You Only Live Twice vs. Moonraker

Out of all three Bond movies directed by Lewis Gilbert, I would say The Spy Who Loved Me is the best, and it seems most agree.  However, which of these two, would be the second best do you think?  They both have different pros and cons for me.

Moonraker is more tightly paced, where as You Only Live Twice, drags in the middle section with the Japanese disguise and wedding, which don't have anything to do with the rest of plot. Also, Roger Moore does a better job than Connery I feel where as Connery just seems tired throughout the whole thing.

But You Only Live Twice possibly has an overall better plot and better cinematography and sets.

What do you think?

YOLT. There's still a semblance of an espionage through line with YOLT which may be missing from MR. I prefer the 60s the charm, set design and cinematography. Plus, I think Barry's score is better too, though that's not to slant MR's music.

I not only think MR is the better film, but I think it's the better Lewis Gilbert Bond film, which I think is practically its own category. His stamp on Bond is so unique. He obviously took Bond the least serious of all the directors, turning Bond films into something resembling British pantomimes. Of all three, I think he perfected that approach with MR. It's not the kind of installment I want out of the Bond series, but I can't deny it's so delightfully enjoyable.

Oh okay, interesting.  One thing I noticed about Lewis Gilbert's Bond movies, is that they all have the best villain layer sets out of all them.  As as if he told Ken Adam, make the sets better any of the other directors previous.  If anyone thinks so?

I guess when comparing the two movies, another thing is, is that YOLT has some of the least best Bond girls in the two Japanese woman. I want to like them but I just can't find much in them, character wise. Where as Holly Goodhead, is probably better than both of them combined.

One of the things that really grated with me over YOLT was how the characters were very underdeveloped to the point they're nothing more than basic archetypes, a step down from the first four films, which at least had much more dedication to the characters. In TB we learn plenty of who Domino is and what her motivations are. I can't tell you much about Kissy Suzuki other than she's initially a "strictly business" agent before she miraculously decides to start making out with Bond on a hill, and she can handle a gun like the best of them.

I get that adapting YOLT would have been difficult given that OHMSS wasn't even made yet so certain story elements had to be excised and replaced with something more conforming to the formula of past films. That said, I don't see why we couldn't have learned about Tanaka, his perspective on the world order, and Kissy's background as a film actress coming back from America after being treated as an animal. Maybe Henderson's curmudgeon demeanor could have been retained, though EON would have likely toned down his casual racism.

But given what we see from all three films, I suppose Gilbert just wasn't interested in taking an earnest look at the characters, as he felt Bond played better as spectacle extravaganzas tapping into the inner childhood fantasies of adults. I imagine if we got a fourth film in the form of FYEO he wouldn't have shown the inkling of interest in returning to Fleming.

Oh okay, I thought that it was probably the script more than Gilbert maybe, because Gilbert does have more character development for the Bond girl, in The Spy Who Loved Me I thought. So I thought maybe it was the script.

As for comparing YOLT to TB, Domino did had more of a backstory, but I thought that she was played so flatly though, that I didn't really think the backstory really showed through. But the Bond girls in YOLT, at least the Japanese ones, were also played flatly I thought.