INT: Costume Designer. What do you look for? What strengths and weaknesses do you look for in a costume designer? 

JG: Yeah, I think generally, that's a process that usually someone who's got good credits and what have you is put up towards you and you see some of their work and you take a bit of a chance sometimes, if you want someone very modern and up to date, and then sometimes you look towards America. You know, we had an American Designer on LICENSE TO KILL, who came up with some very good casual stuff for us and what have you. Other times when we've been shooting based in England and shooting somewhere like Austria, you know, we had the very specialized costumes, dancers dancing the Viennese waltz and all this sort of stuff. Then you know, you let your Costume Designer loose and she comes up with most of the stuff. But I mean, sometimes it goes wrong, the leading lady... I used to go to great expense to get the costumes made for her, where sometimes they'd be almost better off, because they've got such perfect figures and everything else, they'd be better off going into one of the West End stores and even Marks & Spencer's and get something off the rack; it looks fantastic on them. And sometimes you go to great trouble to get something specially designed. And when you go to the dressing, the fitting where you see the end result, sometimes you don't like what you see. [INT: So what would your process be, working with the Costume Designer, and if you can give any examples, great.] Well, it's just that they come up with something, usually, and they say, "What do you think of this or this." And they have a few alternatives for you to look at. But usually they've already made stuff. But then sometimes they decide to design something particularly for someone, which is quite often the case. But I remember once we were doing a crowd scene and I hadn't, you know, the costume had gone backwards and forwards, being changed and what have you, and I hadn't really, they didn't really want to show it to me because they weren't happy with it. And when eventually the leading lady arrived, wearing this costume on the set and that, didn't like it. And we finished up tearing off the costume from someone in the crowd and putting that on her. I mean it's a very unusual thing to do, but we did that on one occasion. But generally, they're pretty good and we get a chance to look at them beforehand. You know, I'm not the greatest exponent of fashion I shouldn't think, but we get plenty of advice.

INT: Now, on the floor. Assistant Directors. Not just because it's the DGA, but they're kind of the unknown quantity for a lot of people, you know, they're so vital as we know, but they kind of...they don't get the kudos that the designer or the cameraman and the what have you get. How do you work with them, both in pre-production and in production? 

JG: Yeah. Well, as you say the Assistant Director is a vital part of the filmmaking process, and he kind of helps you an awful lot as a Director. He's your go between the production office and the floor. He has to schedule, he has to keep note, he has to make the call sheet out at four o'clock, three o'clock in the afternoon, which is not always easy if you're running a bit late, and he's trying to figure out when to call people, it's kind of a tough job. But also on the floor it's important to have a guy that's got command of the set, and got a sense of humor. Brian Cook was invaluable on COLUMBUS [CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS: THE DISCOVERY]. He's one of the great characters of the film industry; I don't know whether you know him, but he's an amazing guy, keep you in fits of laughter. I'll give you an example. We had, on CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS we were doing the big scene where there's 350 crowd and the three ships are moving away, they were being pulled along by John Richardson on ropes, and we took about two or three hours assembling all the crowd, and getting them all dressed and in position and everything else, and we were all ready to go and as I always do, just before I turn over, I always look and think, "What have I missed, what have I missed?" And I suddenly turned to Brian and I said, "I know what it is," I said, "their are teeth. This is 1492.” I said, “All these guys have got shining white teeth!" I said, "In 1492 they all have rotten teeth!" And he said, "Yeah, you're right." So he got on his megaphone, he said "Hair and makeup. Put a bit more shit on their teeth!" And we all fell about. He is a character, he really is. And he was a great help to me on that film, it was quite the troublesome film, but he was always there with his humor all the time. [INT: I think there's a misnomer that they get called Assistant Director because they're not our assistant, one way or the other.] No, they're in their own domain aren't they? [INT: Yeah, and you know, they have their own thing, but they can support or they can undermine, and generally they don't undermine, certainly not the British ones that I've dealt with. I think it's slightly different in the States, their role is slightly different. They're more on the board of scheduling or rescheduling then they are in Britain.] That's right, yeah. [INT: In Britain they tend to be more floor, on the floor running that. That's my experience, anyway.]

INT: Now, that would be the shooting part of it [working with Assistant Directors]. But the prep part of it, when you're preparing… As you say, there can be poorly or well-scheduled films, and that can have a huge impact on your ability to do your job. And I guess when you're working with them in the prep period, how do you go about scheduling, like, the days? Actually two-fold with that, you know, how do you schedule it well? And how do you keep it running well? So if you could just go through how you would work with them? 

JG: Yeah. Well, I can only tell you that my experience, Tom Pevsner was our Associate Producer, and I used to do the budgets and the scheduling with him. We would go through each scene and we'd discuss the problems that might arise and what have you, and we would allow a certain amount of time. And quite often, Tom would turn to me and say, "No, you need more time." His experience came in to it as well. He said, "No, no. Allow yourself a little bit more time, because some things, you know, if it goes wrong, you'll be badly scheduled." And then it has a terrible effect, because it multiplies on, and you know, with calling Actors and so forth. You know, it throws all the business; all the scheduling is thrown by being poorly scheduled in the first place. So I think Tom's point was, better to be, give yourself a little more time than a little less time. [INT: Because, you know, if something can go wrong, it will.] Yeah.

INT: Now, something that you know a lot about, Editor. How do you work with an Editor? Presumably you work, because of having been an Editor yourself, you work slightly different. 

JG: Yes. I think, as I say, editing is so important. And most of my Editors I trained, actually trained myself. They worked for me as assistants. And we did a whole variety of films together, all over the world, and it's like a family thing really. I used to get them all cutting, everyone; when I was a young assistant, we weren't allowed in the same room as the film Editor. He was kind of, some kind of god, you know, you weren't allowed, the assistant would keep you well out of sight of the Editor. He mustn't be disturbed. And you know, in those days they only used to shoot about six or seven setups a day. Sometimes they'd only do one setup, you know, and they'd rehearse it for two days. So the editing was quite simple compared to what it is today, when you've got 22 setups a day, the way it goes. But I was determined I would change all that. And when I was an Editor, all my staff, all my Editors, all my assistant Editors would get a chance to cut a couple of pieces of film together. And I would go off because I was keen to become a Director, and I was very keen to go on the floor and do inserts and what have you. While I was away doing my inserts, I wanted the wheels to keep turning, so I used to delegate to my staff. And I would say, "Cut that sequence together. And I'll look at it when I get back." And I'd come back after a day's shooting on the floor, and I'd see what they've done and I would say, "Why have you done that?" "Oh because of the continuities." And I said, "No that's not editing, don't allow continuity to dictate your editing." And as a Director you should always shoot, of course, so that doesn't happen. You know, you cover it in such a way that you can cut 'round any problems. And you know, that way they learn, and most of them became Editors, eventually. But it was so different in my early days, when you weren't allowed to do that, and consequently, you'd be a very good assistant, and you'd get a chance to edit. And you'd go and sit down on the editing machine and you'd freeze. You wouldn't know what you were doing. So at least these boys had a chance to do a bit. And you can change it, the beauty of editing is you get a second chance, or a third chance if necessary, or a fourth chance. [INT: And the thing about editing is it's not always about cutting.] No. [INT: It's often about not cutting.] That's right. Yeah, you've gotta know when something's best left and it's interesting that some, in my early days, I remember Charlie Crichton said to me, he said, "A close shot is a rare jewel. You only use it very sparingly." You know, the close shot, because it's a different style of filmmaking then, but the close shots are over used today. And partly probably because of the fact that the films are going to go on television, and you have to be that much closer. But it's interesting that, you know, they used to be more sparing with their close shots.

INT: When you're cutting a scene, you presumably would cut it loose, and then refine it? 

JG: No, no. I don't... I had an Editor that said to me once, he said, "Oh I've cut it loosely," I mean he had. It was so loose you couldn't really see what was going on, because it was just boring! No, I never believed in that. I've always believed in cutting it the way you would want it cut. And I remember I worked with Tony Richardson once, I cut a film for him [DEAD CERT]. And he filmed the first sequence and it was like a shot in a car, with like a three shot. And it played for about two and a half minutes, this scene. And it finished and so I rang up the production office and I said, "I assume he's gonna do a cover into that thing." And the next thing is, I get a message back: "Come down to Bognor Regis [Bognor Regis, England], Tony Richardson wants to see you. And I'd not worked with Tony before, and Tony he had a great sense of humor, but you wouldn't know that, he used to play you, you know? So I arrived back and he's in the shower, and he comes out of the shower, and he said, "I understand you want close shots into that scene." So I said, "I think you will need them, eventually." So, he said, "You may be right, or you may be wrong." So I said, "Granted." I said, "You may decide it plays, but I think you will need the close shots." Anyway, he said "All right." So next day, he shot me the close shots. And we did need them, I can assure you. And then he said, "Oh by the way," he said, "have you got a script?" He said, ‘cause I said, "I've got to start cutting this film," because he said, "First of all, I don't want anything cut until I finish shooting." So I said, "Well the schedule doesn't allow for that, I've got to get on with it." So he said, "Well, give me the script,” and he said, “I want you to play the whole of that scene in the close shot of one Actor." And then he said, "I want you to play the whole of that in a close shot of that Actor.” And I'm sure he was winding me up, he was just seeing how I'd react, so I didn't say anything, I just looked at him. And I went back to my cutting room, and I said to my assistant Ron Saunders, I told him the story. And he said, "What are you going to do?" And I said, "I'm just gonna cut the film as I would normally would, and if he fires me, too bad," you know. And he was just testing me out, I'm sure of it. But we got on very well in the end. He came back and he saw, he saw my cut. Wasn't a very good film, it was called DEAD CERT. And I showed him my cut and then I joined up all the out material, put the slug of space in between each cut that I'd used, and ran him all the out material. And every time a slug of white spacing came up, he'd say, "Well, I like that." He was just a crazy guy, but we got on very well. And we had a good working relationship.

INT: When you work with an Editor, what's the process? You say, do you give 'em, do you give ‘em it and just say, "Do what you want," or give 'em it and say, "I want it done this way,” or? 

JG: Well, if it's an action scene, they have a storyboard, so they have a good guide of what your intentions were. Sometimes it varies slightly, although most of the time you look at the storyboards and look at the finished article and they're virtually the same. But you know, in terms of the dialogue, the rest of the film, the dialogue scenes and that, you have to leave it to the Editor. You make selections of rushes but like I used to do, I quite often used bits from every take. So you study the material, and you make your choices. The Director asks for a particular thing, you give it to him. And then later on be prepared to change it. You know, you might say to him, "I think there's a better take," and you run it, and you switch them. So it's a give and take process and I think an Editor worth his salts will do what he thinks is best. And you have time to change it, you know, it's the great thing. [INT: Again, like a stroppy [British word for ill-tempered] Actor, they might come up with something that's better than you thought.] Quite often, quite often the case.

INT: Composers. How and why do you choose one rather than another? 

JG: Yeah. I mean there's so many great composers around and you know, quite often, I mean, on the Bond films, of course John Barry was kind of a first choice if he was available. And some films he wasn't available because he had a dispute with the tax people I think, and he wasn't, he was, you know, if he stepped foot in England he was going to get arrested! So, he wasn't always available to work with us in the latter films. But fortunately, they settled their differences somehow, and he came on and he did a couple of films, you know, one for me, the last film he did, the last Bond film he did [THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS], and we gave him a personal appearance in the film. Which is nice, and kind of we all felt maybe this was his last, last appearance, you know, on a Bond movie. And yeah, he loved that, dressing up and conducting the orchestra on screen.

INT: So how do you go about working with them [Composers]? Is it obvious where you need music or where you want music or what type of music? 

JG: Yeah, you have a pretty good idea of where you need music. [INT: Do you plan that before you start?] No, I usually run the film with the composer and then we, we then having run the film all the way through, you then break it down on a flatbed or something. You run it with him, and you decide where you're gonna use music. Where it starts, where it stops. There's a good example of where you don't use music, was in THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, was the ski parachute jump, where we had music right up until the point that the parachute opened, and then it went silent. And all you heard was wind and it went on and on and on, the drop in, and then the moment the chute opened, back comes in the music. So a lot of it's quite… Quite often it's important not to have music, you know? Where rather than use natural effects and use the music where it really does something for you, but… With John [John Barry], he was wonderful because his music, you know, like OUT OF AFRICA and things like that, they're very expansive score. And he's a great orchestrator. And he did some wonderful work on the Bonds. [INT: Would you use like a temp score?] Yeah, all the time, yeah. I always used to throw in music whenever. And the best music, you know, you take something from GONE WITH THE WIND. Well it helps you, because you cut to it in a way, it gives you an indication of what it should be like. Sometimes it's not... Sometimes when you would go to record the score, sometimes it's not as good. [INT: Well it's the tyranny of the temp. I mean a lot of composers hate it.] Yeah, they hate it, don't they? Like John, we used to strip it all out before John saw the film. [INT: It's usually just as an indication of, you know, where you want something. I've found it works personally though.] Yeah, there's just a quite amusing story, with going back to THE THIRD MAN, where Anton Karas, the street musician that Carol [Carol Reed] wanted to do the score--[INT: And what were you doing on THE THIRD MAN?] I was an assistant sound Editor. Very junior. And when they brought Anton Karas over to England, the unions wouldn't allow him to work in the studio; he wasn't a member of the musician's union. So it was all unionized at that time. So he had to work in Carol Reed's house on the King's Road. So I took the film up there, and worked with Karas on the, running the film for him. And the moment I pressed the pedal on the movie, I blew all the lights in Carol Reed's house. So the butler came down, and together we went into the pantry where the fuse box was, and I put a new fuse in, and we started again, and it blew again, so this time I said to him, "Have you got a nail?" And he came up with a nail and I put a nail in the fuse box and we carried on working there. But years later, I used to walk past his house on the Kings Road in Chelsea [Chelsea, London], and I turned to my wife and I said, "I wonder if that nail's still in the fuse box?" [INT: That as a fantastic score, that as well.] Yeah, it was, yeah. [INT: Particularly beautiful.]

INT: The budget, which you know, we're aware is the kind of dominant thing for most Directors, even though we try and run away from it, it dictates everything. What challenges have you faced with budgetary restrictions? If there are any. 

JG: Well, I think probably on the Bond movies, it was pretty much set, if you kept the schedule, you kept the budget, basically. And I in fact did that on all my five that I directed. That wasn't a problem. But I did find a problem, I did a film called IRON EAGLE III [ACES: IRON EAGLE III] in the States [United States], and we had a major problem that we were supposed to use lots of jet fighters, and when I queried the cost of the fuel and the fighters, they said, "Oh, the American,” Producer said, "The American Air Force will be providing the airplanes and the fuel, as part of their training stuff." And I said, "Really? I'm surprised," because it was all about drug running. I imagine the American Air Force, if they read the script wouldn't be at all interested. We were able to use one of their air bases, but they drew the line at supplying any airplanes or fuel. [INT: So how did you get around that?] Well, it was going to put the budget up. So we had to use the Confederate Air Force. So we used the planes from the Confederate Air Force, and of course they drink fuel. And that naturally put the budget up. And I finished the film, I think, three days ahead of schedule. But because of the fuel costs, the film went over schedule, over budget, not over schedule. And so that was something I had no control over whatsoever. We had to fly the airplanes, so that was all we could do.

INT: And how does the budget affect scheduling? You know, if things, as they do, as you go on, I mean you've talked about having the contingency, generally 10 percent. Once that's getting down, you know, as things happen, the budget changes; it's never a fixed thing. 

JG: Yeah, well the theory is, if you keep your schedule, you'll keep your budget. That's the theory, but of course you're right. Occasionally things get out of your control, and cost wise, things certainly, you know, don't turn up as they should do. I mean, I know in Mexico, shooting there, we didn't really budget for backhanders, you know. And that's a way of life out there, so that was quite a contingency we didn't expect. But even then we still kept, we managed to keep the budget. But only by really efficient shooting, you know. [INT: When you say efficient shooting, does that mean you limit the amount of setups? Or you limit the amount of takes?] I don't think you consciously compromise anything; it's just that your preparation is good, your Actors are good, and they deliver and therefore you're able to maintain the schedule. Sometimes, you know, the permissions, we'd get permission to film somewhere, a government place, and when you arrive there, you couldn't get entry unless you started paying someone, you know. So that was the problem on that film, and it was a problem for the production office more than it was for me, but it nearly drove poor old Tom Pevsner to a nervous breakdown. You know, the fact that nothing was, it was all promised and then on the day it wouldn't arrive, so...

INT: Say the first day of shooting. The night before the first day of shooting, how would you prepare? 

JG: I think you are already prepared in a way. You know, you spent six months trying to refine everything, so you're completely prepared. And the best thing you can do the night before is go and get a good night's sleep. Get up early in the morning, and I used to find that I was at my best in the morning, so I would do an hour's work on the day's work before I left home. So that everything was in my head for the whole day, I very rarely looked at the script for the rest of the day. [INT: And what about homework, as you just touched on, you would do it in the morning, but once you get into the rhythm of shooting, and what have you, what kind of homework would you do for yourself, about planning the next day. How would you…] Well, I've already, as I said, prepared generally, and it's really just a question of refining your preparations, ready for the shoot, taking into consideration any problems that have risen during the day, and just knowing what you're up against sometimes and you just prepare in the morning. I just found that you've got a very clear head in the morning. I mean I would probably spend time in the cutting rooms at night 'til maybe nine o'clock, eight or nine o'clock. Come home, go to bed, get up early, prepare, and go to the studio at eight o'clock. [INT: And what were your preparations for that day? What would it entail?] Preparation for that day? [INT: Yeah, like just before you go out, I guess you look at the scene, you think "How am I going to shoot this?" or what's important?] Well, it depends what the scene was, of course, but if it's like a plane scene, then the first thing you do is you get the Actors on, before they're made up or anybody else, and you go through, so everyone knows what you're doing. And then after you've rehearsed, then you'll plot out the scene, mark it out, put your marks down. When everyone's, you know, knows what's going on, then you send the Actors off to get ready, and you light the set. And then when you're ready they're usually ready and you start to film.

INT: Now, how do you prepare for the visual side of it? I mean do you use a storyboard, or do you make a shot list, you know, or do you just keep it in your head? 

JG: No. If it involves, you see with a Bond movie, a lot of it is delegated to a second unit. So what you tend to do is you have the second unit material shot first, and then you have that material on the set, and you have a Moviola on the set, and you then insert your Actors into that scene. That's the ideal way to do it. Sometimes it doesn't work that way, but generally that's the ideal way that you have your, the scene roughed out, and then you insert your main Actors into that scene. That worked in Mexico. We had an Editor on site, a local Editor, a Mexican Editor on site when we were filming on location [LICENCE TO KILL]. And he had a van, and he had an editing machine in the van. And we were assembling all the second unit material as we went along. And when I arrived with the Actors for a week, inserting Timothy Dalton into the scene, I'd go into the van, and taking, you can take the Actors in and show them exactly what was required. And then we'd go off and do it. [INT: Did you find that was limiting? 'Cause I would have imagined it's often the other way around. You dictate what the Actors are going to do, and the second unit follows up and picks up.] Yeah, it didn't work that way with our films, funny enough, because I think the second units, action stuff was, you know, had to be done almost before the first unit shot sometimes. And they'd be in a, sometimes in a different part of the world, you know, and the film would come to us and it would be assembled. And I would take the Actors in to the cutting room, show them exactly what happened and there's usually great enthusiasm, I must say, you know, when they actually see the sequence, and then they're doing closer shots into that sequence. And we have the movie out on the floor, so we've got constant reference. And it worked very well. [INT: I would never have thought that.]

INT: How would you describe your visual style? 

JG: Simple. I would put great store on shooting a particular time of the day, if it was a location shot. I've made a note of when is the best time to photograph a scene, and I would try and engineer it so that I got there at that precise time, or in time to do that scene. The visual style is pretty straightforward. I don't think, because they're such complex films, the Bond films, you can't really be too fancy with camera moves, because you lose the ability to speed up the timing and so forth, if you move the camera too much, i.e. John Ford. [INT: Would you say the style changes from film to film? Or you kept it pretty much...] I think it's pretty much the same style. It's pretty straightforward filming, really. As I say, the minimum, it's nice to get lovely tracking shots and so forth at times, but you can put yourself into a bit of jeopardy when later on when you get into the editing room. [INT: Trying to find the balance between the story and the, you know.] Yeah.

INT: So then you move into post-production. Now have you ever radically changed your film after photography? Like by ADR [Automated Dialogue Replacement] or narration or shooting new scenes or whatever. They're all slightly different, but have you ever had to completely rework anything? 

JG: Strangely enough, I don't think we ever, once we finished shooting, I can't remember an occasion when we went in and did extra shooting, or even inserts, you know, which we always tended to do our inserts at the very end of the shooting, with a smaller crew. And it was generally pretty well planned, and I can't think of an occasion when we, actually had to go in a week later and shoot extra scenes. But I guess it was being in control of the visual aspect of the film, and knowing, as I say, I was a great believer in inserts, so, you know, I could say to the continuity, or make a note, we need an insert of this and this. I wouldn't do it there and then, but I would pick it up at the very end. In fact, I think I got told off by Cubby [Albert "Cubby" Broccoli] once for doing a shot with, I had a 250 crowd or something, and he caught me doing a close shot with what's her name, and came out at me and he said, "You do that when you've got less people around." And he was quite right, it was just it was there, and everything was happening, and I thought, it'd only take me 10 minutes to do that. But yeah, he was a stickler for that. He said, "No, no. Don't do that. Do that at the end." [INT: It's an interesting thing, 'cause now all the feature films I've done it's been very similar. You don't, you know, you pick them up at last day. Only when I did TV, did I ever come across having to replace dialogue on the back of people’s heads, changing the story. It's a new fangled way of telling. But it's kind of insecure in a way, 'cause I think if you do what you've done, you have the discipline to know, to see this in advance.] You do. I think it's fair to say in the editing process you do a lot of tricks. You know, you throw the lines, you print up outtakes, and use the sound from another outtake, which is better than the other one. You know, you do that as a kind of a matter of course, it's a way to improve the scene. I remember editing a film for Peter Hunt, GOLD I think it was, about the gold mines in South Africa. And we had a scene where this man was a...Bradford Dillman was playing this character who was very particular about, you know, he'd wipe the door handles before he opened the door and all that. He was very particular about personal hygiene. And his father-in-law, who was this untidy guy, and he was dropping--he smoked cigars and he was dropping ash all over his clothes and what have you. And unknown to Peter Hunt, I printed up all the outtakes on the scene, and when I edited the scene, I went through and everything, but where it was messy, where the ash was falling all over him and everything else, I incorporated that in, and when Peter saw the scene, he loved it. And he really complimented me on getting the characterization of this very untidy man as opposed to Bradford Dillman who was so neat and spic-and-span.

INT: Now, have you been consulted on all the creative decisions in your film? Or has a Producer or a studio ever tried to take over it, or interfered with it after you've shot it? 

JG: No. I was very fortunate, I mean, I think the studio definitely didn't interfere in the creative process. They might have had their say about who was going to play a leading lady or so forth at times, but… No, generally I was very lucky. And Cubby [Albert "Cubby" Broccoli] was very good in that sense that, you know, you would be consulted on every aspect. And the only thing he didn't bother you was about his problems. He was very good that way.

INT: Now, marketing. Are you or were you involved with the marketing of the film? 

JG: We were, to a degree. I mean, you know, Maurice Binder, who did most of our titles [on the James Bond films], he was always grabbing the best shots and waiting to, early in production. As soon as we'd got something decent to show he would grab it and start to make up his teasers. You know, "Coming this Summer" sort of thing. In fact, on the ski parachute thing, I was frightened that he was going to get the negative scratched or something, and we're going to be in trouble, because, you know, he was always taking the negative out and running off into positives and prints and things to make up his titles. And you know, I was worried that it would get damaged, the negative. But he, you know, he was very much involved with the marketing in that sense, but then we had the American end that was to do with the American release, or the worldwide release. And unfortunately, MGM [Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer] at that time, they were changing the marketing team like every picture was a different crowd. And we never got, although it cost almost as much to market a film as it does to make a film, we didn't ever think we got good value. All I ever saw sometimes was adverts on bus stops and things. You know, where the real money should have been spent, wasn't spent. I think sometimes the marketing wasn't good on the Bonds--in America. It was good here [UK]. [INT: Did you do test screenings and the likes?] Not on the Bonds we didn't, no. We used to have a screening, a charity screening for the Boy's Club in New York. And that gave us a pretty good idea of, you know, if there had been anything untowards, we would have fixed it probably. But no, I think it was more or less a done deal, the finish of the movie, and the showing to the public was pretty tight. There wasn't a lot of room to maneuver. [INT: Now, have you ever had a film badly served by the marketing? Or a film well served, and helped? Any note worthy?] Well, I think any marketing team that keeps being undermined and changed for budgetary reasons mainly I suppose, 'cause they were going through some one crisis after another at MGM at that time, trying to cut down and… You know, one had a feeling that sometimes they weren't a hundred percent behind the picture, but generally I suppose I've got no complaints really. But it's just that, you know, they could have done better on certain films I think.

INT: Are your films edited for release on television or other ancillary markets? 

JG: Yeah, they're very good. They tell, you know, what they plan to do and they send you a list of what they're going to do. I mean generally, they want to expand the film, they want it to be longer, but it's very little that they want to remove for television. Now I can't say--[INT: And they give you a chance to put--] They give you a chance to put your tongue's worth in, yeah.

INT: Now, out of the films that you've directed, do you have a favorite one? 

JG: Yeah, I think OCTOPUSSY is probably my favorite. [INT: Why?] Because it involved lots of animals and children… It was just fun things. I mean, I remember a chap at my golf club went up to me one day and he said, "Oh I was cursing you the other day. I took my 10-year-old boy to see OCTOPUSSY. And when the blue ringed octopus during a fight gets to suck a man's face, I looked at my son and he was hiding his face under the seat. So that evening he turned to me and he said, "Dad, will you take me back to see it again, because I looked away." So I had to take him to see that film three times, he said, before he actually looked at it, through his fingers! And I said, "Well, that's good for business." Wish everyone did that, saw it three times.

INT: Now converse to that, do you have a least favorite project? 

JG: I enjoyed all my Bonds, I must say. They all had different, different problems to overcome and great fun moments, and I really enjoyed the time with Roger Moore. Roger's a great sport. A prankster of the first degree. But it's all harmless fun with him. He was a pleasure to work with.

INT: What, in your opinion, is the worst part of directing? 

JG: I think it's if you get into a sort of a political situation where you're being undermined by the top office, you know, that can happen on certain films. Where, usually they're the films that are tax films, where they get co-productions and they get tax rebates from this government and that government. And usually you'll find that the money is not used as it should be, you know, I think that I'm not sure that the tax breaks for films, direct tax breaks work really. I think that it's far better if the film's being made in the conventional sense, the money's raised and your responsible for it, and that's, you know, politics don't come into it too much.

INT: What's the best part of directing? 

JG: The best part is when you go to the opening and people just laugh and react and jump in their seats; I just love that.

INT: Now, what advice would you have for young Directors starting out in their career? 

JG: Well, it's... Enthusiasm counts for a lot in our business, and also experience does, I suppose. But you'll always find lots of technicians who will help you, particularly the camera crews, if you're not sure of the technicalities of crossing the line and all that stuff, lefts and rights. They'll soon put you right. So you don't have to worry too much about that. But what you need to do is to concentrate on the story, and getting the performances. [INT: Simple stuff like that yeah. Simple but difficult.]

INT: Now, I've got a load of Guild stuff, which will be long or short. When did you first join the DGA? On what project if you can remember? 

JG: I think it must have been on IRON EAGLE [ACES: IRON EAGLE III]. [INT: IRON EAGLE] Yeah. [INT: So, when you joined the DGA, do you remember who sponsored you?] Yes, I do, it was a client of my Agent, Spyros Skouras, Oliver Stone. And he very kindly sponsored my application and several years later I met him, I think it was in Universal Studios in Orlando. And he was on the set, making a film, and I went up and said, "Hello," and thanked him for recommending me to the DGA.

INT: Did you come to know any other Directors, get to meet any other Directors through your involvement in the Guild? 

JG: Yes. I went to a dinner at the DGA held in Los Angeles while I was working there, and I was fortunate enough to be on the same table as Alan Alda, who I found to be a very interesting man. Very experienced man. [INT: Now, as regards to Britain, have you been involved in any of the other organizations in the UK, that represented Directors?] Yeah, I was one of the members of the ACT [Association of Cinema and Television Technicians] when it was the ACT, and it later became BECTU [Broadcasting, Entertainment, Cinematograph and Theatre Union]. And I'm a member of the, was a member of the Editor's Guild [Motion Picture Editors Guild], and of course I'm a member of the Academy [Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences]. [INT: And do you know, do you know much about the history of the Directors Guild of Great Britain? And its efforts to represent film and TV Directors in the UK?] Yeah, I'm a member of that as well, and you know, it's quite a recent organization really. I think it's about, what, four or five years old now. But it's a very useful one. It was overdue, actually and I think worked very closely with the DGA, and to look after the members that are based in England. [INT: And could you describe what you know of the efforts of the DGGB, or BECTU and the DGA to represent Directors in the UK?] Well I think basically they're trying to get all the European countries to recognize author's rights for Directors. I think they've still got a lot of work to do. I think even in Great Britain we don't fully recognize Directors rights, and I think that's something which is pretty awful really. I mean we should get, you know, Directors rights going in this country.

INT: Are there any issues the DGA has been involved with that have been meaningful to you? 

JG: Well, on a personal note, I was working on CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS: THE DISCOVERY. I had a sort of a strange contract in a way, but in the contract it said that if I got a screening of CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS in the United States, a cinema screening, I would get a bonus payment of a quarter of a million dollars, I think it was. It was quite a substantial amount. And you know, money was a big issue on that film, and when I got to, having finished the film, they did have a screening; they had several screenings in America, in the USA. And I said, "What about my $250,000?" And there was a big hefty silence coming from the Producers. And so then I made a call to the DGA and they took it up on my behalf, and shortly afterwards I had a call, from Mr. Adler [Warren Adler], he said, "Well, we've been negotiating and they've offered half. And I advise you to take it.” So I took it.

INT: And have you been involved in any DGA committees or anything? 

JG: No, I haven't. I was in a committee for the Academy [British Academy of Film & Television Arts] in London. But as I'm not based in Los Angeles, now, I haven't really been very active in that sense. [INT: And could you describe any Guild related events, like dinners or salvations, or tributes that have had any meaning to you?] Yeah. I went, as I say, when I was living for a while in Los Angeles, you know, I used to attend the Guild screenings and meetings and dinners. I took advantage of that when I was there. Went to an annual general meeting, and I found them very enjoyable and an opportunity to meet other Directors, which is great.

INT: Please, if you can describe what you know of the history of the Guild's [DGA] fight for creative rights on behalf of Directors. You know, what of these rights have been most meaningful for yourself in terms of your own experience? 

JG: Well, I read quite a bit about the early days, the formation of the Guild, and you know, I think the sacrifices those early pioneers made on our behalf, and I think we should be duly grateful to them. They certainly established our Guild as a negotiating force. Although, you know, their minimum's quite often what people do, are unsuccessful; they do protect you, to a great deal, as I found out. You know, we have an organization in place that will come to our aid, if we're in trouble. Justly. I think they've got a very intelligent approach to union problems.

INT: And what do you think is the most important service provided for Directors by the DGA? 

JG: I think it's our creative rights. And also, you know, maintaining minimum pay, and just looking after the people probably who are a little less fortunate than the successful Directors, those who are struggling. To come out to make sure they get a fair crack of the whip. Certainly residuals is very important. And the health scheme of course. [INT: And how has it changed since you've joined?] I think pretty much everything was in place, and I think it's just an ongoing thing, I think you just have to maintain your rights and make sure that those rights aren't eroded. [INT: And how has the membership in the organization influenced your outlook, or impacted your life? You kind of touched on that before.] Well, I just think that becoming a member of the DGA was a tribute in a way. I felt that you know, I belong to an organization who was there for us, and in a job which is a pretty isolated one, a film Director. You are fairly isolated. And you need someone to fight in your corner occasionally. And for that I'm very grateful.

INT: Last one. What would you advise a young Director, asking whether to join the Directors Guild and why?

JG: Well any young Director who qualifies, who manages to get a job directing and he should immediately try and join the Guild, because that's the first step on the ladder and it's an essential thing to becoming a Director I would say.

INT: And the floor is yours, John. Anything we have not said, you can say it now. 

JG: I think I, there's a lot to be said, but I think I probably said enough. [INT: Well, it's been my pleasure.] Thank you very much, Michael. I appreciate it. [INT: Thank you very much John.]

INT: My name is Michael Caton-Jones. Today's the 22nd of April, 2013. And I've just completed a interview with John Glen, for the Directors Guild of America Visual History Program. We're at BAFTA, the British Academy of Film & Television Arts in London, England.