50 replies to this topic

[bond4life]

The 1st half is amazing but as soon as bond gets captured its really boring I find

[jrcjohnny99]

The 1st half is amazing but as soon as bond gets captured its really boring I find

Well, many consider it the high point of the series;
but perhaps most importantly, it set the blueprint for the Bond movies going forward and captured the zietgiest of the 60s.
It's also easily the most iconic Bond pic; The Golden Girl, the Aston Martin, the Laser Beam, Oddjob, the golf scene, Pussy Galore etc

[Syndicate]

It set the tone on what is a super spy movie and all the elements that goes with. Also set the tone on what is a James Bond movie and is part of the James Bond world.

[crheath]

It's probably boring to you because every movie since then has copied it's formula so much.

[Joe Bond]

I don't know if its the best Bond film, FRWL and CR could be the best, but it's my personal favorite because of the introduction of that wonderful Bond style and I actually find the parts when Bond is captured interesting like when he listens in on Goldfinger's plan.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

GF is also a very tight, well paced film that more or less "perfected" the formula and goes thru the formulaic elements in a quick manner. It was the shortest Bond film(until QOS). Most of the later films are more elaborate variations on what GF did prior. It was also the first Bond film to really be a huge success in America and what really caused the whole world to go 007-crazy so it's easy to understand why many viewers consider it the best. My only complaints with GF would be it seems the most studio-bound of the Bond films and that sometimes it get praised so much it causes some of the other films(TB, YOLT, OHMSS, OP for example) to be underrated or underappreciated.

[Cruiserweight]

I'll go one up on the OP & say i find the whole film boring.I feel the same way about Dr.No & YOLT.The only three films in the series that i feel that way about.

[jamie00007]

Ive never found it that great either. It definately has some very iconic scenes and lines, and Connery is at the top of his game, but imo its more a case of the whole not being as good as the sum of its parts. I find the last half quite dull, both story-wise and visually (alongside AVTAK as the Bond film with the dullest locations) and the campier aspects of the film (like Odd Job's hat throwing, the army base scene and the "thats our James!" comic relief(?) Leiter dont do it for me at all.

I also think far to much credit is given to the film in regards to it setting the Bond formula. Dr No did far more in that regard. About the only thing GF had in regards to the formula that DN didnt is a henchman and traditional PTS and title song (all introduced in FRWL).

[DAN LIGHTER]

(alongside AVTAK as the Bond film with the dullest locations)

I would never regard Paris as a dull location. But each to there own.

It's a shame Fleming never lived to see it. I think it's a darn good film that kept close to the books plot.

[jamie00007]

Paris isnt a dull place, but it is imo a dull location that we can see in a thousand other movies. But I wasnt really talking about Paris but the US locations.

[Aris007]

Goldfinger was and is so popular because it has many Bond icons in it! Oddjob, Pussy Galore, the first supercar with gadgets, the golden girl. There are so many unique things that first appeared in cinema in this film! What makes the difference though it's that they coesxist harmonically in this film. Since then every film except one or two have tried to use the same formula unsuccessfully in the majority. That's why people love Goldfinger.

[double o ego]

Goldfinger is the definition of irony. It's brillaint film, pcked with all the hallmarks tht come together perfectly. However, simultaneously, it was the first Bond film to introduce the more comic book silliness. When I lok back t Dr.No and FRWL, those films were real serious thrillers. GF came along and the series has never ever been the same since.

[Publius]

Am I the only one who thinks Thunderball comes closer to establishing the Bond formula? Longer movie, epic plot, more exotic locations, Bond isn't a prisoner for the bulk of it...

[dee-bee-five]

Why is Goldfinger so popular?

Hmmm, let's think...

Because it's bloody marvellous and the epitome of 60s popcorn movie making perhaps...?

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

GF was just an excuse to entertain in the most spectacular fashion - total unabashed enjoyment with no apologies.

It also has moments that were evolutionary to the cinematic medium.
Broccoli's insistence of telling the audience what you are going to do and doing it. Explaining the ejector seat in the Aston Martin so the audience anticipates the excitement to come is a remarkable device for a movie and used to maximum effect in the film.
GF has a textbook screenplay on how to write an action movie. The script goes from laughs to being dead serious almost in the blink of an eye - you never know what you are going to get next and the audience are kept alive throughout. It's also a masterstroke of what you can get out of a very slim plot.

Hamilton takes full advantage of Connery's sex appeal in a way the two previous Bonds did not. GF is a very sexy movie.

Above all though it’s a film you will watch and NEVER FORGET.

[DaveBond21]

It's also easily the most iconic Bond pic; The Golden Girl, the Aston Martin, the Laser Beam, Oddjob, the golf scene, Pussy Galore etc

Very true, and these are all scenes that are just as well known by non-Bond fans. No other 007 movie can boast that.

[The Richmond Spy]

You know how it is...sometimes the best parts of things (FRWL) happen before everyone starts paying attention (GF). That said, I think GF embodies more 'iconic' moments than any other 60's Bond. You have the Bassey song, the gold paint, the ruthless henchman, outlandish plot, etc...

It "set the formula"

[Major Tallon]

I'm in the group that believes that Goldfinger is a remarkable movie. At various times, I've replied to some of the criticisms directed to the film, but this time I'd like to reply to the statement that the locations are boring.

The locations (Miami, the golf course, Switzerland, Ft. Knox) are those from the novel, although they ditched the New York warehouse in favor of a Kentucky stud ranch to add a more colorful locale. There are some who believe that a movie doesn't have to be bound to its literary source, but I believe that Fleming was a fantastic writer and that bringing his work to the screen, with some cinematic embellishments, produces some brilliant cinema. Fleming had a gift for bringing prosaic locations to life, and I enjoy it when the filmmakers use the locations that Fleming described.

The central point of "Goldfinger" is that the villain is obsessed with gold, so of course his target would be the largest and most fabled gold depository in the world -- Ft. Knox, which obviously is located in Kentucky. I can't believe that substituting a fictional gold storage facility in some "exotic" location (like sub-Saharan Africa or the Arctic) would have created nearly the excitement that the use of Ft. Knox does. I also don't believe that having a few minutes of footage shot in the surrounding area makes the film boring. I've commented before that crushing a beautiful luxury car gave audiences a jolt when we first saw it in 1965 (my dad refused to believe that they'd done it for real), a scene that certainly wasn't boring.

I confess I'm puzzled when it's called boring that Bond, chained to an atomic bomb, faces off against the invincible Oddjob inside the most famous gold vault in the world, surrounded by fabulous wealth, shimmering with gold, while the clock ticks down. It's got to be one of the most unforgettable sequences in cinema, and it's only one of several that "Goldfinger" offers. 10/10

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I've commented before that crushing a beautiful luxury car gave audiences a jolt when we first saw it in 1965 (my dad refused to believe that they'd done it for real), a scene that certainly wasn't boring.

I agree.
I also understand that GF presented its audience with loads of other elements besides car crushing that they had never seen in '64. Laserbeams, depressurising aircraft, karate chops and the bomb that Bond uses in the PTS.
This must have been awesome at the time.

[Major Tallon]

I also understand that GF presented its audience with loads of other elements besides car crushing that they had never seen in '64. Laserbeams, depressurising aircraft, karate chops and the bomb that Bond uses in the PTS.
This must have been awesome at the time.

Yes, absolutely. The cumulative impact of these scenes (and others, like the chase with the Aston Martin) was simply electrifying.

[PrinceKamalKhan]

Am I the only one who thinks Thunderball comes closer to establishing the Bond formula? Longer movie, epic plot, more exotic locations, Bond isn't a prisoner for the bulk of it...

TB certainly gave the polishing touches to the Bond formula of GF as we would later know it by adding Panavision, a bigger budget, Maurice Binder's titles, longer stories, epic "larger-than-life" feel. One can easily watch DN thru TB and see how each film added to the Bond formula. In a way, the 1st 7 films each added an element or innovation(for better or worse), YOLT with its discarding of the Fleming source material, OHMSS with snow and skiing scenes, DAF with campy humor.

[Safari Suit]

Not to be rude, but I can't help wondering why you felt the need to create two seperate threads asking this question. I guess this issue really eats away at you, huh?

[MarkA]

I had a really interesting experience with someone who was for all intents and purposes a Bond virgin. They had only seen CR and QOS. I took them to see some Bond's at the recent Cubby Broccoli event at the National Film Theatre. This person having seen no other Bond apart from the ones mentioned. We watched a mixture of Connery's, Moore's and Dalton's also OHMSS. Now I appreciate Goldfinger but it is not my favourite. Well their reaction to it was amazing. They were blown away. They told me after awhile they forgot they were watching an old film and just loved it for what it was from beginning to end. I found the reaction really interesting and unexpected and made me realise all those years ago what a mind blowing experience Goldfinger must have been, and still is.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I found the reaction really interesting and unexpected and made me realise all those years ago what a mind blowing experience Goldfinger must have been, and still is.

Yeah and it can still be appreciated today because it is such a dam good film. Much more to it than its super iconography. It works because it was written and directed with fantastical elements juxtaposed with reality and an adult sexual attitude thrown in. (It also avoids the leisurely pace of TB that some people complain about).

I like this extract from Adrian Turner's book on Goldfinger (Bloomsbury Movie Guide, number 2), citing correspondence from Richard Maibaum to Broccoli and Saltzman about Goldfinger's script.
"Let me first give you some of my basic thoughts. Whereas Dr No was a mystery (a man is killed, who did it? - and why?) and From Russia With Love was a straight suspense story (we know almost all of the plot against Bond and want to see how he foils it) Goldfinger is what I call 'a duel'. Bond versus Goldfinger. It is not, I repeat not a story about a robbery, although the Fort Knox heist is the most important section of the book and will be treated as such in the film. Usually in films where robbing a Brink truck or looting the Bank of England.......the planning occupies the first several reels and they are done in almost documentary style. This is not what we should do with Goldfinger because it is both old stuff and doesn't properly tell our story - the clash between two supermen, Bond and Goldfinger."

For me this is one example that illustrates the approach to the film and why it is different from the two films that came before it. The movie could have been about Bond foiling Goldfinger's Fort Knox plan but instead went forward a gear and did something new and became the action movie it is.

[Joe Bond]

I found the reaction really interesting and unexpected and made me realise all those years ago what a mind blowing experience Goldfinger must have been, and still is.

Yeah and it can still be appreciated today because it is such a dam good film. Much more to it than its super iconography. It works because it was written and directed with fantastical elements juxtaposed with reality and an adult sexual attitude thrown in. (It also avoids the leisurely pace of TB that some people complain about).

I like this extract from Adrian Turner's book on Goldfinger (Bloomsbury Movie Guide, number 2), citing correspondence from Richard Maibaum to Broccoli and Saltzman about Goldfinger's script.
"Let me first give you some of my basic thoughts. Whereas Dr No was a mystery (a man is killed, who did it? - and why?) and From Russia With Love was a straight suspense story (we know almost all of the plot against Bond and want to see how he foils it) Goldfinger is what I call 'a duel'. Bond versus Goldfinger. It is not, I repeat not a story about a robbery, although the Fort Knox heist is the most important section of the book and will be treated as such in the film. Usually in films where robbing a Brink truck or looting the Bank of England.......the planning occupies the first several reels and they are done in almost documentary style. This is not what we should do with Goldfinger because it is both old stuff and doesn't properly tell our story - the clash between two supermen, Bond and Goldfinger."

For me this is one example that illustrates the approach to the film and why it is different from the two films that came before it. The movie could have been about Bond foiling Goldfinger's Fort Knox plan but instead went forward a gear and did something new and became the action movie it is.

Interesting quote. Agree with everything you said and its probably my favorite Connery Bond film. I should also note that Goldfinger also shows off the 1960's interstates in the U.S. with various gas stations and restaurants (Kentucky Fried Chicken anyone!) that not many films have shown so it shows us what this was like in the 1960's kinda of like how Diamonds are Forever is one of the few movies to show Las Vegas in 1970's (the original Ocean's 11 was the other film to do it but did it in the 60's). I do have to mention that back in the 1990's when my parents used to take me to my grandmother's house, she lived in a very small and rural area, the interstate around where she lived was very similar to what is seen in Goldfinger especially when it came to signs for various stores/gas stations.

[Eric Stromberg]

I watched GF recently and loved most of it.

The Fort Knox scenes at the end are embarrassing, however. It looks like the second assistant director shot the scenes of those soldiers and in quite a hurry! This is a great movie and deserved better action scenes in the finale.

Edited by Eric Stromberg, 04 August 2009 - 06:13 PM.

[Fiona Volpe lover]

Why is GF so popular? I've never understood that myself. Maybe because it has so many iconic elements-the Aston Martin,Oddjob,the gold painted girl,etc. However,I don't consider it that great a film,and certainly nowhere as good as FRWL,TB and YOLT [I prefer DAF too,which probably means I'm mad].

There's little suspense or tension until near the end,there's little action [think about it,there isn't much at all],Bond is inactive for too long,Gert Frobe [to me] is far too cuddly to be a convincing villain,and don't get me started on Pussy Galore!

Yes,the film has that great 60s cool feel and is still fun,but one of the best-no way!

[DaveBond21]

This is one of my favourite shots in any Bond movie, never mind Goldfinger:-

Attached Files

•  Goldfinger_Tilly_Masterson_rifle.jpg   321.77KB   11 downloads

[Loomis]

I had a really interesting experience with someone who was for all intents and purposes a Bond virgin. They had only seen CR and QOS. I took them to see some Bond's at the recent Cubby Broccoli event at the National Film Theatre. This person having seen no other Bond apart from the ones mentioned. We watched a mixture of Connery's, Moore's and Dalton's also OHMSS. Now I appreciate Goldfinger but it is not my favourite. Well their reaction to it was amazing. They were blown away. They told me after awhile they forgot they were watching an old film and just loved it for what it was from beginning to end. I found the reaction really interesting and unexpected and made me realise all those years ago what a mind blowing experience Goldfinger must have been, and still is.

Agreed. I saw GOLDFINGER last night for the first time in a few years, and my reaction was as follows:

GOLDFINGER. Arguably the best-scripted of all the Bonds, with the possible exception of CASINO ROYALE.

It's perhaps the most dated entry in the series (even more so than DR. NO), and certainly rather clunky in places (and some of the dialogue at the "hoods' convention" is truly wince-inducing), but, fundamentally, this is a good story well told, with all the charm and wit you could wish for as well as a handful of wonderful, iconic moments that truly put the ™ in Classic Bond™.

Not that you didn't know all that already, of course. Still, it's even sweeter an experience in the wake of QUANTUM OF SUICIDE, and the Blu-ray format brings out hitherto unnoticed details such as Connery's back hair.

Basically, GOLDFINGER works.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

GOLDFINGER. Arguably the best-scripted of all the Bonds, with the possible exception of CASINO ROYALE.

It's perhaps the most dated entry in the series (even more so than DR. NO), and certainly rather clunky in places (and some of the dialogue at the "hoods' convention" is truly wince-inducing), but, fundamentally, this is a good story well told, with all the charm and wit you could wish for as well as a handful of wonderful, iconic moments that truly put the ™ in Classic Bond™.

Not that you didn't know all that already, of course. Still, it's even sweeter an experience in the wake of QUANTUM OF SUICIDE, and the Blu-ray format brings out hitherto unnoticed details such as Connery's back hair.

Basically, GOLDFINGER works.

Yes its script is remarkable on so many levels and a giant step forward for cinema.
Unfortunately I have never seen GF on the big screen. I saw it on BR two days ago and the format really does the film the justice it deserves. You watch it with fresh eyes. You do notice little details but also the impact of the film resonates much more somehow.