17 replies to this topic

[Blue Eyes]

Good films have subtext, and James Bond films are no exception! This is the fourth part in a series of articles that take a look at the subtext of various James Bond films. To date, we've looked into [url="http://"http://www.commanderbond.net/Stories/1069.html"]From Russia With Love[/url], [url="http://"http://www.commanderbond.net/Stories/1009.html"]You Only Live Twice[/url] and, most recently, [url="http://"http://www.commanderbond.net/Stories/1173.html"]GoldenEye[/url].

In this fourth article, we'll take a look at 1964's Goldfinger.

James Bond and the Oedipus Complex
The Subext of Goldfinger
By John Cox

While I

[Blue Eyes]

...

Once Bond establishes that Pussy isn

[Blue Eyes]

Zencat, I've got to hand it to you, a fantastic piece there. Very enjoyable read, and very true!

[quote]Originally written by Zencat
...The barn

[freemo]

Hey, thats awesome. Lines like "inferiority complex" and "Beatles without earmuffs" which previously made little sense to me all kind of fall into place now.

[quote]Indeed, the filmmakers go out of their way to show us that Pussy is NOT Goldfinger

[Mister Asterix]

Excellent once again, John. I'd say you hit the nail right on the head if I didn't think you might find some strange sexual meaning in the phrase. The father/son relation of the villain and Bond has always made the films something that a young man could relate to. That is why I believe that subtextually GoldenEye would have been a stronger film had the rumoured Anthony Hopkins played the part of Trevelyan. The story could have had a greater power if it were about a figurative father's betrayal rather than that of a younger brother.

And since the subjects of of male organ substitutes and castration have been breached, I am quite surprised you didn't mention OddJob crushing the golf ball.

[Blue Eyes]

Mr *, what a great pick up! The golf ball! If there's any direct image to Bond's continued castration its the golf ball. He loses his girl, and then gets his balls crushed!

As for GoldenEye, you're right. Had Hopkins played Augustus Trevelyan it would have made a lot stronger film. As someone still relatively young, I can tell you that in any place (work place, university etc...) the struggle to out-do/overcome those above you in ongoing. And one would have related to GoldenEye even more. Maybe I'm biased being an only child. But the brotherly relationship never quite got me in GoldenEye, it didn't seemed developed enough.

[zencat]

The golf ball! I can't believe I missed that. What a great catch, Mr. *.

And I definetly agree with you on Trevelyan in GoldenEye. Should have been a father figure/mentor. Should have been Hopkins.

[Double-Oh-Zero]

Another great sub-text analysis, zencat. I finally realised why Bond mentioned the Beatles. It seemed out of place before. And I think the complexities between Pussy and Bond is also really present when Bond is about to be chauffered by Oddjob (and maybe I missed it): "You know, he kills little girls like you." "Little boys, too."

[Dr. Tynan]

This probably makes me look a bit dim, but these sub-text articles are the sort of articles I need to read and really think about what they mean. I don't think I understand (certainly a lot of it) the first time off.

Regarding this article, on the first read I THINK I know what you mean, regarding SOME of what is written.

[zencat]

You know...

I wrote this pre-Goldmember, but I now find it kind of interesting how Mike Meyers, in creating a parody of Goldfinger, instinctually picked up on the subtext and made a movie about Austin Powers and his father. But he creates a problem for himself in doing this. With Austin "battling" his actual father in the film, there's little reason for the Goldmember character. I'm sure I'm not the first to notice how under used Goldmember is, and how little interaction he and Austin have. Goldmember is really the Oddjob character of the film, a symbol of male potency.

[Xenobia]

On the whole Zencat, I agree with you. There is always an element of Bond fighting against a father figure...be it in a playful way with M and Q or more violently with an older villian.

However, the problem with Goldfinger is I know that biologically it is impossible for Goldfinger to be Bond's father. The actors playing those roles were too close in age.

I think what worked so well in Golfinger worked equally well in Goldeneye: Remember what Pearson told us...Bond had an older brother. James, being the younger one, was not the heir, was not the favored child..so he grew up a loner...trying to find his place in the world. And in defeating the older brother....Bond becomes the pinnacle of what he could be.

Think about it like this....Golfinger is the standard of Connery's era, and perhaps of the whole series in general. After the McClory Disapora, Goldeneye (again, featuring actors close in age) set the tone for the new era, certainly set the tone for Brosnan, and is arguably (although I don't necessarily agree with this point) Brosnan's best Bond to date.

Siblings confronting each other is always a lot more fun....fathers and sons has been done. ;-)

As for Pussy Galore...I think the ultimate defeat of Goldfinger is that he could not win the woman. Bond did, and that lead to Goldfinger's demise. But here, that isn't so much Oedipal as it is Elektra...there the rebellion was (if you want to go that way) Daughter over Father breaking an unhealthy bond (excuse the pun) that went nowhere.

I never saw anything wrong with that Barnyard scene...if anything I found it refreshing that a woman was able to (for a time at least) to hold her own against Bond...and I am sure she could again at some point.

The Austin Powers connection, I fear, might have been more along the lines of "Luke, I am your father," than a subtext from Golfinger. I think MM threw that bit in just to give Michael Caine something to do, so to speak. I agree that the villians field got a bit crowded in Goldmember, and wish Meyers had been a bit braver and perhaps took Dr. Evil off the table while Goldmember was around.

Brilliant work as usual Zencat! Thanks for putting all this effort into this series. I for one appreciated it.

-- Xenobia

[Predator_007]

[quote]Originally posted by Blue Eyes
Having made a deal with Daddy, the son awakens to find himself rewarded with a prostitute!

[scaramanga1]

My my what pseudo phycologists we all are! When you look at the structural oppositions of bond with the various characters he interacts with, alsorts images and theories are thrown up - and without a doubt Goldfinger is prime example of this - plus when you throw in various ideologies and social context, and look deeply enough into such a film its true brilliance can be realised.
I think the article is top notch, and its nice to see that there are thoase of us that take these films a little more seriously than just their popcorn value.
Is it possible to get a James Bond degree yet?

[zencat]

Thanks gang!

[icecold]

:eek: I'll never look at GF the same way again.

[General Koskov]

I'll be sure to write my psych paper on Bond!

And we can't forget how Bond 'appealed to [Pussy's] maternal instinct', so does this mean Bond has found a 'new mother'.

The lesbianism of Pussy Galore's Flying Circus is shown by the aeroplanes controlled by women: Freud argues that an aeroplane indicates a phallus because of it's shape. Therefore the aeroplane represents Pussy Galore having a penis.

But what happens when Bond converts her? The Lockheed is gone and Goldfinger's stolen 'plane is crashed by Pussy (I assume it is possible to keep a depressurising 'plane flying, thus it is her fault) who no longer can control a penis. This is why Bond rushes in to help her: he knows how to control his penis. (Freudian psych is fun!)

Also, is it just me that notices Bond (from the RNVR) fights Goldfinger (dressed as an Army general) in an air force plane (I assume this because it was sent of by the CIA and Bond was going to see the President)? Probably.

PS. I also think the romp-in-the-hay bit is silly. I can't see why they didn't use the note-in-the-loo from the book.

[zencat]

Originally posted by General Koskov
And we can't forget how Bond 'appealed to [Pussy's] maternal instinct'...

Hey, I didn't catch that. Not sure how it applies exactly, but it's interesting that we have yet another use of a psychological term in this film (like the earlier "inferiority complex" comment). Clearly the writers had psychology on the brain (no pun intended) when they wrote this movie. Interesting, interesting...

[Felix's lighter]

I've always felt squeamish about Bond's aggressive conquest of Pussy Galore, and am really surprised that few people notice it as such. In fact, I find it strange that when I watch GF with women - even ones who are critical of Bond's sexism - they hardly notice it. But that could be a thesis paper in itself.