
TMWTGG - Shockingly good
#1
Posted 17 December 2009 - 11:56 PM
I avoided it as its one of the Bond movies I tend to disregard and to be honest I'd forgotten alot of the elements of the movie, so it was a pleasant surprise to revisist it.
Here's my take - the film is great! Firstly those who say the film is too comic are wrong, flat out, 100% wrong. Here's why, the dialogue is actually very tight and lacks gags at all. It concentrates on plot, its witty and sharp when needed, but not overly. I was surprised at how dark the film actually is. It really is, go back and watch it. Bond is still the Roger Moore Bond, but he's darker and little twisted. I mean the Andrea Anders scene is played out perfectly in his hands, and the dialogue scenes he has are brilliant. He's charming as hell when hes with Goodnight and the banter between him and the baddie are great. There's no stupid underlined sex gags which seem to be littered throughout the rest of the Moore films (I'm looking at you MR and AVTAK). The plot is actually very clever and interesting, and I love the way it unrolls itself.
The only comedic elements int he film are perfectly placed and a testament to Hamilton in the directors chair. One of the elemtents Hamilton brings to the film is a very comic-strip feel. There's some slapstick like element throughout the action scenes, but they are forgivable. I see them as crowrd pleasers, being in a full cinema and watching in awe of the action and laughing to the small little subplots. It's a great watch.
Moore is terrific in what I must say is his darkest turn as Bond, every Bond has one - Connery in DN, TD in LTK, PB in TND, and DC in QOS. He's very dark and unforgiving. But when Connery was brutual in DN I found it hard to be on his side, he was quite dislikeable in places. With Moore you go with the character, its a testament to his leading man creditals, his face, voice, mannerisms lead him to be built as a Hollywood leading boy. He's still the Rger Bond we love but he's brilliant when he's evil especially at the start of the picture.
Lee is a brilliant baddie, I reckon he comes rather close to stealing the show.
Even the stuff that is bad about the film is forgivable. Nick Nack has had a alot of attacks over the years but I love that little guy, hes such a legend, I could watch him in his little suit and bowler hat all day. Goodnight is a pointless character without a doubt, but she's played by Britt Eckland...nuff said...remember that scene when she comes out in a nightie? See what I mean? The production design is great, and the locations stunning. The script is well writtern and the film is very cohesive, it has a proper beginning, middle and end that all tie together nicely, witht he trappings of all the familair Bond elements, and is complemented with Hamilton's fun, zesty comic-book timing, which means the film moves along quickly with little deadweight throughout.
If I was to complain about the movie it would be that the action scenes are very light, I count two, a below par boat chase. It's evident throughout Bond is actually going quite slowly and the car chase is quite dull. The engine soundtrack just reminded me how this wasn't Bullitt. Also the film throws far to much plot at you at the end of the movie with the solex nonesence and the solar panels - I stopped caring, surely the more interesting plot point is the duel between these two men and the solex is a mere macguffin, a subplot to the main plot about these two men hunting each other.
Aside that I praise the film and think it odd how the film has been almost displaced from Bond history as it truly is a gem in the 007 crown.
#2
Posted 18 December 2009 - 12:59 AM
I watched it on a lark and found it to be very close to my favorite Moore chapter. (TSWLM still retains top spot with me.) You won't find much love for the film on this site, however. That's fine, but I hope that people who adversely criticize have seen it fairly recently.
Goods: Roger's edgy performance, above average exotic locales, a humorously irascible M (great idea for his field office location, too), wonderful bond girl Maud Adams, simple story with deliberate pace, 80% of the gags still work for me (including Pepper), villain lair location and design is one of the best, some very non-PC behavior from Bond
Others: Not a great action Bond movie--bland action sequences in the boat chase and most of the fights, a squandered opportunity for an exciting showdown between Bond and Scaramanga ends much too quickly and without appropriate tension (definitely a biggie that holds it back)
#3
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:04 AM
#4
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:15 AM
Edited by Slightly Shaken, 18 December 2009 - 01:16 AM.
#5
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:35 AM
This film made my Christmas back in 74. I'm still waiting for the reissue of the Golden Gun replica. I missed my chance to get one back in 94.
#6
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:42 AM
#7
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:50 AM
Roger Moore is fun to watch in this, though, and not just because it's different from his usual schtick. He does a really good job.
#8
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:51 AM
Yes, there are weak points to it, but over all, they help contribute to a weird, larger than life atmosphere, similar to DAF, very close to that of Fleming's later novels.
Edited by The Shark, 18 December 2009 - 01:54 AM.
#9
Posted 18 December 2009 - 02:30 AM
Shark, I like your analysis of Bond's struggle against himself and how he ultimately has to cheat to win. However, the ending does seem painfully obvious as being thought of before most of the rest of the story. Scaramanga has an edifice of Bond precisely so that Bond can trick him in the end (one kind of has to see that coming when it first appears in the PTS). I'm not as keen on that one bit, but overall the movie is a fun Rog romp, as per usual.
#10
Posted 18 December 2009 - 02:58 AM
#11
Posted 18 December 2009 - 05:10 AM
The Solex plot is one of my least favourite Bond plots, as it's irrelevant, uninteresting and even the villain doesn't know or care about it. And the comic relief - bleh. Flying car: why? Bond dismissing Scaramanga's disturbing backstory with a joke: hmm, that was disappointing. Goodnight giving in to Bond's desire for her: way to make the audience lose all interest in that character.
Roger Moore is fun to watch in this, though, and not just because it's different from his usual schtick. He does a really good job.
I agree with the plot. It's incredibly flimsy. Roger Moore once again proves what an ace actor he really is. And Christopher Lee holds himself high. But the rest of the cast? Oy. Britt Eklund makes Denise Richards look like Meryl Streep. And I love Maud Adams in Octopussy, but here . . . no thanks. And the silliest Bond theme song ever, screeched incessantly and needlessly by Lulu. I have to say, this one's definitely at the bottom of my barrel.
#12
Posted 18 December 2009 - 05:14 AM
Not even three weeks -- nine days, and poor Lulu had a sore throat on the day she recorded the title song, so...John Barry created some very moody music - as much as he could with only three weeks to compose it.
#13
Posted 18 December 2009 - 05:56 AM
It does lack some structure, but what holds it up is Lee's fantastic performance; as good as any villain in the whole series.
#14
Posted 18 December 2009 - 10:37 AM
I will admit TMWGG is low down on my list of Bond films. But I admit there are elements that can be easily overlooked.
Bond is just an unlikeable git in this film. But you still go along with the character.
It has some very dark scenes, I always feel sorry for poor old trapped Miss Anders, as Bond does not really treat her any better than Scaramanga.
I do like Moore's cruel moments, he interrogation of Lazar and Miss Anders is dark and Rogs Bond character definitely was at his coldest.
And I have a soft spot for the Beirut fight at the beginning. Its just a bit more close quarter and rougher and a bit less camp than some of Moore's other fights. There's people chucking chairs and bottles and Bond smacking a thugs head against the wall. And I do like the one line payoff at the end "Not from where I am standing" great.
I also like the Bond/Scaramanga confrontations, the fact that Scaramanga really got under Bonds skin and the angry hostile speech between Lee and Moore just before the duel is a good one and a rare bit of RogBond's character coming to the fore.
I think the plot is a bit plodding, overall I find it slow and the action is a bit sparse and dull. But at a real contrast to something like Moonraker(which is one of my favourite Bond films) which is ultra light and fluffy it works a treat.
I find some of the comedy ok, most of the comedy is down to Goodnight and Sheriff Pepper, I think is overdone and campy, I would have preferred just Bonds quips. And I could have done without nick nack really.
The Karate bits are not bad, and I do like the bit of quick thinking from Bond when he's getting whipped by Chula, quick punch and a sharp exit.
Overall still not a great Bond film for me, but it does have some good and overlooked moments.
Edited by BoogieBond, 18 December 2009 - 10:44 AM.
#15
Posted 18 December 2009 - 12:57 PM
#16
Posted 18 December 2009 - 01:02 PM
Just watched it tonight. Still as disappointing as I remembered.
So do you agree with me the title sequence is worse than OP's?
#17
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:11 PM
I thought it worked well in LALD to have Roger's Bond be so focused on his job that he doesn't notice or care that he's laying waste to half of New York and Lousiana, and being so nonchalant and bemused when poor Felix is left to pick up the pieces. For me that works better than putting Roger in the position of "straight man" and having to put up with the idiocy of Mary Goodnight and Sheriff Pepper. It's two different approaches to comedy, and for me the first works much better than the second.
Christopher Lee is terrific, and if they'd kept the plot centered on a personal grudge match between him and Bond, this could've been a great one. Instead they shoe-horned in the Solex Macguffin, a "secret hideout" and a laser cannon, and it never feels like anything more than a contractual obligation ("Hey, gotta put that stuff in; it's a Bond, you know"). The same sort of thing ruined GE for me; two double-ohs in a grudge match is interesting, but the umpteenth killer satellite scheme is so very not.
As for Bond "cheating," I don't think he goes through any agony over it. Scaramanga has already cheated by running into the funhouse in the first place, instead of shooting it out on the beach. And as we saw at the karate school, Roger-Bond will do whatever it takes to win, as well he should. One of the things I like about Roger's Bond is that he's older and wiser; he doesn't have a young man's need to prove he's tougher and better...he just wants to do what needs doing quickly and if possible without breaking a sweat, so he can get back to his drink (preferably NOT "Phu-Yuck"! :-) ).
I guess I'd put TMWTGG somewhere in the middle of the pack. Not the worst, but it doesn't get a lot of spins in the player.
#18
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:36 PM
#19
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:47 PM
#20
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:58 PM
Solid effort, Mharkin.As I said earlier, this thread inspired me to create a fan trailer for Golden Gun; this is what I came up with...
I have a soft spot for TMWTGG. I’ve always liked it. Some may cry boring and dull, but to me, the film exudes it's own exotic flavor that patiently unwinds in it's own time. Moore puts in a wonderful performance as Bond, and for my money it’s probably his best. I also think he looks best age wise here.
Haven’t seen it for a while, and it's not one I watch often to be honest, but I may give it a spin sometime tomorrow.
#21
Posted 18 December 2009 - 04:59 PM

It's good though it would have been better in HD, and with the "forever hold your piece" line, and the one where he threatens Andrea that Scaramanga with use one of his little golden bullets on her.
It is in HD, I just posted it up before it was completely processed.
#22
Posted 18 December 2009 - 06:26 PM
I also thing that this is the film where Bond had the most style. He looks damn good throughout.
#23
Posted 18 December 2009 - 07:00 PM
Just watched it tonight. Still as disappointing as I remembered.
So do you agree with me the title sequence is worse than OP's?
Forgot about that. Well, while it does seem lazily slapped together, I'm hard pressed to come to a decision over which is worse. I think they're both probably equally the worst, in my opinion.
I'm sorry Lulu had a sore throat, but it's still an obnoxious title song.
But I will agree that Roger Moore looked incredibly great in the film.
#24
Posted 18 December 2009 - 07:41 PM
darthbond
#25
Posted 18 December 2009 - 10:51 PM
#26
Posted 18 December 2009 - 11:28 PM
#27
Posted 19 December 2009 - 12:37 AM
Golden Gun is great. Easily the closest Moore got to Fleming's Bond.
Especially when he grabbed a sumo wrestler's buttocks.
#28
Posted 19 December 2009 - 01:26 AM
Golden Gun is great. Easily the closest Moore got to Fleming's Bond.
Especially when he grabbed a sumo wrestler's buttocks.
Desperate times call for cheeky measures.
#29
Posted 19 December 2009 - 01:28 AM
Golden Gun is great. Easily the closest Moore got to Fleming's Bond.
Especially when he grabbed a sumo wrestler's buttocks.
Desperate times call for cheeky measures.
Butt of course.
#30
Posted 19 December 2009 - 01:35 AM
Golden Gun is great. Easily the closest Moore got to Fleming's Bond.
Especially when he grabbed a sumo wrestler's buttocks.
Desperate times call for cheeky measures.
Butt of course.
I guess Bond was a bit of an a*se about it.
EDIT: (hmm, didn't know the a-word was censored here)
Edited by CJB, 19 December 2009 - 01:36 AM.