54 replies to this topic

[Scottlee]

1) I was watching the Guy Hamilton commentary last night and he pointed out the absurdity of having a huge Korean army running around Kentucky with nobody noticing. This got me thinking - How did Goldfinger end up with a Korean army (Oddjob included) in the first place? Is it something explained in the novel but not the film?

2) I'm in the band of people who actually believes the rumpus room exposition scene is perfectly viable because of Goldfinger's ego. Why though take Solo out of the room and do the whole scrapyard thing? Why not just say "Fair enough, Mr Solo. You wait here in the rumpus room and I'll be back in fifteen minutes or so with your money". Depart. Turn. Gas. On.

3) How does Goldfinger know the code for the vault inside Fort Knox?

4) What's going on with the mysterious Korean henchman on the plane near the end? First we see him behind the curtain. Then we see him stood behind Goldfinger inside the room where the fight takes place. Then after the fight the Korean is lying dead on the floor. Was the original intention to have a Largo type free-for-all with the main villain being aided?

[TheSaint]

1)Goldfinger does mention that one of the mobsters helped to smuggle his task force across the Rio Grande from Mexico so, that's where the army of Koreans came from.

2)In the novel Mr.Solo is killed after leaving the meeting, and Goldfinger lets everyone know this.

3)The combination seems to be saved in the device that opens the door. Don't know if that is correct in real life.

[Double-0-Seven]

If I'm not mistaken, for what you listed as number four, originally that henchman was killed in the fight but that part of the scene was removed for running time reasons. During the opening credits, we can see a clip of Goldfinger firing his gun multiple times, more than he actually does later in the film when the fight takes place. I believe this multiple shooting is what was supposed to have killed that henchman.

[Double-Oh Agent]

2)In the novel Mr.Solo is killed after leaving the meeting, and Goldfinger lets everyone know this.

Actually, in the novel, it was the character Helmut Springer that gets killed after leaving the meeting. Mr. Solo survived until the end when Goldfinger killed him off-page.

As for question #4, I just assume that when the jet's window gets shot out that the Korean gets tossed into the air from the sudden depressurization and has his neck broken.

[David Schofield]

Yeah, and for all the faults of the movie's second half, its vastly better than the novel (with the exception of losing the banter between Leiter and Bond on the way to Idlewild).

The novel second half must rank as the great Ian's most cack-handed plotting: good old EON repired and improved it.

[marktmurphy]

The plot's better, but the pace falls apart a bit once he hits the USA. And of course Bond famously fails to actually do anything. His sole contribution to stopping Goldfinger's plan is kiss a girl until she likes it: good plan James!

[David Schofield]

The plot's better, but the pace falls apart a bit once he hits the USA. And of course Bond famously fails to actually do anything. His sole contribution to stopping Goldfinger's plan is kiss a girl until she likes it: good plan James!

True. It would have been better if Bond had left the message to the CIA behind the plane bog as in the novel rather than saving the day by merely converting Pussy from the dark side of lesbiansim.

But by Goldfinger, Connery had made Bond a living, breathing, walking, talking penis, anyway.

[Mr_Wint]

Bond also helped them to defuse the bomb in time, since he opened the container. And that took about 25-30 seconds. Without Bond, Fort Knox would've been radioactive for... hmm... 57 years?

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

Bond also helped them to defuse the bomb in time, since he opened the container. And that took about 25-30 seconds. Without Bond, Fort Knox would've been radioactive for... hmm... 57 years?

58 to be exact.

[Mr_Wint]

Bond also helped them to defuse the bomb in time, since he opened the container. And that took about 25-30 seconds. Without Bond, Fort Knox would've been radioactive for... hmm... 57 years?

58 to be exact.

Thank you. My headcalculation is a little bit off today

[Scottlee]

Bond also helped them to defuse the bomb in time, since he opened the container. And that took about 25-30 seconds. Without Bond, Fort Knox would've been radioactive for... hmm... 57 years?

58 to be exact.

My apologies, Conlazmoodalbroca! It's an inspired deal! They get what they want, economic chaos in the west, increasing the value of your gold many times.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

Bond also helped them to defuse the bomb in time, since he opened the container. And that took about 25-30 seconds. Without Bond, Fort Knox would've been radioactive for... hmm... 57 years?

58 to be exact.

My apologies, Conlazmoodalbroca! It's an inspired deal! They get what they want, economic chaos in the west, increasing the value of your gold many times.

I conservatively estimate, 12 times.

[staveoffzombies]

The second half of Goldfinger is what makes it drop several spots in my Bond film rankings.

[Judo chop]

Agreed.

And location/design is 80% of the reason that the 2nd half bites.
(An impotent Bond is the other 20% of the reason.)

[HildebrandRarity]

An impotent Bond is the other 20% of the reason.

Tell that to Pussy!

[Judo chop]

An impotent Bond is the other 20% of the reason.

Tell that to Pussy!

I knew that was coming the instant I hit "Add Reply".

[RJJB]

For all the negative talk about Bond not doing anything in Goldfinger, I wonder how many of you saw the moive when it originally premiered back in the 60s. I saw it, knowing nothing about James Bond or who the hell Sean Connery was. From my first reaction, I remember never being bored and never thinking that Bond was an impotent prisoner. The whole movie and this James Bond guy were both just really cool.
Obviously things happened around him and the character was the most imporant thing in the movies. His entire manner was made the first four movies the cloassics that they are, and built the foundation for the entire series.

I know later that the gadgets and the overblown stunts started to over shadow the importance of the character of Bond, but it's always going to be Bond himself who makes the movie. That's the main problem with YOLT. Bond became secondary to the spectacle, and that should never be. I think that Lazenby could have enjoyed a longer term as Bond, and the series could have avoided the descent into foolishness that Began in YOLT and take a firm hold with DAF.

Again, it's the character of Bond himself that should be driving the movies.
Dalton was able to portray it. Brosnan had a decent start, but his movies took a wrong turn and tried to remain too familiar for the audience. Craig has done a good job, and while I am still undecided on QOS, his presence certainly provides quality to the movie.

If you think that the second half of Goldfinger is weak, it's because you are looking for an standard action movie. I like Goldfinger because it's a top-notch, intelligent James Bond movie. And when done properly, Bond never fails to deliver.

[Joe Bond]

For all the negative talk about Bond not doing anything in Goldfinger, I wonder how many of you saw the moive when it originally premiered back in the 60s. I saw it, knowing nothing about James Bond or who the hell Sean Connery was. From my first reaction, I remember never being bored and never thinking that Bond was an impotent prisoner. The whole movie and this James Bond guy were both just really cool.
Obviously things happened around him and the character was the most imporant thing in the movies. His entire manner was made the first four movies the cloassics that they are, and built the foundation for the entire series.

I know later that the gadgets and the overblown stunts started to over shadow the importance of the character of Bond, but it's always going to be Bond himself who makes the movie. That's the main problem with YOLT. Bond became secondary to the spectacle, and that should never be. I think that Lazenby could have enjoyed a longer term as Bond, and the series could have avoided the descent into foolishness that Began in YOLT and take a firm hold with DAF.

Again, it's the character of Bond himself that should be driving the movies.
Dalton was able to portray it. Brosnan had a decent start, but his movies took a wrong turn and tried to remain too familiar for the audience. Craig has done a good job, and while I am still undecided on QOS, his presence certainly provides quality to the movie.

If you think that the second half of Goldfinger is weak, it's because you are looking for an standard action movie. I like Goldfinger because it's a top-notch, intelligent James Bond movie. And when done properly, Bond never fails to deliver.

Agreed. I wish I could see Goldfinger when it first came out!

[Judo chop]

Agreed. And my complaint then would have been the same as it is now:

"KENTUCKY?!"

[Turn]

I'm often tempted to put GF down because of the second half, but I just can't. If for nothing else, just for the Fort Knox scenes.

John Brosnan had a great line about this in his book, The James Bond Films: "What hero in the history of cinema has ever been in such an incredible situation? Handcuffed to an atom bomb about to go off, inside Fort Knox while a giant Korean karate expert bears down on him..."

If anything drags some of the stud farm scenes down, it's many of the other actors like the gangsters with their cliched mannerisms and speech. And Cec Lindner's Leiter with phrases like "It's either a drink or a dame" and "Let's get back to the motel, I'm bushed." Those types of things make Bond stand out more than ever for me.

[Major Tallon]

I'm with you, RJJB. As I've stated elsewhere, I also saw Goldfinger on its original release and was knocked out by it.

Over and over, I read comments like, "Bond doesn't do anything" or "Bond was incompetent," and I shake my head. Bond's battle with Oddjob on the floor of the gold depository has got to be one of the most remarkable sequences in cinema.

And to those who prepare the inevitable riposte to the effect that somebody else switched off the bomb, it was Bond who dispatched Oddjob, opened the bomb casing, and, for the matter of that, revealed to the bomb disposal expert where the bomb was housed. With only seconds to go and the clock counting down, they couldn't have managed it all without him. And oh yes, Bond was the guy who seduced Pussy Galore into betraying the plan.

What's a guy got to do to get a modicum of credit for saving the world?

[Double-Oh Agent]

Agreed. And my complaint then would have been the same as it is now:

"KENTUCKY?!"

Where else are you going to go to rob/bomb Ft. Knox?

[sharpshooter]

John Brosnan had a great line about this in his book, The James Bond Films: "What hero in the history of cinema has ever been in such an incredible situation? Handcuffed to an atom bomb about to go off, inside Fort Knox while a giant Korean karate expert bears down on him..."

Great quote. Add Barry's magnificent score on top of that scene as well. Tense, epic, memorable. It's surely one of the best conclusions for any Bond film. Goldfinger is pure spectacle.

[Napoleon Solo]

1)Goldfinger does mention that one of the mobsters helped to smuggle his task force across the Rio Grande from Mexico so, that's where the army of Koreans came from.

2)In the novel Mr.Solo is killed after leaving the meeting, and Goldfinger lets everyone know this.

3)The combination seems to be saved in the device that opens the door. Don't know if that is correct in real life.

Re: No. 2. I think it was Mr. Springer who's killed in the novel after leaving the meeting.
EDIT: oops. That point had already been made.

Speculation: The final scripting of Goldfinger occurred around the same that Eon had been unsuccessful in trying to block production of The Man From U.N.C.L.E., claiming the TV Solo was a ripoff of Goldfinger (it wasn't, of course). The change may have been Eon's way of getting even.

Edited by Napoleon Solo, 31 January 2009 - 04:07 PM.

[Judo chop]

Agreed. And my complaint then would have been the same as it is now:

"KENTUCKY?!"

Where else are you going to go to rob/bomb Ft. Knox?

I don’t blame GOLDFINGER for filming in Kentucky so much as I blame Kentucky for being in the United States, and blame Hamilton for making it look so drab.

I understand why it’s Kentucky. That doesn’t make it any more exotic.

[triviachamp]

As for no. 2 why does Goldfinger lie about his plan if he was going to kill them anyway? Why not tell them the truth?

[Judo chop]

He wasn't going to kill them. He wanted them to join him. But then they proved to be unimpressed, unconvinced and less-than-marveled with the supreme genius of his plot as he unveiled it to them.

Irritated with their doubt and now unsure of their worth, not to mention his pride snubbed, he decided, "I'll do this myself" and offs 'em.

[Turn]

He wasn't going to kill them. He wanted them to join him. But then they proved to be unimpressed, unconvinced and less-than-marveled with the supreme genius of his plot as he unveiled it to them.

Irritated with their doubt and now unsure of their worth, not to mention his pride snubbed, he decided, "I'll do this myself" and offs 'em.

In the big picture, though, it seems like a really risky move in that even if Goldfinger had succeeded with the plan, those mob families would have had a price on his head until he was dead, even if Cuba or China were protecting him.

[dee-bee-five]

There's no getting away from the fact that James Bond is curiously passive in the second half of Goldfinger. Possibly more passive than any other action hero in film history.

But, of course, no-one has ever done passivity better or more stylishly...

[HildebrandRarity]

There's no getting away from the fact that James Bond is curiously passive in the second half of Goldfinger. Possibly more passive than any other action hero in film history.

But, of course, no-one has ever done passivity better or more stylishly...

Where do you/others rate Goldfinger v Q0S?