It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Story of my life old chum.
*sighs*
Wait wait...how about this.
" I have not had a woman prisoner in a very long time!"
Now that sounds nothing like " Ere, caam down wack! Havena 'ad a bit o' skirt in f****** ages! In fact not since the 'Pool won the European cup, like"
Spot on ,couldn't have put it better myself !!
To be fair he does attempt a sort of Russian accent but his scouse accent just can't be hidden....
It really shows in the line "The Colonel does not like to hear screaming at night.."
Yeah it is quite amusing i must admit in an Unintentional way
I wish I could get a role opposite the latest James Bond actor for being able to 'attempt' an accent !
2. Moonraker is better than The Spy Who Loved Me on every level - especially in regards to the main villain. Drax is one of my favorite Bond villains, and Stromberg is one of the weakest.
3. Goldfinger is the weakest of the ‘60s run. The first half is great, but the second doesn’t feel very Bond-like and I always feel like switching it off as soon as Bond arrives at Goldfinger’s stables.
4. Roger Moore is wonderful in A View to a Kill, advanced age aside, and it might be his best performance as Bond. He seems to take the proceedings little more seriously than usual.
5. License to Kill gets way better as it progresses, while The Living Daylights gets way worse.
Interesting points. I agree on 1 and 3, and see where you are coming from on the other points. LTK is great all the way, from start to finish though! ;)
I agree on points 3 and 5...and possibly 4.
Well said !
Can't agree here I'm afraid, although I can understand the comments about Drax vs. Stromberg. For me, Jurgens has always appeared more menacing. Drax, despite some fantastic lines and a terrific deadpan performance by Lonsdale, comes across less threatening to me.
I can sympathize with this view.
I agree actually. He gives a very good performance, and a far more serious one than in OP. For me, it's the St. John Smythe disguise which spoils things, because he's that character for quite some time and it accentuates his age (particularly when he makes the moves on Stacey). I subconsciously have to remind myself that this is Moore as Smythe, and not Moore as Bond.
I agree here as well.
Nice list of controversial points for this thread btw.
Completely agree with you @Revelator it will always be top of my Bond film rankings.
A lot of members on here get bored once the action moves to Kentucky it seems. For me, Bond as a (resourceful) prisoner is just as cool as Bond in action. His conversation with Goldfinger regarding 'Operation Grandslam' is a great scene beautifully played.
Personally i don't think you can touch the first three. DN, FRWL and GF.
Agreed! There's lots of fun in seeing a captive Bond repeatedly try to foil Goldfinger's plot and continually running into major obstacles. And imagine how suspenseful this must have been for first-time viewers at the time.
They are the rock upon which the series stands.
You and @LeonardPine are speaking my language. I honestly can’t see why it’s been popular amongst a few to knock it down a few pegs. Each to his/her own. But like you, just watching Connery in this film was a joy. There’s plenty of “action”, in Kentucky, whether it’s Bond’s escape from prison, sleuthing, discovering what OPERATION GRANDSLAM is all about, his verbal tussle with Goldfinger, his physical tussle with Pussy.
More than enough to keep me engaged.
Exactly. Follow the blueprint of these 3 films and you can't go far wrong.
The same blueprints of the books are Casino Royale, Moonraker and From Russia With Love, in my opinion.
I will put Goldfinger himself up at the top among the very best villains, Oddjob among the best henchmen (I have Grant at the very top), and the laser table scene may be the most suspenseful moment in the series with masterful dialogue. I am also one of the defenders against the claim Bond does nothing to alter the outcome as he clearly does.
Despite those, there are numerous things in the film that make it less than the sum of its parts.
I'd also argue the point above that someone thinks there's more action in GF than in FRWL. GF seems to have the least action of any Bond film.
Not how I'd describe a film that features Bond blowing up a drug complex, two fight scenes with electrocutions, a lengthy car chase, the aerial gassing of an army base, an assault on Fort Knox and army counterattack, a fight scene aboard a plane followed by a plane crash, etc. FRWL is a great film but it doesn't spread its action out as evenly as GF--the helicopter and boat chases feel like they were inserted because not enough stuff had blown up yet.
Those fights are all so brief and I don't count electrocutions as part of that. The fight with Grant alone was worth the price of admission in FRWL. Sure, the helicopter and boat chases were inserted but I find both more exciting one after the other than I do anything in GF.
And don't think I will change my mind simply because you mention it was succesfull...
You mean "plain and simple," but even if your spelling was correct your idea would still be wrong.
The plot is straightforward: Bond is held prisoner and has to find a way to alert the world to Goldfinger's plans, but every time he tries he fails, leaving the viewer wondering how our hero will triumph. Suspense and pace build each time Bond makes an attempt; they mount further when Goldfinger actually makes it into Fort Knox and cuffs Bond to the bomb. From then on you have one of the greatest climaxes of the series.
Luckily the film's stature is not threatened by the contrarian tastes of a few Bond fans on the internet who can't understand why Goldfinger is the most famous, most referenced, and most influential film in the Bond series.
Exactly. The plot, which is tight and straightforward actually improves on Fleming's novel. In having Goldfinger 'ruin' the gold supply instead of stealing it the plan becomes even more ingenious and fiendish.
Now to the actual matter: It is indeed true that the plot tries to build tension. Wether it actually succeeds is again a matter of subjective opinion. For me it fails. Massively.
Is it really a "plain and simple" plot? I am not so sure... Maybe that is what I wish it would be. Let us go through it:
We are to believe that Pussy is the hero allerting the authorities to Goldfinger's plans, right? Now, what is the "plain and simple", logical way to react in that case? I have a feeling it is not to let him go through with the plan, wilingly inhaling toxic sleeping gass (taking a massive gamble she is telling the truth and risking your life in the process), and wait until Goldfinger has installed the bomb inside the vault before you act...
The whole solution to the problem to "how does Bond manage to allert the authorities" is so ridiculous and childish that you expect to find it in a Donald Duck cartoon or in a children's tale (if it wasn't for the fact that a rape scene is involved...). People say it improves on the novel. Well, in the novel it at least makes sense how Bond manages to send the information to the athourities, and it doesn't revolve on a cheap, lazy last minute solution from the script writers. Considering the flack Skyfall for taking nonsensical short cuts with its plot, "The undisputed greatest ever Bond film" is certainly not much better...
It has its fair share of iconic moments, a couple of wonderful scenes and an all time great villain. But somehow, I still find it a little plodding. I think the parts are greater than the sum.
Not knocking anyone elses opinion I know I am in the minority and most Bond fans revere it.
Neither of the two plots make sense, but I love them both regardless.