Alien Covenant Final Boss?

[𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯]

That said, he still has a distinctive visual style that sets him apart from his peers.

I can't think of anything that sets his films apart visually any more. Take out the beginning and end titles and there's little in his modern films that say "This is a Ridley Scott movie".

He has a distinctive "painterly style". Think vast epic landscapes with brooding skies, stark contrasts between light and dark. Lots of atmosphere, dust, rain, smoke and steam. He also has a very good eye for composition and many of the shots in his films were influenced by classical paintings from artists such as Vermeer and Edward Hooper.

Granted, films such as Thelma and Louis, The Counselor etc doesn't really have that visual flair due to setting/subject matter but recent genre films such as Prometheus, Exodus and to a slightly lesser extent The Martian, still showcases his distinctive visual signature very well.

[Necronomicon II]

^ Yup, it's the painterly style that is prominent in many of his works; painterly epics, and his best goes toe to toe with Kubrick (arguably I think Alien and Blade Runner are both the most stunningly shot films with the best art direction of all time, but that's just me) and yeah it's less discernible, say, in his smaller scale films (which are nonetheless visualised and shot very well).  Going all the way back to The Duellists, which wasn't content just to frame shots like 18th century paintings, the scenes in that film are suffused with a beautifully earthy atmosphere; you can almost smell the petrichor, I don't think that one gets enough appreciation in his canon to be honest.

[SiL]

He has a distinctive "painterly style". Think vast epic landscapes with brooding skies, stark contrasts between light and dark. Lots of atmosphere, dust, rain, smoke and steam. He also has a very good eye for composition and many of the shots in his films were influenced by classical paintings from artists such as Vermeer and Edward Hooper.

You've just described every decent director and DP. That's my point.

I can tell a Tony Scott movie when I see one, but when I saw Exodus on TV I had to be reminded Ridley made it.

[Molecules]

He has a distinctive "painterly style". Think vast epic landscapes with brooding skies, stark contrasts between light and dark. Lots of atmosphere, dust, rain, smoke and steam. He also has a very good eye for composition and many of the shots in his films were influenced by classical paintings from artists such as Vermeer and Edward Hooper.

You've just described every decent director and DP. That's my point.

I can tell a Tony Scott movie when I see one, but when I saw Exodus on TV I had to be reminded Ridley made it.

The Duelists, Alien, Blade Runner... Everything running up to perhaps the 90s (where he suddenly becomes Tony Scott for a while)... What made them stand out, particularly Blade R. and Alien was the noir factor - the use of deep shadow, high contrast, strong 'key lights', and to use the 'painterly' cliche again, a real preponderance for painting faces and people with different kinds of light, fed through all manner of obstructions and reflections (the 'light behind an electric fan' thing became a tiresome sci-fi cliche for a long time).

And I'm no expert on this, but there was a quality brought out by the film stocks he was using at the time, that is now (debatably) more-or-less possible to replicate with digital cameras, but he mostly chooses not to it seems

I kind of get what people are saying about his more contemporary stuff (mainly the drab, de-saturated historical epics - The Martian really could have been anybody while he took naps); he frames like a William Wyler or something, almost nothing feels adventurous or gritty, but he goes big, gets what is needed while keeping the balance of elements in that widescreen, directing your attention with aplomb, stunning vistas .

Like when I see Prometheus I don't see the same guy from the first few films, powering through on marginal budgets, hungry. I see a complacent elder statesman who wants to lay down an epic for the ages, like those Golden Age Hollywood flicks that ignited his imagination as a kid

Agreed. I remember he once saying how he never listened to critics and that honestly worried me when it came to Alien: Covenant and how it'd improve upon Prometheus' mistakes. Fortunately, it sounds like he did listen to criticism and take it into account when working on sequel.

Covenant seems like Prometheus take 2, going back to a pre-Lindelof state and reworking the story Ridley and Spaihts were going to tell originally.

Yeah, let's hope so. I think he would advertise the course corrective as being his instincts on what hadn't worked, but the Prometheus feedback must have had an effect. Plus we've heard that line being trotted out that Prom. is now considered more a 'prologue'. Let's get back to features that can stand on their own, please. If Covenant leaves loose ends and doesn't meet $$ expectations, and they never conclude this arc, it'll be blue balls time.

Although interestingly I had heard somewhere (maybe here) that even Lindelof tried to get Ridders to offer more for the audience, knowing based on his 'Lost' rep that he'd be blamed for it. Or maybe that was just Lindelof throwing him under the bus after one too many internet death threats, and Rid not returning his calls.

[Necronomicon II]

His very best is behind him, but yeah even when he's more "director for hire" he still mounts beautiful frames, large scale vistas and has a keen sense of detail, and to be fair it's because of the decades long influence of his best works that have obviously impacted those perfectly competent at the job if given the role (Villeneuve, etc). 
I'm hoping the Böcklin influences that Haag spoke about bring back more of that gritty, naturalistic atmosphere though.