DCT Podcast
DCT Season 2 Episode 25: Im Westen nichts Neues / All Quiet on the Western Front (2022), or Probably the Dirtiest World War I Film to Date
DCT Podcast
DCT Season 2 Episode 24: Avatar: The Way of Water IMAX 3D (2022), or Why Does James Cameron Love the Water so Much?
DCT Podcast
DCT Season 2 Episode 23: Strange World (2022) 3D, or Disney Gets Woke
DCT Podcast
DCT Season 2 Episode 22: Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022), or Rest in Power, Mr. Chadwick Boseman
DCT Podcast
DCT Season 2 Episode 26: The Rundown: The Banshees of Inisherin (2022), The Fabelmans (2022), and Elvis (2022)
Showing posts with label ridley scott. Show all posts
![]() |
| Not red enough, so this is probably Utah. |
I expected this to be another heavy space drama. My only basis for that, of course, was the poster, showing Matt Damon in a spacesuit. The last time we saw him in that get-up was in Interstellar, as the stranded scientist-turned-douchebag Dr. Mann, and we all know how heavy that was.
Well, the premise was pretty heavy enough. After a Martian sandstorm ruins NASA's exploration team, the entire mission is told to evacuate. One man, of course, gets left behind. Everyone thought he died. But he didn't. Tough luck for Matt Damon, because he's actually still alive. So the "Martian" in the title is actually an Earthling that just happens to be stranded on Mars.
This isn't exactly a survival movie like Castaway; neither is it a film about the loneliness and isolation of man in the blackness of space. This is actually a feel-good movie, with humour as its main ingredient. And to make sure that the comedy takes center stage, the filmmakers made sure to cast popular comic faces like Kristen Wiig, Donald Glover, and Michael Peña.
That, in my opinion, is what makes this movie work. You have to counter-balance the heavy premise of being left alone to die on the Red Planet with the comedy of... being left alone to die on the Red Planet. Am I making sense? Probably not. But that's how Sir Ridley Scott was able to pull this off, making sure that despite having Jessica Chastain and Matt Damon as two of the film's lead stars, we viewers won't even think of it as a rip-off of the philosophically heavy drama of Interstellar.
P.S. Go read the book. It's way funnier.
The Martian. USA. 2015.
Original rating: 8.0 / 10
Jeff Daniels' character from The Newsroom being a perfect fit for NASA's director: + 0.1
Entire film not feeling like a Ridley Scott flick: + 0.1
Final rating: 8.2 / 10
![]() |
| YouTube |
If you grew up in the 80s, then you're most likely a fan of the Alien film franchise. And why wouldn't you be, when the Xenomorph is probably the most badass film alien of that decade.
![]() |
| Compared to this guy. |
The layman will tend to think that Prometheus is a prequel to Alien (the first film in the Alien franchise), but director Ridley Scott vehemently denies this. While the film takes place in the same universe as Alien, Scott describes it as something more than a prequel, something that is an original film but just happened to have some similarities with Alien.
![]() |
| Like the ship, for instance. |
Okay, this might be a not-so-recent film, but the title is just so appropriate for New Year's Day that I couldn't resist.First of all, categorizing this film is a bit difficult. It's classified as a romantic comedy, but it's not really a rom-com as we know it. It's more a feel-good film than anything.
Anyway, the movie is so typically predictable that I don't even want to touch on that aspect. So let's just go over the film's finer points, starting with the acting. Okay, it's Russell Crowe. Let's move on. No, seriously, let's move on. When I say "Russell Crowe," you don't need any explanations. So who else is there?
Well, there's pretty Marion Cotillard (that's a pre-Oscar Marion Cotillard) as Russell Crowe's love interest. We all know she's a wonderful actress, but her accent is distracting, as it can turn me on even with my eyes closed (did I just say that?). And there's the beautiful Aussie Abbie Cornish (with a flawless Yankee accent), whose minor character doesn't grace the screen as much (well this is, after all, Russell's movie). Wait, now come to think of it, it does seem that everyone else's screen time pales in comparison to Mr. Crowe's.
The cinematography is first-class, making the entire film look like a travel magazine, showcasing the breathtaking beauty of the French countryside, with all the vineyards and picturesque chateaus. Well, it's Ridley---sorry, Sir Ridley Scott---at the helm, which means you can be assured that the film will be something worth watching. With a predictable plot and a story you could tell in thirty minutes, Sir Ridley kicks in great cinematography with his brilliant directing to give us a film that will at least keep us entertained for two hours.
And the final verdict: Sure, Russell Crowe performs up to par, but still, if it wasn't Sir Ridley Scott behind the wheel, the whole movie would've turned out quite differently.
Rating: Seven out of ten.

Are we not tired of titles that begin with "American-this" and "American-that"?
We had American Pie, American Beauty, American History X...they've probably come up with all the possible titles. So how does this film differ from the rest?
First things first: it's directed by Ridley Scott. That's Sir Ridley Scott to you. That should be enough for those film buffs out there.
Second, it has Russell Crowe in it. Any movie with Russell Crowe in it is definitely worth watching. Not because it's Russell Crowe, but because Mr. Crowe is a bit finicky about the scripts he accepts. He only accepts the good roles, and so if he's in it, there's a huge chance that the movie doesn't suck.
Third, Denzel is in it. I don't even have to say his last name. Just "Denzel". Now that's two Oscar winners in front of the camera, and a three-time Oscar nominee at the helm.
Now speaking of Oscars, Ridley Scott has yet to win one, like his brother Tony, but undoubtedly the brothers are one of the best directors on the planet. They don't do movies together like the Wachowskis or the Coens, which is actually a good thing, because you get two distinct yet similar styles of filmmaking.
Sir Ridley is an excellent storyteller, and he can make a complicated gangster narrative as simple as a bedtime story told by your grandfather. His shots are well-framed, the actions well-executed and delivered perfectly, and the cinematography is just beautiful. The photography actually tries to mimic the look of the old seventies films, and coupled with great costumes and brilliant production design, this film just takes you right back.
However, a word of caution: do not watch this film if you want to see an acting showdown between two Hollywood giants. Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe share screen time only toward the end of the movie (the last twenty minutes of an almost three-hour picture). Also, the real-life characters portrayed in the movie have complained of gross inaccuracies in the film, calling it one percent reality and ninety-nine percent Hollywood. But once you get past that, it's a cinematic work of art.
Rating: Five stars.
Click on this link to read the New York magazine article which was the basis for this film: http://nymag.com/nymag/features/3649/
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)




