaring it damn near god-like, so inevitably I was going to feel a little dissatisfied.

I compare it with The Birth Of A Nation in that sense. I get the significance/importance of it, but I don't enjoy watching it. It hasn't aged well.

[jaykays hat]

Originally Posted by MrSilly

Jaykay, I'm probably one of the biggest Crank: High Voltage fans you'll ever see, so beware, I may just explode with rage if you're implicating that it's poor.

...

Nah, not really, I'll just take comfort in the matter that you're entitled to your opinion, but that I'm right.

I didn't mind Crank High Voltage as I quite like Jason Statham but it's not really in the same league as a Ridley Scott film, but as you say mate, everyone has a different opinion.

I hope you enjoy Robin Hood.

[thedude]

I watched Robin Hood the other day, and while its not up there with Scotts best, its certainly a much better made film than many i have seen this year. Why italic the word made? Because its clear the man making the film knows his stuff, framing, lighting, pace and action were all top notch and had the appearence of a master at work, even if the end result is below what he has mustered in the past.

And Andy Lowe, tsk, tsk, tsk, what a daft thing to say.