Why I love GOLDFINGER

135

Comments

  • Posts: 1,492
    actonsteve wrote:
    I think it's fair to say that for the general public, GF, TSWLM, GE and CR are widely considered classic outings.

    Not Dr No? Not FRWL? Not TB? Not YOLT?

    I didn't say those weren't considered as classics... I said that the ones that are the *most* considered classics by the largest majority of the general public are GF, TSWLM, GE and CR. Yes those you mentioned are considered classics.... but not to the same level as the other 4 I mentionned.

    No offence DC and I dont like offending anyone but unless you have figures and statistics to back that up I don't buy it. Its speculation. I think it is probably projection. I dont buy that the ones you mentioned are "better classics" then the sixties Bond. Its outrageous.

    Incidently, since this thread to argue GFs case and so many people have cited it - I would say I have been vindicated a wee bit.

  • Posts: 11,189
    actonsteve wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    I think it's fair to say that for the general public, GF, TSWLM, GE and CR are widely considered classic outings.

    Not Dr No? Not FRWL? Not TB? Not YOLT?

    I didn't say those weren't considered as classics... I said that the ones that are the *most* considered classics by the largest majority of the general public are GF, TSWLM, GE and CR. Yes those you mentioned are considered classics.... but not to the same level as the other 4 I mentionned.

    No offence DC and I dont like offending anyone but unless you have figures and statistics to back that up I don't buy it. Its speculation. I think it is probably projection. I dont buy that the ones you mentioned are "better classics" then the sixties Bond. Its outrageous.

    Incidently, since this thread to argue GFs case and so many people have cited it - I would say I have been vindicated a wee bit.

    Ah, I remember you saying you favoured CR over GF because it had "more meat on the bone". It could be argued that CR is a "modern classic" and reaches the same standard quality-wise as 60s Bond.
  • Posts: 1,492
    BAIN123 wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    actonsteve wrote:
    I think it's fair to say that for the general public, GF, TSWLM, GE and CR are widely considered classic outings.

    Not Dr No? Not FRWL? Not TB? Not YOLT?

    I didn't say those weren't considered as classics... I said that the ones that are the *most* considered classics by the largest majority of the general public are GF, TSWLM, GE and CR. Yes those you mentioned are considered classics.... but not to the same level as the other 4 I mentionned.

    No offence DC and I dont like offending anyone but unless you have figures and statistics to back that up I don't buy it. Its speculation. I think it is probably projection. I dont buy that the ones you mentioned are "better classics" then the sixties Bond. Its outrageous.

    Incidently, since this thread to argue GFs case and so many people have cited it - I would say I have been vindicated a wee bit.

    Ah, I remember you saying you favoured CR over GF because it had "more meat on the bone". It could be argued that CR is a "modern classic" and reaches the same standard quality-wise as 60s Bond.

    Call me old school but I think the first four Bond films plus OHMSS are automatic classics due to their adherence to the Fleming novels.

    CR in twenty years time could be a classic. But time will tell. It has the potential to become one. In fact the only one I would put with the sixties classics is CR. Not GE or Spy. CR could have been made in the sixties with Connery and Terence Young directing.
  • edited April 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Spy is debatable. Personally I think the PTS alone could make it qualify for' classic' status. It's probably the greatest stunt the series has ever done. Not to mention the beautiful locations, the Atlantis set and Jaws.

    Story-wise?? Ok perhaps the early 60s Bond films were better.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited April 2012 Posts: 15,717
    actonsteve wrote:
    No offence DC and I dont like offending anyone but unless you have figures and statistics to back that up I don't buy it. Its speculation. I think it is probably projection. I dont buy that the ones you mentioned are "better classics" then the sixties Bond. Its outrageous.

    Incidently, since this thread to argue GFs case and so many people have cited it - I would say I have been vindicated a wee bit.

    If you want to live in your own little bubble, so be it... but you cannot dispute facts. GF, TSWLM, GE and CR are the most widely considered classics amongst the general public. Where did I say they were 'better' classics than TB, YOLT or FRWL ? 8-|

    Sorry but have to accept that these 4 outings (GF, TSWLM, GE and CR) are the most widely considered classics outings. Who cares which film is the best, or the 'better classic ?' Simple fact is for the general public, these 4 outings are considered the definitive Bond films. We get it that you don't like Brosnan or GE.... but you have to accept that even if the Brosnan bashers are in the majority on Bond websites like this one, in the real world, they are a very, very small minority.

    I acccept that I am in the minority of people that didn't like CR... please do the same concerning your dislike of Brosnan. You aren't the majority.... far from it.
  • edited April 2012 Posts: 7,653
    CR a classic? The movie is rather recent so to already call it a classic is a wee bit strong imho.

    In GF case it is the truth. O:-)
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    What a BS vid. And how about that pissy redhead? GF all 10s? HAHAHAHAHAHA YEAH RIGHT. And FRWL at #6?! TRIPE.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,717
    What a BS vid. And how about that pissy redhead? GF all 10s? HAHAHAHAHAHA YEAH RIGHT. And FRWL at #6?! TRIPE.

    The video is a bit flawed - some films like TMWTGG only had like 2/3 people watching/voting, while other outings had nearly 3 times as many voters.......

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited April 2012 Posts: 28,694
    What a BS vid. And how about that pissy redhead? GF all 10s? HAHAHAHAHAHA YEAH RIGHT. And FRWL at #6?! TRIPE.

    The video is a bit flawed - some films like TMWTGG only had like 2/3 people watching/voting, while other outings had nearly 3 times as many voters.......

    There is yet another factor, yes. Strangely enough there was a whole pack of the thick headed gits when GF was watched and the imbeciles gave perfect 10s. And for some films it seemed like everyone was sleeping or not paying any attention. Just look when they are watching TMWTGG. It looked like they weren't even paying attention to it, and coincidentally it got the lowest score and had the least number watching it. Hmmmmm....
  • Posts: 12,837
    What a BS vid. And how about that pissy redhead? GF all 10s? HAHAHAHAHAHA YEAH RIGHT. And FRWL at #6?! TRIPE.

    The video is a bit flawed - some films like TMWTGG only had like 2/3 people watching/voting, while other outings had nearly 3 times as many voters.......

    There is yet another factor, yes. Strangely enough there was a whole pack of the thick headed gits when GF was watched and the imbeciles gave perfect 10s. And for some films it seemed like everyone was sleeping or not paying any attention. Just look when they are watching TMWTGG. It looked like they weren't even paying attention to it, and coincidentally it got the lowest score and had the least number watching it. Hmmmmm....

    Am I missing something? what vid?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    The video posted on the previous page.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Samuel001 wrote:
    The video posted on the previous page.

    Ah, skimmed over it before, thanks.


    The redhead chick pissed me off beyond belief. 5 for both Daltons films? they're masterpieces!

    And GF getting all 10s? It's good, I love the film, it's in my top 5, but all 10s? imo that's not deserved.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    It's almost because it's Goldfinger it must earn all 10's. As has been said, some looked like they weren't even watching it.
  • I dont get why people complain about the pace of goldfinger and tb, but they have no problems with The pace of FRWL. It is just as slow. Dont get me wong. I like them all.
  • Posts: 4,762
    I dont get why people complain about the pace of goldfinger and tb, but they have no problems with The pace of FRWL. It is just as slow. Dont get me wong. I like them all.

    The problem with the pacing in Goldfinger is that the actual plot of how Auric plans to break into Fort Knox and his motives therein doesn't come until extremely late into the movie, and so until then, we're left with Bond in captivity and nothing to excite us. As with Thunderball, I recently reviewed it and found no problems with it now, but for those who still do, I believe it is because of the underwater scenes feeling very dragging and drawn out, especially with SPECTRE setting up the bombs and all.
  • edited August 2012 Posts: 3,494
    I don't get why people complain about the pace of Goldfinger and TB, but they have no problems with The pace of FRWL. It is just as slow. Don't get me wrong. I like them all.

    I feel exactly that way myself. The pacing of the first 4 Connery films were very much the same. The pacing did not pick up until YOLT, dropped off again for OHMSS, and then went back to YOLT levels and higher. Let's be honest with ourselves here. Dr. No was more like a detective movie than a spy thriller and dreadfully slow. FRWL does better, but Bond spends about as much time romancing Tatiana as he does "in jail". What I think people don't consider in venturing their "why GF is boring" theories is that he could have made a break for it the first time he escaped, or after he turned Pussy. I actually see it as him wanting to stick around to find out exactly what Goldfinger and the Chinese were up to and sabotage their plans. He even states this offhandedly when he says on the plane that he would gladly accept Goldfinger's hospitality because there was "so much going on around him". He clearly doesn't want to escape. He was doing his job- spying! And TB's underwater drag, if you want to call GF or the first two slow paced, is definitely as slow as anything else in the first 4. Everyone knows I love all 4 films. But the criticisms of GF can be seen in a different context as I've demonstrated, unless of course one has already made up their mind to the contrary and doesn't want to re-examine their analysis.





  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,216
    Goldfinger is one of my favourite Bond films. Those who complain of the pacing just resort to that because they don't have the patience to see a story develop and form throughout the first two thirds, as opposed to something like TND, where the plot can be pieced together after 45 minutes or so (and I quite like TND, but the story isn't the best). GoldenEye, as many others have said, is a great Bond film, better than nearly all of Moore's entries and then some. CR is the only thing since that has verged on greatness.
  • edited November 2017 Posts: 236
    .
  • btw-I went to fort knox just to see the actual "Goldfinger model" that he used in the gangster briefing scene...
  • I like Goldfinger, but I feel like it drags, especially for a movie of it's length. I realize that it sort of paved the way as far as Bond iconography goes, but I really think that From Russia With Love and Casino Royale are really the gold standard as far as Bond films go.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,798
    Goldfinger kind of slipped into my "It's good, but not Connery's best" file over the years. But last night I went to sleep listening to the soundtrack with the movie visuals playing in my head.
    And I suddenly re-realized how amazing the film was on almost every level. Peak Connery, peak Barry, best villain, amazing Bond girl, the car, original & excellent henchman, most emotionally impactful sacrificial lambs, slickest PTS, coolest villain death-by-his-own-stupidity... it's still not my favourite Bond movie, but I think it is, objectively speaking, the best one. Proverbial lightning in a bottle.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    I understand why people think the film slows down when Bond is captured and brought to Kentucky, but I always found Connery so mesmerizing that I never grow bored during these scenes, and; I find he IS active: trying to find a way to escape his imprisonment, snooping about, discovering the true nature of Operation Grandslam, figuring a way of getting this info out to Felix; discovering his message failed to reach his CIA counterpart and so on….

    Connery was slick, the suits were glorious. The music rich and vibrant and sexy. Gert Frobe was one helluva a villain and his plan was so much a part of who his character was: conniving, brilliant, daring, grotesquely big.

    GF is a classic that I can watch any time, anywhere…
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,798
    peter wrote: »
    GF is a classic that I can watch any time, anywhere…
    What about that scene that I've heard so much whining about, where Bond rapes Galore?
    LOL, so much absolute BS has been heaped onto that bandwagon...
    She was fighting him pretty successfully, then oh, wait, she suddenly can't anymore? No reverse grapple? No head butt? No side roll?
    She kisses him. She made him work for it, and she's into it. He passed the test.
    Realistic? For two people in that world, maybe. I never made love to a career criminal semi-lesbian polyamourous lady before, so I can't say for sure in MY world. ;)
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 2,161
    I teach a muiltimedia class. I delve reasonably deep into the history of international cinema, and from day one I tell them that I will not be wasting time apologizing for, or acting horrified about, films being of their time. Don't act shocked if a film made in 1915, or 1964 for that matter, doesn't correspond with your current sensibilities. If an organic discussion arises form such things, I'm all for it, but the generic "tsk, tsk"s I will not entertain.

    My #1 since 1965!
  • edited December 2021 Posts: 16,163
    Occasionally I'll attempt to place TB or FRWL at the top of my Bond film rankings, but GF always seems to manage climbing it's way back up.
    It's one Bond film that has never let me down. I've certainly never walked away from a viewing of GOLDFINGER feeling depressed or defeated. Many of the elements in this film fans criticize I quite enjoy. I love all the Auric Stud scenes, and Connery locked up sitting on his ass is more entertaining to me than most action heroes performing some amazing stunt.
    Classic Bond epic!
  • One day in the early '90s I was contacted by a friend, a woman who had seen GF in the theatre during its' original release. She hadn't seen it since '64 --and in point of fact, had entirely missed several 007 films since then -- but she had a yen to see GF once again at that particular moment, and she had concluded (correctly) that I probably owned a copy. So I lent her my copy of GF...and also pressed a copy of FRWL into her hands at the same time, explaining that some Bond fans actually considered FRWL a superior offering. When she dutifully returned both films a few weeks later, she conceded that she understood why some might actually prefer FRWL to GF --simply because it adhered more closely to the conventions of a "serious" spy movie -- but at base, GF was what she had wanted to see and GF had rung that particular "bell" for her in ways that no other film could match. Having debated the point for many years now with myself, I cannot help but agree. GF is the gold standard among Bond films for good reason. I've stopped trying to find reasons to pretend otherwise, GF is and always will be my #1 favorite James Bond movie.
  • Goldfinger I think has unfortunately undergone a bit of a critical reevaluation in recent years, and in some instances has lost its title as “The Bond to Beat”. I think most fans nowadays would probably cite either From Russia With Love or Casino Royale as the series’ best entry, or even OHMSS.

    I love Goldfinger as a film, I always have since I first saw it when I was young. It’s a great film to really get someone introduced to the series. Similar to the story above, I had shown a very good friend both FRWL and Goldfinger for the first time, and was surprised that he enjoyed both films because he genuinely doesn’t like older films.
  • Posts: 2,161
    Goldfinger I think has unfortunately undergone a bit of a critical reevaluation in recent years, and in some instances has lost its title as “The Bond to Beat”. I think most fans nowadays would probably cite either From Russia With Love or Casino Royale as the series’ best entry, or even OHMSS.

    That was the point of this thread, to my understanding.
  • Posts: 207
    GF bounces back and forth for me. I think it depends on the day I watch it. Some viewings I don’t mind the Kentucky scenes, others I’m a little bored by them.
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    edited December 2021 Posts: 2,148
    FRWL and OHMSS are better overall movies but GF will forever remain my favorite Bond movie.
    The Kentucky portion may seem pedestrian (which doesn’t mean it’s bad) compared to what came before but that’s only because the first hour is as perfect as a Bond film can be, with one iconic sequence following another.
    Best villain/henchman combo by far, unforgettable score, wittiest dialogue and peak Connery - not to mention the movie breezes through due to its excellent pacing and relatively short running time.
    It’s pure, unadulterated Bond bliss.
Sign In or Register to comment.