I do think too much credit or blame falls on a director. I always look at the writer(s) of a movie as well, who often get overlooked despite being such a big part of it all. Though I suppose one could blame Scott for taking on this project with the problems in the script. And more problems stand out after reading that rundown.
I'll repeat what a buddy e-mailed me:
"You know how people say good movies age like wine? This aged like milk." 
Usually directors get too much credit when things go right. When they don't, they get too much blame.
I think the only saving grave Scott has is that he claims he cut off 30 minutes off for the theatrical edit. I'm pretty sure that lost half-hour can save the movie for me, but again this was the guy behind BLADE RUNNER. That went from hated flop to classic after his original version was released.
Another example was KINGDOM OF HEAVEN, a movie I saw in theatres and sorta hated. Reluctant for years to watch his DC of that one because life's too short. But then I saw it, and that was a very good movie with moments of true greatness.
So maybe he'll do it again? But this comes to mind that story about THE GODFATHER when Robert Evans and Paramount tried to get Coppola to cut that movie and cut cut cut because 3 hours was way too long for theatres. Only ultimately for everybody in the room realize that they were needlessly gutting the picture and just let out Coppola's cut.
