At this point, it’s hard to claim that Top Gun: Maverick did a single thing wrong. The Top Gun sequel made a billion dollars at the global box office and was nominated for numerous awards. The casting decision as well as bringing in Tron: Legacy director Joseph Kosinski were clearly all brilliant in retrospect. It’s nearly impossible to imagine how the film could have been any better, except it’s possible that maybe it could have been; the movie could have been directed not by Joseph Kosinski but by Ridley Scott, the brother of the late Tony Scott, who helmed the original Top Gun.

It’s not hard to imagine why the producers of Top Gun: Maverick would have asked Ridley Scott if he wanted to direct the sequel to his brother’s massive hit movie. It would have been fitting to keep things in the family as it were. Scott tells THR that he turned the job for the simple reason that Top Gun: Maverick wasn’t his kind of film because he and his brother had very different tastes. Ridley Scott explained…

It’s certainly true that Tony and Ridley Scott did not make a lot of the same sorts of movies. Of all of Tony Scott's great films, the only genre movie he directed was his first feature film, The Hunger, a vampire movie starring David Bowie. After that, while the plots of Tony Scott’s films could be fantastic, they were all set in a modern-day “real” world.

By comparison, while Ridley Scott did direct modern stories (including Thelma and Louise, for which he would get an Oscar nomination for Best Director), the majority of his films are more detached from reality. Ultimately, Ridley Scott decided that the reason he was offered the film, being Tony Scott’s brother, was precisely the reason he didn’t want to do it. Ridley reportedly dismissed the Top Gun sequel after he saw it, perhaps because he was being extra tough on a movie that followed his brother's work.

Scott gets bonus points for praising one of Tim Curry’s best performances, the fantasy movie Legend, a movie in which Ridley Scott directed Tom Cruise previously. It would have been quite cool to see the two reunite once again, and on a movie that had launched the careers of both Cruise and Tony Scott.

Whether Ridley Scott would have made the movie better, there’s no argument that the director who took the job, Joseph Kosinski, did an amazing job. Kosinski is reportedly involved in the now-in-development Top Gun 3, but maybe if there ends up being a reason he can’t do it, somebody else would be interested.

The directors on this list are among the greatest in the history of cinema, with films that are considered the best of all time; films that will never be forgotten. What about those movies they brought all their tremendous talents to, but which aren’t remembered as well? Here is our list of great movies, by great directors, that don’t get talked about enough these days. 

The Frighteners - Peter Jackson

The Frighteners is such a great movie, and it’s criminally underrated. No, it's not as sprawling or overwhelming as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films, but it has all the heart and more. Michael J. Fox leads as a con man/exorcist who can see and interact with ghosts. The Frightners is really funny, well-paced, and delightful. 

The King Of Comedy - Martin Scorsese 

When you think of Martin Scorsese, “comedy” is not usually the first word that pops into your head, but The King Of Comedy is really a pretty great movie, and while it’s technically a comedy, it’s really dark. Goodfellas has some comedy in it, like Joe Pesci acting like a clown… but a true (dark) comedy? This Robert De Niro and Jerry Lewis-led film stands alone in Scorsese’s canon. 

Peggy Sue Got Married - Francis Ford Coppola

Peggy Sue Got Married is a deceptively simple film. Unlike Francis Ford Coppola’s more-talked-about epics like The Godfather films and Apocalypse Now, this film, starring Nicolas Cage and Kathleen Turner, is smaller, but that doesn’t mean it’s lesser. It’s a weird time-travel tale, but at its heart, it’s really a love story, and while it's not Coppola’s best work, it’s well worth a watch and should be talked about more often. 

Jackie Brown - Quentin Tarantino

Quentin Taratino has famously said that his next movie, his 10th, could be his last. Whether that holds true or not remains to be seen, but it’s a safe bet Jackie Brown will still be his least talked about.

Strange Days - Kathryn Bigelow

Kathryn Bigelow’s won Oscars (for The Hurt Locker) and she’s directed cult classics (Point Break). Strange Days is certainly closer to the latter. In it, Bigelow dabbles in science fiction, a rarity for her, but it’s unsurprising, as Strange Days was written by her then-husband James Cameron. It doesn’t have the iconic quotes that Point Break has, nor is it as white-knuckle as The Hurt Locker, but it is a great time capsule to filmmaking in the mid-90s and well worth remembering. 

Amistad - Steven Spielberg

Wedged between The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Saving Private Ryan in Steven Spielberg’s filmography, is Amistad. It’s easy to understand why this powerful historical drama revolving around a landmark court case regarding the slave trade is overlooked, but it shouldn’t be. It’s a moving story, told expertly as only Spielberg can, with a monster cast including Matthew McConaughey, Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, and Djimon Hounsou, among many others. 

Clockers - Spike Lee

Let’s be clear here, Clockers is not Spike Lee’s finest work. It doesn’t reach the heights of movies like Do The Right Thing or Malcolm X, but it's still a really good movie. It gets lost in Lee’s stellar filmography, which is understandable. It’s also a testament to just how good Lee’s career has been. 

Talk Radio - Oliver Stone

Talk Radio has everything you expect from an Oliver Stone movie. Its pacing and storytelling are perfect, it’s a fascinating and terrifying story that pulls from the real-world events of a murdered radio show host. It also has a healthy dose of conspiracy, as any great Stone film does. 

The Bling Ring - Sofia Coppola

Sofia Coppola’s The Bling Ring is a meta-tastic heist film that is not only a ton of fun to watch with celebrity cameos and great acting performances, but it also touches on some of the emerging trends that exploded in the years after the movie came out, notably influencer culture. It’s too often overlooked in Coppola’s stellar filmography. 

The Game - David Fincher

David Fincher is a master, and his filmography is full of great movies, like Se7en and Fight Club. The movie he made between those two classic is The Game with Sean Penn and Michael Douglas. Understandably, it’s overshadowed, but it’s an amazing film that is every bit as good as those two more talked-about movies. Even when people watch Fincher’s whole body of work, The Game gets overlooked and it shouldn’t. 

Casualties Of War - Brian De Palma

Casualties of War was released in 1989, which was the tail end of a slew of excellent Vietnam War movies released in the late ‘80s, like Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, and Hamburger Hill. Despite earning well-deserved praise from critics, the Brian De Palma film bombed, and as such, it's unfortunately one of the director’s least talked about movies when it should be one of the most. 

Matchstick Men - Ridley Scott

Usually, when movie fans talk about Ridley Scott, it’s his sprawling historical epics like Gladiator or Napoleon that dominate the conversation, along with sci-fi classics like Alien and Blade Runner. Matchstick Men is a smaller movie, a dark comedy about a con man with a myriad of personal problems played by Nicolas Cage. It’s a wonderful performance by Cage, and despite not performing well at the box office, it’s been well-reviewed over the years.

Inherent Vice - Paul Thomas Anderson

Inherent Vice from Paul Thomas Anderson is a complicated movie, based on a complicated book by Thomas Pinchon. It’s easy to understand why it’s not as talked about as some of Anderson’s other movies, like There Will Be Blood and Boogie Nights, but it’s every bit as good as those, featuring great acting performances and wonderful cinematography. 

Out Of Sight - Steven Soderbergh

Steven Soderberg is known for stylish filming techniques with snappy dialog and interesting plot twists. It’s all right there in Out Of Sight, but the movie still gets overlooked. It was Soderbergh’s first big-budget film, and maybe that’s why it doesn’t get talked about enough. It was also his first collaboration with George Clooney, which makes it even more confounding that it’s not more popular. 

Barry Lyndon - Stanley Kubrick

It’s hard to really argue that any of Stanley Kubrick’s films are not talked about enough, but Barry Lyndon comes the closest here. It’s most revered for its cinematography, but it’s also a wonderful story. While it doesn’t have the panache of A Clockwork Orange or the scope of 2001: A Space Odyssey, it’s still a Kubrick film and it’s one of the best ever made. 

Stardust - Matthew Vaughn

Matthew Vaughn has quietly put together one of the finest resumes in Hollywood. The Kingsman movies are a hot franchise, he’s dabbled in Marvel, and may have inspired the choice of Daniel Craig as James Bond after directing him in Layer Cake. Stardust seems to get lost in the shuffle, but it’s maybe, low key, his best film. 

Ryan's Daughter - David Lean

David Lean is rightfully most remembered for three films, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, and Doctor Zhivago. Lost in the discussion of those films is Ryan’s Daughter, a retelling of Madame Bovary set at the end of World War I. It was the last film Lean directed for 14 years and we can only wonder what he might have done had he not semi-retired. 

Fantastic Mr. Fox - Wes Anderson

Wes Anderson has developed one of the most distinct styles in film history, which translates brilliantly to animation, as well. Anderson’s first foray into the genre was Fantastic Mr. Fox, starring George Clooney, Meryl Streep, and Bill Murray, among others. While it may never outshine his live-action classics, it should be discussed more as one of his best works. 

Bound - The Wachowskis

The DNA of the Wachowskis is very evident in Bound, their first movie. It was made on a shoestring budget, so it doesn’t have the over-the-top effects of The Matrix series, but you can see where they were headed in their filmmaking. 

Intolerable Cruelty - Coen Brothers

When you have a filmography like the Coen Brothers, inevitably, some of the movies won’t get talked about as much as others. Intolerable Cruelty is one of those that gets lost in the mix, behind movies like The Big Lebowski and others that are among the best movies of the ‘90s and beyond. 

Insomnia - Christopher Nolan

Christopher Nolan is among the most beloved directors of the 21st century, creating what feels like independent films, but with monster budgets. That DNA was on display early in his career with Insomnia, which has everything you’d expect from a Nolan movie, but with less than half the budget of Oppenheimer. 

The Fan - Tony Scott

There are few better action directors in Hollywood history than Tony Scott. Most remembered today for classics like Top Gun, and Days of Thunder, The Fan should be talked about more. It’s not a perfect movie, but De Niro’s performance is terrifying (in a great way) as a baseball fan obsessed with Wesley Snipes' character. It’s action horror, and it’s great. 

Vincent And Theo - Robert Altman

Robert Altman had one of the most up-and-down careers in Hollywood history. After a string of successes in the ‘80s, his career was almost sunk by Popeye. It took years for him to rebound, but he did with Vincent & Theo. That led to a career revival, but it’s hardly remembered anymore, overshadowed by his early and later films. 

She's Having A Baby - John Hughes

One of the biggest reasons John Hughes is so loved by people who came of age in the ‘80s and ‘90s was his ability to write and direct genuine teenage characters. That extended to a young married couple starting their lives together in She’s Having A Baby. It’s not as quotable as some of Hughes’ other movies, but it’s still sharply written and a fun watch. 

Only The Lonely - Chris Columbus

Chris Columbus has some directed some huge films in his career, most notably Home Alone and Harry Potter And The Sorcerer’s Stone. He's also got movies like Mrs. Doubtfire and Adventures in Babysitting on his resume. One film that is not talked about enough is Only The Lonely starring John Candy as a man looking for a wife, but dealing with a controlling mother. 

Beowulf - Robert Zemeckis

Generations of high schoolers have been confounded and frustrated by Beowulf. Some love the old English classic, but many hate it. It takes a bold director to take it on as a movie. Robert Zemeckis makes it work, and work well. Still, given the material, it’s not a surprise it’s not talked about as much as Zemeckis’ more popular movies like Back to the Future. 

Great Expectations - Alfonso Cuaron

Director Alfonso Cuaron has made some of the best movies of the last 20 years, including Roma, Gravity, and Y tu mamá también. One of his films that doesn’t get talked about much anymore is 1998’s Great Expectations starring Gwenyth Paltrow and Ethan Hawke. It’s a bold modernization of the classic Dickens novel that can be polarizing, but still worth talking about more.

Ed Wood - Tim Burton

Of all the movies Tim Burton has made, it’s unsurprising that Ed Wood is one of his least discussed. It’s a love letter to legendary B-Movie director Ed Wood, and despite being filled to the brim with great performances, it's not as popular as many of Burton’s other works. 

Midnight In The Garden Of Good And Evil - Clint Eastwood

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil is not exactly the kind of film you might expect from Clint Eastwood, but you should. Some of his best work is when he strays away from the tough guy movies he’s so well known for and this is a great one, starring John Cusack and Kevin Spacey. 

Away We Go - Sam Mendes

Sam Mendes is best known for movies that cover heavy topics, movies like American Beauty, 1917, and Road to Perdition. That's probably the reason 2009's Away We Go with John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph isn't talked about as much, but it's a sweet movie about a couple dealing with major changes in their life and how to handle them. 

Sleepers - Barry Levinson

Sleepers is a dark, dark film. It's also really, really good. With an all-star cast that includes Brad Pitt, Dustin Hoffman, Robert De Niro, Kevin Bacon, and many more, it's surprising it doesn't get talked about as much as some of director Barry Levinson's other work, but given the subject matter, it can be a very hard watch.  

High Anxiety - Mel Brooks

Mel Brooks is a living legend and his filmography is filled with some of the most quotable movies of all time. One that doesn't get quoted much, or even talked about much, is High Anxiety. It was, believe it or not, the first time Mel Brooks also played the lead in one of his movies, so that alone should garner more attention. 

Great directors usually have long filmographies, so it's only natural that some of their finest work would be talked about less than their most groundbreaking or biggest films. That said, many movies should be talked about as much as those classics, but aren't. Here's to that changing now! 

When reflecting on the films released in 2022, Top Gun: Maverick emerges as one of the standout success stories of the year. Not only did it receive widespread critical acclaim, with our very own Eric Eisenberg awarding it a solid 4 out of 5 stars in his review, but it also achieved the remarkable feat of becoming the first 2022 movie to surpass the $1 billion mark at the global box office. This impressive financial performance ultimately earned it the title of the year's second-highest-grossing film, trailing only behind Avatar: The Way of Water. But while this accomplishment may impress many, you might as well call Blade Runner director Ridley Scott "Shania Twain" because "hat don't impress him much. The Tom Cruise-led sequel left him feeling a bit "meh," according to a story shared by director Fede Álvarez.

Scott's renowned for his no-nonsense attitude and candid nature, but his response regarding Top Gun: Maverick is rather tepid. In a recent Variety interview, the director of the upcoming Alien movie shed light on a fascinating exchange with the legendary Gladiator filmmaker. Álvarez elaborated:

The original Top Gun was helmed by Ridley’s brother, Tony Scott, who tragically took his own life on August 19, 2012. Tony, known for directing iconic films such as Man On Fire, Enemy Of The State, and True Romance, unfortunately passed away in San Pedro, California. His untimely death sent shockwaves through the cinematic community and his brother’s life, which he addressed in his 2016 emotional Golden Globes acceptance speech. 

Álvarez admitted to some initial jitters ahead of his meeting with Scott, mainly because the iconic director had recently viewed his film Alien: Romulus. That project is notably a continuation of Scott’s own groundbreaking work on Alien, one of the best horror movie franchises he co-created. Nevertheless, the Panic Attack! writer emphasized the significance of being physically present to absorb Ridley’s insights. In a candid moment, the Don’t Breathe director confessed:

Fortunately for the Evil Dead filmmaker, the meeting didn't unfold as he feared. According to Fede, unlike his thoughts regarding Maverick, the Napoleon director praised the upcoming horror movie. Fede continued: 

Details surrounding Alien: Romulus have been closely guarded by 20th Century Studios and Disney. However, they've given a tantalizing glimpse, revealing that the story revolves around "a group of young people on a distant world, who find themselves in a confrontation with the most terrifying life form in the universe." The cast is headlined by Cailee Spaeny (Priscilla), as well as David Jonsson (Industry), Archie Renaux (Shadow and Bone), Isabela Merced (Rosaline), Spike Fearn (The Batman) and Aileen Wu (Away From Home).

Only time will tell if the next installment of Alien will make as big of a box office splash as Top: Gun Maverick once it hits the 2024 movie schedule when it lands in theaters on August 16, 2024. But, at the very least, it has Ridley Scott’s stamp of approval, which has to count for something. 

If you want to make up your mind regarding Top Gun: Maverick, it's available to stream with an Amazon Prime video subscription. Check out our 2023 movie release schedule to see what movies are headed to a theater near you. 

In recent years, it’s been a joy for movie fans to come back together to see a sequel to a classic ‘80s movie, with examples including Blade Runner 2049, Coming 2 America and Ghostbusters: Afterlife. Coming this summer, Tom Cruise will return as U.S. Naval Aviator Peter “Maverick” Mitchell in Top Gun: Maverick alongside a star-studded cast, after over a decade of the sequel being in the works. 

When the development of the Top Gun sequel began, the 1986 movie’s original director, Tony Scott, was attached to direct. However, the filmmaker tragically died by suicide in 2012, and Oblivion and Tron: Legacy director Joseph Kosinski later inherited the helming reins. As the movie’s release comes closer, Top Gun: Maverick producer Jerry Bruckheimer has shared the sweet way he and the other filmmakers have honored the original director behind Top Gun. In Bruckheimer’s words: 

The late Tony Scott has a fellow filmmaker brother in Ridley Scott, who, of course, famously made movies like Alien and Blade Runner in his heyday, while in recent years he's helmed flicks like The Last Duel and House of Gucci. During a recent interview with Empire, Jerry Bruckheimer revealed that they showed Ridley Scott Top Gun: Maverick early, and apparently there are a number of tributes to his late brother. 

Getting the thumbs up from Ridley Scott in general is a huge deal, but Top Gun: Maverick will continue the legacy of the ‘80s film Tony Scott delivered. Per Jerry Bruckheimer, Scott was vocal in his praise about the upcoming 2022 movie. Check out the Top Gun: Maverick trailer: 

Tony Scott was reportedly part of early conversations about Top Gun: Maverick dating back to 2011, one year before he died. The Top Gun director met with Jerry Bruckheimer, Tom Cruise, screenplay co-writer Christopher McQuarrie and David Ellison, another producer. McQuarrie shared that when Scott died, “the movie went away with it” for a while. Cruise also recalled this: 

Jerry Bruckheimer also shared that they had even gone to Top Gun school together and spoken to numerous officers and aviators to gauge ideas for the sequel. It would have been incredible if Tony Scott had the opportunity to make another Top Gun film, but it wasn’t meant to be. Scott’s last film ended up being 2010’s Unstoppable, starring Denzel Washington and Chris Pine, which rounded out an incredible career . Scott directed 16 films in total, with other classics including True Romance, Domino and Man On Fire. 

We can look forward to the first reactions to Tom Cruise's next movie when Top Gun: Maverick remieres at the Cannes Film Festival this May, which will also feature a tribute to Cruise’s career as well. Maverick opens to the public on May 27.

Fans have been waiting years for a Top Gun sequel, and they’re finally set to get one in the form of Top Gun: Maverick. Originally set for release in 2019, the film was pushed back to the summer of 2020, which unfortunately caused it to be delayed multiple times due to the COVID-19 pandemic. At present, the film is finally set to fly onto the big screen this fall, though some fans may be feeling the need for speed ahead of the release date. Luckily, they’ll now have the chance to revisit with Tom Cruise’s Maverick very soon.

For those who are unaware, May 13th is Top Gun Day, during which fans show their love for Tony Scott’s 1986 film by wearing their best aviator sunglasses and quoting lines from the film, but this year’s celebration will be particularly special. Paramount Pictures has announced that beginning on May 13th, Top Gun is returning to theaters for a one-week engagement in Dolby Cinemas at AMC across the country!

Additionally, the film has been remastered with Dolby Vision for clearer picture quality and Dolby Atmos for a more immersive audio presentation This cinematic re-release will not only sync up with Top Gun Day but will also arrive around its 35th anniversary on May 16th.

You can’t help but get pumped when you hear that Top Gun is making its way back to theaters. This actually isn’t the first time the Tom Cruise classic has returned to the big screen. Some fans may remember that the film was actually re-released in the IMAX 3D format for a six-day engagement back in 2013.

This is, however, the first time the film has been remastered for Dolby Cinemas, and the updated specs are sure to add to the motion picture. With Dolby Vision, iconic scenes from the film should pop off the screen, including that bright and sandy volleyball game. And it goes without saying that the film’s aircraft masterful sequences are going to get a real boost from the Dolby Atmos upgrade.

This re-release is a nice primer for anyone who’s looking to revisit the film before Top Gun: Maverick arrives. And while the original film featured its fair share of practical feats, the highly anticipated sequel looks to up the ante with some big moments of its own. This created plenty of work and training for the cast and crew, but the result should be a cinematic spectacle for moviegoers.

The wait for Top Gun: Maverick has been difficult, to say the least. However, a trip to the movies to see a remastered version of the original film is definitely a nice pre-sequel treat for those looking for some thrills. The sequel finally soars into theaters on November 19, 2021.

It’s become custom for elongated awards speeches to be truncated with the annoying sound of an overture trying to play recently rewarded recipients off stage. It’s an unfortunate necessity, otherwise the event would last for days. But at the Golden Globes on Sunday, Sir Ridley Scott delivered an emotional tribute to his late, great brother Tony Scott, all while the orchestra tried to shoo him away. Thank the heavens they didn’t succeed though, because it was truly beautiful to see, and it will make any self-respecting cinephile instantly tear up. Sir Ridley’s tribute to Tony starts at around the 2:35 mark in the following video. 

Personally, that was the highlight of the entire evening for me. Just hearing Sir Ridley remark, "And finally, my brother Tony would have been here tonight for sure. And I know many of you knew and loved him. I miss you Tony," immediately made me well up.

In fact, Ridley Scott’s entire speech was rather sensational, starting with his playful quip about The Martian being categorized as a comedy, to him teasing about only receiving awards posthumously, via telling the orchestra, "screw you," all the way up to his surprising tip of the hat to his deceased brethren. 

OK, he might have rambled a little bit about how The Martian was "left in the dust" by the juggernaut that was Star Wars: The Force Awakens and how the box office race has turned filmmaking into a sport. But his comments about why this is good for the medium made a lot of sense. Plus, it’s Sir Ridley Scott. He can say what the heck he wants. Especially when it comes to Tony. 

The 68-year-old Tony Scott, the younger brother of 78-year-old Ridley, died on August 19, 2012. The Top Gun, Man On Fire, Enemy Of The State, and True Romance director committed suicide by jumping off the Vincent Thomas Bridge in San Pedro, California, shocking the cinematic community and sending us all into mourning. 

Since his death, Sir Ridley Scott has only spoken sporadically about the death of his younger sibling, telling Variety back in November 2014 that it was "inexplicable" before acknowledging that Tony had been "fighting a lengthy battle with cancer – a diagnosis the family elected to keep private during his treatments and in the immediate wake of his death."

Sir Ridley Scott was on stage as The Martian collected the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture – Comedy. Sure, it’s a comedy in the same way that The Hateful Eight is a film about making a good stew. But the fact that the hugely entertaining sci-fi adventure is being rewarded at all deserves to be celebrated, because The Martian was one of the best-made films of 2015. And, sometimes, that’s overlooked in favor of its more shocking counterparts, when it really shouldn’t be. 

Virtually everyone associated with the project refuses to go on record, but the Top Gun sequel appears to have fallen apart in the wake of Tony Scott’s suicide earlier this year, and Paramount’s now trying to figure out how to handle the delicate matter of a 3D Top Gun it wanted to release in theaters.

Converting older films to 3D isn’t exactly the rage (yet), but Paramount saw the success first-hand with the Titanic 3D re-release earlier this year, and Disney has had strong successes with Pixar re-releases as well, including the upcoming Monsters Inc. 3D. According to the NY Times, Legend3D (Hugo) completed the conversion on Top Gun with contributions from Scott before he died. Now that Scott is gone, the studio is figuring out what to do with the film (and all declined to comment officially on the Top Gun re-release plans).

But what of the sequel? Tom Cruise had said publicly that he’s willing to play hot-shot ace Maverick on screen again. The Times adds that Cruise and Scott were scouting Top Gun locations for the possible sequel, which Scott was going to direct. Now those sequel plans appear to be on the backburner … where, if I’m being honest, they should stay.

If Paramount thinks that they have a sensitive issue on their hands with a possible 3D release of Top Gun, I can’t imagine how the public would respond to a Top Gun sequel that Scott didn’t have the chance to direct. I wasn’t wild about revisiting Top Gun so many years after the initial open anyway. Doing it without Scott is a bad idea, and hopefully the Times is right by saying it now has fallen apart. We shall see.

It’s hard to find the right words. Even the inclusion of one that’s only a single letter long, I, takes a lot of thought, especially when you’re trying to talk about the life of another, not to mention one that has so recently ended. Pictures, of course, are worth a thousand words, so I’ve included ten but by no means can take the credit since they all belong to Mr. Tony Scott. Now multiply that by 24 per second of every film that the late director carefully composed and that’s the size of the body of work that obviously one article cannot ever offer a proper and complete summation.

This is where that one letter word comes in--"I." I didn’t know the man, I only knew the director but after thumbing through the list of his titles, it was easy to see why Scott made such an indelible impression on me: I saw a lot of his films during my formative years, each like a million times, and most of them are quite good.He’s responsible for some truly iconic movies and I wanted to celebrate his life by looking at some sequences from throughout his career that resonate with me. The sad cherry to top this list is that most of these movies were watched on weekend evenings with my older brother while he was stuck babysitting me. Our thoughts go out to the Scott family and friends.

Tony Scott directed over a dozen feature films, produced many, many more under his Scott Free banner with his brother Sir Ridley Scott, and here are ten unforgettable scenes from his body of work. Of course, there are many more, so chime in with your favorites in the comments.

[Click the images for corresponding video, if available…]

The Opening Sequence, The Hunger [1983]

One of Scott’s first features was The Hunger, an erotic, horror film starring Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie and Susan Sarandon. And no, I didn’t go with the famous Deneuve-Sarandon sex scene but instead the music video-like title sequence that not only introduced an interesting twist on the vampire film but more importantly an interesting new filmmaker. What better way to pick up some unsuspecting, and totally sexy, victims than stalking the local disco? Especially when they’re playing “Bela Lugosi is Dead” by Bauhaus.

Beach Volleyball, Top Gun [1987]

Top Gun is a pop culture landmark. I’m sure many people would name the Tom Cruise vehicle as the epitome of 80s action flicks, the pre-Michael Bay culmination of the Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson school of filmmaking. And they wouldn’t be wrong but, for whatever reason, the scene that seems to get the most play isn’t a dogfight in the air or the group serenade of Kelly McGillis at the bar but the intense, shirtless (in jeans) scene of the two rival cockpits going at it on the beach volleyball court. A lot of high-fives, flexing and the occasional shot of a volleyball, the homoerotic action only ends to remind the audience that Maverick likes the ladies and has to run to McGillis’ for a sweaty shower.

Hospital Hallway Race, Days of Thunder [1990]

A couple years later, Scott turned to Days of Thunder, once again with Tom Cruise in the lead, and I still can’t believe I actually enjoy a movie about stock-car racing. The racing sequences themselves are well shot at all but it’s the antics off the race track that I remember most-- unsurprising, since it was scripted by Robert Towne. There are two misunderstandings (first with the cop, then with the Nicole Kidman’s doc) and tearing through the city streets with arch rival Rowdy Burns (Michael Rooker) but it’s the scene where Cruise’s Cole Trickle and Bruns race wheelchairs in the hospital hallway that takes the checkered flag.

”Play some rap music,” The Last Boy Scout [1991]

The Last Boy Scout was one of my favorite films growing up. Die Hard was already top of the list so it’s no surprise that Scott’s action movie starring Bruce Willis also received regular rotation on the VHS player. Written by the Shane Black, Willis is joined by Damon Wayans in this modern day noir set to investigate the shady side of professional sports. Willis plays the prototypical Private Eye, this time a disillusioned former Secret Service Agent, and when he and Wayans’ ex-football star are captured by the bad guys it takes his daughter (Danielle Harris) and her puppet Furry Tom to bail them out with some riddle time.This is an underrated action flick. Great, dark, fun. Go watch this one in full.

”You’re Part Eggplant,” True Romance [1993]

Hands down the best, and most cited, scene of Tony Scott’s career comes from True Romance. Scott’s film is the best from a Quentin Tarantino script not directed by Tarantino himself (and even then, I’d say Romance gives a few more than a run for their money). The sequence between Christopher Walken’s gangster and Dennis Hopper’s father and former policeman is absolutely genius. Attribute as much of the scene’s success to the writing as you want but let me say this--you can give a director Shakespeare and nine times out of ten they’ll turn it to shit. I’ve used this scene to teach on many occasions, and will continue to do so until I find something better. So, not anytime soon.

The Lipizzaner Stallions, Crimson Tide [1995]

You can’t talk Tony Scott and not talk Denzel Washington. The director-actor duo are a regular Scorsese and De Niro (or DiCaprio), having worked on five features together in a span of 15 years that started with Crimson Tide. This movie also marks the first of two team ups with the great (but supposedly insufferable) Gene Hackman and it’s largely the two heavy weight performers thrown into close quarters that creates such a combustible situation. Not to mention the threat of war all riding on whether or not a message was properly received. The film wound up where a lot of Scott film’s do--nominated for technical Oscars like sound and editing--but it’s the simmering exchange between the now two Captains that stands out.

Hotel Debugging and Escape, Enemy of the State [1998]

It wasn’t long after they worked together on Tide that Tony Scott managed to bring Gene Hackman on board for another flick, which was kind of important since the addition gives Enemy of the State the bonus of being a pseudo-sequel to Francis Ford Coppola’s The Conversation. Don’t think Tony Scott didn’t know that. Film-geekery aside, the Will Smith starring conspiracy thriller was another one of my favorites growing up. When secretly slipped a sensitive package, Smith has to turn to the off-the-grid Hackman for help, but their first unpleasant encounter ends abruptly when the NSA arrives and starts chasing the former through the hotel. And outside it. Then back inside. Then there’s a fire. You get it.

Training, Spy Game [2001]

I was already a sucker for action flicks’ recruitment and/or training montages before Scott put together the perfect mentor-protege relationship on-screen. Robert Redford plays a high ranking but retiring CIA operative who has to try to work with, and then eventually against, his own government to try and free Brad Pitt’s spy from a Chinese prison. The pair don’t have too many scenes together and they make them all count but there’s a meta-level of enjoyment in watching the aging Redford train the still relatively young Pitt. Too bad nobody ever got Newman and Clooney together. Finally, beyond the multiple levels of enjoyment, the sequence is also a great example of Scott’s evolving, and increasingly experimental, aesthetic with the quick cutting, lapse pans and ‘snapshots.’ And try not to grin when Pitt’s trainee holds up the cup of tea.

”Kill Them All,” Man on Fire [2004]

The second of Washington and Scott’s five collaborations didn’t come until almost a decade after their initial pairing. but the two would work together on all the rest of the director’s films save the Keira Knightley led Domino. And Man on Fire might be the quintessential Tony Scott film. It’s got Denzel, exciting, but not overbearing, formal experimentation and a simple, focused narrative. It’s the best character that the pair managed to create together and Creasy’s revenge, or even his early depression fueled rages, provide many memorable scenes. But I love the quiet before the storm when he’s found looking for his bible in Pita’s room by her mom, played by Radha Mitchell. She doesn’t know how to go on but he does, he’s going to do what he does best. That she agrees, hands over the teddy bear and kisses him goodbye makes it all the more intense. Scott using Nine Inch Nails’ “The Mark Has Been Made” doesn’t hurt.

Denzel on a Train, Unstoppable [2010]

Scott’s final film, Unstoppable, was well-received and loosely based on a real incident involving a runaway train carrying dangerous chemicals. Denzel is joined by Chris Pine, another of many great casting calls over Scott’s career, as one of the two heroes who risk their lives in order to stop the locomotive from hopping into a heavily populated area. With Pine’s rookie hurt and time ticking away, Denzel’s grizzled veteran hops on the speeding train to run down the manual breaks and keep them from spilling over the hairpin turn. It, and the film’s last few minutes offer an exciting and crowd pleasing final sequence.

Long before the Scott brothers were kings of Hollywood action and suspense, Tony Scott was just a boy helping his brother by appearing in his first film. This was a black and white short titled "Boy and Bicycle." It's one of Tony's few acting credits and Ridley's only writing credit. The former stars as the titular hero who skips school to enjoy a illicit free day in Hartlepool, England.

In the wake of the shocking news of Tony's suicide, it's not only his friends and family who are left to mourn, but also all those who've ever enjoyed his films, from Top Gun to True Romance and Man on Fire. While the whys of Tony's decision may be up for debate, let's focus on the man's life, and the career that began in 1965 with "Boy and Bicycle." You can see the film at The Space, presented by the British Film Institute. Click on the image below to get there.

Much of the Scott family got in on the act with "Boy and Bicycle," as Tony and Ridley's mother and father, Elizabeth and Colonel Francis Percy Scott, have cameos in the film. The colonel also drove the car to help Ridley capture many of the film's tracking shots, which were shot on a 16mm spring-wound Bolex. BFI awarded Ridley funding to complete post-production on the film, and four years later supplied financing to Tony for his directorial debut, a short called "One of the Missing."

In other news, THR reports Ridley has suspended production of his upcoming thriller The Counselor, which was shooting in London, so he could return to Los Angeles to be with his family. The film penned by No Country for Old Men author Cormac McCarthy stars Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt, Javier Bardem, Penelope Cruz, and Cameron Diaz. It centers on a lawyer entangled in the treacherous world of drug trafficking. Production is expected to resume next week.

SECOND UPDATE: ABC's report about brain cancer has been called into question by several sources close to the family.

UPDATED: ABC News is now reporting that Scott had received a diagnosis of inoperable brain cancer prior to his suicide.

Tony Scott, best known for directing Top Gun and Enemy Of The State passed away this afternoon in what's being reported as a suicide. Reports state that the Hollywood legend parked his Prius on the side of the road by the Vincent Thomas Bridge near Long Beach, climbed a fence and jumped off without hesitation.

According to DailyBreeze.com, following the suicide, the Coast Guard was called to the scene and, using sonar, they discovered the director’s body about four hours later. It was promptly handed over to the Los Angeles County Coroner, who confirmed to TMZ that the victim was, in fact, Scott.

A suicide note was reportedly discovered inside the sixty-eight-year-old’s car, but it’s unclear what, if any, reason it may have given. Regardless, Cinema Blend’s thoughts are with Scott’s wife Donna, his children and his older brother and longtime producing partner Ridley.

Over the course of his career, Tony had his hand in a ton of wonderful projects. He directed Beverly Hills Cop 2, Days Of Thunder and True Romance. He worked as an executive producer on the extremely underrated Numb3rs and he even directed the Kenny Loggins music video for “Danger Zone”. His vision and his creativity will be missed for decades to come.

For having so many big names, A&E Network's Coma has been flying well under the radar. The four-hour television event, from Ridley and Tony Scott's Scott Free Productions, is split over the course of two nights and features an incredible ensemble. The multiple Academy and Emmy Award winning cast is lead by Six Feet Under's Lauren Ambrose and features Steven Pasquale, Geena Davis, James Woods, Ellen Burstyn, and Richard Dreyfuss.

Like I said, not much had surfaced on the project thus far (except for the Labor Day premiere) but now we have the first tease for the impeccably staffed yet still mysterious medical thriller (also available on the A&E Coma website). Take a look...

(embed via Bloody Disgusting)

So it's still unclear what exactly is going on in Coma besides the fact that there's definitely some medical malfeasance and a whole lot of creepy. That sounds like Ambrose's voice delivering the first line (you know, 'human sacrifices') but I honestly can't pinpoint the second voice. It's male and seems to be (one of) the disturbed doctor(s). The twang near the end gave me a certain Lost vibe though, so I'm predicting it's Ben Linus.

A&E's Coma is a modern retelling of Robin Cook's novel as well as a remake of a previous feature film adaptation by Michael Crichton (both of the same name). Ambrose stars as Dr. Susan Wheeler, a medical student at Peachtree Memorial where otherwise healthy patients inexplicably start slipping into comas on the operating table. The 'television event' was written by John J. McLaughlin (Black Swan and the upcoming Hitchcock) and directed by Mikail Salomon (Hard Rain).

Coma premieres on Monday, September 3rd at 9 p.m. ET on A&E and concludes the following night, Tuesday, September 4th, at the same time. In addition to Ambrose, Pasquale, Davis, Woods, Burstyn and Dreyfuss, it also stars familiar TV faces James Rebhorn, Joe Morton, Michael Weston and Joseph Mazello.

Screenwriter Peter Craig only has one produced credit to his name, but it's a damn good one. A few years back, Craig teamed up with Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard to adapt Chuck Hogan's Prince of Thieves and the result wasThe Town, one of the best crime dramas to come out in the last decade. Today Craig landed a brand new project, and while it likely won't have a lot in common with The Town in terms of tone or content, one can hope that he brings the quality.

Peter Craig has been hired to write the script for Top Gun 2, according to THR. First announced about two years ago, Tony Scott is attached to direct the project and both Jerry Bruckheimer Films and Skydance Productions are on-board to produce. The sequel is a long time coming, as the original came out all the way back in 1986 and not only made a ton of money at the box office, but also boosted recruitment for both the Navy and the Air Force. The trade suggests that Craig's hiring is a big deal as it shows that Paramount is getting serious about putting Top Gun 2 into development. Tom Cruise has previously said that he is involved with the sequel, but as of yet it's not 100% clear that he will be returning to the role of Maverick.

What's interesting, though, is that there was a report last October saying that Ashley Miller and Zack Stentz, writers on both Thor and X-Men: First Class, had been hired to do the job that Craig has now been assigned. THR doesn't mention either of the writers in their report. The article also doesn't mention what the story will be about. Scott has previously gone on the record saying that the movie will be about Air Force drone operators who play war games during the day and "then party all night."

Considering that there will be at least a 27 year gap between films, I'm curious if there's really that much demand out there for this project. Will you go see Top Gun 2 should it ever reach theaters? Leave your thoughts in the comments section below.

Tony Scott hasn't set up a new project for himself since his last film, 2010's Unstoppable, became a pretty big worldwide hit, grossing $160 million overall. The director of Top Gun and Crimson Tide has never been shy about constantly talking up the projects he wants to make next, but even with rumors of everything from a Warriors remake to the 24 movie, nothing seems to have solidified.

Until now, that is-- maybe. Deadline reports that Scott could finally be settling on Lucky Strike, which would star Vince Vaughn and be distributed by 20th Century Fox. In a change of pace for the Four Christmases star, but right in Scott's wheelhouse, Lucky Strike would be an action thriller about a DEA agent teaming up with a drug runner to take down a presumably even worse drug cartel. Vaughn also recently seemed ready to reunite with Owen Wilson for the raunchy comedy Interns, but with Lucky Strike ready to shoot this summer, it might come up first.

At this point I don't really want to see Tony Scott try something new-- he's good at one very specific thing, so why ask for something else? But this might be an interesting challenge for Vaughn, who seems to have been coasting for years now and might need something big and different like this to shake him out of his rut. At the very least, I want to see this more than a Top Gun 2-- can we all agree on that?

Director Tony Scott -- who, as near as I can tell, will be directing every movie in Hollywood within the next 10 years or so -- has added yet another project to his already overloaded docket. This one doesn't stray far from his wheelhouse: it's the action thriller Narco Sub, based on the spec script by hot up-and-coming writer (and former Us Weekly editor) David Guggenheim. Scott will direct and produce, with Simon Kinberg (Sherlock Holmes) also on board to produce. This is, of course, in addition to his plans to remake The Wild Bunch, make the 24 movie, and any number of other projects he's brought up over the years.

Plot details are scarce because 20th Century Fox is keeping a lid on them, but Variety says it's being described as in the same vein as Crimson Tide and Man on Fire. They also add that the title, Narco Sub, likely refers to the underwater craft that drug dealers have used to smuggle drugs into the U.S. Maybe one of the drug-smuggling sailors will stage a mutiny over the nuclear launch codes?

This is the second time Guggenheim has worked with Kinberg recently, having written the script for a flick called Santiago, which Kinberg is also producing. Guggenheim's action-writing chops will next be on display this February in the Denzel Washington/Ryan Reynolds flick Safe House. That's hardly the only project Guggenheim has in the works; he's nearly as busy as Tony Scott. In addition to Narco Sub and Santiago, he's penned Stolen, which will star Nicholas Cage as a thief in search of his kidnapped daughter; Puzzle Palace, to be directed by McG; and a pitch called 364, which has Ron Howard attached.

Ashley Miller and Zack Stentz may have spent most of their careers writing for television shows like Fringe, Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles and Andromeda, but this past summer they proved that they are ready for blockbuster films. Credited writers on both Thor and X-Men: First Class - two of the better-reviewed action films of the summer, the pair may not end up rolling in Oscars for their work, but they have just been handed an incredibly high-profile project.

According to Variety, Miller and Stentz have been hired to write the script for Tony Scott's sequel to the 1986 hit Top Gun. Talk about the second movie began exactly one year ago today, when producer David Ellison approached Jerry Bruckheimer about the possibility of a Top Gun 2. Commenting on the talk, Scott said that the movie won't be a remake or a reinvention, but rather a new movie that centers on unmanned fighters. At the time Scott was planning a trip to an air force base in Nevada where "computer geeks" would play war games during the day and "then party all night." Paramount declined comment on the news and it's unknown when the project may start production or casting.

I still find the whole "Scott brother midlife crisis" to be kind of funny. First Ridley decides to make a prequel to Alien (which ended up turning into Prometheus); then Tony decided he wanted to do make a sequel to Top Gun and most recently Ridley was inspired to reboot Blade Runner. One can only imagine what's coming next.

At this point Kiefer Sutherland seems to be the only person who actually believes that a 24 movie will happen, since as of December the script had been rejected by the studio, and in January we learned that Sutherland was the one person taking meetings with Tony Scott, who was considering taking on the project. So it shouldn't come as that big a surprise that this morning on the morning talk show circuit, Sutherland was once again talking up the project's potential. But if you want to take this as a sliver of hope, be my guest.

According to Coming Soon's intrepid morning-news-show-watcher Ed Douglas, Sutherland appeared on both Good Morning America and Live With Regis And Kelly to promote his appearance in the Broadway show That Championship Season, and was asked about the potential for the 24 movie by both sets of hosts. He gave the longest answer to Regis and Kelly:

You can also see video of his Regis and Kelly segment below (the 24 starts around 45 seconds in). There's no new information there, and no sense that anything has changed in the last few months, but it's somewhat notable that Sutherland still isn't trying to put all this speculation to bed. Is a 24 movie any likelier to happen now? Definitely not. But those of you still hoping for it can at least rest assured that Sutherland is also on your side.

It's not news that Fox has turned down the first script writer Billy Ray turned in for the planned 24 movie-- we were reporting on that over two weeks ago. But while today's Entertainment Weekly story is mostly about that old information, there's a tidbit in there that actually points to more hope for the TV adaptation. They talked to 24. series executive producer Howard Gordon, who said that the script is dead but "There is talk about re-approaching it. I understand Tony Scott is meeting with Kiefer to talk about ideas. People are still talking about it.”

Howard mentioned Tony Scott's name when talking about the script's rejection a few weeks ago, but at that point his participation was just a rumor Howard was repeating. Given that he's not actually "engaged or involved" in production on the 24 movie, there's no telling how good Howard's information is, and it's possible he's just repeating the same information he had a few weeks ago with slightly different words.

24 has now been off the air for 7 months, which means the clock is ticking even faster for them to actually get the movie made. Jack Bauer is enduring enough a character that Kiefer Sutherland could probably pull off playing him for years to come, but the number of people interested in the movie at all will dwindle as the years go by. It doesn't sound like Fox is moving very fast to get the movie made, which may be a sign they don't intend to make the movie at all. If Tony Scott really has that big idea, it's time for him to get it out there and get this process moving.

With Fox having canceled 24 earlier this year, the only bright spot for fans who want more Jack Bauer action in their lives is that the news of the cancellation came with the announcement that they would be making a feature film. It was back in April that the shows star/executive producer Kiefer Sutherland said that the script, written by Billy Ray, was finished, so why has the project not moved forward in the eight months since? The easy answer is that the script sucked.

Assignment X recently interviewed one of the show's executive producers, Howard Gordon, who revealed that the script turned in by Ray has been rejected. Saying that he isn't "engaged or involved" with the project, Gordon said that the rumor is that director Tony Scott has an idea, but that he's unsure of the exact status. As to why the script was rejected, the producer said that, "it wasn’t the right proposition. It wasn’t strong enough or compelling enough to the studio obviously to move ahead with it."

Sorry, 24 fans - looks like you may have to wait a little longer before this one comes together. In the meantime, feel free to join up with some Arrested Development folks and start a support group called "Fox Canceled Our Show And Might Not Ever Give Us A Movie." There's always comfort in numbers.

Ridley Scott is currently juggling no more than eight projects right now, but his brother Tony isn't far behind. Last we heard, Tony had signed on to the adaptation of the Mark Millar comic series Nemesis, but didn't know where the film would fit into his schedule as he also has Potsdamer Platz, Hell's Angels and The Associate in his backlog. But much like Ridley is doing with his Alien prequels, Tony is also now looking to return to the film that launched his career, in his case being a sequel Top Gun.

As announced a couple weeks ago, Top Gun 2 is now in the works and, as it turns out, Scott couldn't be more excited to return to the project. HitFix recently spoke with the director, who is currently promoting his newest film, Unstoppable, and he discussed what we might see from the new film.

While unwilling to discuss where Maverick will fit into the story, Scott revealed that the focus will largely be on unmanned fighters, or drones, that the Air Force is currently operating. He already plans on heading down to the base in Fallon, Nevada to do some research, observing "computer geeks" as they play war games during the day and "then party all night." He's also rejected the idea of reboot, saying, "I don't want to do a remake. I don't want to do a reinvention. I want to do a new movie."

Scott also said that the film won't be his next project, so it may be a few years before we actually see a Top Gun sequel. The only thing I'm upset about in this story is that Scott doesn't say whether or not there will be a beach volleyball scene in the new film - it's just not Top Gun without beach volleyball.

The big story that broke yesterday was the news that Christopher Nolan has officially begun the search for a Superman director. A short list of five potential directors to take the spot - Tony Scott, Matt Reeves, Zack Snyder, Duncan Jones and Jonathan Liebesman - was revealed and it was an interesting mix to say the least. An argument can be made for every director on the list and an argument can be made against every director on the list. Apparently, word has gotten back to some of them, and now their responses are available.

First up is Snyder, who I feel is the strongest candidate, as his visual style could work perfectly with the storytelling of the Nolan brothers and David S. Goyer. Sadly, it's not to be. A few days before the news broke, Snyder did an interview with Latino Review in which he mentioned that he was approached about the project, but turned the opportunity down.

Next up is Jones, best known for directing last year's critical hit Moon. Coming Soon caught a comment by the director on his Twitter page about the news (it appears to have been deleted since). According to the site, the director said, "About Superman... I'm going to say something really cheesy; Can't talk about it, but an honor to be on the list. Interesting times!" Correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds like a confirmation to me.

Lastly, JobBlo got a quote from Reeves about the story down at Fantastic Fest in Austin, where his new film, Let Me In, is showing. Said the director, "I was surprised. I really have no idea if any of that is true. It's certainly an amazing project, but I would be surprised..." So pretty much the complete opposite of Jones. It sounds as though Reeves knows nothing about his inclusion, which may or may not mean that his appearance on the list was conjecture.

The only two directors that have not yet commented are Tony Scott and Jonathan Liebesman, but, as I reported in my original article, they are also the two that are already booked on other projects. While I'm sad to see Snyder fade from the project, Jones would definitely be my second choice of the five. I unabashedly loved Moon, and while it was certainly a smaller project than Superman would be, he has shown me enough that I could have faith in him.

The selection process for a Superman director has been as up and down as any casting for a superhero film. Since it was announced that Christopher Nolan would be producing the project, there has been plenty of speculation as to who would take the reins, be it Christopher's brother Jonathan, Chris Columbus or someone else entirely. Apparently the list is down to five.

Deadline has revealed that Nolan and producer Emma Thomas have begun meeting with a short list of directors for the project that have included Tony Scott, Matt Reeves (Cloverfield, Let Me In), Jonathan Liebesman (Battle: Los Angeles), Duncan Jones (Moon), and Zack Snyder. Some members of the list, however, already have prior commitments, including Liebesman, who has signed on to direct Clash of the Titans 2, and Scott, who has four other projects on his plate at the moment. This leaves Reeves, Jones and Snyder, who appear to have open schedules, though it's possible that this isn't a finite list.

Certainly an interesting mix, no? Fair arguments both for and against everyone above can be made, but I think that the most intriguing one is Snyder. His storytelling skills may not be fantastic, but few directors can spin movies that are as visually beautiful. Throw in the fact that the story is being taken care of by the team that includes the Nolans and David S. Goyer and you may have a fantastic combination. Xerxes can sit on a shelf for a little while. Let's make this one happen.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/UPDATED-Clash-Of-The-Titans-2-And-Deadpool-Still-Don-t-Have-Directors-But-They-re-Getting-Closer-20421.html

The folks at The Playlist continue to deliver some interesting scoops, but like the others, this one should be handled with skepticism. A reliable source with a history of delivering accurate information says Wolverine 2 has been coming together under the radar and that Fox’s list of directing candidates which once included Kathryn Bigelow, Timur Bekmambetov, Daniel Espinosa, Matt Reeves and Tony Scott has been whittled down to just Reeves and Scott.

It’s hard to even care about who Fox goes with when X-Men Origins: Wolverine wasn’t all that good, especially compared to the other three X-Men films. However, Wolverine was a moneymaker and we all know what that means in this industry, a sequel is necessary. With finances in mind, The Playlist points out that Reeves is certainly the cheaper of the two and I’ve got a feeling that’ll be what it comes down to. With the first film costing $150 million to make, I doubt Fox will drop the extra cash on the man behind the lens when the big stars in front of it are going to be the ones to draw the crowd for round two.

Wolverine 2 was once scheduled to start shooting in January 2011, but there’s been rumblings that that’ll have to change. Perhaps that has a little something to do with Scott’s plan to get to work on Potsdamer Platz that same month, but I doubt it. I’m putting my money on Reeves for the gig. As a huge Cloverfield fan I’m all for him getting the job and hopefully when Let Me In hits theaters on October 1st, that’ll boost confidence in his ability tenfold.

It's been a while since we last heard from anything from Tony Scott's project Potsdamer Platz. Back in April, Mickey Rourke, Javier Bardem and Jason Statham all signed on to the project about two members of a New Jersey crime family looking to go international, but things have been quiet since then for the long in-development project. Fortunately, it looks as though the project is still very much alive and has just added two new cast members.

French website leParisien is reporting that Christopher Walken and French actor Johnny Hallyday have joined the cast. Unfortunately, the article doesn't supply any information regarding who the actors will play in the film, though an educated guess would be that Walken plays a member of the Jersey mafia and that Hallyday is one of the internationals the two soldiers encounter abroad.

What's strange is that Jason Statham is not mentioned in the article, meaning that he's either no longer involved with the project or that the French don't care about him. I'm inclined to lean towards the former because, seriously, who doesn't love Jason Statham? That guy's awesome.

Ever since the money to make Unstoppable finally came together last summer, we haven't heard much from Tony Scott-- he wrapped up filming the Denzel Washington/Chris Pine action film in December, and presumably has been hard at work figuring out exactly which swoopy camera shot would make it into the final cut.

Now, according to Deadline, Scott is ready to move on, and he's bringing Mickey Rourke, Javier Bardem and Jason Statham-- now there's a dream team-- along with him. He'll be directing the long-in-development Potsdamer Platz, about two members of a New Jersey crime family who decide to expand their business internationally. And while it may seem logical to assume, based on the title, that the international expansion includes Germany, oh would you be wrong-- the movie is going to be set in Puerto Rico. As much as I'd love them to keep the now-illogical title, it's apparently heading for a name change.

Perhaps the craziest news in all of this is Scott was pursuing Gene Hackman, who hasn't acted since 2004, to take a role in the film. Hackman turned him down, but whether or not that's because he's happy not acting or because he wanted nothing to do with another Tony Scott movie, we'll never know.

Filming on Potsdamer Platz, or whatever it's going to be called, begins this fall.

Normally when you think summer movies, your mind almost certainly drifts to exploding building and flying men in tight leather outfits. You probably think high-octane car chases and yippee kai yay mother f… But not me. I know the truth about summer: It's all about lovin'. Summer 2009 was, like any other summer, all about romance. Love was in the air and Hollywood delivered lustful relationships with style, flair, and ridiculously over-inflated budgets. We loved them for it.

Now that another summer's over, we're looking back over the mega-movie season that was. In this case, it's my look back at summer's biggest romances. It was hot outside and it was even hotter inside. Whether it was silly, sweet, or heartbreaking… love was in the air!

Spock Loves Everything

Though once a being of logic and reason, in J.J. Abrams' re-imagining of Star Trek, Spock is reborn as a pointy-eared man of lusty passions. Spock was in love with pretty much everything. He loves his mommy. He loves his planet. He loves Uhura who seems to be suffering from hot for teacher syndrome. But most of all he loves James T. Kirk, and you can cut the sexual tension on the Enterprise bridge with a phaser. When he strands Kirk on that frozen planet it's the outer space equivalent of your wife forcing you out of the car in the bad part of town, during a heated interstate argument. Forget logic, Spock's love knows no bounds.

George Kirk Loves Winona Kirk

Less all-encompassing than Spock's scattershot romance with the universe, but far more touching, was Star Trek's romance between Jim Kirk's parents. They're never on screen together but George's sacrifice to save his family is by far the most memorable moment in a memorable film. In only ten minutes of footage Star Trek had us in tears, and as George dives guns blazing into certain death we know he does it not to save the lives of everyone on his ship, but for the love of his wife and newly born son. Splashy summer science fiction movies aren't supposed to be this moving, are they?

Michael Bay Loves Boobs

The infamous director's love affair with plastic explosives is no secret, but in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen we learned of a new Michael Bay obsession: Boobs. Megan Fox earned her part in Transformers by wearing skimpy clothes and washing Michael Bay's exotic car and this summer he put those driveway honed sexual assets to use by keeping his camera stuck to her cleavage. Megan's character serves no other purpose in the movie, she's just there to provide ass shots whenever Bay gets bored with blowing things up and wants to make sweet, visual love. This he does, over, and over, and over again. It must be love.

Tom Loves Summer

(500) Days of Summer is not a love story, but it is about a man in love. Tom is desperately in love with Summer, but is Summer really in love with him? Probably not. It's the ultimate one sided romance, the story of unmet expectations and the way love blinds us to the reality of what's going on around us. Tom misses all the little clues that tell him Summer isn't interested and Summer seems to be trying to talk herself into believing, against her better judgment, that Tom's the one. Tom loves Summer and in the process, even if Summer didn't, we fell in love with him.

Alan Loves Carlos

Ok so maybe Alan's affection for the baby he dubs “Carlos” in The Hangover isn't exactly of the maternal variety. Maybe it's more of the Paris Hilton and her Chihuahua variety. Whatever the nature of their relationship, Carlos soon becomes Alan's favorite accessory as the Hangover boys stumble their way through Vegas attempting to reconstruct the out of control events of last night. Maybe Alan has no idea what he's doing, but don't take that to mean he doesn't care. He'd breastfeed Carlos if he could and after all, they did crack a window for him.

Carl Loves Ellie

Carl and Ellie's life together is seen in Up only as a montage. In a few brief, wordless minutes we watch as they meet, fall in love, live a life together, and grow old. It's a beautiful and bittersweet beginning to a film driven almost entirely by love. Carl's love for Ellie pushes him to live out the dreams they never got to live together. It's his love for Ellie, whether she's there or not, which keeps him going, which defines who he is and what he does throughout the course of the film. Carl and Ellie's romance survives death and lives on, influencing the lives of everyone Carl touches.

McG Loves Himself

The real story in Terminator Salvation wasn't John Connor's fight to save the world from Skynet. It's a love story, a romance between McG and himself. The one-named director spent most of his time before the film's release publicly trumpeting his work as the best thing since sliced bread, inventing fake endorsements from the likes of James Cameron, lying about the film's plot, promising endless sequels, and positioning himself as the fan's best friend; all while turning the entire Terminator franchise into a flaccid turd. McG really thinks McG is cool, even if nobody else does.

Julia Child Loves Food

In Julie & Julia, when asked by her husband what she really likes to do, Julia Child's instant response is “Eat!” And so this lovable, Big Bird-like woman begins a new life devoted entirely to her love of food. She spends every moment immersed in it, celebrating it. Every bite is a delight to Julia and her obsession for food carries over to those around her, inspiring others to take up her cause of cooking or, as in the case of Julie Powell, to copycat her work as a means of gaining fame through blogging. Julia's passion for eating and enjoying inspired an entire generation of foodies here in America and on film as brought to life by Meryl Streep it loses none of its passion.

Tony Scott Loves Google Maps

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 was supposed to be about a face off between Denzel Washington and John Travolta, but instead director Tony Scott inexplicably fell in love with mapping. He punctuates his entire film with what can only be described as a Google Maps acid trip, every scene is followed by a jittery cut to an aerial view of the cityscape which sometimes zooms in on the current location of something unrelated to the main story between Washington and Travolta. I'm not sure what Scott was thinking. It must be love.

Hermione Loves Ron

It's the romance Potter fans have been waiting for, and it's off to a rocky start. In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, the kids are growing up, dealing with hormones, and getting hair where there was none before. In Ron's of the male persuasion and so that's sent him snogging his way through Hogwarts making out with whichever girls show him the most attention. But in the background there's Hermione, madly in love with Ron who remains utterly clueless as to her affections. So far it's been handled sweetly and with real emotion, leaving fans with plenty to look forward to in the next film when will Ron finally get his head out of his ass.

Me Loves Amy Adams

I've been in love with Amy Adams ever since she crawled across the table in Talladega Nights to unleash her inner wildcat. But even I've never been as in love with her as I was after A Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian. Her portrayal of Amelia Earhart, while not particularly accurate, is weirdly and unexpectedly sexy. Clad in ridiculously tight cargo pants which showed off one of her best er… assets she strutted around the screen shouting strange, flapper-era witticisms, and staring adventure in the eye with a wild, steely-eyed gaze. Even if you weren't already smitten with Adams, it's impossible not to fall in love with her at least a little here. Sure at midnight she'll turn back into a mannequin, but that's a mannequin I'd love to take out for dinner and a movie. Scratch that, let's just tongue kiss. Your lips taste like plastic baby.

Henry Loves Underage Girls

Every summer has at least one genuinely sappy romance movie and of the contenders this year The Time Traveler's Wife was the sappiest. It's also the strangest and if you think about it, wholly inappropriate. Henry meets Clare when she's a little kid and spend the next twenty years slowly brainwashing her to be the perfect time traveler's wife. By the time they meet as adults she's completely in love with him, saving him from having to go through all that boorish, dating crap guys so often have to put up with. He skips right over the flowers and candy to go straight to banging. Morally reprehensible? Maybe. But they are in love with each other in a weird, Big Love, sort of way. They're so in love they can't even cheat properly. Clare cheats on Henry with a younger Henry, which isn't really cheating at all, is it? Now that's love.

Chev Chelios Loves Life

Chev Chelios is the man who just won't die. Long past the point when he should be dead and lying in the ground he just keeps right on going in Crank 2: High Voltage. Partly he's driven by revenge but mostly, Chev Chelios just loves not being dead. Rip out his heart and he keeps right on living, running, jumping, and shooting people in the head. He's willing to do anything to keep right on living, from public fornication, to attaching jumper cables to his nipples, to the humping of old ladies. Chev Chelios is in love with breathing and he loves it so much there's literally nothing anyone can do to make him dead.

Tony Scott is the hippest looking 64-year-old I've ever seen. Full of energy and dressed in a stylish hoodie at 10 a.m., he gave over an hour of his time to a group of online journalists yesterday, answering questions about everything from working with Denzel Washington in four movies to the homoeroticism of Top Gun. This is a guy who loves movies, who stays young by making movies, and is happy to talk candidly about his 25+ years in the business.

Want to know which movie he thinks he fucked up by overdoing the camera work? Want to know which legendary movie producer discovered him while high at 3 a.m.? Ever wonder how anyone can possibly film a movie in the subway and enjoy it? Then read on, as we talk about Scott's new movie The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 and lots more.

How extensive was the shooting in the NYC subway system?

It was all here. We did everything in New York. They gave me the opportunity to use real toys and real trains in the subway. What we shot in the motorman’s booth with Travolta was on stage, but everything else is real. All other movies where you see them on subways they make them build sets, and it’s very hard to catch the real feel, and you always sense there’s something not quite right, or something wrong. I think they gave me full-on cooperation here because the original was one of New York’s favorite movies.

We did a tour of the subways, and it was so dusty and moldy down there. I can’t imagine spending months filming down there!

No, I loved it down there. But I’m from the northeast of England, which is depressed mining and shipbuilding, so I grew up in this. You said you did a lot of research for the film. Could you elaborate on that?

What always leads me in terms of my movies are characters. [I tell my production team] 'Go into the real world, cast these people in the real world, and find me role models for my writers.' Then I reverse-engineer. I don’t change the structure of the script, but I use my research. That’s always been my mantra, and that’s what gets me excited, because I get to educate and entertain myself in terms of worlds I could never normally touch, other than the fact that I’m a director. And I get paid well to do this, so it’s fun!

What about the control room? I heard they don’t let anyone in there at all.

They let me in, and it’s like NASA. I can’t tell you where it is, otherwise I’ll have to kill you! It was difficult for us to get in there because of the security – somebody could get in there and target the subways. . I went in there on a Sunday morning, a hundred people, it’s the size of a football field – three stories high - and you could’ve heard a pin drop. Everybody’s on headsets, in suits, so I just took it right from that, and that’s what we did in our movie.

So what attracted you to the original film, and why did you think it was ripe for a remake?

One, I don’t regard it as a remake. I don’t regard it as a reinvention. My memory of the original was Walter Matthau, with his laconic New York sense of humor, his pants at half-mast – he was brilliant. Our story is motivated by John’s character, who’s a real guy, and his character is motivated by this real guy who just got out of jail before we started prepping the movie. But listen, I love the original. I could only watch ten minutes of it and then I had to stop, because I wanted to leave that as a separate movie, and not make this a reinvention or a remake.

In movies like this, where the subways play such a large character, how well do you think it translates to people whose environments are outside of cities?

I think it’s a very exciting two hours, and it puts you on the edge of your seat. I think everybody’s familiar with what a subway looks and feels like because of television. I think I’ve given a feeling that the subway’s just different from what they’ve experienced before, and I think I’ve made New York a very strong character in the movie.

This is the fourth or fifth time you’ve worked with Denzel Washington. So what’s it like working with someone you’ve worked with so often? Do you guys have a shorthand? And does it make the day go by easier?

No! Our days are always hard. There is a shorthand, but there’s a terrible, old-fashioned word called ‘respect’. I respect his process and he respects mine, and both of us are insecure in that we’re always examining and making what we do better, and my goal every day is to try and think, “How do I see these characters in a different way?” And I’m always motivated by the characters, and it’s the same with Denzel. I mean you look at the four movies I’ve done with him, he’s always reached back inside himself and taken different aspects of his personality, from: Crimson Tide, Man on Fire, Déjà Vu and Pelham, he’s always given me a different Denzel. And that’s what I do with all my actors. I say, “There’s an aspect of you inside him, and I’ve got this guy over here, and he fits that aspect of your personality.” With Denzel, he’s always delivered. He’s one of those actors who can do nothing and communicate everything, and that comes from doing your homework. If you feel comfortable about yourself, you don’t have to give. You can just let the camera sit and do nothing – and I rarely do, as the camera’s always [moving].

Your camera is moving a lot in this movie, in scenes where it's not necessarily motivated. For example, Gandolfini comes out of the subway after he first hears about the hijacking and he’s talking to his assistant, and you do three or four 180 swoops in a row. What’s that all about?

360s! It’s about energy and it’s about momentum, and I think the movie’s very exciting, and it’s not one individual thing. The true excitement comes from the actors – that gives you the true drama – and whatever I can do with the camera, that’s icing on the cake. I wanted the movie to grab you. I use four cameras and I maybe do three takes – so the actors love it. Maybe I move it more than I should, but that’s the nature of the way I am. One of the big challenges for this movie, and one of the reasons it’s sort of perverse why I took it on is in the original, it’s really about two guys on the telephone for two-thirds of the movie, and I said, “Damn! This is going to be hard trying to keep it tense!” I was always seeing that tension, and Brian gave me the tension on the pages, and the actors gave me the tension in terms of their interplay.

This is an ambitious project in terms of going into the subway. Were there any specific snafus technically or logistically?

No, it was hard. When I first came here, I was asking all these questions, I want to do this, I want to do that-- "No." Then I discovered it was New York, and there was a way that I had to learn. And embracing them, and actually making them part of the project. And people loved it. It was polled as New York's favorite movie, the original [Pelham 1 2 3]. [During shooting I was] taking 150 people into the subway at night. We've got John, and we've got Denzel, and I had real trains behind them at 40 miles an hour. You can CG a train in , but you watch the performances change. They go to a whole different dimension when you put actors in a real environment. The strength of my movies is that's what I always do. I always drop actors right in the middle. I will not peel away the sound to give them an easier time. They always get angry at me at the beginning.

How do you define both New York and L.A. as characters?

You look at how I shot New York in the beginning, my definition I stole from Koyaanisqatsi. I said 'How can I portray New York, not just differently from how it's done before, but how can I portray it as the guy that John Travolta wanted to take revenge on, wanted to humiliate.' I'm a plagiarist-- I always look back at other movies and I steal, but I steal well, and I reinvent. Koyaanisqatsi, it's a huge stoner movie. It was just time lapse, and i thought it was great. I kept reaching, saying how can I grab the audience right at the beginning, make them feel the anxiety and the pressure of New York. Then I cut my opening title sequence.

When Ridley was shooting American Gangster, he was saying the city is impossible to control when you're shooting. Did you have that same experience?

I got lucky. The Waldorf was hard, because that sequence, they'd only let me shoot six guns at a time, and each gun could only have six rounds in it. I had to shoot all that shootout, and they wouldn't let me use automatic guns, because you know they're scared in the city. Imagine staying at the Waldorf Sunday morning, and hearing all that gunfire. I had to cobble all that together to make it look like-- I stole from Bonnie and Clyde, another movie. I actually stole it from Wild Bunch. No, I had a good experience here. I had a few fingers thrown at me from cars going by. But other than that, it was good. And the Manhattan Bridge, that was hard, with the helicopters and the trains and the cars. We did it on Sunday, and I was respectful of the times. I didn't run over.

How do you work with your brother Ridley?

If Ridley and I worked together on the set we’d kill each other. But we’ve been in business for 45 years together, and when business is good in blood there’s nothing better, but rarely it’s good. So we’re right arm/left arm. And we’ve developed these companies now – our commercial production company RSA, and we’ve got Scott Free Productions. He’s great. He’s the nuts-and-bolts up at the front, and I’m the day-to-day.

What do you think are the basic elements that turn an action-thriller into a classic?

Damn. That’s a very intellectual question! I always get criticized for style over content, unlike Ridley’s films like Alien or Blade Runner or Gladiator that go right into the classic box right away. Mine sort of hover. Maybe with time people will start saying they should be classics, but I think I’m always perceived as reaching too hard for difference, and difference doesn’t categorize you as the ‘classic’ category.

Speaking of your style, you’re known for a very distinctive editing techniques with freeze-frames, jumbled chronologies, slo-mo - Domino is an extreme example.

If you look at Domino, I sound like a broken record, but everything is driven by research. I hung out with these bounty hunters who were all coked up all the time – they’re all on speed or meth – and the movie was a product of my research. Everything in the way I shoot the movie is dictated by the world when I touch it, so we had ride-alongs with bounty hunters who were [sniffing like crazy] in the back, and it’s a product of that. But I think I was wrong. I didn’t let the movie breathe enough. The script was great – Richard Kelly wrote a great script – and I got overcome by the insanity of the world I was touching. I think I fucked up on that one.

We were talking about classics earlier, and I was wondering if you could talk about the enduring legacy of Top Gun? Also, a lot of people have satirized the homoerotic elements of the film. Was any of that apparent while you were filming?

No it wasn’t. Not at all. But with Top Gun, I had just done The Hunger, and Hollywood’s always trying to find the new kid on the block, and nobody’s seen a foot of film, and I was actually developing Man on Fire 25 years ago, and they saw a cut of The Hunger, and all of a sudden my parking spot at Warner Brothers was painted out! It took me four more years to get another movie, which was Top Gun. Don Simpson saw [The Hunger] channel-surfing at 3 a.m. – I think he was high. And he actually saw a Saab commercial that I shot which is a jet racing a car, then he saw The Hunger, and him and Jerry [Bruckheimer] called me. Hollywood just hated that movie. They called it, “Esoteric, artsy-fartsy,” and we’re going to do a sequel to The Hunger. I’m not directing it, but we’re doing it.

Do you have nostalgia for the way films were being made and the way the industry worked in the 80s?

The 80s was a whole era. We were criticized, we being the Brits coming over, because we were out of advertising-- Alan parker, Hugh Hudson, Adrian Lyne, my brother-- we were criticized about style over content. Jerry Bruckheimer was very bored of the way American movies were very traditional and classically done. Jerry was always looking for difference. That's why I did six movies with Jerry. He always applauded the way I wanted to approach things. That period in the 80s was a period when I was constantly being criticized, and my press was horrible. I never read any press after The Hunger. Me, my brother, not Alan Parker, Alan Parker skated through. Adrian Lyne got slammed like I did.

You've mentioned fear quite a few times this morning. Is fear a motivating factor in many of your characters, and where does that come from for you?

If you look at my body of work, there's always a dark side to my characters. They've always got a skeleton in the closet, they've always got a subtext. I like that. Whether it's Bruce Willis in Last Boy Scout or Denzel in this. I think fear, and there's two ways of looking at fear. The most frightening thing I do in my life is getting up and shooting movies. Commercials, movies, every morning I'm bolt upright on one hour two hours sleep, before the alarm clock goes off. That's a good thing. That fear motivates me, and I enjoy that fear. I'm perverse in that way. I do other things. I've rock climbed all my life. Whenever I finish a movie, I do multi-day ascents, I got hang on a wall in Yosemite. That fear is tangible. That's black and white. I can make this hold or that hold The other fear is intangible, it's very abstract, and that's more frightening.

Tony Scott has a lot-- a lot-- of projects on his dance card and he swears up and down he'll make every single one of them. While it's possible he'll pass a few along to one of the other directors hanging around his Scott Free productions, he's confident about one of them getting made-- a remake, or a reimagining, or reboot, or whatever, of 1979's The Warriors.

We already know thanks to his conversation with Rotten Tomatoes that he's setting the new movie amid the gang culture of Los Angeles. But at this morning's roundtable interview for The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, he gave a lot more details about his plans for the film, to the point that it almost sounded like was describing individual shots.

"L.A. is now the city of the future," he told us, maybe deliberately evoking the vision of L.A. his brother Ridley put forward in Blade Runner. "If it's the Warriors, it's sunset and it's quiet. I've got a whole different feel. I'm letting it breathe in a different way."

As for the event that kicks off the movie, the killing of gag leader Cyrus, Scott is planning for some serious mayhem. "Then on the Vincent Thomas bridge, which is Long Beach, you have a thousand gang members up there, then Cyrus goes bang. It's almost like 9/11, bodies coming off, it just goes ballistic. Then these guys have got to get from the Vincent Thomas back to Venice, through all these different gang territories. And it becomes anarchy. The gangs are meeting, they're meeting for a truce. Just like they were in the original. But once that truce is broken, they go back to their turf. And our guys, the Warriors, they've got to get back to their turf, back to Venice."

So, as Scott promised earlier, he really does seem to be keeping much of the similar plot from the original film, as much as he swears up and down it's not a remake. And when Tony Scott promises that a scene is going ballistic, you can be guaranteed there is going to be some insanity going on. Swooping cameras! Lightning fast editing!

We'll have more from my interview with Scott later today, but for now, just revel in all the crazy possibilities this new Tony Scott Warriors might have to offer.

Yesterday Bloody-Disgusting broke the news that either a remake or a prequel to Ridley Scott’s original Alien movie was in the works. Now that story’s been confirmed by the good folks over at Collider and we know for certain: It’s a prequel.

Even though the idea of creating a prequel to explain away the origins of the Aliens is a pretty horrible idea, maybe there’s a silver lining here. At least Ridley Scott is somewhat involved. It’s his production company that’s behind it and his brother Tony Scott confirmed that one of the company’s directors, a guy named Carl Rinsch will be helming the prequel.

They plan to start shooting by the end of this year and yes, like it or not, Fox is still the company funding it. With their recent track record that’s bound to make fanboys nervous, as if the idea of a prequel wasn’t bad enough, but again at least the Scott’s are behind it. That’s good… isn’t it? Now somebody give us some information on this Carl Rinsch character. His IMDB page is almost as barren as my own would be, if I had one.