...
I like Ridley Scott. He's got a great work ethic for a 75 year old and he's a blunt Geordie (very entertaining interview with Scott here.) Although I dont consider myself a Scott fanboy somehow I have managed to see all of his films. British critics especially consider him to be an auteur but he clearly isn't a genius all the time as there have been some real stinkers along the way. A visual poet certainly but story often lets him down. Anyway these are my ratings in the standard A-F format:
1979 Alien A
1982 Blade Runner A
1985 Legend F
1987 Someone to Watch Over Me D
1989 Black Rain C
1991 Thelma & Louise C
1992 1492: Conquest of Paradise D
1996 White Squall D
1997 G.I. Jane C
2000 Gladiator B
2001 Hannibal D
2002 Black Hawk Down A
2003 Matchstick Men C
2005 Kingdom of Heaven E
2006 A Good Year F
2007 American Gangster D
2008 Body of Lies E
2010 Robin Hood F
2012 Prometheus D
42 comments:
Hi Adrian,
The only two I'd disagree with are The Duellists and Black Hawk Down. I'd downgrade the first because I just couldn't buy Harvey Keitel as a Napoleonic officer, and the second because Ridley seemed to relish showing thousands of Somalis being turned to hamburger by American military technology. The collateral damage to civilians in that action must have been atrocious, but Scott never addresses that. Oh, and he will never be forgiven for A Good Year, possibly the worst ever film by a top director.
I'm evidently not a big fan of Ridley Scott seeing as how I didn't really like any of the movies on the list a whole lot. Although, I do remember thinking Body Of Lies wasn't too bad.
Cary
I didnt think there were philosophical problems with BHD because we were relentlessly following the POV of the Americans. It wasnt an attempt to give us a 360 of the battle...
A Good Year was incredibly incompetent on so many levels. I dont know how so much talent could turn out such utter drivel.
Glenna
Wasnt a big fan of Body of Lies to be honest.
If you dont lie scifi or war movies Matchstick Men is harmless fun.
Adrian,
Have you seen the Director's Cut of KINGDOM OF HEAVEN? I wasn't keen when I saw the movie in the theater but new cut makes all the difference. Amazing how much it changed the film.
Craig
I havent. But I'm willing to give that movie another shot. There were some great ideas in there.
The director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven is much better than the theatrical, but man, when you surround Orlando Bloom with Liam Neeson, David Thewlis, Jeremy Irons, and others you can't help but wonder why not cast a better actor in the lead of such a huge production. I'm pretty sure that when Bloom gives his meant-to-be-impressive, 'band of brothers' speech, you can see some of the extras in the background swigging red bull.
Edward Norton is good as the leprous king though.
Crowe and Scott? They just need to declare a 20-year ban on making films together.
Matt
My whole problem with the auteur theory is that it diminishes the role of the actor. Orlando Boom has zero gravitas and not much charisma. He was not a convincing anchor in that film.
Last night I was watching Witness For The Prosecution and there's a terrific scene between Charles Laughton and Marlene Dietrich - with two other actors it would have limped along but with those two it was utterly electric.
I haven't seen all that many of these. I hope John McFetridge checks in here and weighs in on your ideas about the auteur. I'd be surprised if anyone could be an auteur in Hollywood. Maybe George Lucas has that much control over his movies, but who else? And I'm not saying that that's ended up being a big plus for Lucas, either.
I don't think Americans really see themselves in that kind of light anyway. Maybe some little indie filmmakers. But isn't it really all about the box office?
I liked Thelma and Louise pretty well. It didn't rock my world or anything, but I gave it points for being a different kind of buddy picture. At least in America.
Seana
Steven Soderberg? Scorsese? Tarantino? I think they're pretty much untouchable/uneditable for good and ill.
Lucas's long artistic suicide since 1982 has been particularly inglorious.
Good examples. As long as you keep in the for ill part. I'd still say that American filmmakers thinking of themselves as auteurs is only courting hubris.
Ha, this may be the first time anyone looked forward to my comments on a blog, so thank you.
From what I've seen there are a few different styles of directors much like different management styles in any operation that requires a couple hundred people. But really, by the time it gets to the editing so much of the work - the decision making - has been done it's down to some very small things.
A few directors are on board from the very beginning and have input into casting, making final decisions after producers and casting directors have narrowed down the choices. Most established directors have DoPs they prefer.
A lot of time I think these other people don't get enough credit, espeicially (if this isn't blasphemy) good producers.
I mean look at Tarantino's track record and then look at Lawrence Bender's.
On most films the producer is involved from the buying (or commissioning) of the script, the pre-production (all those casting decisions, locations decisions, which means deciding bow much of the budget will be spent on locations and how much on sets which affects how many days you
shoot in each place, and so on), production and poat-production. In many, many cases the director runs the set but has little input in pre and post production.
Of course, there are some directors involved in every stage but not that many. Ridley and Tony Scott for sure, Scorsese, sure, James Cameron - pddly it may be more ta the big budget end than the middle or low end.
But the thing is, that cliche of filmmaling being collaborative is true, so the best directors like the best managers in any field are the ones who can delegate and make final decisions based on what the people in charge of their departments suggest.
So and "auteur" diretor would be just as likely to accept suggestions from an actor as anyone else. Someone has to have the final say and the actor sees everything from the character's pov while the director is suppised to see the big picture.
But I really do think producers make a much bigger difference to a film than any other single position. Sometimes that's by allowing the director to make all the decisions, sometimes not. Most of these "auteurs" are now co-producers where they used to be co-writers.
Thanks, John. Good stuff. It does seem like everyone, once they develop sufficient clout, wants to produce, or co-produce.
I just happened to watch Unforgiven last night on television. Ironically, it was on against A Good Year, so probably best that I was steered clear by this post. Even Netflix didn't think I would like it much, though how badly could things go wrong in a movie set in Provence? Anyway, I am not a big Eastwood fan, but I did like the film. What I think made it only good but not great was the ending, which I won't go into here. I'll just say that if Eastwood hadn't been the director, actor AND producer, it would have been true noir, and not in the end, another tribute to the Eastwood myth.
Alien, Bladerunner & Gladiator for me. What is his defining style? I mean I wouldnt have known Ridley had done some of those on the list. Their all quite different.
Unforgiven is interesting, I think, because of the way it takes the whole John Ford western and turns it on its head, the way in Ford women are the civilizing influence and in Unforgiven women hire the gunman to do the killing and so on (I got that from my wife, she likes the Ford westerns but didn't like Unforgiven at all).
It's possible that I'm watching Unforgiven a little too late in the game for it to have the impact it would have in 1992. Post Deadwood, the community of the whores is not as novel as it would have been then, though of course it's probably Deadwood that owes a nod, not the other way around.
It's funny, but the Wild West even with these more recent inversions of the themes feels about played out to me. The guns, the cows, the boots, the whores, the saloons, the sheriff, the posse--tired.
I'm much more interested in the new west of say, Breaking Bad than more stagecoaches and one horse towns.
Yeah, the old west themes seem played out. Unforgiven and Deadwood owe a small debt to EL Doctorow's Hard Times.
I'd like see a look at the old west that was a little more honest about the "rugged individual" pioneers needd to stick together and form communities to survive, but that's unlikely to come from Hollywood.
Some of the western stories of Elmore Leonard are still worth reading, especially the newer ones like "The Tonto Woman," and "Hurrah for Captain Early." also his novel "The Hot Kid" for that in between period.
People have always told me that Leonards westerns are good, so I suppose I'll have to get around to them. I like his crime stuff a lot.
Frankie
I dont know. I suppose you could say that they all have an epic quality whatever that is.
Seana
Yes the Westerns are good. In fact I think I prefer EL's westerns to his crime fiction, which of course is blasphemy in some circles.
John
I think the lesson here is that total control is almost always a bad thing. Lucas has been able to do what he wants since 1982 and he's made nothing but rubbish. Same story with Spielberg more or less. Limitations force people to be more creative.
I dont think its coincidence that the greatest eras of English literature 1580 - 1610, 1840 - 1880 were periods of heavy censorship.
I dont know if that analogy quite works with cinema but certainly the great periods of American cinema say 1940 - 1944 and 1967 - 1977 were still times when as you point out the producer was still very powerful.
I don't know if I should take tips from a blasphemer. And I do really like Leonard's style in the crime fiction. But I'll add your rec to the pile.
I do agree with you on the total control aspect. It's hard to reconcile with my thoughts about freedom--like I'm glad my mom wasn't a tiger mom, for instance--but I think any kind of artist or writer benefits from some sort of outer constraint. Well, really, any kind of human needs some sort of real feedback that includes the possibility of someone saying "That sucked."
Scary, but true.
I have a feeling that Clint Easton hasn't heard it for awhile.
John, that's an informative, non-bullshit look at how movies are made. Thanks.
======================
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://www.detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com/
Don't know about GI Jane having an epic quality, unless you count Demi Moore's chest puppies. Lots of the other films are epic i guess.
I did like Alien and Blade Runner. Gladiator, too. I didn't like Hannibal.
I saw but barely remember some of these films so I guess I must not have liked them very much.
I must disagree with you on Thelma and Louise. You gave it C. I really liked that film but I realize it is probably labeled chick flick.
Off topic: Just finished Fifty Grand audiobook today. Loved it.
(maybe spoiler)
Interesting twist at the end.
Rather sad at the very end, I thought, too and just a bit of a let down. Maybe I felt let down because I didn't want the book to end. An awesome book. Awesome narrator. Applause.
Trudy
I hope you left a review on Audible, there is a LOT of hate for that book over there. I think the ending of Fifty Grand might be my favourite ending of all my books, or possibly the second book of the lighthouse series.
Maybe for a stand-alone Prometheus would've been ok, but as the official Alien prequel? Bleh. Very disappointed.
Matt
In terms of quality its not that much different from Alien V Predator which Ridley Scott has mentioned with contempt.
The Economist review of Prometheus here:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2012/06/ridley-scotts-prometheus
They hated the stupid stupid script.
Nice that the Economist review says up front the movie is a mess. The New York Times review gets around to calling the story weak but only after many paragraphs about the spectacle (and only after the review has jumped from Page One of the section to an inside page)
===============================
Detectives Beyond Borders
"Because Murder Is More Fun Away From Home"
http://detectivesbeyondborders.blogspot.com.
Adrian, I'm going to hope no one offers you ten million dollars then. Not just for our sake, but for yours. I don't actually know what to hope for you, but that's not it.
As for the movie, I was just reading a screenplay book today and the general impression I got was that these days, style trumps all. Mad Men would seem to be a case in point.
Peter
Yes the NYT does go on doesnt it? I suppose they count the number of seconds you spend at their website now so everyone has been instructed to bury the lead in the 10th paragraph.
Seana
Well I think its unlikely that I'll ever make enough money to retire...so its moot.
Good.
Well, I read the review in the old-fashioned, paper version of the paper. The funny thing is that its review said pretty much the same thing the Guardian review did, only with reversed emphasis and placement within the review.
At least the fella who was broken up over your take on The Avengers seems to be keeping it together here. Although I think the failing of Prometheus is much more terrible in the grand scheme of things. I admit I had high hopes for this one.
Matt
I was reading Roger Ebert's 4 star review and its interesting that he has removed his original 1979 review and replaced it with it a "Great Movies" review from 2003. When he reviewed Aliens he gave it 3.5 stars and called Alien "effective" so I reckon he probably gave Alien 3 stars when it came out which means that Prometheus is the best Alien franchise film according to Ebert which is just a joke.
That is a joke. I think Ebert is far removed from the height of his powers. A good man but no longer willing to subject films to piercing criticism.
As you know Adrian, Blade Runner was far from universally loved when it was first released back in '82. But some misguided Ridley Scott fans are using that fact to justify or rationalize Prometheus' generally disappointing reviews.
Matt
And of course Ebert gave Blade Runner 3 stars when it came out, so Prometheus is his favourite Ridley Scott sci fi film.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-x1YuvUQFJ0#!
Some good points.
Matt
If they created us why do we share 98.6% of our DNA with chimps and 50% of our DNA with fish?
Matt
I like the Redletter chaps but I wonder what Mr Plinkett has to say.
Post a Comment