›

There's something about that The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)!

1246789

Comments

  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    How great of a villain can he be if a really bad wax dummy could fool him?

    What? God, talk about clutching at straws...

    doubleohdad wrote: »
    Seriously? Scaramanga over Silva or any of the complex, interesting characters in SF? Even Tanner is more interesting.

    Yes, to put it short.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2014 Posts: 17,795
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote: »
    Scaramanga is a better villain, or I dare say, character, than anyone from Skyfall.
    Yeah, and the people in my cinema laughed at Silva when he took his retainer out...


    :))
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    So did he!

    LOL!
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    So did he!

    LOL!

    So did I!

    LOL!
  • HASEROTHASEROT has returned like the tedious inevitability of an unloved season---
    edited November 2014 Posts: 4,399
    (deleted)
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Lee's performance is one of the very few things that carries that movie, and makes it at the very least - watchable.
    Lee was great in it.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    HASEROT wrote: »
    Scaramanga is a great villain trapped in an awful movie... it happens.... Lee's performance is one of the very few things that carries that movie, and makes it at the very least - watchable.

    It often happens with Christopher Lee. Playing an amazing villain in a lousy movie. For the record, I also prefer Moore's performance in Gun than in most of his future Bonds.
  • NapoleonPluralNapoleonPlural
    Posts: 512
    I saw the film aged 9 in a cub scout hut, all the other cubs loved it and whistled at the rude bits. It did somehow augment the sleazy feel of it however. But a lot of the kids loved it and it was like they'd never seen a Bond film before (and maybe hadn't).
  • Matt_HelmMatt_Helm
    Posts: 908
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    How great of a villain can he be if a really bad wax dummy could fool him?

    Or one dumb enough,not to have Bond have searched for a radio device,when he knows that he's there to track him down.
    BTW, I wouldn't try arguing for SF on a competence/cleverness level.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Although wasn't it part of Silva's plan, to be brought back by Bond ?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    Gun, for all his flaws, has a b movie charm which I love.
  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    TMWGG has strong bits and weak bits. Stron bits: Christopher Lee as Scaramanga, Roger Moore's performance as a darker Bond, Scaramanga's Island, Nic Nac Barry's score. Poor bits: Britt Eklund as Mary Goodnight, JW Pepper, the car twist jump with that sound.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    I actually think that Mary Goodnight was not miscast. The problem was that she was poorly written. Had they remained close to the original Fleming character, she would have worked far better. Not like Honey Ryder or Tatiana Romanova, but she could have been a decent Bond girl.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    The sunny whistle over the car stunt is a crime. Such an amazing stunt ruined by a stupid noise. I wish they'd just done it silent or better still with the Dukes of Hazard tune over the top.

    Joke.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Gun, for all his flaws, has a b movie charm which I love.
    Yes, my favourite Bonds seem to be those rushed, underfunded, or during writer's strikes.... =D>
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Gun, for all his flaws, has a b movie charm which I love.
    Yes, my favourite Bonds seem to be those rushed, underfunded, or during writer's strikes.... =D>

    It does sometimes seem to bring out the best.
  • The_ReaperThe_Reaper
    Posts: 1,092
    There are things I really like about Gun, like Moore's performance and certain scenes like when he tracks down the gold bullet, but things I don't like irk me. Overall it looks a bit cheap and slapped together.

    Remember, it came out the next year, right after LALD, and it feels rushed and low budget. I mean, really, look at Scaramonga's dueling playroom, looks like a kid's carnival or something, really cheap and silly. I hate Pepper in it, he's annoying and superfluous. And adding the kung fu stuff was really dumb; they did it only to appeal to the sign of the times and try to generate box office. Bad move.

    I still like certain elements, but it's my least favorite Moore Bond.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    I prefer the novel.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    It has a certain charm.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    Getafix wrote: »
    It has a certain charm.
    People in my cinema booed and hissed and walked out in droves during the movie.


    ;) =))
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    Read the book. way better.
    No silly stuff.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2014 Posts: 17,795
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    Read the book. way better.
    No silly stuff.
    In my library, people booed and hissed and walked out in droves during the readings.
    Hahahahaha!

  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    that was almost funny

    nice try lol
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,795
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    that was almost funny
    nice try lol
    Thanks.
    You are a solid fan of Flint, I'm guessing....

    Me too, BTW. ;)
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    You remember an audience from 30 years ago? ...I believe you but I'm sure not every audience did. TMWGG flawed or not is still a classic Bond film most of us grew up watching over and over.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    You remember an audience from 30 years ago? ...I believe you but I'm sure not every audience did. TMWGG flawed or not is still a classic Bond film most of us grew up watching over and over.

    I think in popular imagination it's a classic. Just the title is iconic. Similar with LALD. Even if they're not the best, people have them in their minds as classic. Obviously something resonated.

    It's sad to hear some people slagging off Sir Rog. He is a legend.

  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    Getafix wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    You remember an audience from 30 years ago? ...I believe you but I'm sure not every audience did. TMWGG flawed or not is still a classic Bond film most of us grew up watching over and over.

    I think in popular imagination it's a classic. Just the title is iconic. Similar with LALD. Even if they're not the best, people have them in their minds as classic. Obviously something resonated.

    It's sad to hear some people slagging off Sir Rog. He is a legend.

    You can disagree, I understand we all have divergent opinions. I just think his interpretation of the FLeming character is too soft and genteel, in many ways.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    doubleohdad wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    You remember an audience from 30 years ago? ...I believe you but I'm sure not every audience did. TMWGG flawed or not is still a classic Bond film most of us grew up watching over and over.

    I think in popular imagination it's a classic. Just the title is iconic. Similar with LALD. Even if they're not the best, people have them in their minds as classic. Obviously something resonated.

    It's sad to hear some people slagging off Sir Rog. He is a legend.

    You can disagree, I understand we all have divergent opinions. I just think his interpretation of the FLeming character is too soft and genteel, in many ways.

    Moore's take is not about slavish authenticity. It's about irrepressible Rog having a laugh and the audience just not being able to resist even though they know the whole thing is way OTT half the time.

    Either you take it for what it is and go with the flow, or you sit slouched grumpily and sour faced in the corner harrumphing from under your enormous fringe while everyone else has a whale of a time.

    I think I know what your approach is.
  • doubleohdaddoubleohdad
    Posts: 1,146
    So if the Moore Bond is not slavish the the character, you cannot understand why others might object? Not seeking to offend, just explain the opposite view.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I actually just can't understand what you're saying.
Sign In or Register to comment.