My hate/love relationship with John Glen's directorial efforts

chrisisall

Back in the day, as much as I liked Bond taken back down from the heights of MR lunacy, FYEO still began & ended very badly IMO. OP surprised me being so entertaining despite a Tarzan yell that I could only forgive because Chewie did one in ROTJ the same year. Then California Girls. X-( As I was ready to give up on Bond altogether, he popped out with TLD- a friggin' REAL BOND MOVIE! Then LTK, not quite as good for me at the time, but still, devoid of goofy garbage. Those two movies brought me back to Bond. And he almost made me give up on Bond before...

Thoughts?

hehadlotsofguts

He does make some good decisions. The pigeons startling Bond for example

Thunderpussy

I always thoughhe was an average director, LTK being his best Bond.

chrisisall

hehadlotsofguts wrote:

He does make some good decisions. The pigeons startling Bond for example

Or the monkey...

Barbel

hehadlotsofguts wrote:

He does make some good decisions. The pigeons startling Bond for example

Yes, that's his motif.

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

I always thought he was an average director, LTK being his best Bond.

I like his directorial style in general, but he seemed to suffer from a smaller touch of what Richard Lester had- that NEED to throw a goof in where you can...
Thankfully, in his last two Bonds he abandoned that.

hehadlotsofguts

And Stacey's cat in AVTAK. I think FYEO was his best film in the series. His choice of using no music during the St Cyril's ascent saving a sudden loud sting for when Bond reaches the top and sees Apostis adds to the suspense of the scene .

Barbel

In context, being old enough to have seen these movies as they arrived, FYEO was like a breath of fresh air after MR. Real Fleming material! Arguably Roger Moore's greatest performance! Glen's keep-it-simple approach fitted in well.

OP was more of the same with less Fleming, Moore inhabiting 007 with confidence and assurance, and some of the silliness creeping in (double-taking camels? Tarzan yells? SIT!!!) but still a solid Bond flick- especially held up against NSNA the same year- and Glen's flair with the action sequences carried the film. Some grumbles (the reveal of the twins, Mischa & Grischa, at the start could have been better) but a winner.

AVTAK had problems which weren't Glen's fault. It's not my wish to rehash the "Moore was too old" argument, or the "plot stolen from GF" one either. IMHO he did well here, though with more weak points than OP.

The attention on TLD was, naturally enough, on Dalton rather than Glen. The film does bog down about 3/4 way through, though I'd say that's more to do with the convoluted plot than Glen's direction of it.

It was with LTK that a certain sense of strain began to appear with Glen's approach. The film has a plain and simple plotline, unlike the 4 others above, and Glen's plain and simple approach doesn't generate enough contrast/tension, again unlike the others above. This isn't to imply that it's a bad film- I love LTK!- but it had become clear that this combination of writers and director had run their course.

chrisisall

Barbel wrote:

The attention on TLD was, naturally enough, on Dalton rather than Glen. The film does bog down about 3/4 way through, though I'd say that's more to do with the convoluted plot than Glen's direction of it.

See, I never felt that it bogged down, just switched gears. If pressed, I'd say that TLD is, objectively speaking, one of the five most 'perfect' Bond films made. Glen had a role in that. -{

Firemass

John Glen's sense of humor is a bit daft since he likes to take credit for the tarzan yell and california girls. However, don't let 5 seconds ruin an entire Bond film for you!

FYEO is rather clunky by modern standards, but OP and AVTAK are both top notch 007. My appreciation for Octopussy has really grown in the past month...it's become one of my very favorites.

and then we have the legendary pair of Dalton films of course...

Don't forget Glen's contributions to Bond films in the 60's and 70's either. He was in charge of the opening ski jump for TSWLM among other things.

Thunderpussy

I've noticed a panning shot Glen used in FYEO, From a moving seaplane crossing to
Melina climbing up some stairs to the ships deck. I hadn't seen this used since
DAF, when Bond leaves Prof Metz lab by one door and the camera pans across
to another to show a technican entering. He uses it again in FYEO, panning from a
Zamboni to Bond and his contact walking beside the ice rink.

Not important, I just seem to remember it from it's first showing. )

Richard--W

The Bond films had become phoney, artificial, cartoonish, and ossified by the time Moonraker arrived in 1979. People went to see the semi-annual event of a new Bond film, but they didn't leave the theater impressed. Audiences laughed at The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker, not with it. That came later with the next generation of fans.

With For Your Eyes Only in 1981, John Glen restored energy, realism and a sense of danger to the series. He deserves credit for that. I applauded him then and I applaud him now.

But he was also a plodding mediocrity. He could always manage the logistics of elaborate action scenes and stunts, but he had ho dramatic sensibility nor dramatic timing. He would read a script and have no idea what it meant emotionally. He couldn't see the subtleties in characters. He didn't know how to direct actors except to tell them where to stand. He couldn't compose for group interaction. He was strictly a logistics director. For Your Eyes Only lost a lot of dramatic subtext under his insensitive and boorish handling, even as it gained in vitality. Most directors refine their skills from one film to the next, but Glen learned nothing by doing. He didn't improve over the years. After nine years he still didn't know how to pace an action scene or be subtle when subtlety was called for nor how to favor the actor. Glen pounded and dragged out Licence to Kill longer and harder than the material could support.

Richard Maibaum tried to keep the 1980s Bond films on the plausible side so that audiences could relate to them. His script writing holds the 1980s Bond films together. Glen's direction helps in some ways and hinders in others.

Higgins

Richard--W wrote:

The Bond films had become phoney, artificial, cartoonish, and ossified by the time Moonraker arrived in 1979. People went to see the semi-annual event of a new Bond film, but they didn't leave the theater impressed. Audiences laughed at The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker, not with it. That came later with the next generation of fans.

What????

I am not sure where you have seen these movies.

Where I was, the audience gave standing ovations and left the theeaters with the intense feeling, that they have just seen THE BEST Bond movie of all times!

Sir Miles

Bondtoys wrote:

Richard--W wrote:

The Bond films had become phoney, artificial, cartoonish, and ossified by the time Moonraker arrived in 1979. People went to see the semi-annual event of a new Bond film, but they didn't leave the theater impressed. Audiences laughed at The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker, not with it. That came later with the next generation of fans.

What????

I am not sure where you have seen these movies.

Where I was, the audience gave standing ovations and left the theeaters with the intense feeling, that they have just seen THE BEST Bond movie of all times!

Bondtots....I know comedy usually passes Germany by but Richard is obviously a 'wind-up' merchant....he only posts to provoke....don't bite... -{

Higgins

well, usually I am the provocateur so he'll definitely not getting me on that foot )

Rhanks for the heads up and don't you dare to change it again! :v

Richard--W

Bondtoys wrote:

What????

I am not sure where you have seen these movies.

Where I was, the audience gave standing ovations and left the theeaters with the intense feeling, that they have just seen THE BEST Bond movie of all times!

I saw the early Bond films in New York City and on Long Island in the 1970s. I saw THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in Los Angeles, California the day it opened in 1977. I saw MOONRAKER in Los Angeles as well, the day it opening in 1979. There was a lot of dissatisfaction among Bond fans at the time that people don't know about today.

Higgins

hmm, I doubt that many people from California would agree, but whatever floats your boat -{

chrisisall

Richard--W wrote:

I saw the early Bond films in New York City and on Long Island in the 1970s. I saw THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in Los Angeles, California the day it opened in 1977. I saw MOONRAKER in Los Angeles as well, the day it opening in 1979. There was a lot of dissatisfaction among Bond fans at the time that people don't know about today.

I saw them both first run in Long Island, NY. The crowd for TSWLM seemed to love it from what I could tell, however the crowd for MR took to that one less well; low-level groans & giggles broke the otherwise dead silence after "Here's to us" and no applause or anything when Bond blew up the Death St- I mean satellite. No applause at the end credits. I heard the word 'stupid' being muttered repeatedly as we walked out.

Charmed & Dangerous

That's pretty much how I was In he UK too on first run.

Everyone cheered TSWLM because it was 3 years since TMWTGG so it was good to see Bond back, and because TMWTGG (while fun enough) contained nowhere near the spectacle of TSWLM.

However Moonraker couldn't top TSWLM and 'Bond in space' was just a step too far for most fans, so it didn't receive quite the same applause that TSWLM did.

Richard--W

chrisisall wrote:

Richard--W wrote:

I saw the early Bond films in New York City and on Long Island in the 1970s. I saw THE SPY WHO LOVED ME in Los Angeles, California the day it opened in 1977. I saw MOONRAKER in Los Angeles as well, the day it opening in 1979. There was a lot of dissatisfaction among Bond fans at the time that people don't know about today.

I saw them both first run in Long Island, NY. The crowd for TSWLM seemed to love it from what I could tell, however the crowd for MR took to that one less well; low-level groans & giggles broke the otherwise dead silence after "Here's to us" and no applause or anything when Bond blew up the Death St- I mean satellite. No applause at the end credits. I heard the word 'stupid' being muttered repeatedly as we walked out.

Yeah, I heard the word "stupid" a lot, too. But times change and so do audiences. Now the stupid things Bond fans and audiences used to complain about are the things people like the most.

Which theater on Long Island, do you recall? I saw the Connery Bonds as double-features in 1970 and 1971 at the Smithhaven Mall Twin Theater, in Suffolk County. One of the Aston-Martins was on display in the outer lobby while Goldfinger played. Also saw Diamonds Are Forever there in 1971. The satellite prop was displayed in the inner lobby and the Vegas car Bond drove was displayed in the outer lobby where the lines formed. I saw Live and Let Die and The Man With Golden Gun at the Meadowbrook Theater, in Nassau County. The Godfather had played there for almost a year until Live and Let Die replaced it. I used to keep a journal of my theater-going and film-going in those days.

Richard--W

chrisisall wrote:

Back in the day, as much as I liked Bond taken back down from the heights of MR lunacy, FYEO still began & ended very badly IMO. OP surprised me being so entertaining despite a Tarzan yell that I could only forgive because Chewie did one in ROTJ the same year. Then California Girls. X-( As I was ready to give up on Bond altogether, he popped out with TLD- a friggin' REAL BOND MOVIE! Then LTK, not quite as good for me at the time, but still, devoid of goofy garbage. Those two movies brought me back to Bond. And he almost made me give up on Bond before...

Thoughts?

I relate.

Regarding FYEO, are you referring to the pre-title sequence and the end-joke with PM Thatcher? If that's what you mean by beginning and ending badly, I agree 100%. I cut both scenes out of my fan edit. You can get a seamless edit of the watch being dropped into the wineglass then cut to Bond and Melina diving into the water. So seamless you'd never know the Margaret Thatcher silliness was removed. The pre-title sequence involving a helicopter in which Bond drops a Blofeld look-alike down a chimney was shot as an afterthought after principle photography had wrapped. I cut it. I reinstated the sinking of the trawler, the phone scene with the Russian minister, and the helicopter assault on the yacht as the pre-title. It's one big chunk inserted between the gun barrel opening and the titles. It ends with a push into close-up on Melina's eyes. I had to stagger some frames at the start and end to make it work and then add the opening bar of the song over the push on Melina's eyes. After the titles, I start with Bond walking through the cemetery. Once again I had to stagger some frames and edit sound to make it seamless. I cut with the priest crossing himself as the helicopter takes off. Then cut to Monepenny's office. You'd be surprised just how much the correct opening and ending restores the mood and proper tone of the film. The problems in the snow can't all be fixed, but most of them can. The idea was to put the story back the way Richard Maibaum wrote it. FYEO holds up remarkably well once Wilson's crap is removed.

Richard

chrisisall

Richard--W wrote:

Which theater on Long Island, do you recall?

Wow... I haven't tried to access that memory in a LONG time...
I saw DAF at the Meadowbrook, I totally remember that, it was my first theatrical Bond. I think I saw most first run Bonds there, it WAS a UA theatre, wasn't it? :007)
Most of the Bond revivals I saw at the Hempstead theatre, down the block from the Caulderon I & II. The Cinema 150 in Syosset was the nicest theatre IMO, no Bonds, but I did See Alien there. The Broadway multiplex in Hicksville is where we saw Star Wars for the first time. The Uniondale Mini-Cinema was cool, but they just played artsy & stoner flicks. God I miss that theatre. Got turned into a religious library or something.

BIG TAM

Richard--W wrote:

chrisisall wrote:

Back in the day, as much as I liked Bond taken back down from the heights of MR lunacy, FYEO still began & ended very badly IMO. OP surprised me being so entertaining despite a Tarzan yell that I could only forgive because Chewie did one in ROTJ the same year. Then California Girls. X-( As I was ready to give up on Bond altogether, he popped out with TLD- a friggin' REAL BOND MOVIE! Then LTK, not quite as good for me at the time, but still, devoid of goofy garbage. Those two movies brought me back to Bond. And he almost made me give up on Bond before...

Thoughts?

I relate.

Regarding FYEO, are you referring to the pre-title sequence and the end-joke with PM Thatcher? If that's what you mean by beginning and ending badly, I agree 100%. I cut both scenes out of my fan edit. You can get a seamless edit of the watch being dropped into the wineglass then cut to Bond and Melina diving into the water. So seamless you'd never know the Margaret Thatcher silliness was removed. The pre-title sequence involving a helicopter in which Bond drops a Blofeld look-alike down a chimney was shot as an afterthought after principle photography had wrapped. I cut it. I reinstated the sinking of the trawler, the phone scene with the Russian minister, and the helicopter assault on the yacht as the pre-title. It's one big chunk inserted between the gun barrel opening and the titles. It ends with a push into close-up on Melina's eyes. I had to stagger some frames at the start and end to make it work and then add the opening bar of the song over the push on Melina's eyes. After the titles, I start with Bond walking through the cemetery. Once again I had to stagger some frames and edit sound to make it seamless. I cut with the priest crossing himself as the helicopter takes off. Then cut to Monepenny's office. You'd be surprised just how much the correct opening and ending restores the mood and proper tone of the film. The problems in the snow can't all be fixed, but most of them can. The idea was to put the story back the way Richard Maibaum wrote it. FYEO holds up remarkably well once Wilson's crap is removed.

Richard

That sounds pretty good, Richard--W. I've often thought a similar thing could be done to MOONRAKER. It's an enjoyable film if one is prepared to view it in the right frame of mind but could be improved immeasurably with a few judicial snips of the editor's scissors. Then it would fall in line with Christopher Wood's superior novelization.

Higgins

chrisisall wrote:

TLD- a friggin' REAL BOND MOVIE! Then LTK, not quite as good for me at the time, but still, devoid of goofy garbage.

I recall that there was still some goofy garbage - particularly when Dalton tries to deliver a one-liner.

The chopped-off police Lada was definitely goofy and so was the "salt corrosion" comment - best Roger Moore tradition may I say!

I am pretty sure that there is more such as the Bollinger promo sentence and other stuff but i really can't be bothered to see Weepy Dalton again to list all those things for completeness

Aren't you watching these Dalton movies a little with pink glasses

chrisisall

Bondtoys wrote:

I recall that there was still some goofy garbage - particularly when Dalton tries to deliver a one-liner.

There's a useful four letter word, and you're full of it. )

Higgins

Very constructive - as always

chrisisall

Bondtoys wrote:

Very constructive - as always

You deserve the best!

Thunderpussy

Best, was that the four letter word you were thinking of, chrisisall. )

chrisisall

Thunderpussy wrote:

Best, was that the four letter word you were thinking of, chrisisall. )

Quite.

DelicatessenInSteel

John Glenn did a good job directing, the editing of the films weren't tight enough, especially in some of the fight scenes and sequences..you could almost see the storyboards and how slavishly they stuck to each scene to the point they felt over choreographed. A tighter cut would have benefited many a Bond movie...a slower cut would have benefited QOS.

BIG TAM

Some recent observations of THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS interest me. It's a pretty solid Bond thriller but with several holdovers of the Moore era. Dalton sitting in a cello case careening down a snowy slope seems less silly than if it were Moore, even though the situation itself is blatantly ridiculous. It doesn't feel as daft because it's Dalton, a percieved 'serious' actor doing it. But it's still pretty daft! I am however more than pleased they decided to dump the whole Moroccan Bazaar 'magic carpet ride' sequence. A rare example of John Glen reining in his comic inclinations.