›

Lewis Gilbert- The Michael Bay of Eon?

DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
edited July 2012 in Bond Movies Posts: 1,778
Before I say anything else I won't to point out that the title is deliberatly misleading. I think Lewis Gilbert is a great director and miles of ahead of Michael Bay in all areas.

Now this three time Bond director is responsible for You Only Live Twice, The Spy Who Loved Me, and Moonraker. Three of the most financially successful Bond adventures that shared more in common than simply being epic in scale.

A common criticism I hear for The Spy Who Loved Me is that it's basically a remake of Gilbert's earlier Bond film, You Only Live Twice. A massive ship is going around swallowing up space shuttles or submarines, respectively, and highjacking nuclear weapons to carry out a megalomaniac’s plot for world domination. Pretty similar. Hell the original script for TSWLM had Blofeld in Stromberg's role, the very same villain of YOLT. As if the similarities weren't glaring enough.

Now another common complaint I hear is that Moonraker, released only two years later, coasted of the success of TSWLM and pretty much rewrote and already rewritten script and filmed TSWLM 2.0. Only this time in space. Yet again directed by Lewis Gilbert.

I just wanted to hear your opinions on Lewis Gilbert basically directing the same film 3 times. Now I have nothing against Gilbert or these films. While I wouldn't rank them as my favorites (Casino Royale, From Russia With Love, and OHMSS are more up my alley) they certainly served a purpose in making James Bond a larger than life character.

What are opinions?

Comments

  • VirageVirage
    Posts: 1,856
    I think the epic battle with more explosions then 2 series and 3 films of thunderbirds combined in about 5 minutes is more bay then remaking the same film 3 times.

    Bay is an unbearable director and at least these films don't feature bay's product placement habit.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Like I said Im not comparing him to Bay. Just pointing out that Gilbert seemed to be the "go to" guy for grand scale James Bond. If possible Im sure DAD would've fit him like a glove. If he directed it might've been decent.
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    I'm quite fond of Lewis Gilbert's contributions to the series. MR and YOLT were my 2 favorite Bond films as a child. He knew how to handle large crowds and had a keen visual eye. He's also responsible for Freddie Young serving as Director of Photography on YOLT(the most beautiful looking film in the series IMHO, of course). I consider Gilbert to "Movie Bond" what Terence Young or Peter Hunt were to "Fleming Bond".
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Well said PrinceKamalKhan. I agree. What's you opinion of John Glen in that regard?
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    Well said PrinceKamalKhan. I agree. What's you opinion of John Glen in that regard?
    Thank you kindly. I'd say Glen's direction was probably ultimately as good as the scripts allowed it to be. I'm quite fond of TLD and OP but I like the stories, background scores and Bond/Lead Bond girl pairings in both of those very much. AVTAK's direction was tired but so was the script. It might've been interesting to see how Glen would've handled a huge sci-fi Bond epic like the ones Gilbert did or how Gilbert would've handled an OHMSS/CR-type Bond film.

  • GerardGerard
    Posts: 5,833
    "Bay is an unbearable director and at least these films don't feature bay's product placement habit.
    "
    You obviously haven't seen Moonraker. From the big 7Up ads on the cable car house to the British Airways ad in which one of the bad guys crashes during the fight in the ambulance, that movie is riddled with them.
  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    Posts: 1,778
    Well said PrinceKamalKhan. I agree. What's you opinion of John Glen in that regard?
    Thank you kindly. I'd say Glen's direction was probably ultimately as good as the scripts allowed it to be. I'm quite fond of TLD and OP but I like the stories, background scores and Bond/Lead Bond girl pairings in both of those very much. AVTAK's direction was tired but so was the script. It might've been interesting to see how Glen would've handled a huge sci-fi Bond epic like the ones Gilbert did or how Gilbert would've handled an OHMSS/CR-type Bond film.

    Yeah it's definatly hard to classify him as the Bond films were constantly changing in the 80s under his direction. They went from serious (FYEO) to lighter (OP/AVTAK) back to serious (TLD) to possibly the most violent film in the series (LTK).

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited July 2011 Posts: 23,614
    Gilbert's films have heart. They breathe. And despite their reliance on spectacle, they still tell a story. Gilbert also worked well with his actors.

    Michael Bay's films are often messy, however I'm not going to bash the man on Transformers alone. I've always enjoyed the Rock and I think Bad Boys was a great little film. That journey to Hasbro really narrowed his mind towards strictly toyrific CGI porn. But there are other films.

    I'm a horror fan and unlike many, I'm not too negative about Platinum Dunes' remakes and reboots. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) is a personal favourite of mine. Well scripted, well acted and so forth. I agree, Bay didn't direct, but as a producer his influence is no doubt massive. I somewhat like the latest Freddy, the Hitcher (mostly because of Bean) and Amityville (although it's a remake almost scene for scene). Only F13 let me down.

    As for other Bay films, I like the Island and I'm one of the few to enjoy Pearl Harbor or at least its second half. Whatever issues I may have with Transformers, I will not throw dirt at Bay just to be in vogue. When he wants to, he makes it happen.

    However, though I understand the title of this thread, there's still a vast difference between what Gilbert wanted to do with the Bonds and what Bay wants to do with his films. Their heavy reliance on spectacle might in fact be the only thing they have in common. Gilbert's films nonetheless had a lot of love for the Bond legacy and they mostly stood the test of time. I doubt time will be so gentle for Bay's exploits. Also, Gilbert's enormous budgets were put to legendary use, as best exemplified in the YOLT volcano I think. Bay simply throws money at stuff that either doesn't exist (CGI) or has to be blown up. That's why I feel like Bay is more of a porn director, figuring we need an action scene every few minutes and it doesn't matter how we arrive at those as long as we do. Gilbert uses action and spectacle as it fits the scripts, not the other way around.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,693
    Gilbert is an amazing director that made fantastic film. He's the one who understands Bond films like me : Epic scope, grand scale adventures. All 3 of his films are in my top 10, with MR in my top 3 !!

    But I also agree with Dimi - I quite liked The Island from Bay.
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    That journey to Hasbro really narrowed his mind towards strictly toyrific CGI porn.
    The toyrific CGI porn is all Bay's good at, which is why TRANSFORMERS 2 is his finest film to date. It plays directly to his strengths - that is focusing on his love of technology and machinery.

    Lewis Gilbert's on another plane. This is the director who gave us SINK THE BISMARK, REACH FOR THE SKIES, ALL ABOUT EVE, and his 60s masterpiece - ALFIE. He understood character and nuance, and was an adult. Michael Bay's simply never grown up.

    Gilbert's greatest Bond achievement - MOONRAKER, meets an ethereal, spiritual evelation when the film reaches space - mainly thanks to John Barry's score and Ken Adam's sets. It almost resembles art. In that respect, it's unique in the franchise.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Gilbert's greatest Bond achievement - MOONRAKER, meets an ethereal, spiritual evelation when the film reaches space - mainly thanks to John Barry's score and Ken Adam's sets. It almost resembles art. In that respect, it's unique in the franchise.
    I adore how MR starts out basically as a detective story, and slowly turns into something quite surreal when Bond finds Drax´ control center, making the ending in space quite a logical conclusion.

    I don´t mind at all that YOLT, TSHLM and MR have basically the same plot. It´s a very good James Bond plot, it would be a waste if it hadn´t been milked a bit. And despite the plots reminding strongly of the respective older films, each of those three is very different. TSHLM for instance seems to be fit together from 5-10min episodes, one leading into the next, whereas YOLT is more of one flowing story.

  • DoubleOhhSevenDoubleOhhSeven
    edited July 2012 Posts: 1,778
    Since old threads have been brought back in the last few days I thought I'd bump one of my first ones. It's been about a year and I'd like to hear some new opinions.

    And I want to repeat myself. Lewis Gilbert is much better than Michael Bay.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    Posts: 4,399
    Lee Tamahori i would consider the 'Michael Bay' of Bond before Lewis Gilbert.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    HASEROT wrote:
    Lee Tamahori i would consider the 'Michael Bay' of Bond before Lewis Gilbert.

    Spot on.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    HASEROT wrote:
    Lee Tamahori i would consider the 'Michael Bay' of Bond before Lewis Gilbert.

    I would say the same of Martin Campbell with CR, a sinking house in Venice instead of real acting (don't get quality actors then)

    One should not forget that the Bondmovies used to be the eventmovies of the year, everybody looked forward to great OTT actionspectacles with 007 in the lead. One of the best spoofs is that James Cameron vehicle with Schwarzenegger who admitted following the 007 formula.

    Bay just went a few steps further with his HASBRO movies. But before that he did make BAd Boys and the Rock which are great actioners.

    Mr. Gilbert made three excellent movies, the last real Connery flic, The movie that saved the 007 franchise (TSWLM) and my favorite MR that gave us Roger in his prime.
  • SirHenryLeeChaChingSirHenryLeeChaChing
    edited July 2012 Posts: 3,494
    I'd only say Gilbert delivered on the first two, we needed a more faithful adaptation of the MR novel instead of what we got.

    All things considered, I'll take a sinking house in Venice over most of what I saw in 1979. At least an original thought went in there, whether it worked or not is debatable of course.
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited July 2012 Posts: 4,399
    SaintMark wrote:
    HASEROT wrote:
    Lee Tamahori i would consider the 'Michael Bay' of Bond before Lewis Gilbert.

    I would say the same of Martin Campbell with CR, a sinking house in Venice instead of real acting (don't get quality actors then)

    there is a difference though...

    CR in my opinion, as well as GE had strong or good stories backing them up - as well as solid acting... i dont know how there is a problem with the acting in CR, from Craig on down the acting was top notch.... but did things get a little 'too unbelievable' at times? - yes, but when has a Bond movie not had some suspension of disbelief? - and even then, blue screen and miniatures get far more respect in my book then a CGI orgy.... Tamahori just took it to a whole new level of absurdity, and let's not also forget him almost being allowed to do that whole 'James Bond is just a code name' tripe.... god, if one man could have nearly ruined an amazing franchise with just 1 movie, in a way that many consider Bay has done to Transformers, then it's Lee Tamahori..

  • bondsumbondsum
    Posts: 3,333
    SaintMark wrote:
    The movie that saved the 007 franchise (TSWLM) and my favorite MR that gave us Roger in his prime.
    More like TSWLM was the movie that saved Roger Moore from being replaced as Bond. There's no proof that the 007 franchise would have ended if TSWLM had been less successful at the BO than it was.
  • SaintMarkSaintMark
    Posts: 7,653
    bondsum wrote:
    SaintMark wrote:
    The movie that saved the 007 franchise (TSWLM) and my favorite MR that gave us Roger in his prime.
    More like TSWLM was the movie that saved Roger Moore from being replaced as Bond. There's no proof that the 007 franchise would have ended if TSWLM had been less successful at the BO than it was.

    I did read a few articles in the past and this was the 1st movie were a solo Brocolli had to show what he could do without Salzman. They build a special new studio due to the size of the production. And Roger Moore was never doubted at that point.
    From here on we got the Brocolli vision of James Bond 007. Had it failed we might just not Know James Bond as we do today.

    So I say you are wrongly informed.

Sign In or Register to comment.