75 replies to this topic

[Qwerty]

Time to get in depth about TMWTGG! Often pointed out by many to be the worst Bond film, or very near the bottom. I was wondering if that's really the deal on this site.

First off, the film sometimes seems rushed, and the production schedule may be the thing to blame. The sometimes wishy-washy plot of elements, Scaramanga's bullet, the solex agitator, etc... do not always come together very well and it shows in the film. Fransisco Scaramanga is a very fine Bond villain, but some people criticize him for being to 'likeable.' Mary Goodnight also arises some remarks as well, but she's not really that bad.

The musical score has some very good parts, (Bond's flight to the island) and also some parts that could've been improved. The title song wasn't one of the best of the series either. (Would you have liked Cooper's version metter?)

The main-title sequence also is not up to standards. Sure, there's the girls and the golden gun, but it's how it all fuses together that's the problem.

I think there's some info to get the thread started. What's your opinion of TMWTGG? Is it a flawed gem, with parts better than the whole? Is it a chaotic mess that never had a chance of being good, or do you love the film?

[CommanderBond]

i say its a flawed gem. if the would have takin there time with it it would have been one of my favorites..but to me it gets kinda side tracked alot but the more i watch it the more i like it.

[ray t]

there's a lot of memorable stuff in 'Golden Gun and, in essence, is a decent movie. there are, however, many other james bond movies in which a great deal of care was taken during the production process.

perhaps the fact that it was a rushed job at a time when the partnership was coming to an end may be a reason for its relatively low ranking

the points about Scaramanga being "likeable" aside, there is really no reason to truly "hate" him. he's stylish and lee plays him well. but you sometimes get the feeling you wouldnt mind scaramanga killing mooreBond. THAT idea should NEVER creep in in a james bond movie.

also, the aspect ratio i feel doesnt give it scale...that epic-y feel is, as a result, missing from a cinematic POV.

and i feel the movie sags after scaramanga is killed. my feeling is that the tension of the duel should have been higher...the duel a bit longer...and the retrieval of the solex quickened.

bagging nick nack at the end strictly for gags is not a high point.

otoh, barry did great work in a short span of time and the islands of phuket are memorable...too bad they cant nix the kazoo sound out of the car jump stunt.

what could, then, rank lower than 'Golden Gun?

none of the first 5 connerys

not OHMSS

not 'Spy, Moonraker...not Octopussy or AVTAK...perhaps not even FYEO

neither Daltons

and i rank the 4 brosnans higher

so where does that leave said movie?

[Loomis]

It's a terrific James Bond film, preposterously underrated (why people slam it for being "silly" while at the same time going ga-ga over OCTOPUSSY is beyond me).

For me, it was the last of the Bonds to really have that old-time "travelogue" feel, giving us precisely the sort of exotic locations we'd wish to be in ourselves.

Moore turns in a fine performance (with more of Fleming's Bond evident than in any of his other outings, and I'm not just referring to the scene in which 007 starts slapping Andrea around). Christopher Lee and Herve Villechaize make a dynamic team (and Nick Nack is perhaps the coolest, most intelligent and convincingly dangerous henchmen of the series), and there are two superb Bond girls in the shape of Britt Ekland and Maud Adams.

Nice John Barry score, too, as well as great action scenes, and a script with plenty of wit. One of the best Bond flicks ever, as far as I'm concerned. They don't make 'em like that any more. Beats the living daylights out of all the Brosnans put together.

[Mister Asterix]

The Man With The Golden Gun has:

• One of the best performance any actor had as Bond.
• One of the all time great Bond villains in Scaramanga
• The creepest and cleverest henchman of the series in Nick Nack
• The most wonderfully played dumb bimbo of the series in Goodnight
• A very clever plot in Andrea Anders using Bond to kill Scaramanga
• Wonderful scenery
• The greatest stunt of the series (with the sound turned down anyway )

I

[Turn]

Flawed gem.

I think its low ranking deals a lot with it departs a lot from the formula of the time. There are no armies clashing at the end or a huge objective such as stolen nuclear weapons or the threat of WWWIII. Just Bond against a super villain who is an unseen threat for a lot of the film.

In this way, it probably turned some of the audience off when it was released. And stacked against the other larger-than-life Moore films in the series, it seems out of place for casual fans of the series.

It is neglected in a lot of fan circles mainly because of the humor. I have some fan newsletters from around the time of its release and TMWTGG was disliked intensely because of the humor, Moore and Goodnight.

And please give me some good reasons, kazoos aside, of why this Barry score is so disliked so much. I think its among his strongest, much more interesting than AVTAK, which I feel is overrated. It has a lot of local flavor and appropriate scoring to coordinate with the action onscreen.

[Genrewriter]

Pros:

1. A solid, dark performance by Roger Moore.
2. An excellent performance by Scaramanga.
3. Bond vs. Scaramanga plot has a good first two thirds.
4. Andrea Anders is a very strong, sympathetic character.
5. Screenplay is for the most part well written.
6. Nice cinematography
7. Good music score from John Barry.
8. Some nice stuntwork.

Cons:

1. Humor is not incorporated into the story very well, the slide whistle during the barrel roll almost destroys the stunt.
2. J.W. Peppers and Nick Nack were to0tally extraneous characters.
3. Final duel is a bit soggy and is too similar to the pretitle sequence.
4. Mary Goodnight is a horribly written character.
5. Solar energy subplot should have been either reworked or dumped entirely.

Wjile I find more good than bad, the bad outweighs the good. I consider it to be a very flawed movie that could have been much better.

[MrDraco]

Golden Gun the movie was much more enjoyable than the book, some of it the book made no sense, like how bond had no memory but yet he was back in action with a chapter later remembering everything..not even explaning it had taken months to unbrain wash him...should have read Bourne Idenity before writing that one Ian Fleming...

[CommanderBond]

5. Solar energy subplot should have been either reworked or dumped entirely. (Genrewriter)

i totally agree. I was not irrelavent throughout the story that Bond was going after the agitater (or how ever you spell it). The main focus was bond getting to know who Scaramanga was and why he was going after Bond.

[Qwerty]

I liked with the arly Moore films that his joking about everything hadn't gone ovebaord yet. I love the jokes, but not all the time. Great performance in TMWTGG.

[4 Ur Eyez Only]

I guess I would pick flawed gem ..

BUT to be honest ALL the 007 films are.. there isn't a totally perfect James Bond Film.. some are just better then others.. there is really about 3 styles and they just keep repeating them.. not in order, but basically 3 different styles..

they are all flawed gems really.. if you want to sit back and find whats wrong with each one.. I think we all could..

[Rolex]

3. Final duel is a bit soggy and is too similar to the pretitle sequence.


This could have been better if they had not cut the beach duel scene. You can see some of this cut scene in the teaser trailer

[DLibrasnow]

I would have liked it more with better production design, but Christopher Lee sure played a great villain.

[BondNumber7]

I guess I will choose flawed gem. The real problem is not the humor, but compared to other films in the series it's quite dull. The action isn't real interesting, and despite the Eastern locations being very good, there is little excitment. I used to be a fan of this one, but my opinion has changed. What is good however, is the scene where Scaramanga shoots high fat, the part where Scaramanga is telling Bond about his African Bull elephant friend, the lunch sequence, the car jump(and yes I am not bothered by the slide whisle as such a joke was common during the 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's), the lazar scene, the part where Andrea goes to Bonds hotel, and the two funhouse sequences.

[Triton]

I wouldn't descibe it as a flawed gem, more like a flawed cubic zirconia. I don't see how it could ever be considered a chaotic mess.

I don't quite understand why this film has been so vilified, while Live and Let Die has been so praised. The two films are cut from the same cloth in regards to tone, production values, and budget.

Both Live and Let Die and The Man with the Golden Gun are smaller in scope than the last Sean Connery Bond film Diamonds Are Forever.

The locations for the film are some of the most beautiful and exotic in the entire Bond series, Beirut, Macau, Hong Kong, Bangkok, and the islands around Phuket.

Christopher Lee is one of the best villains in the series because of the fact that he is charming, intelligent, and is the anti-Bond. This character is alot more interesting than the homocidal maniacs or petulant brats we get in the series. The film would have been worse if they had cast Mr. Badbreath himself, Jack Palance. Could you imagine Scaramanga's lines delivered in the heavy-breathing voice of Jack Palance.

The film also has one of the most interesting henchmen in the series with Herv

[Double-Oh-Zero]

It's a flawed gem, I think. We could have done without the return of Sgt. Pepper, but it's not as bad as some make it out to be.

The film has some great moments, namely:

-the Lazar scene
-Bond's smacking around of Andrea Anders (not saying I'm a fan of that sort of thing, it was just a nice reminder of the Connery/Bianchi scene in his second outing as Bond)
-mostly any scene with Christopher Lee as Scaramanga
-Scaramanga's solemn speech about his elephant friend
-the duel was made more light than it should have been (because it was set in the funhouse)
-The Nick Nack character was pulled off better than expected
-the karate scene is very good
-Lieutenant Hip is also an effective ally for Bond

It does have it's bad parts, however:

-horribly dated (mostly by Bond's plaid jacket at the end)
-Scaramanga's funhouse seems rather absurd; marred the effect of the final duel
-the flying car
-the Solex Agitator plot should have been dropped in favour of a down-to-earth assassination plot involving M (like the novel)
-Hip's nieces getting involved in the fight was laughably senseless
-Mary Goodnight's character is shot to hell after she activates the sun gun thing with her hindquarters

[Qwerty]

One little thing I've noticed is how close the Us One-Sheet posters resemble eachother. They both have the same pose from Moore, and several of the same ideas and designs.

[Tarl_Cabot]

flawed gem. Goodnight has grown on me over the years. Roger is at his best in this one: he is still young and apparently dangerous, before the 'James Bond lite' routine really kicked in.The locales are inspiring. Christopher Lee was great.It's one of the top two '70s Bonds for me along with 'Spy'.

[Qwerty]

Exactly my thoughts, Tarl, TMWTGG and TSWLM I think were both before Roger's Bond 'routine' started. Moonraker eld to it, but I still love the film. That's what makes the films great.

[ChandlerBing]

This movie is an embarrassment. Has nearly nothing in common with the novel. Fleming at his worst was still better than Bond at his worst here. He sure is, boy!

[Qwerty]

You do bring up a very interesting point Chandler. I wonder if they had used the novel, which I agree is horrendous for Fleming's work, if it would have helped the film or worsened it. I like what they did with the villain though, the novel had him as a common punk!

[Triton]

Originally posted by ChandlerBing
This movie is an embarrassment.  Has nearly nothing in common with the novel.  Fleming at his worst was still better than Bond at his worst here.  He sure is, boy!

Despite their flaws, the Fleming novel and the film do have some entertainment value. They aren't complete losses.

[Qwerty]

I completely agree Triton, no work of Fleming's can ever be considered a complete loss. However, I do feel it's his weakest effort. The book starts off very promising, but with Fleming's death and the book finished by others, it just doesn't have that punch.

[goldengun]

Well, if I say I hated this film - then I would do no justice to my handle here on CBn.

The movie is a flawed gem - I have never found it embarrassing or boring - always fun and has an excellent pace. Moore and Lee scenes are absolutely wonderful, from the time they meet at the kickboxing match, to the dinner table eating fried mushrooms.

I always found Goodnight cute, and Ekland is a terrific looking blonde - Moore really reacts well to her cutesy lines. Maud is also good looking in her dinner attire.

The car chase is one of the best ever and dare I say that I love the car twist in the air - and I don't mind hearing he slide whistle - it's great!,

And you're right - Bond seems very dangerous throughout the movie. He loses this danger a little in MR - but then picks it up again in FYEO.

TMWTGG is a wonderful entry in the series.

And as for Pepper - I am not sure why some hate him? I found him funny, and I couldn't stop laughing when he's talking to the police about Kissinger. I found it funny that this guy and his wife would travel to the Far East.

Did I mention that I like the song title as well?

[Jaelle]

Originally posted by Loomis
It's a terrific James Bond film, preposterously underrated (why people slam it for being "silly" while at the same time going ga-ga over OCTOPUSSY is beyond me).
For me, it was the last of the Bonds to really have that old-time "travelogue" feel, giving us precisely the sort of exotic locations we'd wish to be in ourselves.
Moore turns in a fine performance (with more of Fleming's Bond evident than in any of his other outings, and I'm not just referring to the scene in which 007 starts slapping Andrea around). Christopher Lee and Herve Villechaize make a dynamic team (and Nick Nack is perhaps the coolest, most intelligent and convincingly dangerous henchmen of the series), and there are two superb Bond girls in the shape of Britt Ekland and Maud Adams.
Nice John Barry score, too, as well as great action scenes, and a script with plenty of wit. One of the best Bond flicks ever, as far as I'm concerned. They don't make 'em like that any more. Beats the living daylights out of all the Brosnans put together.

I have to go along with Loomis, tho it took me awhile to get here. My only disagreement is with Loomis' comments about Nick Nack (tho I still prefer him as a henchman to Jaws). I think the Bond girls are great (I can't help it--I have a strange fondness for the politically incorrect Mary Goodnight).

The two things that strike me the most about this film are:

1. The contest between Bond and Scaramanga has an almost mythic feel to it.

2. This mythic, near-epic feel is enhanced by the film's locations. I disagree with Ray when he criticizes the aspect ratio of the film. For me it feels like a very cinematic epic, strikingly beautiful. There are moments -- like the opening one on the beach -- where it almost feels ethereal. I think it's a film difficult to pin down, difficult to label. It's an unusual Bond film, the most unusual of the Moore Bond films, imo. It just feels very different from all the others. I am always struggling to articulate it more clearly than this when I talk about TMWTGG lately, and find I have a very hard time of it.

[_JW_]

Flawed gem. It's definately in my own top five Bond films.

It's my favorite Moore performance as Bond. One of those rare entries in the film series where we see a glimpse of the novel Bond. Moore is dark and dangerous, yet still maintains his comedic backbone with some great lines: "I've lost my charm! ...... Not from where I'm standing."

For me, the best glimpse of novel Bond in TMWTGG is not the girl-slapping scene, but the dinner scene with Goodnight. He's on a stakeout and he knows nothing is going to happen until tomorrow... he's bored! It's almost as if he's trying to get in bed with her for a cheap laugh. That's the same kind of attitude Bond has in the novels when he's 'in between assignments' - bored.

I also think that credit should be given for finding the island used for Scaramanga's lair. Fantastic location.

[Loomis]

I don't quite understand why this film has been so vilified, while Live and Let Die has been so praised. The two films are cut from the same cloth in regards to tone, production values, and budget.

The production values of THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN seem to me a lot higher than those of LIVE AND LET DIE.

Viewing LALD (a film I've never loved, but never hated, either; I've never rated it as highly as TMWTGG, but neither have I ever felt it remotely as wretched as THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH) on DVD recently, I thought the sets looked, to put it bluntly, bargain basement. The "San Monique village" where the voodoo ceremonies are conducted is just plain embarrassing - the CARRY ON films could have come up with something a lot more convincing. Neither are the authentic locations anything special.

(It's not as though it was a much simpler age and the Bond series hadn't established a reputation for ravishing viewers' eyes with lavish locations and stunningly beautiful sets photographed to perfection - look at THUNDERBALL or YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE. Having looked at THUNDERBALL or YOLT, look at LALD - see my point?)

As for TMWTGG, as you state: "The locations for the film are some of the most beautiful and exotic in the entire Bond series, Beirut, Macau, Hong Kong, Bangkok, and the islands around Phuket." Not only are they beautiful and authentic, but they're also captured brilliantly - watching the film, you're truly "there".

I, too, am unable to understand why THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN "has been so vilified, while LIVE AND LET DIE has been so praised". IMO, LALD is even more jokey and lightweight than TMWTGG (which is routinely bashed for being "silly"), with none of the flashes of Fleming's Bond or sophisticated humour to be found in TMWTGG. TMWTGG boasts a better cast, better action and a better score. LALD has a superior title song, but that's about it.

[Loomis]

For me, the best glimpse of novel Bond in TMWTGG is not the girl-slapping scene, but the dinner scene with Goodnight. He's on a stakeout and he knows nothing is going to happen until tomorrow... he's bored! It's almost as if he's trying to get in bed with her for a cheap laugh. That's the same kind of attitude Bond has in the novels when he's 'in between assignments' - bored.

Yep. Nicely observed, _JW_. That dinner scene shows Moore as Fleming's Bond, no question.

[CharlieBind]

I agree about GUN being good, but disagree about LIVE AND LET DIE being bad. DIE is my favourite Moore Bond, full of great lines, good set-pieces, an above-average supporting cast and a trully great Bond from Sir Roger. GUN follows it's formula, but never quite reaches it's heights of coolness.

And as for it looking cheap, that's because the budget was tight as UA didn't want a repeat of OHMSS which had a very high budget but struggled to make it back.

[Loomis]

[quote name='CharlieBind' date='24 October 2004 - 14:48']I agree about GUN being good, but disagree about LIVE AND LET DIE being bad.