54 replies to this topic

[Vanish]

I have to say, despite TMWTGG's generally poor reputation among both Bond and cinema fans in general, I love this movie - Christopher Lee is fantastic, and effectively makes Scaramanga my favorite villain in the series. The plot is atypical and a departure for the most part, save for the solex angle, but I enjoyed the fresh-feeling structure and mood of the movie. John Barry's score is very, very cool, and the scenery is interesting and exotic.

The film has its problems, but overall I really enjoy this one and appreciate the risks that it takes without forsaking its Bondian-ness. Definitely my favorite Roger Moore outing.

9/10

Edited by Vanish, 05 January 2007 - 06:19 AM.

[dee-bee-five]

I gave it a 3. I'm in a generous mood this morning.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

I gave it a 3. I'm in a generous mood this morning.

Awww come on,it's not that bad! And I wouldn't give any Bond film lower than 5!

[Bond fan since March 2000]

Ok, I reviewed all 21 Bond films on DVD & I'm starting with my least favorite & working my way to #1. So enjoy!

#21 The Man With The Golden Gun, 1974

1974 was a dark time in Bond history. During the making of The Man With The Golden Gun, there were problems between producers Cubby Broccoli & Harry Saltzman, in which Saltzman left the Bond franchise after this making this & Cubby Broccoli was the sole producer. This probably had an effect on the final result of this movie, which happens to be the worst Bond has come out with. However, that doesn't mean it's a bad movie as there are some good elements.

After receiving a bullet with his number on it, James Bond (a younger Roger Moore) travels through Beirut, Macau, Hong Kong & Thailand trying to find the million-dollar a hit hitman Francisco Scaramanga (Christopher Lee) before Scaramanga finds him. Scaramanga watches Bond & is joined by midget Nick-Nack (Herve Villechaize). Bond is joined by Mary Goodnight (Britt Ekland) to help get a solex agitator Scaramanga is using for his plan to make lots of money.

Bond movies are known for elaborate action scenes & that's what The Man With The Golden Gun lacks. There's a car chase which has an Astro-Spiral jump that is jaw-droppingly spectacular. However, that's about 10 seconds of a 125 minute movie and most of the other action is weak. A fight scene inside a belly dancer's room is lame, the pre-credit sequence is a yawn & the finale feels kind of cheap. Due to the popularity of Bruce Lee back then, martial arts was brought in & there's an amusing scene where Bond is outdone by a couple of teenage girls who beat up several henchmen all by themselves while Bond looks amusing.

People's preferences for Bond films depend on the actor playing Bond. If you are most into Roger Moore, you make like this one more than other people who don't. I think Moore is a great Bond, but this isn't prove of that. He does have good looks & charm here, but he is still slightly uncomfortable with the role, but at least he improved after this one. The Bond Girls are two beauties from Sweden & their roles are mixed. Maud Adams (who appeared later in Octopussy) appears as Andrea, Scaramanga's mistress who just wants to be rescued & is effective at that. On the other hand, Britt Ekland's Mary Goodnight is one of the worst Bond girls to ever appear in a Bond film. She's supposed to be a secret agent, but is dumb as a doorknob. Is it me or is it that the blonde Bond girls always seem to be the stupidest? (with a few exceptions).

The best parts of the cast however are the villains. Despite being full of silliness, Christopher Lee's Scaramanga is a cold bad version of Bond who is truly menacing & ranks among the very best Bond villains. The scenes between Bond & Scaramanga are terrfic & should have been more numerous. His henchmen Nick-Nack is played by Herve Villechaize "De plane, De plane" & proves being small doesn't mean you can't piss Bond off. Rounding out the cast are Bernard Lee, Desmond Llewelyn & Lois Maxwell as M, Q & Moneypenny & Clifton James, returning from Live & Let Die as Sheriff J.W. Pepper providing some good humor.

This was the last film directed by Guy Hamilton, whose first Bond film was the pivotal Goldfinger, but here doesn't seem to be trying which is the same way it felt with Diamonds Are Forever & Live & Let Die. Also weak is John Barry's score (probably his worst) with a lame title song by Lulu. Maurice Binder's titles are nice, but not his best & the screenplay by Richard Maibaum & Tom Mankewicz should've included more action & less padding.

The Man With The Golden Gun is oftened ranked as one of the worst films among Bond fans & it is the weakest to me, but I'm being somewhat nice to it. For me, it's a very mixed bag. If you have a younger family member like maybe 7 or 8 years-old who has never seen a Bond movie, The Man With The Golden Gun should not be their first, but it still has it's pleasures.

By the way, I give it a 6!

[sharpshooter]

I like the film alot.
Great locations, villain, a more colder Bond by Moore. I believe it was Moore at his peak. If it were not for the sherrif and a few minor quibbles, it would be my favourite Moore.

Edited by sharpshooter, 26 April 2007 - 11:44 AM.

[PlayItBogart]

Eh, it was ok. It has a lot of legacy, what with the Golden Gun and Scaramanga and all, but I dunno. A lot of it just doesn't work for me.

5/10

[Chula]

If you have a younger family member like maybe 7 or 8 years-old who has never seen a Bond movie, The Man With The Golden Gun should not be their first

That's odd. I just watched this one the other day with a family member who is eight years old...and she loved it.

And, I can speak for another eight year old who saw it and loved it...me! It was the first Bond film I saw from start to finish and I was hooked right there. Next summer THE SPY WHO LOVED ME was released and I was first in line at the theater to see it.

I actually feel young kids should see films at an early age that are "talky" or "slow". Films should unfold, like a good book. If an eight year old sees STAR WARS as a first film, the kid would be ruined for life and never be able to sit through any film that has more than three sentences of dialogue.

THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN is a wonderful film for a young person. The locales are breathtaking..it's like a fairy tale world. Of course you must fast-forward through a few of the lines here and there, but outside of that, TMWTGG has very little violence and takes kids to a fantsy world with clearly defined good guys and bad guys.

[Turn]

If you have a younger family member like maybe 7 or 8 years-old who has never seen a Bond movie, The Man With The Golden Gun should not be their first

That's odd. I just watched this one the other day with a family member who is eight years old...and she loved it.

And, I can speak for another eight year old who saw it and loved it...me! It was the first Bond film I saw from start to finish and I was hooked right there. Next summer THE SPY WHO LOVED ME was released and I was first in line at the theater to see it.

I actually feel young kids should see films at an early age that are "talky" or "slow". Films should unfold, like a good book. If an eight year old sees STAR WARS as a first film, the kid would be ruined for life and never be able to sit through any film that has more than three sentences of dialogue.

THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN is a wonderful film for a young person. The locales are breathtaking..it's like a fairy tale world. Of course you must fast-forward through a few of the lines here and there, but outside of that, TMWTGG has very little violence and takes kids to a fantsy world with clearly defined good guys and bad guys.

You're right. It's my daughter's favorite Bond. She even sometimes likes to run around playing Bond and Scaramanga sometimes.

[Chula]

You're right. It's my daughter's favorite Bond. She even sometimes likes to run around playing Bond and Scaramanga sometimes.

That's really funny to hear.
Hey, maybe we found something other than NICKELODEON that young ones can watch.

It was a pleasure to watch this film with my little niece. I really do think the exotic quality of the film had a captivating affect on her. (And I'm sure Nick Nack did, too.) She also found Sheriff Pepper hilarious. I mean getting pushed into a canal by an baby elephant is not my kind of humor...but for an eight year old, well, that's sophisticated comedy at its best.

One other thing: What really was interesting to me was how she just loved the barrel roll car stunt. I've seen that so many times that it has lost any "Wow" factor it had. But to see her eyes bug out over it...well, it made me once again realize just how incredible that moment is. It also made me think that there is hope that good old fashioned stunt work still means something to film watchers. CGI should take note.

[LadySylvia]

[Mike00spy]

Having watch it recently, I have tried to really put my thoughts in order for this movie. I'll just give a few short ones here.


"Scaramanga as the dark side of Bond."

It has been menitoned by many who enjoy the film. However, I did not get the sense of that quote from watching the movie. I understood that Scaramanga was a killer, but that is it really. The conversation at lunch has Scaramanga point out that they are the same in the sense that they are killers (which draws out a strong response from Bond)- but how is Scaramanga like a dark Bond?

The plot

More than any other film, this plot really does seem to be patched together- and very awkwardly, that is. It also contains some puzzling moments? Why did Bond bother getting the bullet from the dancer when they had the one that Anders sent? Why did Hip drive away from Bond? (Really sloppy) After admitting how much he loves killing and how well off he is, why does Scaramanga turn into a Bond cliche by having a control room and something up for sale to the highest bidder? Didn't anyone see how annoying Nick Nack's fight vs Bond was? Am I really to believe that Bond spared his life? How did M call Bond and Goodnight at the end? Did he look in the phone book?

Edited by Mike00spy, 04 May 2007 - 12:23 AM.

[BoogieBond]

Just rewatched this for the fist time in quite a few years.

It's one of my least favourites, but still reasonably entertaining.

I have a number of problems with it. The main one being that no real sequence sticks out for me. Nothing in the film excites/thrills me. All the action has been done better and with more flair and orginality in previous Bond films (OHMSS, GF, TB and IMO LALD) and the excellent TSWLM followed(IMO the most exciting bit in the film is the end credits where it says "James Bond will return in TSWLM ), and therefore feels a little flat.

The plot, as said before, feels really patched, first going in one direction(Bond vs Scaramanga - sort of interesting) and then another(Solex/Energy crisis). The characters are also a mix and match, Scaramanga I feel is great, but Goodnight is just silly comic relief, JW pepper also, Nick Nack, well I could do without them. Hai Fat and Hip are OK.

The film also just feels as though it is on a low budget. I was suprised when I read somewhere it was slightly more budget than LALD, for me LALD feels much more epic and expensive than TMWGG. I think the visit to Scaramangas lair with just Scaramanga, Nick Nack and the security guard give it a understated feel.

The locations are fine. I must admit I like Maud Adams in this one although she is a bit of a trapped bird really, and does get a bum deal off of Bond and Scaramanga.

The good bits. A couple of Moore scenes where he does well, the dinner scene with Scaramanga, the Lazar scene, the Anders scene where he presses her for info at her hotel room is slightly too much, but it was out of character for Rog, so I would point to that too. Overall, though, I feel he gives evener performances in SWLM and FYEO.
Another good bit, the Car jump. And the fight at the beginning is OK(but nothing spectacular), ditto for the Karate sequences

I wish they would have taken some of the more exciting elements from the novel, and adapted them to be really epic and exciting, and to create tension, but it was not to be.

Overall, this is one of the last DVD's I would put in, but, as a rare watch, I find it decent enough entertainment, as all the Bond's are IMO

Edited by BoogieBond, 09 April 2008 - 10:55 PM.

[Cruiserweight]

I gave it a 8

[Golden Claw]

I gave it an 8/10. While I consider LALD as Rodge's best film, this is my favourite of Rodge's 7. Granted, it has plenty of faults, which all of you have pointed out, but it has plenty of great moments as well. It comes as really mean-spirited and mature as compared to its awful and immature successor.

Rodge, despite being 46 years old, looks much younger, around 40. His age shows in TSWLM. And he gives a firecracker performance and I consider it his best performance as Bond. In TSWLM, he plays Roger Moore, not James Bond. His performance is one of the things which appeals to me. chris Lee's brilliance has already been talked about. I like Herve Villechaize's character Nick Nack. One of the best henchmen in the series, unlike the stereotypical Jaws.

All the faults have already been pointed out so I won't go into them. I don't mind the lack of action but the comedy feels really forced in mean-spirited movie like this. What I like is that the movie tries to be different, instead of blindly following the dreaded Bond formula to a T (yes, TSWLM, I'm looking at you). Bond has no gadgets (what a relief); instead, Scaramanga has the flying car, which is more sensible than TSWLM's Lotus Espirit. Everybody I know enjoys this movie (TSWLM bores all of us to death).

To make a long story short, TMWTGG rocks! (TSWLM sucks!)

Edited by Golden Claw, 15 April 2008 - 05:07 PM.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

The Man with the Golden Gun is usually hated by some Bond fans, and liked by other Bond aficionados.

I'm in the group of people who like it. Yes, it's a very deranged Bond film, very far away of Ian Fleming's Bond, but, how can I loathe the first film I've ever seen of Roger Moore playing Bond?

My dad bought me the movie when I was eight, and thanks to The Man with the Golden GunI became intrested in all the Bond films besides the Brosnan era.

Chris Lee is amazing, Roger is also amazing... and the challenging dialogues between them outstanding, as the 360

[DaveBond21]

It's near the bottom of my list, but it's still a Bond movie and so I gave it a 7. I still think there is a really great, darker 007 movie in there, amongst the sillier scenes.

[London77]

To sum up; There are definately films that are not as strong as this one. I can think of 3 or 4. It has the feel of a bond film aswell.

[ChrissBond007]

8/10

I really enjoy TMWTGG, I prefer it over TSWLM. Why? Well, It's really entertaining. Moore gave his second best peformance, Christhoper Lee plays a fantastic villian, great Bond girl, Herve Villechaize as Nick Nack is a great henchman and I even can enjoy the car chase with J.W. Pepper.

The plot is very orginal, just a assassin that wants to kill Bond. I love the locations too, especially Scaramanga's island. It hasn't much action, altrough the car chase is excellent followed by the great car jump, but overall the action in this film is a little bit to slow. And again, Guy Hamilton uses too much comedy, but the jokes aren't as irritating as in Diamonds Are Forever.

TMWTGG is really great fun, but not at the top of my list.

Edited by ChrissBond007, 29 September 2008 - 02:45 PM.

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

My Review of The Man with the Golden Gun:
Well...it's not the worst, but it's certainly not one of my favorites. I don't remember anything memorable from this film. So, let me start from the beginning.
The opening pretitle sequence was boring, for me. It was interesting to see the set up for Scaramanga, but the pretitle sequence didn't do a lot for me.
The title sequence was okay, but the opening song was just awful.
Scaramanga was an interesting villain, and the foil of 007. That's the one redeeming quality of this film.
Mary Goodnight is just another "typical" Bond girl, who's only purpose is to bed Bond (She's actually kind of a ditz, IMO (just watch the last scene with the solar laser thingy)).
The plot is confusing (something about solar power?), the flying car is ridiculous. However, one of the redeeming qualities of the film is the locations and the martial arts.
Overall, this isn't the worst Bond film ever made, but it's low quality for me.
2/10

[MajorB]

It's fairly low on my list, but I thought it was an improvement over LALD: classier locations and production design, Bond takes the initiative through most of the story, Moore gets more chances to play tough, there are fewer vehicular chases, and some other pluses.

But the story is all over the place and not very imaginative, and Scaramanga's motivation is hazy at best (why is the world's best-paid assassin messing with a solar power plant??). Plus some of the plot contrivances are the worst and most arbitrary in the series: The sumo wrestlers imitating statues when they could have just waylaid Bond when he walked through the garden door. The kung fu school. The world's best-paid assassin equipped with a flying car. Bond going through with the duel instead of turning around and slugging him as they stood back to back.) Plus Scaramanga's fun house makes no sense--for a man who's supposedly looking to be challenged, sending victims through a distracting environment that he himself knows by heart would seem to take the thrill out of it.

And yes, Mary Goodnight is annoying as hell. But I disagree about Britt Ekland--I thought she did an excellent job playing the character as written. It's basically a comedic part, and I thought she did it really well. I didn't find her especially sexy, but I did think she was funny. (I like the idea someone suggested of Andrea as the female lead. That could have been interesting.)

[Double-Oh Agent]

I gave it a six. It's an entertaining film but far from perfect. It's actually #22 for me out of 23 Bond films.

[chrisno1]

In 2008 I watched all the Bond movies and wrote a series of reviews for another site. The aim was to watch them in order in the run up to the premiere of QOS. I succeeded and the reviews were well received.
However, subsequently, I have re-read my reviews and re-watched a number of the movies (the BFI had a whole 007 season earlier this year and I saw quite a few on the big screen again!).
This is my updated review for The Man With The Golden Gun.

THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN
REVISED REVIEW 11/01/10

Ian Fleming’s The Man With The Golden Gun is not a good novel. It starts well, but descends into a lazy homage to the Wild West. Its climax takes place on a scenic railway and even the chief baddie calls himself “Pistols” Scaramanga.

When the producers opted to make a film of this admittedly unpolished work, they gave the writer Richard Maibaum carte blanche to create what ever he wanted. Maibaum did just that and more was to follow, as the producers threw out all Maibaum’s ideas and asked Tom Mankiewicz to pen a re-write. The Man With The Golden Gun, even more so than You Only Live Twice, is the first completely created Bond film; only the characters of Scaramanga and Mary Goodnight survived the cull. It is with some relief then that Mankiewicz developed three outstanding supporting roles.

Firstly we have Scaramanga, a psychopathic assassin, deadly with one golden bullet, who charges $1m a kill. The fearsome shape of Christopher Lee encapsulates this cold, calculating hit man who admires Bond’s skill, but scoffs at his choosing to work for a pittance and a pension. Lee has plenty of experience playing villains and he doesn’t disappoint here. His clipped delivery matches the tidiness of his expertise. It is unfortunate that his death is somewhat tame.

Scaramanga is aided and betrayed by the beautiful Andrea, a prostitute by any other name, whose ruse is to try and enable Bond to kill her keeper. Maud Adams is very good in her scenes with Lee and Moore, able to display both cornered defiance and vulnerability. There is a moment when she cringes away from Lee’s erotically positioned pistol with a mixture of revolt and fascination that tells us more about Andrea than any of her words.

Finally there is the midget Nick-Nack, played by Herve Villechaize, an annoying little runt who pops up time and again to redirect the audience to a potential twist in the story. Villechaize too is good, being both disarmingly cute and potentially deadly. His motives too are unclear as he reflects on an inheritance of wealth should his master be killed.

The three conspirators provide differing moods to the film. The tone changes again each time Bond’s ditsy assistant Mary Goodnight appears. Britt Ekland sadly has possibly the dumbest role yet given to a Bond girl; more than a hindrance than a help, she is used for light relief, but the comedy is laboured and in one excruciating scene she has to hide in a wardrobe while Bond makes love to another woman.

After his reliable debut, one would hope Roger Moore’s Bond is consistent. Not so. Early on, when pursuing Lazar the bullet-maker and then Andrea, Moore is ruthless and malicious, blackmailing them both to achieve his ends. Later on when he confronts Scaramanga he confesses earnestly that killing him would be a pleasure. “But not in cold blood?” queries his protagonist. “Don’t count on it,” is the sharp reply. Moore’s very good here; it’s disappointing most of his other lines are given over to heavy handed comedy by-play with M, Hip, Goodnight or the returning and still racist J.W. Pepper.

Director Guy Hamilton and his crew struggle to create tension amid all the flippancy and here lies Golden Gun’s major failing. The producers, writer, director or maybe all three do not seem to know what sort of film they want. It tries hard to be funny, but it’s more slapstick than ironic and this impacts what should be Bond’s saving grace: the action

There are some flair touches: Bond is suitably roughed up in Beirut, he takes a moonlight boat ride across Hong Kong harbour and there is a spectacular, if swift, car jump. But we are also presented with a series of set pieces that seem to be thrown into the film as if to fill the gaps. Bond is rescued by karate kicking school girls, assaulted by two sumo wrestlers, a black belt champion and even Nick-Nack. There is a pursuit through Bangkok’s river canals and another across its streets. None of it raises the temperature. The chases are long and the fights lack tension. Even Bond’s gun duel with Scaramanga in The Fun House is played out for an interminably long time, made tedious by the fact we’ve seen the set up before in a pre-title sequence that’s possibly the most pointless five minutes of the whole film. Scaramanga deserved a better send off.

Designer Syd Cain’s Fun House is a childish and unconvincing ghost ride. Bruce Lee’s (and Orson Welles’) famous Hall of Mirror’s scene handle theme park theatre far better in Enter the Dragon (and Journey Into Fear), which is clearly the inspiration. Meanwhile Cain’s other big set, the solar energy complex is worryingly reminiscent of Tracy Island and when it finally blows up, I could only think how much better it was on Thunderbirds. John Barry too has caught the bug and his score is appalling, at times providing us with little more than single note musical chortles.

Golden Gun didn’t have to be so bad. The energy crisis story is good and, unlike most Bond films, still relevant today. It’s the execution of it that’s poor. The formula that worked so well for Eon for just over a decade seems to have run its course. The old guard who were once innovators were becoming imitators. They had a new James Bond; they needed a new product to go with it.

RATING 3 from 10

[Andy Bond]

Not a great film. All Bond films have their positives for me, it isn't completely awful but it is one of the weaker films. I liked the whole Bond/Scaramanga plot and the scenes they have together are really good. I thought the idea of Bond being hunted down by Scaramanga was a great idea for a film but obviously they felt that they couldn't make a full film on that alone and had to add in some other stuff.

It does feel a little cheap, there aren't any terrific locations or memorable action scenes and we got the return of the strange comedy that we first started to get in the second half of LALD including J.W. Pepper. The whole plot with Andrea sending the bullet to Bond turned out to be completely pointless in the end and the solex plot was very tacked on just to have the usual Bond climax.

6/10.

[DamnCoffee]

I really enjoy Golden Gun. I think Christopher Lee is an outstanding villain. It's a lot more different from the usual Bond film, as well. Although, I have to say that I feel that I could see Lazenby in this film, and Live and Let Die for that matter. I absoloutely love Moore, and he's my favourite Bond, but if things were different, Moore should've only done The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker, and maybe Diamonds Are Forever (Allowing Lazenby to do You Only Live Twice after OHMSS, Live and Let Die, and this.) I think he suits the light hearted Bond movies a lot better. Moore's brilliant but a strange one. His Bond is so much different in LALD and TMWTGG, than the character in Spy and Moonraker. For Your Eyes Only. Octopussy and A View To A Kill, are more tailored for Dalton. I adore the chemistry between Moore and Lee though. But what I wouldn't give to see Lazenby have a crack at it, with Clint Eastwood as Scaramanga and Sergio Leone (The Good The Bad And The Ugly) directing.

But anyway, I'm going off track. For what it is, Golden Gun is a damn good Bond film. Also, Nick Nack is a great villain. John Barry provides a great soundtrack, and the only bad things about it, are Britt Ekland and Sherrif Pepper.

7/10

Edited by Mharkin, 17 February 2012 - 09:05 PM.

[007RogerMoore]

TMWGG is my favorite Bond film, even though it might not be the best. It´s so lighthearted in a good way and flows nicely.
Roger Moore is the best 007 and Scaramanga is one the best villains in the series. Nick Nack is my favorite henchman and I like Mary Goodnight more than most, perhaps all Bond girls (she is funny, you´ve got to admit that). Pepper, his wife and the elephant-selling kid are ok in this movie, but they reduce the quality of the boat chase. I like Pepper more in the car chase, which by itself is great.
This is the Bond movie I watch the most, that says it all. Like I said, it´s not the best Bond movie (FYEO probably is, but that one is my least favorite Moore film) but I really like it. It lacks gadgets though.