“I’m expensive, but I’m fucking good”: Is Ridley Scott really as great as he thinks he is?
The level of ego in the film industry is sometimes quite sickening, with certain directors in Hollywood maintaining a violent level of self-confidence about their work that makes them completely insufferable. Fame is a corrupting process that can sometimes bring out the worst in people, leading celebrities to become entitled and disillusioned by their power. There are some figures who have sparked controversy for this very reason over the years, with the likes of Quentin Tarantino, Dennis Hopper and William Friedkin being criticised for their dizzying self-importance that manifests in a myriad of ways, either talking at people about their work or mistreating the people around them as they bring their visions to life. However, there is one figure that most irks me above anyone else, with an unbearable level of narcissistic obsession that feels so extreme you might think it’s a joke.
Ridley Scott is known for works like Alien, Thelma and Louise, Gladiator and Blade Runner, becoming one of the most infamous commercial directors from Britain. While there is no debate about the fact that he has made a couple of films, his approach to filmmaking in later years has evolved into an aggressive and desperate pursuit of power and domination, churning out toxic piles of trash stories such as Napoleon, House of Gucci and Gladiator II that reveal his true creative intentions.
In a recent interview, Scott discussed his remaining anger at esteemed film critic Pauline Kael for daring to criticise Blade Runner, saying, “She destroyed me! I never even met her!… It’s insolent. At my level, it’s insolent…” The description of Kael as being ‘insolent’ is incredibly offensive and quite baffling, implying with its utterance that his power in the industry should leave him immune to criticism. As well as this, he also compared his recent slate of projects to Ridley Scott, saying, “Well, since he started Killers of the Flower Moon, I’ve made four films”, revealing something very sinister about his creative approach.
For Scott, filmmaking is now about quantity and scale over quality, with egregious projects that are simply meant to be impressive because of their size despite containing no substance or anything that could connect with audiences in a meaningful way. He is a master manipulator of cinema, choosing to lure viewers with grand visuals and extensive special effects as a form of entertainment. After a couple of good films, his ego became so corrupted and colossal that he now genuinely believes he is the best director in the world: outraged at anyone who doesn’t believe this and exerting his power by going on a manic creative tirade that only exists to boost his self-image and sense of power.
When asked about his potential Bee Gee’s biopic, Scott explained that the project was temporarily on the back burner, saying, “I was being asked to go too far. And I said, ‘No. Next!’ They didn’t like my deal. So I said, I’ll move on. I’m expensive, but I’m fucking good.”
Scott is a leech on cinema itself, using the medium as a way to empower himself but with no respect for the art of storytelling. His films have become a childish quest to boost his own ego, with comments from his recent DOP about his laziness and reliance on digital technology to eliminate water bottles from frames showing his disrespect for filmmaking.
When asked to share his own favourite movies with Letterboxd, he listed his own project. When true film lovers have been asked the same question, they have launched into an impassioned discussion about the projects that have most moved them and shaped their lives. He is not a director who truly loves cinema – he is a man in love with power.
