Jump to content


Photo

Ridley Scott interview in June Maxim


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 30 June 2010 - 02:14 AM

I started reading the interview, so I really DO look at the magazine for the articles when the articles are interviews with one of the best directors of all times!!! Coarse the super hot half naked chicks don't hurt. B)
  • 0

#2 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 30 June 2010 - 02:35 AM

Scott's early films are classics, but to me he lost it years ago. His politics suck. Gladiator was just a revenge movie with so much CG it looked like Blade Runner! So an interview in Maxim? That's exactly where he belongs.

I prefer the films by his brother Tony.

Edited by Karel Bata, 30 June 2010 - 02:37 AM.

  • 0

#3 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 30 June 2010 - 03:38 AM

I prefer the films by his brother Tony.


Good one :D .....oh wait a minute, you're actually serious :huh: . And I do agree, that interview DOES belong in Maxim along side the other things I find truly beautiful and fascinating. Gladiator was one Hell of a movie as was Black Hawk Down and Kingdom of Heaven. Ridley is a cinema GOD and comparing his other movies to Blade Runner is like comparing the Mona Lisa to every other painting Da Vinci did. If an artist can create one true masterpiece in their lifetime, they are one in a million, that alone is an almost impossible accomplishment to achieve and Scott, like Da Vinci, has created 2.

As for Gladiator being filled with special effects, I suppose you would have preferred that they completely reconstructed the Coliseum to scale or perhaps the entire city of ancient Rome, similar to what was done in Intolerance, it would have only cost the gross national product of Uruguay to do so, so why not? THAT'S your argument for Ridley turning into a hack, he loads special effects into an epic? Considering one of the major stars of the film died halfway through production and the script had to be salvaged in order to keep the film afloat, IIIII consider it a noble and heroic effort of brilliant film making that paid off in spades and since it won 5 Oscars INCLUDING Best Picture, I'd say I wasn't the only one.....'coarse everyone's entitled to their opinion, so see what you see, my friend. If you're distracted by those amazing, very effective special effects, so be it, who am I to say you're wrong. B)
  • 0

#4 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 30 June 2010 - 04:54 AM

Rome did a much better job of recreating the era. And Generation Kill shows that you can cover modern war without a gung-ho lets-go-kill-the-bad-guys approach.

During the first minute of Gladiator someone says, "How long has he been gone?" The reply is "Nearly two hours." Huh? Did he have a wristwatch? Next we have the spectacle of exploding trees, somewhat reminiscent of Thunderbirds in the way that anything and everything (like bridges!) would explode and burst into flame. :lol: It was laughable.

But seriously? Maxim..?
  • 0

#5 James Steven Beverly

James Steven Beverly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4199 posts
  • Director
  • El Paso, Texas

Posted 01 July 2010 - 02:54 AM

Rome did a much better job of recreating the era. And Generation Kill shows that you can cover modern war without a gung-ho lets-go-kill-the-bad-guys approach.

During the first minute of Gladiator someone says, "How long has he been gone?" The reply is "Nearly two hours." Huh? Did he have a wristwatch? Next we have the spectacle of exploding trees, somewhat reminiscent of Thunderbirds in the way that anything and everything (like bridges!) would explode and burst into flame. :lol: It was laughable.

But seriously? Maxim..?


Sure, why not? It's fun light fare and I like keeping an eye on a lot of different demographics, plus I'm a fan of eye candy, so sue me. I think it was Spartacus that had wristwatches, BUT if you want to pick on Gladiator, In the "Battle of Carthage" sequence in the Colosseum, a chariot is turned over and there's a gas cylinder in the back of it. I saw a lot of Rome and can't remember any of it, but Gladiator, I can quote and have watched it again and again. It worked for me. It's an epic and ALL epics are a little over the top. That's what makes them "epic". Show me a truly realistic epic and I'll show you a borefest. Is it the greatest epic ever made, no but it IS one damn good film and I'll stand by that. B)

Edited by James Steven Beverly, 01 July 2010 - 02:56 AM.

  • 0

#6 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 01 July 2010 - 03:34 AM

Maybe I should first apologise for being a bit heavy handed in my earlier post. So easy to do on the net, but Scott irritates the hell out of me. He really has made some of the finest movies out there. And then it seems the fame went to his head. Or the money. Or something. Such a waste.

You think a realistic epic is a borefest? :o Check out Rome. It is epic. And it is realistic (just about! :lol: ) But it is most certainly not boring! And I think it is all the more epic for being realistic. And by realistic here I mean convincing. Step away from and you've got a big budget popcorn movie. So which is more epic: 2001 or Star Wars? Saving Private Ryan or Black Hawk Down? Lord Of The Rings or Harry Potter?
  • 0

#7 Justin Hayward

Justin Hayward
  • Sustaining Members
  • 928 posts
  • Director
  • Chicago, IL.

Posted 01 July 2010 - 05:26 PM

His politics suck.


There was an article Script Magazine that went into detail of the accounts of Black Hawk down and one of the biggest battles was figuring out how to show more of the “other side” without the movie being four hours long. Apparently Ridley Scott was fighting the hardest and predicted there would be a backlash if they didn’t address the issue. And he was proven right.
  • 0

#8 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 02 July 2010 - 03:55 AM

Apparently Ridley Scott was fighting the hardest and predicted there would be a backlash if they didn’t address the issue.


And his solution was to portray the Somalis as deranged idiots? :lol: And it's now a video game for our kids? Kill all the bad guys! Scott must be proud.

In Gladiator the hero escapes from slavery and staggers wounded from Germanica (without ever stopping it seems) to his home in Italy. That's several hundred miles. Idiotic.
  • 0

#9 Justin Hayward

Justin Hayward
  • Sustaining Members
  • 928 posts
  • Director
  • Chicago, IL.

Posted 02 July 2010 - 11:20 AM

And his solution was to portray the Somalis as deranged idiots? :lol:


Well, in the article, it says they didn’t solve it and that’s why there was an appropriate backlash.
  • 0

#10 Pat Murray

Pat Murray
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 129 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 July 2010 - 09:16 AM

Scott's early films are classics, but to me he lost it years ago. His politics suck. Gladiator was just a revenge movie with so much CG it looked like Blade Runner! So an interview in Maxim? That's exactly where he belongs.

I prefer the films by his brother Tony.



I could not figure out Ridley Scott's politics from the article, but I'am fairly certain the author, Stuart Jefferies, is left of Lenin. LOL.

The Somali perspective would have been nice, but here's something important to know from the POV of the Somalis in that battle. Pretty much the only thing the viewer needs to know. The American soldiers were trying to grab a Somalian warlord who was a major cause of chaos, destruction, famine etc. The failure of that operation probably has a lot to do with Somalia's current existence as a lawless failed state.

The warlord and his thugs weren't freedom fighters against an oppressor.

No need to partake in any political ideology to know this. It's a historical fact.

That said, agree that "Gladiator" is a (very enjoyable) revenge flick, but revenge flicks make great popcorn movies. I didn't think the movie deserved Oscars, this is, however, an Academy who gave an Oscar to Julia Roberts before Martin Scorcese!

It certainly isn't profound and Ridley definitely hasn't produced anything profound in a long time. So, I agree there, but that article you link, no offense, was like leftwing nails screeching on a chalkboard. :-)

Edited by Pat Murray, 05 July 2010 - 09:19 AM.

  • 0


rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

CineLab

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Wooden Camera

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Glidecam

Tai Audio

CineLab

Opal