›

John Glen

2»

Comments

  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited July 2012 Posts: 1,778
    He was just a very straight-forward action director. Supposidly Timothy Dalton got very angry with him while shooting LTK after Dalton went up to him to talk about the characters and Glen constantly ignored him because he was too wrapped up in planning an explosion. It was said that most of the actors went to Dalton to talk about their characters and motivations not Glen.

    And people say Timothy Dalton didn't care about Bond. I think he cared a hell of alot. But an actor of his caliber deserved a better director and better scripts. Kinda like what Craig is getting now.

    Yet Lazenby, the most inexperienced and least accomplished of all the Bond actors, got arguably the best script the series' 22 film history in his 1 outing. Kinda ironic. Could you guys imagine Dalton in the 80s starring in OHMSS. Im sure he would've really sank his teeth into that one.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Give me John Glen over Lee Tamahori, Roger Spottiswoode or Michael Apted any day.

    This may suprise you @Bondsum but I agree. Glen had his faults but his films were (on the whole) better written and better made.

    He can't beat Martin Campbell though as you say ;)

    Even Roger Spottiswoode in that list? I thougt he worked some crazy good magic with Tommorow Never Dies. Too bad he didn't get to continue on to The World is not Enough and Die Another Day. I didn't mind Apted in TWINE, his direction style was really good, but TWINE would have been even better I think with Spottiswoode, and goodness knows about DAD.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    00Beast wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Give me John Glen over Lee Tamahori, Roger Spottiswoode or Michael Apted any day.

    This may suprise you @Bondsum but I agree. Glen had his faults but his films were (on the whole) better written and better made.

    He can't beat Martin Campbell though as you say ;)

    Even Roger Spottiswoode in that list? I thougt he worked some crazy good magic with Tommorow Never Dies. Too bad he didn't get to continue on to The World is not Enough and Die Another Day. I didn't mind Apted in TWINE, his direction style was really good, but TWINE would have been even better I think with Spottiswoode, and goodness knows about DAD.

    Yes I think Spottiswoode actually did a decent job with a poor script. Best of the Brosnan era.

  • Jones_The_BondJones_The_Bond
    Posts: 344
    It's not really a gag. It's a Glen trademark more than anything. Some directors have them, most don't. Can understand you getting a little tired of it, though.
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    Jones_The_Bond wrote:
    It's not really a gag. It's a Glen trademark more than anything. Some directors have them, most don't. Can understand you getting a little tired of it, though.

    John Woo usually had quite a few white doves appear in his HK films - maybe JG got the idea from there and just pared it down to one bird! Think it is quite effective in FYEO and LTK.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    00Beast wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Give me John Glen over Lee Tamahori, Roger Spottiswoode or Michael Apted any day.

    This may suprise you @Bondsum but I agree. Glen had his faults but his films were (on the whole) better written and better made.

    He can't beat Martin Campbell though as you say ;)

    Even Roger Spottiswoode in that list? I thougt he worked some crazy good magic with Tommorow Never Dies. Too bad he didn't get to continue on to The World is not Enough and Die Another Day. I didn't mind Apted in TWINE, his direction style was really good, but TWINE would have been even better I think with Spottiswoode, and goodness knows about DAD.

    Yes I think Spottiswoode actually did a decent job with a poor script. Best of the Brosnan era.

    Spottiswode did a few decent things in TND but he's just very lightweight. I don't get the logic of hiring the director of Stop or my Mom will Shoot! if you want to go into deeper territory with Bond.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    I have no problem with Glen. He did 5 films, EON must have thought he was doing something right.
    He rescued the franchise after the outrageous MR. As mentioned earlier, four of his films are very good (let me guess the one bad one... ;)) )
    His signature "animal scare" I don't have a problem with. Like Hitchcock's famous cameo's this was his trademark.

    If we must bash a director save the rotten tomatoes for that sack of dog turd, Tamohori.
  • 00Beast00Beast
    Posts: 4,762
    @OHMSS69: Hahaha, what a thread that would be! The "We Can't Stand Lee Tamahori" thread. I can see it getting shut down in no time!
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Lancaster007 wrote:
    Jones_The_Bond wrote:
    It's not really a gag. It's a Glen trademark more than anything. Some directors have them, most don't. Can understand you getting a little tired of it, though.

    John Woo usually had quite a few white doves appear in his HK films - maybe JG got the idea from there and just pared it down to one bird! Think it is quite effective in FYEO and LTK.

    I think FYEO is really the only time it was effective. The rest of the time it just felt forced. Afterall how many times is a seasoned spy like Bond gonna be freightened by small animals?
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    Glen's animal scare wasn't just birds:
    FYEO Birds
    OP Tiger
    AVTAK Stacy's cat running down the stairs
    TLD Monkeys on Gibralta after one of the agents falls to his death
    LTK Pigeons

    I don't think Bond was always scared, it was there to jar the audience. (*)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    Glen's animal scare wasn't just birds:
    FYEO Birds
    OP Tiger
    AVTAK Stacy's cat running down the stairs
    TLD Monkeys on Gibralta after one of the agents falls to his death
    LTK Pigeons

    I don't think Bond was always scared, it was there to jar the audience. (*)

    For Octopussy, don't forget Spiders, Leeches and Snakes. :p
  • LegateDamarLegateDamar
    Posts: 381
    I was looking at his directing credits and he hasn't done much since LTK--looks like he made a few b-films. Kind of a bummer.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Only four films:

    1990 - Checkered Flag
    1992 - Aces: Iron Eagle III
    1992 - Christopher Columbus: The Discovery
    2001 - The Point Men
  • LegateDamarLegateDamar
    Posts: 381
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Only four films:

    1990 - Checkered Flag
    1992 - Aces: Iron Eagle III
    1992 - Christopher Columbus: The Discovery
    2001 - The Point Men

    That's a pretty big comedown. One would think, given that he had directed five Bond films that he would have some real projects other then this crap.

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Maybe being in his 60's did not help things. Look at Campbell; another director that did not go on to do a lot afterwards. Then again, which Bond directors have?
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I saw one of his post-LTK films, an awful Christopher Columbus project that lives in the darkest of shadows of Ridley Scott's 1492. But I also think that Glen has always been part of the Bond family and that he has always been at his best as such. When you know the people you work with through and through, the producers, members from the crew, recurring cast members, ..., you are merely one radar in the whole network. Everyone shines in the department where their true talents exist; the director has the luxury of delegating specific tasks to other folks. Once those secure confines have vanished, you have to work from an entirely different methodology. Maybe after all those years at EON, Glen simply wasn't up to that task anymore.
  • MrBondMrBond Station S
    Posts: 2,044
    Well, my opinion has changed about Glen. Even though his films are all good (except AVTAK) his direction is too dull. He doesen't do anything spectacular with the scripts nor the actors, it seems he chooses to take the easy way out in order to direct action sequences. With a better director i think that the 80's Bond films whould have stood the competition better against franchises. Just for the reason that Bond needed to feel fresh again and Glen didn't bring that to the table.
  • LegateDamarLegateDamar
    Posts: 381
    Dalton's fight with Necros on that net was pretty awesome.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    I have no problem with Glen. He did 5 films, EON must have thought he was doing something right.
    He rescued the franchise after the outrageous MR.

    Rescued???? MR was a very succesfull movie and the franchise was in NO DANGER WHATSOEVER.
    If anything MR stabilised the Franchise in a profitable course after the gamble that TSWLM was with Broccoli in his 1st solo movie.

    This stupid ranting about MR more often than not contain totally baseless accusations disguised as fact while they are NO more than personal views based upon really nothing factual whatsoever. :!!

  • StirredNotShakenStirredNotShaken Toronto
    Posts: 2,402
    I always really liked the cinematography of TLD and LTK. Especially the two tracking shots about 15 seconds long each in LTK of Bond entering Felixs house, gun drawn and the second of Bond climbing the lift in Sanchez' casino.
  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    I have no problem with Glen or his films. I think that he rescued the franchise after that Crown Prince if Shit Moonraker.
    FYEO and OP are my favorites of the Moore films.
    LTK ranks as one of my top four.

    I like his trademark "animal scare" that we see in all his films. Birds, Monkeys, Tigers, and even a housecat.

    They say former writers make the best directors but former editors manage to do well for themselves too.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    I think that he rescued the franchise after that Crown Prince if Shit Moonraker.

    And there it is............. a personal opinion.

    And that is fine, however your defenition of rescue must be a blast.

  • OHMSS69OHMSS69
    Posts: 2,341
    SaintMark wrote:
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    I think that he rescued the franchise after that Crown Prince if Shit Moonraker.

    And there it is............. a personal opinion.


    And that is fine, however your defenition of rescue must be a blast.

    This chat is about John Glen and his fine films during his tenue as Bond director.

    I'm not going to get drawn into a discussion of why I think MR is a particular foul turd of a movie.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    Fine by me but you called him a sviour as he was rescueing the franchise, which in my humble opinion was done by Albert Broccoli who realised what the audiences wanted to see and suplied them with some great 007 flics and used the director Glen because he seemed to be doing a decent enough job without too many pretention.
    Having read Glens book I must say that the man is in essence a director for hire more than an artist with great vision.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,800
    SaintMark wrote:
    Having read Glens book I must say that the man is in essence a director for hire more than an artist with great vision.
    I agree to a point. But then I appreciate workman direction on some projects.
    Face it- Spielberg would have turned in a Bond movie looking like Close Encounters; sometimes less is more.
  • Baltimore_007Baltimore_007
    Posts: 5,634
    John Glen wasn't the best Bond director - and he was far from the worst with it. Anyone who can provide such entertaining adventures such as For Your Eyes Only, Octopussy, Living Daylights and even License to Kill can't be all bad. From where Gilbert departed in '79, Glen took over with the franchise in very capable hands and continued to give fans some damn fine escapades. When we look back on the 1980s, now, and in years to come, we can be honest with ourselves and say that the director in question did a fine job of things for the most part and warrants a certain degree of adulation

Sign In or Register to comment.