Licence to Kill Screening with John Glen

It's bank holiday weekend this weekend and the Starburst International Film Festival is happening in Manchester, which includes a screening of Licence to Kill with John Glen and a screening of Aliens with Peter Lamont.

Anyone got any ideas for questions I could ask them?

Bond girls Caroline Munro, Virginia Hey and and Martine Beswick will also be at the festival.
«13

Comments

  • Posts: 1,653
    Sure!

    Does John Glen believe United Artists didn't market LTK correctly in America?

    Does John Glen regret making LTK more violent than the previous Bond films?

  • Posts: 11,175
    What actually happened between him and Dalton?

    What would he do differently if he was making the film today?
  • Posts: 4,325
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Sure!

    Does John Glen believe United Artists didn't market LTK correctly in America?

    Does John Glen regret making LTK more violent than the previous Bond films?

    Good, I was thinking of asking him a question about the American-ness of LTK too - many on here claim it's very Miami Vice - I wouldn't know, not see it - but it does seem to be influenced by American action films of the time.
  • Posts: 4,325
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    What actually happened between him and Dalton?

    What would he do differently if he was making the film today?

    Yes, I was thinking about that first question - how to ask it diplomatically? Tht second question is excellent.
  • Posts: 5,075
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!
  • Posts: 11,175
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!

    Bond in the books (from what I remember) does seem to shrug his shoulders and put his hands in his pockets a lot.


    Ive not read Glen's book to be fair although I have heard that he referred to DC as "a cheap Timothy Dalton impression.

    Not sure I agree there.
  • Posts: 5,075
    The book came out before Craigs casting, but he's done a re-issue, so unless that quote appears there! Dalton did go through all the books thoroughly, so maybe Glen should have trusted him more!
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    Posts: 12,801
    I don't see any similarities between them, Craig is more in line with the movie template as moulded by Young. Dalton on the other hand, is more closer to the literary Bond.

    My question to Glen, if he hasn't answered it in some form: If the series had continued, would he have been open to directing a 6th Bond film?
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 11,175
    The quote wasn't in Glen's book, it was from a talk he did that an online fan I know attended.

    I think Craig started as being a more modern version of the literary character - at least in his tougher demeanour (downing drinks, taking risks, killing people particularly brutally) but by SP it was more film-Bond.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,405
    According to Glen's autobiography @MajorDSmythe, they wanted a fresh direction for the 90's, that included the jettison of Glen and Maibaum.
  • DragonpolDragonpol Writer @ http://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited August 2016 Posts: 15,820
    Echoing @MajorDSmythe above, I'd like you to ask him if he knows anything about the plot of Dalton's projected third Bond film, The Property of a Lady, and if he would have directed it?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    Posts: 12,801
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I think Craig started as being a more modern version of the literary character - at least in his tougher demeanour (downing drinks, taking risks, killing people particularly brutally) but by SP it was more film-Bond.

    I would have to disgree there. Early on, the depiction of Bond was a mess, alternating between the cinematic Bond and Jack Bauer/Jason Bourne. On top of that, finishing each film with the now supposedly fully rounded Bond, only to revert back at the start of the next.
    royale65 wrote: »
    According to Glen's autobiography @MajorDSmythe, they wanted a fresh direction for the 90's, that included the jettison of Glen and Maibaum.

    I can't say that I would have objected to that. As much as I think that Glen was a perfectly fine directir for Dalton's two films, 5 films taking up a whole decade of Bond is enough. Bond #17 would have been a suitable time to bring in some new talent behind the camera.
    As for Maibaum, that would have been a shame (though he died in 1991, so how much involvement in Bond #17 could he have had), he had been with the series since the beginning.
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 11,175
    @MajorDSmythe, but surely Bourne was modelled on Bond.

    -an "anonymous" agent working for the government.
    -the same initials
    -highly trained
    -dragged out of the sea with amnesia (YOLT novel)

    I will agree that Craig isn't the closest we have had (that's probably early Sean, George or Tim) but I think that indulgent, "blunt instrument" aspect comes through well with him.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,405
    Yes, I was surprised that they considered dumping Maibaum, although the point is moot as you said.

    I wonder how much pressure the studio put on Cubby to change the guard as it were?
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Moderator
    edited August 2016 Posts: 12,801
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    @MajorDSmythe, but surely Bourne was modelled on Bond.

    I haven't read the Bourne books, but going off of the films, their initials are the only resemblance.
    royale65 wrote: »
    Yes, I was surprised that they considered dumping Maibaum, although the point is moot as you said.

    I wonder how much pressure the studio put on Cubby to change the guard as it were?

    Maybe Licence To Kill's "failure" was used as a tool by the studio to clear house. It's anyone's guess what was or wasn't going on behind the scenes in 1989/90.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,405
    I expect it was a lot.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117

    Maybe Licence To Kill's "failure" was used as a tool by the studio to clear house. It's anyone's guess what was or wasn't going on behind the scenes in 1989/90.

    Can we dare to dream that after SP's lacklustre box office stateside the studio will demand a similar changing of the guard?

    i.e. - bin P&W, Mendes and Newman (and if we're having a cull it would be a shame if Rory were to escape so let's add him to the list too).
  • Posts: 4,325
    Anything I should ask Lamont?
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 12,717
    I'll have to read Glenn's autobiography. It makes me happy to know that LTK is his favourite and he's as right to be as proud of it as he is. Highpoint of the series for me. I think in general he doesn't get enough credit. He's too often thought of as a hack or a journeyman imo. He put out consistently solid Bond films every two years for a whole decade, some of which rank among the best of the series (the Dalton films especially). Plus his era was the highpoint for action. The keelhauling, the train fight and plane stunt, the landrover sequence, the cargo net fight, the plane fishing, the plane waterskiing, the tanker chase, etc. And that's just the films he directed. As a second unit director he also oversaw the (iirc) OHMSS ski chase as well as various other action sequences. He's a living legend who contributed a lot to the series.
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    Anything I should ask Lamont?

    I think it'd be cool to ask him about what he thinks of the production design of the last few films, in particular QoS (I'm mainly interested in what he thought of the white high tech MI6). I'd also be interested to know how working on other films compared to Bond and what his favourite of the films he worked on is, Bond or otherwise (I bet that's something I could find through google though so maybe don't use your questions on that). It'd also be interesting to see if he had any stories about James Cameron and what it was like working with him, since he's a great director but also a really interesting man and there have been some entertaining stories about him in the past (nearly drowning Ed Harris is the one that springs to mind).

    I think it'd be cool to ask Glenn if there were any ideas he had (action sequences, etc) that couldn't be used, and how working on the Dalton films compared to the Moore era (I remember the EON doc talked about how refreshed and enthusiastic Cubby felt during production of TLD, I'm wondering if it was the same for Glenn).

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    tanaka123 wrote: »
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    Sure!

    Does John Glen believe United Artists didn't market LTK correctly in America?

    Does John Glen regret making LTK more violent than the previous Bond films?

    Good, I was thinking of asking him a question about the American-ness of LTK too - many on here claim it's very Miami Vice - I wouldn't know, not see it - but it does seem to be influenced by American action films of the time.

    Great questions. LTK isn't like Miami Vice (I have the box set), the only similarity is Bond's more relaxed wardrobe for tropical climates.

    I would ask him what he had to cut out of the film? And if he felt that this 'watered down' the vision for a grittier more adult Fleming Bond?
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 11,175
    14045693_1830979363790261_3794952278354840463_n.jpg?oh=08b10b1ff5edb73cc2e526028a3c07b8&oe=584793E4

    I saw this image this morning from an episode of Charlie's Angels. Initially I thought it was a still from LTK as Dalton seems to be wearing very similar clothes to those he wore in the scene when he found Felix and Della.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,513
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!

    Bond in the books (from what I remember) does seem to shrug his shoulders and put his hands in his pockets a lot.


    Ive not read Glen's book to be fair although I have heard that he referred to DC as "a cheap Timothy Dalton impression.

    Not sure I agree there.

    Glen was wrong. No reason why an ex navy Commander wouldn't put his hands in his pockets in civilian dress. Connery's Bond did it all the time.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I'll have to read Glenn's autobiography. It makes me happy to know that LTK is his favourite and he's as right to be as proud of it as he is. Highpoint of the series for me. I think in general he doesn't get enough credit. He's too often thought of as a hack or a journeyman imo. He put out consistently solid Bond films every two years for a whole decade, some of which rank among the best of the series (the Dalton films especially). Plus his era was the highpoint for action. The keelhauling, the train fight and plane stunt, the landrover sequence, the cargo net fight, the plane fishing, the plane waterskiing, the tanker chase, etc. And that's just the films he directed. As a second unit director he also oversaw the (iirc) OHMSS ski chase as well as various other action sequences. He's a living legend who contributed a lot to the series.

    Absolutely.

    When you look at the lacklustre action of the last 3 films Glen's era has some staggering action sequences.

    Was he a journeyman? Yes. Is that better than being a poncey auteur who thinks 10 minute tracking shots, pointlessly expensive explosions, the MI6 crew tagging a long all the time, everything having to be personal and the villain being Bond's foster brother are the way to go? Indubitably.

    John knew his onions. Just got on with telling an action packed story without recourse to constantly using the emergency get out of jail system labelled 'In case of not having a clue what to do next break glass and press this big red button to bring on the DB5'.
  • Posts: 11,175
    NicNac wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!

    Bond in the books (from what I remember) does seem to shrug his shoulders and put his hands in his pockets a lot.


    Ive not read Glen's book to be fair although I have heard that he referred to DC as "a cheap Timothy Dalton impression.

    Not sure I agree there.

    Glen was wrong. No reason why an ex navy Commander wouldn't put his hands in his pockets in civilian dress. Connery's Bond did it all the time.

    Connery's hands practically lived in his pockets in Goldfinger.
  • Posts: 5,767
    NicNac wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!

    Bond in the books (from what I remember) does seem to shrug his shoulders and put his hands in his pockets a lot.


    Ive not read Glen's book to be fair although I have heard that he referred to DC as "a cheap Timothy Dalton impression.

    Not sure I agree there.

    Glen was wrong. No reason why an ex navy Commander wouldn't put his hands in his pockets in civilian dress. Connery's Bond did it all the time.
    No reason to claim Glen was wrong. Every director is entitled to have his own vision, also in connection with a respective actor. Dalton is still undoubtedly the one Bond closest to literary Bond, while simultaneously being great fun on the big screen, so how wrong can Glen have been?

  • Posts: 11,175
    boldfinger wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!

    Bond in the books (from what I remember) does seem to shrug his shoulders and put his hands in his pockets a lot.


    Ive not read Glen's book to be fair although I have heard that he referred to DC as "a cheap Timothy Dalton impression.

    Not sure I agree there.

    Glen was wrong. No reason why an ex navy Commander wouldn't put his hands in his pockets in civilian dress. Connery's Bond did it all the time.
    No reason to claim Glen was wrong. Every director is entitled to have his own vision, also in connection with a respective actor. Dalton is still undoubtedly the one Bond closest to literary Bond, while simultaneously being great fun on the big screen, so how wrong can Glen have been?

    To be honest I think Dalton's more fun in other films I've seen him in. I like him and I admire his dedication to the role, but I do get the sense he was quite self-conscious himself at times.

    Connery nearly always seemed at ease with what he was doing. Didn't quite buy that with Dalton.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,513
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    He answers some of these questions in his excellent book 'For My Eyes only'.
    He definitely was disappointed with the promotion of the film, and he also states that out of the 5 films he directed its the one he was most proud of, and says it holds up well today, so he hardly would do anything differently! He and Dalton clashed in the beginning when Dalton wanted Bond to be a lot more casual, but Glen insisted Bond was an ex Naval Commander and would be more disciplined! Glen claims they had a final tetchy day of filming, but put it down to fatigue on both their sides!

    Bond in the books (from what I remember) does seem to shrug his shoulders and put his hands in his pockets a lot.


    Ive not read Glen's book to be fair although I have heard that he referred to DC as "a cheap Timothy Dalton impression.

    Not sure I agree there.

    Glen was wrong. No reason why an ex navy Commander wouldn't put his hands in his pockets in civilian dress. Connery's Bond did it all the time.
    No reason to claim Glen was wrong. Every director is entitled to have his own vision, also in connection with a respective actor. Dalton is still undoubtedly the one Bond closest to literary Bond, while simultaneously being great fun on the big screen, so how wrong can Glen have been?

    To be honest I think Dalton's more fun in other films I've seen him in. I like him and I admire his dedication to the role, but I do get the sense he was quite self-conscious himself at times.

    Connery nearly always seemed at ease with what he was doing. Didn't quite buy that with Dalton.

    Quite.
    It was said Glen's major confrontation with Dalton was over the hands in pockets thing. He argued that an ex Navy Commander wouldn't do that. And he was wrong to suggest that unless he knew some ex Navy Commanders and because the series itself had already established that Bond would effect a relaxed attitude (Connery).
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 11,175
    i can't quite put my finger on it but i do think that sometimes Dalton almost pushed his performances a bit too much to the point where it came off as a little fake.

    He had some really good scenes, but there were others that just felt like he was using all his acting chops as opposed to being genuine (the scene with Lupe in the casino, finding Della and even the scene with M where Brown easily gives the better performance).

    He was acting tough rather than actually being tough - especially in LTK.

    A good example is the beginning of this scene. Notice his dramatic stares, the double take when the waitress comes and the way he stares at Pam waiting for her to deliver her line.


    It's ultimately all opinion though,
  • Posts: 676
    Here's a bit of background on Glen, if you'd like to read before deciding which question to ask: http://roger-moore.com/articles/john-glen/
  • Posts: 4,325
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    i can't quite put my finger on it but i do think that sometimes Dalton almost pushed his performances a bit too much to the point where it came off as a little fake.

    He had some really good scenes, but there were others that just felt like he was using all his acting chops as opposed to being genuine (the scene with Lupe in the casino, finding Della and even the scene with M where Brown easily gives the better performance).

    He was acting tough rather than actually being tough - especially in LTK.

    A good example is the beginning of this scene. Notice his dramatic stares, the double take when the waitress comes and the way he stares at Pam waiting for her to deliver her line.


    It's ultimately all opinion though,

    To be honest I've always thought that scene was meant to be humourous.
Sign In or Register to comment.