There has been considerable uproar regarding the world-famous director, Sir Ridley Scott, advising against Malta as a holiday destination during an interview that followed the screening of his latest film Gladiator II.

The reaction on the island is understandable, as few anticipated such remarks from a director who has praised Malta for many years and frequently mentioned how much he enjoyed filming here since the 1990s. Furthermore, his last two films shot in Malta benefitted generously from taxpayer funds.

However, I disagree with former Nationalist Party leader Adrian Delia for saying that Scott is no longer welcome in Malta after having received substantial financial support from the country. While I respect Delia’s knee-jerk reaction to defend Malta, I believe that Scott’s comments warrant a more nuanced consideration.

First and foremost, it is plausible that Scott simply intended to convey that he is not beholden to the Maltese government for promoting Malta. By voicing his admiration for Malta’s architecture and history, he aimed to express genuine appreciation without bias stemming from the financial support his latest film received – arguably the most generous cash rebate in the world.

Could Scott have refrained from stating what he said, joking or not? Certainly. However, I believe he did not anticipate that an unedited interview would get released so widely. He most likely expected Paramount Pictures to ensure that only vetted content would be released but mistakes can happen, even with large Hollywood studios. 

It would not be unwise to consider that Scott’s recent statement, that he was only joking, is just an effort to mend relations with Malta, especially when the payment of tens of millions of euros are at stake. If he genuinely believes that Malta is no longer the ideal holiday destination it once was, he is entitled to that opinion. And instead of blaming him for his comment, perhaps Malta should reflect.

Scott has visited Malta numerous times and filmed his first project here in 1995 with White Squall, followed by Gladiator in 1999. He is familiar with the charm Malta offered back then and can compare it to the current realities of chaotic traffic, excessive construction and overtourism.

If Ridley Scott genuinely believes Malta is no longer the ideal holiday destination, he is entitled to that opinion- Malcolm Scerri-Ferrante

Personally, I would agree if he felt that Malta is no longer the desirable destination it was some two decades ago. The so-called ‘progress’ – or, as economists refer to it, ‘growth’ – has come at a cost. The quality of life for residents has not improved; roads are congested, new concrete structures often detract from the traditional landscape, the healthcare system is strained and the population has grown significantly, necessitating a reconsideration of tourism levels.

Scott’s opinion about Malta as a tourist destination should not be seen as the fault of the Malta Film Commission but, rather, as the result of current and past government administrations.

Instead of criticising Scott for his comments, Malta should consider that this man is an intelligent and creative filmmaker. It is also good to note that the promised taxpayer funds of around €50 million (€47 was the provisional amount before the actor’s strike temporarily halted the filming) is not going directly to Scott but, rather, to Paramount Pictures.

While Scott may indirectly benefit from these funds by seeing profits sooner due to the Maltese contribution – which has no stake in the film’s equity – the notion that the entire sum goes into his pocket is misleading.

By stating this, I am not trying to justify the €50 million rebate. I recognise, as, no doubt, Paramount executives do, that the film would have been shot in Malta even with a mere €10 million incentive; the historical appeal of locations like Fort Ricasoli and Scott’s positive experiences in Malta since the 1990s were already significant draws.

Malta should not hold Scott’s honesty against him simply because of the controversial regulations surrounding the film rebate scheme. Instead, the focus should be on adjusting the scheme to ensure it is sustainable, allowing it to continue to exist for many years to come and thereby keeping the local film servicing industry alive, but without allowing one single Hollywood film to consume the entire annual budget for these incentives.

Malcolm Scerri-Ferrante is a film line producer who worked in the industry for over three decades.