Goldfinger logic (or lack thereof)
#1
Posted 22 January 2002 - 03:26 PM
Although Goldfinger (the film) has improved on the logic of Goldfinger (the book) by removing the idea that the gold is to be removed from the bank and instead leaves it where it is for subsequent value augmentation of his current stock, the hoods meeting and the ensuing minutes just leaves me totally confused.
Could anyone explain why Goldfinger holds a meeting for the hoods since by then;
1. He already has the necessary funds for the robbery.
2. He already knows that he is going to kill them, so why bother with all the Grandslam descriptions.
3. Following on from point 2, he doesn't have to try to convince anyone to stay in with him, so why the effort.
Moving on from there to Solo's killing;
1. Why not just shoot him (sounds familiar)
2. Why the gold and Solo in the same car
3. Why the hassle for subsequent car/gold/Solo crushage and, again, subsequent gold - car/Solo split.
It all gets very confusing around that portion of the film - no doubt all for the audience's benefit. God knows it wasn't for the benefit of Goldfinger.
Or am I totally missing something?
#2
Posted 22 January 2002 - 03:48 PM
I take this that Mr. Goldfinger made didn't decide to kill the hoods until after he got their reaction to the plan.
Moving on from there to Solo's killing;
1. Why not just shoot him (sounds familiar)
The hoods may have been alerted by a gunshot or if they or their men, who might have been watching the property, noticed anything odd happen to Solo on the property.
2. Why the gold and Solo in the same car
Solo would have known something was up if they told him, 'Oh, we're just going to put your gold in a different car.'
3. Why the hassle for subsequent car/gold/Solo crushage and, again, subsequent gold - car/Solo split.
I agree with you here. Not taking out the gold before crushing the car wasn't very smart.
#3
Posted 23 January 2002 - 01:32 AM
Maybe the gold was to make up for the weight of the engine the car noticeably lacks whilst been picked up by the magnet.Mister Asterix (22 Jan, 2002 03:52 p.m.):
3. Why the hassle for subsequent car/gold/Solo crushage and, again, subsequent gold - car/Solo split.I agree with you here. Not taking out the gold before crushing the car wasn't very smart.
#4
Posted 23 April 2002 - 06:18 PM
Mister Asterix (22 Jan, 2002 03:52 p.m.):
Could anyone explain why Goldfinger holds a meeting for the hoods since by then;I take this that Mr. Goldfinger made didn't decide to kill the hoods until after he got their reaction to the plan.
Moving on from there to Solo's killing;
1. Why not just shoot him (sounds familiar)The hoods may have been alerted by a gunshot or if they or their men, who might have been watching the property, noticed anything odd happen to Solo on the property.
2. Why the gold and Solo in the same carSolo would have known something was up if they told him, 'Oh, we're just going to put your gold in a different car.'
3. Why the hassle for subsequent car/gold/Solo crushage and, again, subsequent gold - car/Solo split.I agree with you here. Not taking out the gold before crushing the car wasn't very smart.
A question I'd like clearing up from someone is why is there footage from FRWL of Connery (in the opening credits), ducking behind a hillside, to avoid the SPECTRE helicopter, if it is never seen in FRWL?
#5
Posted 23 May 2002 - 02:39 AM
Hardyboy (22 May, 2002 02:36 a.m.):
I think Goldfinger's reason for explaining his plans to the gangsters and then killing them is explained in the scene where Pussy Galore brings Bond to Goldfinger. "I enjoyed your speech," Bond says. "So did I," Goldfinger replies. Goldfinger is a megalomaniac--his desire is to create a masterpiece of crime--he couldn't resist going over his own plans to an appreciative audience. . .even one that he was planning to kill.
Well, to me, the 'so did I' comment seemed to be a nervous response from Goldfinger because he's embarrased at Bond's escaping. Well, you know how he says it, kind of 'shyly' or something.
You've hit the nail with the megalomaniac bit. The 'revealing of the plan' part is exactly what every villain does to Bond. The problem for the hoods was that they're too dumb and could not escape, like Bond would!
#6
Posted 23 May 2002 - 12:14 AM
And being a meglomaniac he wanted to be able to actually tell someone, especially the best criminal minds in the country, his plan and amuse himself with their respomses.Hardyboy (22 May, 2002 02:36 a.m.):
I think Goldfinger's reason for explaining his plans to the gangsters and then killing them is explained in the scene where Pussy Galore brings Bond to Goldfinger. "I enjoyed your speech," Bond says. "So did I," Goldfinger replies. Goldfinger is a megalomaniac--his desire is to create a masterpiece of crime--he couldn't resist going over his own plans to an appreciative audience. . .even one that he was planning to kill.
#7
Posted 22 May 2002 - 10:41 PM
Blue Eyes (22 May, 2002 12:59 a.m.):
As I understand it the gangsters did learn of Goldfingers plans and went along with him. They were actually to be in the raid on Fort Knox, however, it was reported as becoming too confusion having a horde of characters running around. Hence, Goldfinger kills them. It also adds to his sadistic nature.
If that's the reason we have a [cuss] plot in Goldfinger then some people at Eon should be fired. What kind of cinemagoers are so stupid as to not be able to tell a few hoods apart? The Godfather won some friggin' Oscars (I know Goldfinger did too, so don't bother pointing that out ) and all three were filled with hoods' meetings.
As for it adding to Goldfinger's sadistic nature, shouldn't he be whipping them rather than gassing them? ;d
#8
Posted 22 May 2002 - 01:36 AM
#9
Posted 21 May 2002 - 11:59 PM
#10
Posted 21 May 2002 - 11:47 PM
#11
Posted 21 May 2002 - 11:45 PM
#12
Posted 19 February 2002 - 11:04 PM
Simon (22 Jan, 2002 03:26 p.m.):
Although Goldfinger (the film) has improved on the logic of Goldfinger (the book) by removing the idea that the gold is to be removed from the bank and instead leaves it where it is for subsequent value augmentation of his current stock,
See, I always thought that the book had a much better plan (because there was much more of a 'planning stage' shown to us in the novel with the gang meetings and the flyby of Fort Knox)
The letter-in-the-plane's-head thing was the coolest way Bond ever alerted the authorities!
And the train made sense to escape with all the gold. However this all could have worked with the same movie plot of just setting off the bomb to irradiate the gold (also: notice the completely opposite purposes of the atom bombs: book bomb='clean' movie bomb='very dirty').
Simon (22 Jan, 2002 03:26 p.m.):
Could anyone explain why Goldfinger holds a meeting for the hoods since by then;
1. He already has the necessary funds for the robbery.
2. He already knows that he is going to kill them, so why bother with all the Grandslam descriptions.
3. Following on from point 2, he doesn't have to try to convince anyone to stay in with him, so why the effort.
1.This is very confusing. Perhaps he wants to test his Delta 9 gas. That's another reason the book makes more sense, he killed the gangsters after.
2. Maybe during Mr Solo's (why change the 'traitor''s name?) drive to the big knackers in the sky, the gangsters proved to be unreliable (remember in the book they were chummy and in the film they said things like: 'I don't deal with Chicago.' or whatever) and Mr Goldfinger had to get rid of them. Maybe it was the fact that Felix Leiter was watching and if he saw ten capos leaving Auric Stud he'd call in the FBI. However since these points were not delved into, your question is shared by me and it bugs me too.
3. Maybe he *did* have to try to convince them, but as I said above, they were just too stubborn.
#13
Posted 21 May 2002 - 11:43 PM
#14
Posted 23 April 2002 - 09:38 PM
Plan Omega (23 Apr, 2002 07:18 p.m.):
A question I'd like clearing up from someone is why is there footage from FRWL of Connery (in the opening credits), ducking behind a hillside, to avoid the SPECTRE helicopter, if it is never seen in FRWL?
I think this is because Robert Brownjohn is a goof. Or perhaps From Russia With Love is a better film so Brownjohn thought he'd use scenes from it!