Amph 50(+) Years of James Bond - Octopussy and The Living Daylights (1966) - 007 in New York

Discussion in 'Community' started by Ender Sai, Dec 1, 2012.

  1. Champion of the Force Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 27, 1999
    star 4
    Thank you Ender for your praise. :)

    I just really enjoy FRWL - in particular (and I mentioned this briefly) how it seems to subvert the 'Bond formula' (before there even was a formula to being with). Consider:
    1. The opening scene - Bond on a mission as we see it countless (future) films. Except it isn't - Bond's a fake, and it's actually setting up the villain instead.
    2. Kerim Bey shooting the Russian agent (esacping through the 'Call Me Bwana' poster) - we expect Bond to do this himself, or to take control at some point, but instead the hit is pulled off successfully with Bond merely acting as observer (I can't recall a situation in a any future films which has Bond relegated to such an observer role whilst someone else does the dirty work).
    3. The Grant/Bond scene culminating with the fight - Bond tries to get out of it with the cigarette request, but fails (only the subsequent offer of the sovereigns changes the situation), and then the briefcase that isn't used, only to lead to the 'other' case.

    I'd even argue that FRWL works even better after seeing subsequent films, becuase once you've gotten used to the Bond formula it's fun at how this film plays around with it and surprises you. Good fun. :)
  2. Rogue1-and-a-half Manager Emeritus who is writing his masterpiece

    Member Since:
    Nov 2, 2000
    star 7
    Not a whole lot for me to add. I basically agree with everyone else.

    If pressed, I might pick Goldfinger as Connery's best, but From Russia with Love is a close second. The Bond-Grant fight is still a winner. As previously stated, only the 007-006 fight from Goldeneye really hits the same intensity, though I also love the brutality of the Bond-Blofeld fight from OHMSS. Say what you want about Savalas as Blofeld, but he was the only physically menacing Blofeld for sure. Is it the marker against which all serious Bond films should be measured? I'd go with OHMSS, personally, as the marker, but FRwL is no slouch.

    It's an interesting movie. You can definitely see the franchise stepping up from Dr. No with a higher gloss. The violence is more intense and thrilling; I even love some bits of the gypsy fight. The antagonists have stepped up for sure; replacing the rather forgettable Dr. No, you've got the incredibly creepy and memorable Rosa Klebb and the physically and mentally dominating Red Grant. The scene with Grant and Bond in the train is a fantastic scene; it's already been dissected quite well above, but here's a second to that analysis. The fight is great, but so is what comes before it.

    One other thing that I don't think anyone else has mentioned is the fact that this is the only Bond film to really treat Bond's sexual activities with even the slightest hint of reality. The implication of the plot is that a scandal could actually be created if anyone found out about Bond's sexual activities. I don't recall that thread showing up anywhere else in the franchise. Bond's liaisons are rather like his kills in the rest of the series; they carry no real-world consequences. I do have to add, while on this path, that I love the creepy scene of Bond making love to Tatiana where the camera eventually reveals that they're being filmed by Klebb (I think it's by Klebb; it's been a while). That's a great scene too.
  3. Koohii Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 30, 2003
    star 5
    FRwL is one of the best still. Goldfinger gets more praise and play, but to me, it is over-rated. FRwL is a lot more of just about everything. The new movies could learn a lot by looking at classics like this one.

    "Yeah, I slept with your spy. And? It isn't like I'm married. And neither was she."
    I was under the impression that was more of Spectre being ready to destroy Tatiana's life (or blackmail her in the future) than Bond's. Maybe it's been too long since I watched that one.
  4. TryWhistlingThis Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 9, 2012
    star 3
    From Russia With Love

    I'm running behind by one movie so I thought i'd just skip Dr. No and instead start my journey here with the thread. I haven't seen Dr. No in a while but it wasn't one that I cherished the most. But, that's definitely untrue of FRWL. To me it's the staple of classic spy story telling because it's focus is on the characters and settings instead of the gadgets and stunt work. One of the most memorable character moments was between Bond and Red Grant in the carriage when 007 had his own suspicions confirmed about Red's true identity. While on the one hand Bond was vulnerable on his knees with his hands in his pockets, at the same time he was also at his most unpredictable because that's when he needs to think the quickest. This made the physical confrontation all the more sense and nail biting because of the quick sudden movements in the small confined space.

    Another great character moment, arguably a lot more subtle than the one mentioned, was one that I just noticed on this viewing. Once again, it's on the train when Tatiana is given her false passport. While the focus of the dialogue is with Bond and Bey, if you just purely on her, she's standing there miming as though practicing to be more British. I found it kind of cute and once again, the first time I had noticed it given how driven the scene was by Bond and Bey.

    Regarding Bey, he's also one of my favourite supporting Bond characters. Much like Mathius from CR and QOS, there's both a friendship and a working relationship that just feels natural. This is something a Bond film tends to struggle with when choosing a male companion for 007 to work with. As brilliant as Jeffrey Wright's take on Felix Leiter was, the relationship between that character and Craig's Bond wasn't quite there because there wasn't a sense of the friendship but more of a meeting of the minds.

    I suppose if I really had to criticise, one thing that always bothered me was a scene from early in the film when Bond arrives in Istanbul and enters his room. Throughout this whole sequence, we hear the Bond theme playing quite loudly over it as Bond surreptitiously inspects the room for bugs and traps. I think Bond's demeanor in this scene was diminished somewhat because of the clashing with the loud Bond theme blazing over the top of the scene. This part would have worked amazingly without the score as it would have helped capture a quieter, more cynical and meticulous side of Bond.

    But, overall, FRWL would have to be one of my favourite all time 007 films. Clearly the best of the Connery era because of its pacing, casting, performances, writing plus with just the right balance of action, dialogue, sleuthing, and believable real world style gadgets.

    5 out of 5
    Merlin_Ambrosius69 likes this.
  5. TryWhistlingThis Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 9, 2012
    star 3
    I did. I still have it lying around somewhere along with my PS2, both of which have been collecting dust for a generous number of years. There's lots to enjoy about this game. I was particularly impressed with the respect that Electronic Arts had for the source material in the way they followed the events of the film plus of course saw Connery reprise his role. Ironically, it would not only serve as his final contribution to the 007 franchise, but I believe was his final ever performance since it was released well after The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen. The gameplay did let it down somewhat because of some frustrating control moments, agonizing difficulty in parts plus some overall repetitive by the numbers action gaming.

    It's definitely not a bad game, but one that could have been improved by cutting back on the action, explosions and noise just a little so as to help the game capture the subtle nuances of the film.
  6. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    I've not meant to neglect this, it's just the silly season and all! I will do Goldfinger shortly, since it was on TV last night in the hotel I was staying at.
    Champion of the Force likes this.
  7. TryWhistlingThis Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 9, 2012
    star 3
    Thunderball was on television last night :) Ready when everyone else is, no rush. If we make it up to You Only Live Twice by Christmas, we've done extremely well.
  8. TryWhistlingThis Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 9, 2012
    star 3
    Any chance we'll get stuck into Goldfinger before Christmas or New Year? I'm really hoping to follow this thread each film of the way.
  9. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 6
    Bring it back! Bring it back!
    DESHAY BASARA BASARA! DESHAY BASARA BASARA!
    "It means rise."
  10. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    By the time the producers had decided to make their next Bond film, the first two had proven to be wildly successful. But, they hadn't truly hit the level of phenomenon yet. Goldfinger would change all this, as well as changing the franchise forever.

    Goldfinger wasn't always slated to be the third film; the plan had been to film Thunderball however the lawsuit between Kevin McClory and Ian Fleming was still in the courts so the source material could not be used. Instead, the producers turned to Fleming's 1959 novel about Bond's attempts to disrupt a SMERSH-sponsored gold smuggling operation. Several key changes would need to be made; Pussy Galore was no longer a lesbian, won over by Bond's forceful masculinity. The car, which replaced Bond's Bentley for the purposes of cover, was upgraded from an Aston Martin DB Mark III to a newer model, and finally the major plot hole of the novel had to and was rectified (stealing gold from Fort Knox; see the scene in which Connery calculates the time it would take to steal it all).

    The film, which largely takes place in the US but was never shot there, was a hit beyond wildest expectations. Police at the premiere in Leicester Square could not control the eager crowds and it produced one of the most enduring models/toys from a film series, ever, by way of Corgi's Aston Martin DB5. I had one as a child, but as a man-child I now have this on my bookshelf instead:

    [IMG]

    A 1:43 model, complete with Furka pass diorama scenery and extended tyre slasher, from GE Fabbiri's Bond car magazine.

    So, without further ado...

    [IMG]

    Goldfinger, 1964

    Plot

    After a pre-title sequence that's unrelated to the plot (a trend we see in the Moore films), we kick off into a wonderfully sexist, arse-slapping Bond meeting yet another actor to play Felix Leiter in Miami, FL. M has instructed Bond, via Leiter, to keep an eye on one Auric Goldfinger. Bond does so, and observes Goldfinger cheating at gin rummy via binoculars and a fairly delectable personal secretary, Jill Masterson. After taking Masterson back to his room and delivering a wonderfully snobbish, and dated line; "My dear girl, there are some things that just aren't done, such as drinking Dom Perignon '53 above the temperature of 38 degrees Fahrenheit. That's just as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs!" he is knocked out by Odd Job and awakes to find Masterson painted wholly in gold. The effect is that her skin suffocated and she died, creating a wholly memorable scene.

    Bond is given his assignment and his new car, which I'll discuss in greater detail, and he heads off to play a round of golf against Goldfinger, who cheats again. Bond is warned off by Goldfinger, but not before he places a tracking device in Goldfinger's Rolls Royce. Bond then follows Goldfinger to Switzerland where, after some gorgeous shots of the Furka Pass, he meets Jill's sister Tilly. She tries to kill Goldfinger twice, and on the second attempt trips an alarm. She is killed but Bond is able to engage the Aston's gadgets to attempt to flee, ultimately crashing out after being confused by his own reflection in a mirror.

    [IMG]

    Bond awakens to yet another iconic moment - spread eagled on a slab of gold, with a laser cutter threatening to cut him in half. I still have, boxed up somewhere, a 1965 Gilbert toy of this scene and it features in my favourite Simpsons episode, You Only Move Twice:

    [IMG]

    Goldfinger memorably tells Bond he has no expectations of Bond talking, only dying, but Bond is able to convince him he has reported too much to be left for dead; his replacement would be well informed and stand better odds at succeeding in his mission. Goldfinger relents and takes Bond to Kentucky.

    Bond is able to woo Goldfinger's personal pilot, Pussy Galore, and determine the details of Goldfinger's plot - a plan to irradiate the gold supply at Fort Knox so as to increase his own gold's value. Pussy gets words out, and Bond is able to diffuse the bomb after fighting the first of many seemingly impervious henchmen to the death. The bomb is stopped and Bond remarks that only 3 more ticks and Goldfinger would've hit the jackpot - the counter shows 007 though, in the first of many concessions to American audiences.

    Bond, thinking he's done his job well, is off to the White House when it turns out Goldfinger's still alive and on board. After a brief fight, Goldfinger's .45 revolver decompresses the cabin and he is sucked out. Bond and Pussy escape to safety.

    Review

    This is a tough one. Mostly because it's such an icon; any criticism feels iconoclasitc which I suppose it is. The film has more quips, which were brought in to soften Fleming's character and broaden the appeal. Apparently, murder is shocking; but murder with a pithy one-liner is ok. But, and Rogue will hate this - I feel like it's just a collection of set pieces and that the parts are more interesting and more memorable than their sum. The Aston Martin is wonderful - I won't say Aston never make ugly cars, because the Lagonda is just dreadful, but they really have an eye for beautiful lines on their cars. The gold-painted Masterson, the golf game, the laser cutter and the raid on Fort Knok are all inspired but as a whole I just don't enjoy Goldfinger like I used to. I feel like it's given such esteem in the series that I should like it more. I just don't. I feel this is where the films got sillier and more fanciful and despite a few exceptions it took a reboot to rediscover the true Bond.

    I won't discuss Bond himself separately, because I'm sure others will. To me this is really when Connery stopped being deadly, like he was in the first two, and you can tell by Thunderball he's just over it.

    The Aston Martin DB5

    Where I'd normally discuss Bond, I'm breaking my rules and discussing this car instead. Why? I don't get anything new from Bond in this film except for some quips, but the car? It's still emblematic of the films as a whole.

    The DB5 was a design evolution from the DB4, made in conjunction with coachbuilders Touring Superleggera. The "DB" comes from David Brown, who headed Aston Martin until the 1970's. It features a 282bhp, inline six engine capable of 0-100km/h (0-60mph) in 8s - fast for it's day but not as quick as, say, the E-Type Jaguar.

    Q-Branch fitted it with a remote tracking system; revolving headlights; 30mm front mounted machine guns; a bullet proof shield; smoke and oil ejectors in the rear; and of course an ejector seat.

    As I mentioned before, the car was made into an iconic toy by Corgi:

    [IMG]

    And featured again in the following films: Thunderball; GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies; The World is Not Enough (on satellite at the end); Casino Royale, and Skyfall.

    It also started the film Bond's association with Aston Martin, which was the car of choice in: Thunderball (DB5), On Her Majesty's Secret Service (DBS); The Living Daylights (V8 Volante); Die Another Day (Vanquish); Casino Royale (DBS V12), and Quantum of Solace (DBS V12).

    The choice of marque was an interesting one. Fleming had Bond driving a battleship grey Bentley 4 1/2 litre Blower in Casino Royale and Moonraker, where it was crashed and replaced with a Continential Type R. Fleming was advised by a reader to look at Aston Martins, and as mentioned gave Bond the DB Mark III in the Goldfinger novel (though it's incorrectly called a DBIII in the book). You see, when Fleming was giving Bond a Bentley, it was a rugged, tough, fast English gentleman's racing car and had famously won the 1929 Le Mans endurance race for the Bentley Boys. Like his Rolex Submariner, Bentley conveyed the image of a well-to-do, sophisticated adventurer who took plenty of risks. By the time of the films, Bentley had been bought by Rolls Royce and had moved more into the luxury saloon range. Aston, therefore, fit that image nicely and it made sense to make it Bond's car on screen. Aston Martin have retained that image; Rolex went the way of Bentley and that's why the producers sought out Omega over TAG-Heuer for Bond's watch (he says, appreciatively looking at his own Seamaster). Though Dalton did wear a TAG in TLD.

    If you don't own a model DB5 (even Micro Machines made one with a pop-up bullet proof shield!), and are a Bond fan, I can only tut-tut admonishingly.

    How it fits in the series.

    Not to put too fine a point on this, but... it kind of is the series. It's often said that this is where they perfected the Bond formula, so you would expect to find it as a template for future Bond films. Which, now I think about it, is curious; FRWL is held up as the best of the films, but Goldfinger is the most emulated. Oh well.

    But if you wanted to show the Bond films and how they didn't really vary too much in terms of structure you could show someone, say, Goldfinger and a Brosnan film and they'd see the similarities. Crucially, we see the following traits established here that come up later:

    1) Bond's wisecracks
    2) Bond's gadgets
    3) Bond's winding up of Q as his gear is issued.

    These elements were introduced in Goldfinger and stayed with us until 2006's reboot (notably excepting films where Q didn't appear or interact with Bond, such as OHMSS or LALD; or LTK where Q had his finest hour) and in that sense they typify the series.

    They also, to me, represent what was wrong with so many of the films.

    I want to love Goldfinger more, but... I just can't. Sorry Rogue!

    004/007 Stars.
    Debo likes this.
  11. JoinTheSchwarz Comms Admin & Community Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Nov 21, 2002
    star 7
    Yes and yes. Exactly my feelings.

    I have an undying love for the pre-credits sequence, though.
  12. Souderwan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 3, 2005
    star 6
    Dude. Just discovered this thread. You may have renewed the JCC for me. Lots of catching up to do!
    Ender_Sai likes this.
  13. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    I do excepting "Shocking. Positively shocking."
    JoinTheSchwarz likes this.
  14. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 6
    I really liked this one, and I feel that this is the best of the Connery films besides Dr. No. It's so wonderfully silly while being edge-of-your-seat entertainment which the Moore films tried and failed to replicate.
  15. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    After finally getting Blood Stone on PC once the Steam sale dropped it to a mere $20, I can safely say that Goldfinger is to the films what GoldenEye 64 is to the games. A pointless benchmark.

    Also, on the Aston Martin - as lovely as it is, no way it could compete against a Ferrari 355 like it did in GoldenEye. Even with Michael Schumacher at the wheel, a car with drum brakes, leaf suspension and thin tyres cannot compete with a modern supercar.
  16. TryWhistlingThis Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 9, 2012
    star 3
    Goldfinger

    This is a tough one for me because, as already stated by Ender, it's such an iconic Bond film. In fact, it's more than that, it's an iconic 1960s film. Its use of action, one liners, gorgeous women and spectacle shows why so many filmmakers of the action and spy genres draw inspiration from it. There really isn't anything wrong with the film as such, but even when watching it as a child, I never could appreciate it as many fans and critics seem to. But, I can definitely admire it in terms of its legacy to 007. For instance, it's the first 007 film that features a pre-title sequence that has no connection to the overall plot. The pre-title sequence is terrific because it ticks precisely the same boxes as what FRWL did when it came to the action. It looked clean, simple but absolutely gripping. Admittedly, Connery's initial one liner, "shocking" was far stronger than the one used only seconds later given how derivative the second one liner was.

    As another watershed in the series, it also starts to broaden both the camaraderie and banter between Q and 007. I've always enjoyed this aspect of a Bond film except the more it went on, the more it felt like a showroom display more it did an extension of a briefing for the mission. This is especially the case in how the gadgets are used. I'm not denying that they're fun and enjoyable to watch, but, they do feel a little "placed" in their practical application. Not only are they used at just the right time, but they're only used once, much like a computer game. But they're definitely fun, enjoyable diversions from the main plot. However, as this particular era of Bond tended to utilise the gadgets, the more formulaic they felt.

    Overall, the film is well written, nicely paced and does have some good action. However, to go from the subdued tone in FRWL to the grander spectacle in Goldfinger is quite a leap. It's here where I feel the film doesn't succeed as well as its predecessor because it's hard to justify whether it services the plot at hand. Especially since the nerve gas was meant to render its victims in a state of paralysis for 24 hours. This leads me to the film's antagonist, Goldfinger.

    Gert Fröbe does a fine job in the role and is arguably what helps to make this villain so iconic with his subtle use of voice, facial expression and overall demeanor. But, as i've watched Goldfinger over the years, the villain is lacking in the writing. I just never understood, apart from sheer insanity, his motive to carry out his ultimate goal. The audience is never really treated to to his background and there's nothing to indicate where the world has done wrong against him. It's also unclear, apart from making 007 suffer, as to why he allows Bond to follow him around and then hold him in captivity for such a long period. Although this is a 1960s spy film with a certain camp quality to it, by having identified this aspect of Goldfinger's character, with the exception of Fröbe's performance, it is hard to see why he is such a classic villain if we don't know that much about him.

    When you contrast this to FRWL, we're given very clear reasons and motives for Spectre to want Bond dead. Their scheme culminates in the fierce one-on-one fight in the train carriage. Whereas, with Goldfinger, although Goldfinger is carrying out an elaborate scheme, the grandiosity of it all seems to be for absolutely nothing apart from the sake of destruction itself. I also felt that Goldfinger's final confrontation with 007 was almost literally a last minute event. It just would have felt like a more rounded arc by having Goldfinger fall prey to his own scheme rather than initially succeed but only fail because he waved his gun in the wrong direction at the worst possible moment. For all the time that 007 and Goldfinger shared on screen, you really didn't get a sense of common ground or all that much tension which is why their interplay doesn't feel that dynamic.

    This isn't to say i dislike Goldfinger. It's a classic 007 film and has earned its place in the history of cinema. But, I can't help it feel that after all these decades, the love for Goldfinger is more to do with the "idea" or iconic quality of what a spy film should be because of how effectively its visuals and spectacle is portrayed rather than giving us characters that we can genuinely invest our interest in for 90-120 minutes. Goldfinger is definitely an important Bond film because it shows how the franchise learned in its youth the importance of taking risks with the formula while being faithful to the nature of the series and, most importantly, learning how to have fun doing that. In High Definition, the film presents brilliantly. As you'd expect, the picture is even more crisp and the colour is all the more serene as a result of the HD transfer.

    4 out of 5

    I also want to note I will use this thread to also rank the 007 films one by one. Disregard the list posted earlier. I'm going to order them film by film.

    Ranking:

    1. From Russia With Love

    2. Goldfinger

    3. Dr. No
    Last edited by TryWhistlingThis, Dec 23, 2012
  17. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
  18. Rogue1-and-a-half Manager Emeritus who is writing his masterpiece

    Member Since:
    Nov 2, 2000
    star 7
    I don't necessarily take issue with the idea that this is more a connection of set pieces than a coherent whole. But those set pieces are simply so vibrant. I think there's simply no doubt that this is the single most iconic movie in the franchise. The gold-painted girl, the golf match, Odd Job's hat, the laser scene, Pussy Galore, Odd Job's death scene.

    A lot of people find it strange that I love this movie so much, since it is the beginning of what one might term the less serious Bond. The villain is more audacious, the villain's sidekick is more overtly gimmicky, the Bond girl name reaches its zenith, the gadgets start to come to the fore and Connery softens the character, after two very hard-edged performances in Dr. No and From Russia with Love. This is the film, that more than its predecessors, led to the Roger Moore years and the Bond formula, which would eventually (or maybe immediately) become annoyingly calcified and frustrating, begins here. So, why do I love it? Well, the formula is still fresh in Goldfinger and even rewatched after all the imitations, there's an energy level that doesn't really ever flag for me. This is, I think (some trivia hound confirm this), still the shortest Bond film at barely over ninety minutes. And it feels like it. It's unbelievably brisk and fast paced; one of the large problems with the bad Bond films is their length (even Skyfall suffered from overlength). It still all feels fresh.

    Also, it's worth pointing out that there are still holdovers from the previous films in a few wonderful moments when Bond's more human side is revealed. The iconic laser scene is one example; Bond escapes from that deathtrap, not with a gadget or a stunt, but by his quick wits and, ironically considering the earlier card game, a brilliantly played bluff about how much he knows about Goldfinger's plot. That's a stripped down Bond that seems left over from FRwL. My favorite, however, is the climax of the film, when Bond faces the bomb that must be defused. Faced with a couple of wires, and the clock rapidly ticking down, he hesitates, even dithers, sweats a bit. And, in the end, it's Felix, reaching in over Bond's shoulder, that pulls the right wire and saves the day. That's interesting on two levels. On the character level, it gives us a surprisingly fallible Bond. On the story level, it's a surprising twist to have a secondary character save both the hero and the day. Little touches like that help in elevating this movie; after this one, they mostly disappear from the franchise.

    In short, this is the last of the truly great Connery Bond films; I don't think he turned in another one that was even really half decent, at least not an official one. The franchise has had a fantastic opening trilogy; the decline begins next time and in a big, big way.

    Live or Let Die? Thumbs up from me on this one: Live!

    I also intended on rating the franchise. Here's my list so far:

    1. Goldfinger
    2. From Russia with Love
    3. Dr. No
    SithLordDarthRichie likes this.
  19. corran2 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2006
    star 4
    It may not be as great a film as "From Russia With Love" but this is THE James Bond movie. It has a ceaseless energy, an inventive nature that has to be taken in context. It must be remembered, "Goldfinger" didn't about some of the awful sequels to come. What I always find surprising is that Gert Frobe is perhaps the weakest link of the main cast, overshadowed by the rest of the main cast. His performance is good, but I think Connery is the driving force behind his most famous scene, the laser scene. But this still remains classic Bond, and the campiness would never again be this great.

    1. From Russia With Love
    2. Goldfinger
    3. Dr. No
    SithLordDarthRichie likes this.
  20. darthcaedus1138 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2007
    star 5
    Absolutely agree with everything Ender said, so I won't say anything more. I just don't enjoy this movie as much as I feel I should, and I feel like this is the one where it starts becoming a bit ridiculous.

    1.From Russia With Love
    2. Goldfinger
    3. Dr. No
  21. Rogue1-and-a-half Manager Emeritus who is writing his masterpiece

    Member Since:
    Nov 2, 2000
    star 7
    It appears we all agree that Dr. No is the weakest so far.
  22. drg4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2005
    star 4
    While so many fans mark Goldfinger as the beginning of the end for the series, it should be noted that this third film has more commonality with its two predecessor insofar as how character-driven it is. Beginning with Thunderball, the Bond casts would serve as mere ingredients in a not-always-palatable stew; archetypal, with a few memorable one-liners delivered here and there. Not in Goldfinger. Bond, Auric, Pussy and Oddjob are so distinct, so superbly cast, so beautifully rendered, that all the splash and spectacle actually seems to exist as extensions of their personalities.

    Here's one of my favorite exchanges:

    Bond: "You'll kill 60,000 people uselessly."
    Goldfinger: "American motorists kill that many every two years."

    If there's ever been a more incisive glimpse into the mind of a psychopath, I'd like to hear it.
  23. Havac Some Guy Who Moderates Lit

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Sep 29, 2005
    star 7
    No, I think I'd take Dr. No over Goldfinger. Goldfinger is tons of fun, and like Ender says, full of great bits and pieces, and it's the ultimate "Bond movie" -- but I have to come down on the side of the harder-edged thriller form of Dr. No and its more serious, menacing Bond. No is certainly flawed, but I give it some leeway as the first stab at Bond, and I prefer its more satisfying overall presentation to Goldfinger's use of excellent components in a rather emptier whole. On a gut level I just have to rank Dr. No higher.
    Darth McClain and Ender_Sai like this.
  24. Champion of the Force Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 27, 1999
    star 4
    So, finally got to see Goldfinger. No need for a full analysis (everyone else has already done so), so I'll simply leave my own quick thoughts.

    In short, it's no longer my #1 Bond film (FRWL now takes that spot).

    I pretty much agree with Ender - there's some fantastic scenes and set pieces to be found here, but the overall plot and flow? Ehhh, this didn't grab me in the way FRWL did. That's not to say this is a bad film - far from it (I'd still consider it one of the best), but after the fantastic tight thriller we found in its predecessor this feels less taut, more bemused and casual about itself. The action scenes are great (although I feel the car chase goes on too long - they clearly felt the need to show off very single device Q installed in that DB5) and the dialogue witty, maybe even a bit too much. I guess it's just the overall tone - the Bond that managed to defeat Red Grant in FRWL is largely absent here.

    Anyway, next up we have Thunderball, one of my least favourite Connery films. Considering how much I've changed my mind over this film, it's going to be interesting to see that one.
  25. Darth McClain Arena Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Feb 5, 2000
    star 6
    I'd agree with putting FRWL over Goldfinger, and Dr. No over Goldfinger. It's been a good while since I've seen the non-Craig Bonds, and I've enjoyed the harder edge of the first two. I have vague recollections of Thunderball, but don't remember a whole lot of specifics.