Controversial opinions about Bond films

1672673675677678707

Comments

  • Posts: 1,917
    I thought it was pretty clear following MR that when the series wanted to go back down to earth that Glen was hired on the strength of the action scenes he helped bring to life. The series was at that point becoming more associated with the big stunts such as the TSWLM ski jump and the MR freefall and FYEO seemed tailor-made for his strengths what with its wall-to-wall action scenes.

    Not working with the actors it doesn't surprise me. It's fortunate there were a lot of strong actors including Louis Jordan, Walken, Krabbe, Malik, Davi, Rhys-Davies, who could handle themselves and were memorable. It's some of the female roles that especially suffer: Tanya Roberts, Kristina Wayborn, Talisa Soto. Carey Lowell's performance has gotten passes from a lot of fans, but I find a good number of her line deliveries wooden and unconvincing.

    Maybe it was okay to be hands-off with Dalton. I'd have just let him run with it given his preparation and ideas of how he wanted to play Bond.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,636
    BT3366 wrote: »
    I thought it was pretty clear following MR that when the series wanted to go back down to earth that Glen was hired on the strength of the action scenes he helped bring to life. The series was at that point becoming more associated with the big stunts such as the TSWLM ski jump and the MR freefall and FYEO seemed tailor-made for his strengths what with its wall-to-wall action scenes.

    Not working with the actors it doesn't surprise me. It's fortunate there were a lot of strong actors including Louis Jordan, Walken, Krabbe, Malik, Davi, Rhys-Davies, who could handle themselves and were memorable. It's some of the female roles that especially suffer: Tanya Roberts, Kristina Wayborn, Talisa Soto. Carey Lowell's performance has gotten passes from a lot of fans, but I find a good number of her line deliveries wooden and unconvincing.

    Maybe it was okay to be hands-off with Dalton. I'd have just let him run with it given his preparation and ideas of how he wanted to play Bond.

    Tanya Roberts openly called John Glen out for not caring about her or character. It’s not like she was the greatest actress to begin with, RIP.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited August 2021 Posts: 8,188
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Also, I want to point out that Glen edited films like OHMSS and TSWLM, two rather fine action films in my opinion. Editing is not, of course, the same thing as directing, but as an editor, one must at least have some feeling for action to be able to pull it off, no?

    AFAK it's up to the director to instruct the editor. The editor is responsible for the exact cuts and how transitions work, sound corresponds to what you see on screen and all that jazz. A very particular job for sure, but hardly the person who calls the shots on what the film eventually looks like (except for very bad editors of course, they can still ruin the best of the directors' intentions).

    So in the end his rather good work on OHMSS and TSWLM would hardly say anything aabout his skills as a director (sadly).

    Right. And the editing styles are vastly different between OHMSS and TSWLM/MR. For the former it’s clear Hunt was calling a lot of the shots when it came to how to edit scenes, especially with fights. They have the trademarks that Hunt was known to contribute in the prior films. I don’t think Glen really inherited that for TSWLM/MR, because they’re pretty languid, especially MR. Likely more suited to Gilbert’s style, but still.





  • Posts: 1,630
    Agreed -- whatever John Glen may or may not have been able to do, the script must be worthy ! The discussions above re: the silliness of death-by-hockey in FYEO is so astute an observation ! Thinking it through gets to the Austin Powers level. Consider the discussion among the killers:

    Killer One OK, let's get into the hockey uniforms and be ready when this guy shows, up and we'll puck him to death !

    Killer Two What ? These uniforms notoriously are the ones, in all of sports, which take the most time and most help to get on ! Do we have an hour's time before he arrives ? Come on, let's lure him to a soccer field -- much easier to change into those uniforms -- and then just kick him in the balls !

    Killer Three OK, but no headers to the balls. Not my cup o'tea, mate.

    Killer Four Speak for yourself ! He's dreamy ! Why don't you just give me a chance to seduce him and distract him for a few days and then the big boss can get done whatever it is they're up to this time ?

    Killer Five Never mind, you prattling idiots. Too late. He just left the arena.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited August 2021 Posts: 1,711
    Like @FatherValentine , I'm a massive fan of Glen's films, so I'm inclined to defend the guy, but it does seem unfair to suggest that the things we like from his editing/second unit work are a credit to the directors, and that the things we like in his director work are a credit to the editor/second unit!
  • Posts: 2,918
    I'm not into the Glen-bashing either. As a second-unit director Glen directed several of the most memorable stunts in OHMSS (the bobsled chase), TSWLM and MR (the pre-titles in both), so the idea that he actually wasn't all that good an action director is false. Arthur Wooster's second-direction work on Glen's solo directorial films is excellent, but Glen exercised a great deal of close supervision and in many cases devised the action in question.

    As an editor Glen learned at the feet of Peter Hunt and was trusted by him--that's why he edited not merely OHMSS but also Hunt's Gold, and directed the second-unit on Hunt's Shout at the Devil. As editor of TSWLM and MR he could not be as experimental as in OHMSS, but his work is still adroit and the best edited scene in MR--Bond in the centrifuge--shows some of that OHMSS-style cutting.

    Glen was not the best dramatic director in the series, but it's perverse to knock the performances in his films and ignore how frequently comatose those in the Gilbert films were. Glen was the right man to take the series back to reality after the excesses of the Gilbert era. The idea that other directors would have done better with the same progressively shrinking budgets and progressively worse marketing is probably wishful thinking and influenced by the bungling of LTK's release, which Glen wasn't responsible for.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    I feel that Dalton was pushing for more Fleming when everyone else wasn't ready for that yet.
  • Posts: 2,918
    I don't think Dalton can take credit for the screenplays of TLD and LTK incorporating more Fleming than any Bond film since FYEO, which itself marked a return to Fleming.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Well, it is known that Dalton whipped out the Flemings when cast because he felt that the series had slipped into pastiche and he wanted to go back to basics. I doubt he had little to say in terms of the script but he certainly played the role closer to Fleming, no?
  • edited August 2021 Posts: 7,507
    Revelator wrote: »
    I'm not into the Glen-bashing either. As a second-unit director Glen directed several of the most memorable stunts in OHMSS (the bobsled chase), TSWLM and MR (the pre-titles in both), so the idea that he actually wasn't all that good an action director is false. Arthur Wooster's second-direction work on Glen's solo directorial films is excellent, but Glen exercised a great deal of close supervision and in many cases devised the action in question.

    As an editor Glen learned at the feet of Peter Hunt and was trusted by him--that's why he edited not merely OHMSS but also Hunt's Gold, and directed the second-unit on Hunt's Shout at the Devil. As editor of TSWLM and MR he could not be as experimental as in OHMSS, but his work is still adroit and the best edited scene in MR--Bond in the centrifuge--shows some of that OHMSS-style cutting.

    Glen was not the best dramatic director in the series, but it's perverse to knock the performances in his films and ignore how frequently comatose those in the Gilbert films were. Glen was the right man to take the series back to reality after the excesses of the Gilbert era. The idea that other directors would have done better with the same progressively shrinking budgets and progressively worse marketing is probably wishful thinking and influenced by the bungling of LTK's release, which Glen wasn't responsible for.

    +1

    Seems pretty absurd to knock Glen down for some wooden performances. If Carey Lowell was wooden, how do you describe Lois Chiles? Or Barbara Bach for that matter...
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,281
    Yes, and if you read his autobiography or listen to an interview with him you'll know how much of a literary Bond fan John Glen was too. Glen was very much on board with including as much Fleming as he could into the scripts. He tells the story of how he once went on holiday to Spain or somewhere and lay on the beach just reading Goldfinger for the whole holiday! So, yes, he was very much a Fleming Bond fan and that shows in nearly all of his films.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 2021 Posts: 6,304
    Each of Glen's films has at least two outstanding, showstopping action sequences. Which other director after him accomplished that? Campbell in GE and CR. But that's it.
    BT3366 wrote: »
    I thought it was pretty clear following MR that when the series wanted to go back down to earth that Glen was hired on the strength of the action scenes he helped bring to life. The series was at that point becoming more associated with the big stunts such as the TSWLM ski jump and the MR freefall and FYEO seemed tailor-made for his strengths what with its wall-to-wall action scenes.

    Not working with the actors it doesn't surprise me. It's fortunate there were a lot of strong actors including Louis Jordan, Walken, Krabbe, Malik, Davi, Rhys-Davies, who could handle themselves and were memorable. It's some of the female roles that especially suffer: Tanya Roberts, Kristina Wayborn, Talisa Soto. Carey Lowell's performance has gotten passes from a lot of fans, but I find a good number of her line deliveries wooden and unconvincing.

    Maybe it was okay to be hands-off with Dalton. I'd have just let him run with it given his preparation and ideas of how he wanted to play Bond.

    Good point. These more experienced actors were more likely able to "direct themselves" than some of these ingenues (and some were just bad actors hired for their looks).

    Back to FYEO, the buck should stop with the director but did it? I'm pretty sure Cubby insisted upon the jokey end to not-Blofeld, and the hockey and ice skating scenes were an attempt to cash in on the Olympics.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2021 Posts: 16,420
    echo wrote: »
    Each of Glen's films has at least two outstanding, showstopping action sequences. Which other director after him accomplished that? Campbell in GE and CR. But that's it.

    And Spotiswode/Armstrong in TND with Mendes in SF.
    It also depends what you're counting in CR- are you including the airport scene? I think it's great but I know quite a few Bond fans don't rate it (which I think is mad).
    Revelator wrote: »
    I'm not into the Glen-bashing either. As a second-unit director Glen directed several of the most memorable stunts in OHMSS (the bobsled chase), TSWLM and MR (the pre-titles in both), so the idea that he actually wasn't all that good an action director is false. Arthur Wooster's second-direction work on Glen's solo directorial films is excellent, but Glen exercised a great deal of close supervision and in many cases devised the action in question.

    And surely something like the LTK tanker chase he would have been overseeing quite a large proportion of, as it was such a substantial part of the film. And it's one of the best in the entire series.
  • Posts: 15,125
    w2bond wrote: »
    From what I've heard and read that, it all seems true. Yet the movies turned out quite well

    It didn't do too well though. It probably didn't help Dalton either.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited August 2021 Posts: 1,711
    Another point regarding Glen's contribution to the action in his films, albeit one obviously not entirely positive: I believe he has been quoted as saying he was more engaged with action sequences, while he felt much of the other stuff could be filmed "like TV". Perhaps they should have given the standing-around scenes to the second unit!

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 2021 Posts: 6,304
    mtm wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Each of Glen's films has at least two outstanding, showstopping action sequences. Which other director after him accomplished that? Campbell in GE and CR. But that's it.

    And Spotiswode/Armstrong in TND with Mendes in SF.
    It also depends what you're counting in CR- are you including the airport scene? I think it's great but I know quite a few Bond fans don't rate it (which I think is mad).
    Revelator wrote: »
    I'm not into the Glen-bashing either. As a second-unit director Glen directed several of the most memorable stunts in OHMSS (the bobsled chase), TSWLM and MR (the pre-titles in both), so the idea that he actually wasn't all that good an action director is false. Arthur Wooster's second-direction work on Glen's solo directorial films is excellent, but Glen exercised a great deal of close supervision and in many cases devised the action in question.

    And surely something like the LTK tanker chase he would have been overseeing quite a large proportion of, as it was such a substantial part of the film. And it's one of the best in the entire series.

    For me only the carpark chase rates in TND for "action cleverness." And yes, the parkour and airport chases in CR. Aside from the PTSes, I don't rate much of the action in either SF or SP.

    I grew up with Glen's Bonds so I am biased, but I think, of all the things to slam Glen on (tonal inconsistency, erratic performances, Dalton's LTK hair), action is not the one.
  • I really like the skyscraper fight and all the Scotland action in SF, but yeah only the PTS is truly a spectacular action set-piece on par with the big moments in other films. NTTD looks like it could have a few contenders, which is exciting.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,420
    echo wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Each of Glen's films has at least two outstanding, showstopping action sequences. Which other director after him accomplished that? Campbell in GE and CR. But that's it.

    And Spotiswode/Armstrong in TND with Mendes in SF.
    It also depends what you're counting in CR- are you including the airport scene? I think it's great but I know quite a few Bond fans don't rate it (which I think is mad).
    Revelator wrote: »
    I'm not into the Glen-bashing either. As a second-unit director Glen directed several of the most memorable stunts in OHMSS (the bobsled chase), TSWLM and MR (the pre-titles in both), so the idea that he actually wasn't all that good an action director is false. Arthur Wooster's second-direction work on Glen's solo directorial films is excellent, but Glen exercised a great deal of close supervision and in many cases devised the action in question.

    And surely something like the LTK tanker chase he would have been overseeing quite a large proportion of, as it was such a substantial part of the film. And it's one of the best in the entire series.

    For me only the carpark chase rates in TND for "action cleverness." And yes, the parkour and airport chases in CR. Aside from the PTSes, I don't rate much of the action in either SF or SP.

    I grew up with Glen's Bonds so I am biased, but I think, of all the things to slam Glen on (tonal inconsistency, erratic performances, Dalton's LTK hair), action is not the one.

    The PTS in TND is one of the best action sequences in the whole series if you ask me, extremely punchy and inventive and full of invention and tension. And SF you have the excellent PTS (which of the 80s ones I'd say only TLD comes close to it) together with the whole climax. They easily match or outstrip the 80s ones.
  • edited August 2021 Posts: 2,918
    mtm wrote: »
    And surely something like the LTK tanker chase he would have been overseeing quite a large proportion of, as it was such a substantial part of the film. And it's one of the best in the entire series.

    In Glen's autobiography he writes about arriving on location and going straight to the editing van, where he expected to find the assistant "editor and his female assistant hard at it. I gazed downwards and instead discovered them both on the floor, hard at something else." His autobiography has many stories about the shooting of that sequence, though he gives credit to Wooster for shooting most of it.

    Some other excerpts of interest:

    "MGM/UA were giving us a bit of a hard time about budget control since Licence Revoked was budgeted at approximately the same level as every Bond film since Moonraker. This hadn't posed too much of a problem with For Your Eyes Only, but by the end of the 1980s it was becoming a bit of a struggle to make ends meet without compromising the quality expected of a Bond film. We remained economically minded and extremely efficient, but we were making first-division action films on a fraction of the budget available to our principal competitors in the US.

    "Our problems were compounded by the by the Thatcher government's unfriendly attitude towards film-makers in England and for a while it was looking impossible to balance the books." Eventually it was decided to film most of the film in Mexico.

    "I don't think we knew what we were letting ourselves in for when we decided to go Mexico, but we had to stay within the budget and that was that...the fact that we were based in Mexico meant that much of the casting was done from local or American agencies....Things were difficult in Mexico from day one. The bureaucracy was a nightmare and everyone was so poorly paid that bribery and corruption were rife - if you wanted anything done, a backhander was obligatory."

    "...Things ended in a bit of a sour atmosphere, unfortunately - I was feeling a little unwell and Tim wasn't in the best of moods either. The whole thing was a bit of an ordeal and Tim and I had a bit of a slanging match across the pool. I don't know whether to put it down to tiredness at the end of the schedule or the accumulated tension of what had had been an unusually arduous shoot."

    "...Another boardroom shuffle at MGM/UA initiated a period of uncertainty at Eon and the ensuing deadlock between production company and distributor meant that production of the James Bond series was put on hold. During that hiatus period, shortly after the release of Licence To Kill, Cubby phoned me with some bad news. He told me that MGM/UA had decided that when the new Bond film went into production, it should have a new director at the helm. I had been hired only on a picture-by-picture basis, so I didn't take the news personally. 'I think it would be a very good idea to get someone new in,' I responded. 'It will give the series some fresh blood.' My admiration for Cubby was undimmed and I closed the conversation by sincerely thanking him for the wonderful years we'd had together."
  • Posts: 1,917
    mtm wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Each of Glen's films has at least two outstanding, showstopping action sequences. Which other director after him accomplished that? Campbell in GE and CR. But that's it.

    And Spotiswode/Armstrong in TND with Mendes in SF.
    It also depends what you're counting in CR- are you including the airport scene? I think it's great but I know quite a few Bond fans don't rate it (which I think is mad).
    TND has what I think of as the best action in the Brosnan era. I also like the airport scene. It's got atmosphere and Bond being dogged in preventing the disaster.
    I really like the skyscraper fight and all the Scotland action in SF, but yeah only the PTS is truly a spectacular action set-piece on par with the big moments in other films. NTTD looks like it could have a few contenders, which is exciting.

    The lack of any truly memorable action in SF is part of why I don't rate it higher. The skyscraper fight is unique and well-executed but not a showstopper or one that would rate among the best fights. The fight in the casino is surely one of the worst.

    The PTS sequence, Bond getting shot aside, isn't one of the better ones, IMO. The motorcycle chase only reminds me how much better the MI movies are at presenting such chases. Train action is also done better in previous Bond films and later in SP.

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,420
    Revelator wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    And surely something like the LTK tanker chase he would have been overseeing quite a large proportion of, as it was such a substantial part of the film. And it's one of the best in the entire series.

    In Glen's autobiography he writes about arriving on location and going straight to the editing van, where he expected to find the assistant "editor and his female assistant hard at it. I gazed downwards and instead discovered them both on the floor, hard at something else." His autobiography has many stories about the shooting of that sequence, though he gives credit to Wooster for shooting most of it.

    Some other excerpts of interest:

    "MGM/UA were giving us a bit of a hard time about budget control since Licence Revoked was budgeted at approximately the same level as every Bond film since Moonraker. This hadn't posed too much of a problem with For Your Eyes Only, but by the end of the 1980s it was becoming a bit of a struggle to make ends meet without compromising the quality expected of a Bond film. We remained economically minded and extremely efficient, but we were making first-division action films on a fraction of the budget available to our principal competitors in the US.

    "Our problems were compounded by the by the Thatcher government's unfriendly attitude towards film-makers in England and for a while it was looking impossible to balance the books." Eventually it was decided to film most of the film in Mexico.

    "I don't think we knew what we were letting ourselves in for when we decided to go Mexico, but we had to stay within the budget and that was that...the fact that we were based in Mexico meant that much of the casting was done from local or American agencies....Things were difficult in Mexico from day one. The bureaucracy was a nightmare and everyone was so poorly paid that bribery and corruption were rife - if you wanted anything done, a backhander was obligatory."

    "...Things ended in a bit of a sour atmosphere, unfortunately - I was feeling a little unwell and Tim wasn't in the best of moods either. The whole thing was a bit of an ordeal and Tim and I had a bit of a slanging match across the pool. I don't know whether to put it down to tiredness at the end of the schedule or the accumulated tension of what had had been an unusually arduous shoot."

    "...Another boardroom shuffle at MGM/UA initiated a period of uncertainty at Eon and the ensuing deadlock between production company and distributor meant that production of the James Bond series was put on hold. During that hiatus period, shortly after the release of Licence To Kill, Cubby phoned me with some bad news. He told me that MGM/UA had decided that when the new Bond film went into production, it should have a new director at the helm. I had been hired only on a picture-by-picture basis, so I didn't take the news personally. 'I think it would be a very good idea to get someone new in,' I responded. 'It will give the series some fresh blood.' My admiration for Cubby was undimmed and I closed the conversation by sincerely thanking him for the wonderful years we'd had together."

    Interesting reading, thank you.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    Not a fan of the second unit by Vic Armstrong, to be honest. He’s partly why I rate the three latter Brosnan films in the bottom five. Way too much reliance on machine gun play, and one or two many action set pieces.

    One thing I noticed was how when GE, CR, and SF were big hits with an appropriate amount of set pieces, EON in all three cases follow those films up by adding MORE set pieces.

    So if Bond 26 has minimal set pieces and then they hype up Bond 27 as having more action, I’m going to take that as a grim warning.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,420
    Not a fan of the second unit by Vic Armstrong, to be honest. He’s partly why I rate the three latter Brosnan films in the bottom five. Way too much reliance on machine gun play, and one or two many action set pieces.

    I find it odd how TND has some really great stuff and then TWINE’s action is really quite poorly directed. Feels like one of the directors of those two must’ve been getting more involved.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    I don’t even care for the action in TND.

    Fun fact, it was my very first Bond film (if you don’t count NSNA). I watched it on Pay-Per-View after hearing my friend hype about it. After the garage sequence, I switched the TV to something else because that’s how much it bored me. I was 11. I would never actually try branching out to other Bond films until years later when I gave GE a chance due to playing the video game a lot.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 2021 Posts: 16,420
    Ah okay; I like them.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,183
    Revelator wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    And surely something like the LTK tanker chase he would have been overseeing quite a large proportion of, as it was such a substantial part of the film. And it's one of the best in the entire series.

    In Glen's autobiography he writes about arriving on location and going straight to the editing van, where he expected to find the assistant "editor and his female assistant hard at it. I gazed downwards and instead discovered them both on the floor, hard at something else." His autobiography has many stories about the shooting of that sequence, though he gives credit to Wooster for shooting most of it.

    Some other excerpts of interest:

    "MGM/UA were giving us a bit of a hard time about budget control since Licence Revoked was budgeted at approximately the same level as every Bond film since Moonraker. This hadn't posed too much of a problem with For Your Eyes Only, but by the end of the 1980s it was becoming a bit of a struggle to make ends meet without compromising the quality expected of a Bond film. We remained economically minded and extremely efficient, but we were making first-division action films on a fraction of the budget available to our principal competitors in the US.

    "Our problems were compounded by the by the Thatcher government's unfriendly attitude towards film-makers in England and for a while it was looking impossible to balance the books." Eventually it was decided to film most of the film in Mexico.

    "I don't think we knew what we were letting ourselves in for when we decided to go Mexico, but we had to stay within the budget and that was that...the fact that we were based in Mexico meant that much of the casting was done from local or American agencies....Things were difficult in Mexico from day one. The bureaucracy was a nightmare and everyone was so poorly paid that bribery and corruption were rife - if you wanted anything done, a backhander was obligatory."

    "...Things ended in a bit of a sour atmosphere, unfortunately - I was feeling a little unwell and Tim wasn't in the best of moods either. The whole thing was a bit of an ordeal and Tim and I had a bit of a slanging match across the pool. I don't know whether to put it down to tiredness at the end of the schedule or the accumulated tension of what had had been an unusually arduous shoot."

    "...Another boardroom shuffle at MGM/UA initiated a period of uncertainty at Eon and the ensuing deadlock between production company and distributor meant that production of the James Bond series was put on hold. During that hiatus period, shortly after the release of Licence To Kill, Cubby phoned me with some bad news. He told me that MGM/UA had decided that when the new Bond film went into production, it should have a new director at the helm. I had been hired only on a picture-by-picture basis, so I didn't take the news personally. 'I think it would be a very good idea to get someone new in,' I responded. 'It will give the series some fresh blood.' My admiration for Cubby was undimmed and I closed the conversation by sincerely thanking him for the wonderful years we'd had together."

    That was very interesting. Thanks for the post!
  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    Ludovico wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    From what I've heard and read that, it all seems true. Yet the movies turned out quite well

    It didn't do too well though. It probably didn't help Dalton either.

    Financially and critically no. Some cracks show - the stuntmen in AVTAK, made for tv feel especially in LTK - but given the constraints with budget and alleged Dalton clashes with Glen the films didn't fall apart.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    That's assuming LTK works for you, and we know how divisive that film is.

    I used to like it a lot because of the novelty of Bond going rogue. It's still a cool breakthrough, but it's got a lot of issues that's now hard for me to ignore which is why I rank it just above the bottom five.
  • Junglist_1985Junglist_1985 Los Angeles
    Posts: 1,033
    TLD really seems to be Glen’s odd one out (for the better IMO). TLD is very Fleming and cinematic - particularly those Afghanistan scenes conjuring LawofArab feel… whereas LTK, AVTAK, and even FYEO sometimes has a rather made-for-TV feel. OP is somewhere in the middle.

    Many compare TLD and LTK, but to me Dalton is the only common denominator… they are strikingly different films.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    TLD really seems to be Glen’s odd one out (for the better IMO). TLD is very Fleming and cinematic - particularly those Afghanistan scenes conjuring LawofArab feel… whereas LTK, AVTAK, and even FYEO sometimes has a rather made-for-TV feel. OP is somewhere in the middle.

    Many compare TLD and LTK, but to me Dalton is the only common denominator… they are strikingly different films.

    I agree with all of this. TLD is easily a top five contender for me. I think because this was a new Bond, Glen had to push himself much harder than he would have with Moore. It resulted in a very solid entry. However, I think he was way out of his depth with LTK.
Sign In or Register to comment.