Monday, November 18, 2024

Got a Tip?

The Essentials: The Films Of Ridley Scott

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+]

Related Articles

27 COMMENTS

Stay Connected

221,000FansLike
18,300FollowersFollow
10,000FollowersFollow
14,400SubscribersSubscribe

Latest Articles