A guy like Ridley Scott hardly needs introducing. He's one of the key directors of the past 30 years. Maybe not Spielberg-level famous (mostly because he's a bit more genre-centric) but nonetheless a common, household name. And even those who don't know him by name are bound to have seen at least one of his films. While I will readily admit Scott made some good stuff along the way, I'm not really a big fan of his work and generally speaking prefer the films of brother Tony.
Scott's early years (the late 70s/early 80s) are probably his best, were it not that he also directed The Duellists, his very first feature. A rather horrible film that betrays none of Scott's lingering talents. It stands in great contrast with his second feature, Alien. While I'm probably the first to point out that the film works so well because of Giger's tremendously awesome designs, Scott deserves his share of the credits as director of the film. Blade Runner is another cult classic, though one that more aptly demonstrates Scott's shortcomings. While the first half is moody and atmospheric, it quickly dissolves into a lame 'catch the bad guy with horrible romance' ploy that does little justice to the first part of the film. Still, it's a must see for every sci-fi fan, but beware of the iffy Hollywood aftertaste.
For the biggest part of the 80s and 90s, Scott would switch back and forth between genre cinema and Hollywood blockbuster. Films like Black Rain and Someone to Watch over Me have clearer genre roots, while 1492 and GI Jane are little more than subpar money grabs.
In 2000 Scott directed what may be considered his biggest success (if you take IMDb as a viable source that is). Gladiator is loud, big, long and epic, pretty much everything I hate about Hollywood cinema. Personally I think it's one of Scott's worst. On the other hand, just one year later he directed Black Hawk Down, a film that could also be described as loud, big, long and epic, but for some reason I was able to stomach that one a lot better. Black Hawk Down is more stylized though, where Gladiator is firmly stuck in the narrative corner of Hollywood.
Through the '00s Scott kept jumping between huge Hollywood projects (Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood, American Gangster) and smaller projects (Matchstick Men, All the Invisible Children). The results were very hit and miss, with only Matchstick Men standing out as a worthwhile film.
Then came the news that Scott was going to revisit the Alien universe. Expectations were mile high for Prometheus, sadly the film didn't really deliver. Giger's lack of involvement was all too visible and all of Scott's attempts to add extra spice to the Alien universe backfired. Something that doesn't bode well for the upcoming Blade Runner sequel I'm afraid. After Prometheus I was convinced Scott had completely lost it, luckily he proved me wrong with The Martian (his latest film). A very typical Hollywood sci-fi adventure, but well-executed and a fun ride.
Looking at his oeuvre, Scott is a pretty tricky director to coin. Some of his films I like, some of them I hate, but there's no obvious differentiator to separate the good from the bad. Sometimes I like his big, epic Hollywood fodder, sometimes his smaller, less prestigious projects. But it could be just as well the other way around. It's probably the reason why I've been going through his oeuvre so easily, because even though there's a lot of garbage there, you never know when you might hit another diamond in the rough.
Best film: Alien (4.0*)
Worst film: The Duellists (0.5*)
Average rating: 1.95 (out of 5)