-
-
I’ve seen a lot of skepticism around it and I have my doubts, so definitely not just you. The first was just such a successful, incredibly popular, well-done movie and follow-ups to those types of films are rarely ever good. But, we’ll see. It could be great and if it isn’t, it will at least be an interesting failure.
Yeah. It could be a failure. We will see. At least, it will have great actors. Ridley Scott always gets the greatest actors/Greatest Casts in his movies
ReplyCopy URLYeah. It could be a failure. We will see. At least, it will have great actors. Ridley Scott always gets the greatest actors/Greatest Casts in his movies
From his 50+ feature films you’d be hard pressed to find one of his films that didn’t have an Oscar nominated/ winning actor.
That’s incredible.
ReplyCopy URLThe Sunne in Splendour.
I prefer my roses whiteFrom his 50+ feature films you’d be hard pressed to find one of his films that didn’t have an Oscar nominated/ winning actor.
That’s incredible.
Yes, but for all of the movies he’s made and talent he’s directed, he’s “only” directed actors to 7 Oscar nominations and 1 win (Russell Crowe). In contrast, Scorsese has directed actors to 24 Oscar nominations and 5 wins. Ridley Scott has many talents as a director, but he’s not particularly renowned for getting great performances from actors despite all the talent he’s worked with over the years— he’s certainly not famous as an “actor’s director” like Scorsese or Mike Nichols or Elia Kazan or Sidney Lumet, or a number of others. Which isn’t to say that there haven’t been great performances in some of the films he’s directed— but I don’t think he’s generally thought of as a director responsible for eliciting great acting performances.
ReplyCopy URLYes, but for all of the movies he’s made and talent he’s directed, he’s “only” directed actors to 7 Oscar nominations and 1 win (Russell Crowe). In contrast, Scorsese has directed actors to 24 Oscar nominations and 5 wins. Ridley Scott has many talents as a director, but he’s not particularly renowned for getting great performances from actors despite all the talent he’s worked with over the years— he’s certainly not famous as an “actor’s director” like Scorsese or Mike Nichols or Elia Kazan or Sidney Lumet, or a number of others. Which isn’t to say that there haven’t been great performances in some of the films he’s directed— but I don’t think he’s generally thought of as a director responsible for eliciting great acting performances.
Marty and Ridley are so different. It’s more than coincidence that almost all of the latter’s films have Oscar caliber actors. They gravitate towards him.
I see your point but mine was more of a “count”. I was surprised.
They’re both master directors in different ways.ReplyCopy URLThe Sunne in Splendour.
I prefer my roses whiteYes, but for all of the movies he’s made and talent he’s directed, he’s “only” directed actors to 7 Oscar nominations and 1 win (Russell Crowe). In contrast, Scorsese has directed actors to 24 Oscar nominations and 5 wins. Ridley Scott has many talents as a director, but he’s not particularly renowned for getting great performances from actors despite all the talent he’s worked with over the years— he’s certainly not famous as an “actor’s director” like Scorsese or Mike Nichols or Elia Kazan or Sidney Lumet, or a number of others. Which isn’t to say that there haven’t been great performances in some of the films he’s directed— but I don’t think he’s generally thought of as a director responsible for eliciting great acting performances.
Yeah. It’s because Ridley Scott is very famous as a “genious technician/technical Director”. Critics compare Ridley Scott with Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg. Directors more famous for Technicals, Cinematography, Sci-Fis and Epics
ReplyCopy URLYes, but for all of the movies he’s made and talent he’s directed, he’s “only” directed actors to 7 Oscar nominations and 1 win (Russell Crowe). In contrast, Scorsese has directed actors to 24 Oscar nominations and 5 wins. Ridley Scott has many talents as a director, but he’s not particularly renowned for getting great performances from actors despite all the talent he’s worked with over the years— he’s certainly not famous as an “actor’s director” like Scorsese or Mike Nichols or Elia Kazan or Sidney Lumet, or a number of others. Which isn’t to say that there haven’t been great performances in some of the films he’s directed— but I don’t think he’s generally thought of as a director responsible for eliciting great acting performances.
1 more thing I remembered: Ridley Scott gives a lot of Freedom to all his actors and actresses in all of his movies. Sometimes that is perfection, sometimes that is disaster. Lady Gaga and Jared Leto were disasters with too much Freedom. Sigourney Weaver, Joaquin Phoenix, Rutger Hauer, Russell Crowe, Michael Fassbender, Adam Driver, Denzel Washington and Matt Damon were perfection with too much Freedom
ReplyCopy URLYeah. It’s because Ridley Scott is very famous as a “genious technician/technical Director”. Critics compare Ridley Scott with Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg. Directors more famous for Technicals, Cinematography, Sci-Fis and Epics
They are not necessarily mutually exclusive skills— for example, Spielberg has had 16 actors receive Oscar nominations with 3 wins for performances in his movies, and is particularly renowned for eliciting great performances from child actors.
ReplyCopy URLThey are not necessarily mutually exclusive skills— for example, Spielberg has had 16 actors receive Oscar nominations with 3 wins for performances in his movies, and is particularly renowned for eliciting great performances from child actors.
You have a great point. But he is not the only successful director who have “that problem”: Christopher Nolan, Denis Villeneuve, David Fincher, etc…. Usually happens with Sci-Fis and Epics
ReplyCopy URL
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
