Cannes Film Festival 2013

James Bond Declassified: File #3 - 'Goldfinger' takes the series into the realm of pop cartoon

One of the most popular films in the series deserves its reputation

  • Critic's Rating A
  • Readers' Rating A+
<p>In my head, this is how I look every morning when I wake up.</p>

In my head, this is how I look every morning when I wake up.

Credit: MGM/Fox Home Video

Are you a fan of Motion Captured?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

JAMES BOND 007 DECLASSIFIED
File #3: "Goldfinger"

This series will trace the cinema history of James Bond, while also examining Ian Fleming's original novels as source material and examining how faithful (or not) the films have been to his work.

Directed by Guy Hamilton
Screenplay by Richard Maibaum & Paul Dehn
Produced by Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman

CHARACTERS / CAST

James Bond / Sean Connery
Pussy Galore / Honor Blackman
Auric Goldfinger / Gert Frobe
Jill Masterson / Shirley Eaton
Tilly Masterson / Tania Mallet
Oddjob / Harold Sakata
M / Bernard Lee
Solo / Martin Benson
Felix Leiter / Cec Linder
Simmons / Austin Willis
Miss Moneypenny / Lois Maxwell
Dink / Margaret Nolan

CREDITS SEQUENCE

After the gun-barrel image of Bond firing at the audience, we see Bond emerging from the water somewhere, a fake seagull on his head, and he immediately starts working to infiltrate wherever he is.  This involves knocking out guards, firing grappling hooks, and planting plastic explosives all over a bunch of nitroglycerin tanks.

Then he strips off his wetsuit, revealing a tux underneath, and heads into a nearby bar, just as the explosion goes off, giving himself a lovely alibi.  He talks to his contact about how the guy whose operation he just hit won't be using "heroin-flavored bananas" to fund his operations anymore.  Before he leaves, he stops by a hotel room to see the dancer from the bar, who he finds in the bathtub.  It's a trap, of course, and Bond sees the guy who is about to kill him reflected in the girl's eye.  There's a struggle, and the guy ends up in the bathtub.  Bond throws in a fan, electrocuting him, and as he reclaims his gun and leaves, he utters one of the most definitive Bond one-liners ever, echoed through decades of crappy action movies since then:  "Shocking.  Simply shocking."

And then the song.  Shirley Bassey's "Goldfinger" is the first truly great Bond song, and she belts it here like her life depends on it.  Big and brassy and packed with attitude, the song is matched by a credit sequence that further refines the formula that played out over the course of the series.  Robert Brownjohn's hallucinatory mini-movie consists of film clips played over the gold-painted skin of women, and there are few things stranger than seeing Odd Job superimposed over a hot woman.  Title sequences were so short at this point, though, that I wish this one was longer.  It's really confident and cool and sets the tone with a few smart thematic touches, ending with fire playing out over the gold-burnished skin of the last girl.

THE FILM

It's an interesting creative team on this one.  Guy Hamilton stepped into the series as the first new director, after Terence Young worked to help set the tone for the films in "Dr. No" and "From Russia With Love."  Hamilton was a guy who had a few hits under his belt, and movies like "Man In The Middle" and "An Inspector Calls" indicated that he was able to create light mainstream entertainments that played with some heavy ideas without ever sacrificing the Hollywood mainstream veneer.  By this point, the main creative team defining the look and mood of the James Bond movies was cinematographer Ted Moore, editor Peter Hunt, and production designer Ken Adam.  Adam didn't work on "From Russia With Love" because he was busy with Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove," but he returned for "Goldfinger," and it's a good thing.  I think his influence here is one of the things that helped the series make the jump from fun spy movies to pop sensation.  Adam's work has a real sense of play, and along with what Moore and Hunt were doing, the Bond films felt fairly cutting edge at the time.  They had this bright palette, and they had a swagger, and they just felt like there was a whole world of sophistication they could serve as a window into, contemporary and alive.

So what better place to start than 1963 Miami?

A plane flies by with a "Welcome To Miami Beach" banner, and looking at the establishing shots of the '60s version of Miami, it's sort of small-scale and charming compared to the city it is today.  And right away, I love the score for "Goldfinger."  Like the theme song, it comes out swinging, big and bold.  And I love the way the film goes from that opening helicopter shot to a close-up of someone diving into a pool, and Felix Leiter standing on the other side of glass watching the dive.  What's funny about the blend of these shots is that the helicopter shot is obviously really in Florida, as is the shot of Felix Leiter watching the girls swimming on the other side of the glass, then turning and walking out into the hotel.  But when he actually reaches Bond, that's England.  Connery never came to the US once during the production of the film.  So Leiter is the thing that carries us from the real to the fake, and it's a clever bit of business by director Guy Hamilton.

This is our second Felix Leiter in three films, and I'll say this:  Cec Linder is no Jack Lord.  This guy probably looks more like a real spy would look, but it's a pretty jarring bit of recasting.  Connery's such a great big glorious sexist ape in this film.  I love how he tells Dink (the very '60s and very cute Margaret Nolan) to run along because it's time for "man talk," complete with a slap on the ass.  I'm not sure why my wife dislikes it when I quote him in my daily life.  Hmmmmm.

The film wastes no time at all setting things in motion.  Leiter tells him right away that Goldfinger is his new assignment, and within a few minutes, he's figured out how Goldfinger is cheating at cards, and he's also managed to win over JIll Masterson, the girl who was helping him cheat.  I like how sweaty and unimpressive Goldfinger is as a physical specimen.  He's not exactly the template you picture when you hear that someone's a super-villain.

One of the reasons the Bond films are culturally significant is because of the way they capture the shifting nature of what is acceptable from our screen heroes.  Watch Bond deal with women here.  When Jill's flirting with him while he's on the phone, he grabs her by the face and shoves her onto the bed.  Her reaction?  A smile and a purr.  Try that today and see what happens.

Important detail:  James Bond hates the Beatles.  "There are some things, dear girl, that just aren't done, such as drinking Dom Perignon '53 above the temperature of 38-degrees Fahrenheit.  That's as bad as listening to the Beatles without earmuffs."  What's funny is that I mentioned his slam on Twitter, and someone immediately fired back that Bond obviously loves them because of what he said.  I think that person was confused about the difference between earmuffs and headphones, though, because it's very clear… Bond is not a fan.  That makes perfect sense based on how old he is and how generational the Beatles were.  And it also makes the theme song for "Live and Let Die" about 50 times more hilarious.

Want More...

James Bond?
  • Bond_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.
Oddjob is introduced here as just a shadow and a hand, and it's nice, because he's such an iconic visual.  They make the most of that.  And after Oddjob knocks Bond out, we're treated to one of the most memorable visuals in any film in the series, the dead Jill Masterson, painted gold from head to toe.  Talk about a villain quickly setting the stakes for the film and sending a very clear message to Bond about what happens when you mess with Goldfinger.  This is the first of three things that became instantly iconic from the film, and the image of her dead nude gold body was not just the cornerstone of the key art for the film, it's also one of the most famous images in any James Bond movie.

17 minutes in, and we're already back in London.  Right away, M lays the law down and tells Bond that he screwed up and made it personal.  He wasn't supposed to humiliate Goldfinger, but it was obvious from the scene that Bond was just offended by seeing Goldfinger cheat so blatantly.  He had no idea it would lead to a murder, and that escalation is what draws Bond in.  Bond's furious about what happened, but he also knows that it was his fault.  People don't really give Connery credit for his acting in these films, like he's just cruising through them looking cool, but there's a reason he is still the favorite of many fans.  There is a wellspring of rage in Connery's Bond that he allows out when it suits him, and the rest of the time, he plays this alpha male who feels that the world will simply do whatever he wills it to do.  His flirting, his one-liners, his attitude… it's all a distraction from the moments when he has to get his hands dirty.  That's why I wish we'd seen his "On Her Majesty's Secret Service."  Watching him finally open up to someone only to lose her… man, that would have been something.

I like the way the Moneypenny relationship has already become familiar by this point in the series.  She is one of the few people he allows himself to simply like without reserve, and it's nice to see the interplay.  There's a great dinner meeting where Bond is given a crash course education in gold to prepare him for his further pursuit of Goldfinger, complete with a £5000 gold bar.  The next morning, he reports to Q branch for his briefing, and this is the first time we've really seen the sequence that became such a staple of the series.  There's a less-fully-realized version in "From Russia With Love,"  but here, we've got Desmond Llewelyn as Q, complete with his undisguised contempt for Bond and the way he treats his equipment in the field.  These scenes are basically a road map for what we can expect to see later in the film, and I always loved that as a kid.  If they tell you there's an ejector seat in the Aston Martin, you can be damn sure they're going to use the ejector seat.

This is one of those films where I'm confused by the designation of Bond as a "spy," since he introduces himself to Goldfinger in Miami Beach, and then as soon as he's back on his trail, makes sure to introduce himself again, leading to the tensest golf game ever played by anyone besides Rodney Dangerfield and Ted Knight.  Bond just charges in and goes toe to toe with Goldfinger, giving him a heads-up that he's on his trail.  Only Sean Connery can make golfing look badass.  And the way he and his caddy twist Goldfinger during the game once they catch him cheating is great and subtle fun.  Still, it only makes Goldfinger angrier, and at this point, he's already killed someone.  It's a dangerous game Bond plays in this film, and when Goldfinger has Oddjob demonstrate the bowler hat, I think that's the second moment the film makes the jump to pop cartoon, and the series made the jump to all-time status.  It elevates things further than either of the first two films did, and it gives the series permission to start playing bigger like that.  He's a henchman who can crush a golf ball to dust with his bare hands.  This is not reality.

John Barry's orchestral treatment of the "Goldfinger" theme throughout the film is pretty great, and I love the melancholy version during the long sequence where Bond is tailing Goldfinger through Switzerland in his car.  This whole middle section of the film is one of my favorites in any Bond film.  I just like the narrative flow of it.  First, Bond spots Tilly Masterson on Goldfinger's trail and he stops her, making sure he gets a chance to meet her.  Then he sneaks into Goldfinger's factory, which looks an awful lot like he's just creeping around the alleys of Pinewood Studios, and he learns about Goldfinger's smuggling plan, a fairly clever conceit that is paid off well here.  It makes sense of all the emphasis that Hamilton places on Goldfinger's car before this.  This is the first mention we hear of "Operation Grand Slam," and we see that the Chinese are involved.  It's funny how this feels like it could be the plot of a movie right now, with a little shift making it so the Koreans are behind a nuclear plot against the United States, even though it's been almost 50 years since this came out.

I've always liked the character of Tilly Masterson, but I think Tania Mallet is sort of a dud onscreen.  The moment before the big chase, when Bond figures out who she is, should be an emotional moment between the two of them, but Mallet just doesn't sell it.  It's a shame.  I think she keeps that part of the story from working as well as it should.  The script gets it right, but without the emotional connection, it just doesn't land right.  The end of their chase, with Oddjob taking Tilly down, is effectively handled by Hamilton, who sells the idea that Bond would let himself get caught because of the sense of responsibility he feels to this girl.

The ejector seat gag is interesting because of how thrown away it is.  Yep.  He uses it.  But a modern Bond film would turn it into this elaborate effect or stunt set-up.  Here, it's a long-shot, and it's pretty much just a dude getting thrown out of the car a few feet in the air.  The entire chase is frustrating for Bond, like a bull that's slowly being hedged in before it gets brought down, and so is his escape attempt.  He's just plain cornered.

The third, and maybe most iconic moment that helped push this one over the top is the next sequence, justifiably one of the most famous in film history.  Bond strapped to a table.  Goldfinger gloating.  The laser beam making a slow climb towards his crotch.  "No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!"  When someone sees this for the first time now, who knows how many of this film's imitators are going to be bouncing around in their head already?  When audiences saw this scene in the '60s, it was a very clever new riff on an old idea.  We're used to bad guys who like to monologue a bit, but Bond was part of making that into a convention of the genre.  I like that we see Bond struggling to catch up to the bad guys for most of this film.  He's good, but he's also got to use the fine art of bullshit at times.  And there's something very primal about a character who has been established as a nonstop f**k-machine having his privates threatened with bisection.  There's nothing more damaging that Goldfinger could do to him.  And going from a direct threat on his crotch to the introduction of Pussy Galore within a few shots is one of the reasons this one punched through on a nearly chemical level for audiences.  Using Fleming's work, the filmmakers took great pleasure in playing with archetypes and iconography and innuendo in a fairly heady blend, and "Goldfinger" is one of the moments where they got the balance just right.  It may only be a matter of degrees between a character named Pussy Galore and a character named Holly Goodhead, but those degrees matter.  "Goldfinger" benefits from the casting of Honor Blackman, whose name makes her sound like she's a Bond-character-within-a-Bond-movie.  She makes Pussy Galore into such a potent figure of power with the quiet strength she brings to the role that she's never allowed to be a joke.

Oh… by the way… I love that Burt Kwouk, best known to film audiences as Kato in the "Pink Panther" films, appears here as Mr. Ling, the Red Chinese representative for Operation Grand Slam.  It just entertains me mightily that the two franchises overlap in any way.

By this point in the film, when Bond arrives in Kentucky in the care of Pussy Galore, Oddjob just smiles every time he sees Bond, like he's just waiting for the moment where he's finally taken off the leash.  It's creepy, and it's one of the great bad guy performances in the series, with the extra bonus of being entirely non-verbal.  It's all attitude.  Felix Leiter has a real presence in the film, showing up again as part of the team that is following Bond's tracking device.

The scene with Goldfinger and the various mob bosses from around America is very funny, and it's a snapshot of how the Mafia was portrayed in movies at the time.  This is still the pre-"Godfather" world of the mob on film, and they're like Damon Runyon stereotypes cranked up to 11.  They're played mainly for laughs, not for menace, and you get the sense that Goldfinger loves showing off his spiffy automated hideout to them, scaring them like gorillas seeing a Zippo lighter for the first time.

I think it's pretty lovely the way Goldfinger finally reveals his plot to Bond and takes such visible pleasure in watching him add it all up.  It blows my mind that Frobe's entire performance was dubbed by another actor.  He looks so natural delivering his lines.  I like his casual assessment of Goldfinger, telling Galore, "He's quite mad, you know."  The scene between Galore and Bond in the barn is a bit of fisticuffs as foreplay, something that's become familiar in the years since, but it's done well here.  I'm fairly sure I'd call the seduction date rape as depicted, but then again, this is James Bond and the '60s.  They hadn't even invented the term yet.

The films were getting more expensive from film to film, but looking at them now, there's not a lot of what we would consider the earmarks of an expensive movies.  The effects like the rear projection stuff are passable, about as good as could be expected at the time, but not terribly convincing.  For the most part, if they needed to do something in the movie, they just staged it for real.  It's the scale that seemed to get a little bigger from film to film.  There's more of a sense of globetrotting in this one than in the first two, and the scenes of everyone at Fort Knox being knocked out are pretty expansive, with tons of extras. 

I'd argue that the wrap-up for the film is maybe the least fun stuff in the movie, but that's just because after a certain point, there's an air of inevitability to it.  Even so, they try to keep it exciting right up to that final fight onboard the airplane, including a fake-out that makes it look like Bond and Galore die, and Hamilton's great sense of composition and character really does make this one of the most overtly entertaining entries in the entire franchise.

THE TEASE

Right at the start of the closing credits, as Shirley Bassey's vocal kicks back in:

THE END

OF
"GOLDFINGER"

BUT
JAMES BOND
WILL BE BACK

IN
"THUNDERBALL"

THE BOOK

This was the seventh book in Fleming's series, and it's interesting that this is the moment where the books started to evolve into something darker and richer than originally conceived, while it's the moment where the movies made the push into a heightened reality.

The book and the film's stories are roughly the same, with a major change being that in the book, Operation Grand Slam really is just a heist at Fort Knox.  One of the things I love about the choice to have Goldfinger's scheme be something else in the movie is that it must have pulled the rug out from under the people who had already read the books.  It's a nice surprise, and a good example of the adaptations working to really engage the fans of Fleming's novels.

I like the way the book is structured, and while the film follows the same rough shape, in Fleming's book, it's more pronounced.  It's divided into three sections:  "Happenstance," "Coincidence," and "Enemy Action."  That's explained by a quote from Goldfinger in the book:  "Mr Bond, they have a saying in Chicago.  'Once is happenstance.  Twice is coincidence.  The third time, it's enemy action.'  Miami, Sandwich, and now Genea.  I propose to wring the truth out of you." 

There are things that Fleming was able to be clear about that the film only hints it.  Both Tilly Masterson and Pussy Galore are lesbians in Fleming's book.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.  And Pussy Galore's team of burglars are also all lesbians.  While you can certainly read the film that way, they never say it, and I get the feeling they couldn't.  They also wanted to make sure that Bond booked a little sack time with her in the movie, even if he did have to get rough to make it happen.

The way Oddjob dies in the book is the way Goldfinger dies in the movie.  They gave Oddjob a more elaborate death, and it's fitting.  I like seeing how they took an idea from the book and twisted or turned it, though.  The adaptation by Maibaum and Dehn is a smart one, and it both honors Fleming's book and also folds it into this particular spot in the film franchise, using it as a springboard for things that would become standard over the course of the film series.  The smartest thing they did was turn it all up to a just-shy-of-camp level, because that's the tone that made the films a phenomenon.  While I personally think I would prefer that all the Bond films be more like the books, rougher, leaner, and more grounded, I acknowledge that the reason they are still making the movies 50 years later is because they've explored all these different ways of approaching the material, and they've gambled on the zeitgeist several times, and they've mostly been right.

When I want to turn someone on to the books over the films, I introduce them to this book first, because I think most Bond fans know "Goldfinger" pretty well, and so when they read the book, they can see what's different and they can immediately get a sense of how Fleming approached the character over the way the films did it.

James Bond will return...

In the meantime, catch up with our series:

"Dr. No"
"From Russia With Love"

Drew-mcweeny-sm
Drew McWeeny
Film Editor
A respected critic and commentator for fifteen years, Drew McWeeny helped create the online film community as "Moriarty" at Ain't It Cool News, and now proudly leads two budding Film Nerds in their ongoing movie education.
Trending Now on HitFix Boards
Topic Started By Latest Post Replies
sandylewis90
2 months ago
1
sandylewis90
4 months ago
1
Discuss Movies General on HitFix Message Boards »

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Phlogo_talkback_profile

    Playhouse

    'Goldfinger' and 'Thunderball' are tough films for me for exactly the reason you specify: this is when they established the over-sized Bond that would come to identify the series for decades. 'Goldfinger' does it so superbly that it's easy to see why so many choose it as their top Bond film. I enjoy it for what it is but I sometimes cringe because, like you, I would've preferred something that followed up on the excellent portrayal of both Bond and world in 'From Russia With Love'. After 'Goldfinger' they felt the desire to "top" a previous film with each new one and it just snowballed into the outlandishness that was the calling card of the Roger Moore years. But 'Goldfinger' establishes the formula so well that you can't help but appreciate it.

    March 27, 2012 at 2:27AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Fastbak

    "This is our second Felix Leiter in three films, and I'll say this: Cec Linder is no Jack Lord. This guy probably looks more like a real spy would look, but it's a pretty jarring bit of recasting. Connery's such a great big glorious sexist ape in this film. I love how he tells Dink (the very '60s and very cute Margaret Nolan) to run along because it's time for "man talk," complete with a slap on the ass. I'm not sure why my wife dislikes it when I quote him in my daily life. Hmmmmm."

    I took a college course on film music a few years ago and when they talked about John Barry showed the opening credits to GOLDFINGER and they showed a little bit of the movie after that includes this part with Bond slapping the girl in the behind "Man talk." and the whole class, both male and female students laughed out loud! Just the archaic and blatant sexism of the character back then is hilarious to watch now. You couldn't get away with the hero doing and saying anything like that in a movie.

    March 27, 2012 at 3:05AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Noyer

    The thing with GOLDFINGER is that while I respect its place within the Bond series, I've always found it among the more frustrating of the Bond films. Part of it is that I think the filmmakers nailed the tone perfectly with FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, while another part of it is that I honestly have never really cared for Goldfinger as a villian.

    This is particularly true given the place GOLDFINGER has in the series: after two films of building up the threat of SPECTRE, we ditch that plot thread for this fun self contained work. Had I been alive and a kid in 1964, I can only imagine how frustrated I would have been having to wait for another film to see where the SPECTRE plot goes. And given that the next film is THUNDERBALL, very disappointed...

    March 27, 2012 at 9:57AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Eyes

    When Oddjob crushes the golf ball, it's not like he zaps it with heat-ray vision. It still seems within the realm of the possible, but so far at the edge that we aren't quite sure. The suspension of disbelief is low. That comes with the Bond stories' stakes being so high that people are always pushing themselves to extremes. It was easier to accept when a cold war was on.

    There is a fine line between something exaggerated and something that flies in the face of all rationality, like a cartoon. Most of the later Bond movies crossed the line, but without some anchoring to reality they could not have succeeded. I can't watch the post-80s Bond movies because they are so artificial and going through the motions. The world had changed so much since the Bond formula was in stone, but in the 60s and even the 70s you can see that the movies are really part of the moment.

    March 27, 2012 at 10:16AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Fastbak

    Another thing that makes Bond not liking the Beatles hilarious is the guy who gives Bond an education about gold at dinner is played by the same actor who plays the passenger the Beatles annoy in the train in the beginning of A HARD DAY'S NIGHT!

    March 27, 2012 at 10:34AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    nick_r

    Those two scenes you described with Dink and Jill just make me cringe. I just can't be amused by the casual sexism in this movie and other early Bonds, any more than I'd be amused by casual racism. (I don't think anyone's chuckling today at Ian Fleming's description of the bad guys in Live and Let Die as "dumb black apes.") Yes, both prejudices were more or less socially acceptable to a lot of people at the time, and that's too bad.

    The Fleming books definitely had their share of sexism and racism, but the difference between the books and the early movies was that Fleming actually paired Bond with women and minorities who could hold their own, and who wouldn't let him be dismissive toward them. With the possible exception of Honey Ryder, the female characters in the early Bond films were mostly meant to be playthings for Bond -- easy conquests, or targets of humiliation. It wasn't until On Her Majesty's Secret Service that they finally brought in a female co-star whom the audience was actually meant to respect. (Comparatively, look at Gala Brand in Moonraker, written several years before the first film came out, who is a great physical and mental match for Bond and even rejects him romantically in the end.)

    March 27, 2012 at 12:25PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      James McMahon Well, the bad guy characters that Ian Flemig created in Live & Let Die for the scene in which he described them as "dumb black apes" really WERE dumb, and "black" is factual, so there's no prejudice there, and as for "apes" that's only racist if you think it is. For instance, look no further than Drew's review above where he refers to SEAN CONNERY as "a great big glorious sexist ape." Unless you're suggesting that Drew is racist against Scotsmen. "Ape" was a much more widely used term back then to mean a thug or bully or an idiot.

      You've got to remember the society and time in which Ian Fleming was writing, and not attribute to him alone, the things that were common in society at that time, which may strike us today as improper. Who knows what things we're doing today that will be looked at askance 50 years from now. Yeah. I said "askance." And I'm sticking with it.

      May 4, 2012 at 4:31PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    EricJCohen

    I always thought that GOLDFINGER was the best of the "OTT" Bond films. Just pure, escapist entertainment. Although it is a bit eye opening reading the novel AFTER having seen the film (and a bit cringe inducing coming from a 21st Century perspective. I guess Ian Fleming didn't believe in "true" lesbianism and felt it was a defiant product of the suffragette movement. "Quaint" also was his approach to race). But I do the admire Fleming's attempts to bring some psychology to Bond at this point in the book's series although I prefer his MOONRAKER over his GOLDFINGER (while the film MOONRAKER is nowhere near as good as the film GOLDFINGER). Another interesting thing for me is this where is the filmmakers begin to "soften" Bond as a character (during the Connery years). Becoming more and more of that suave, slick, witty character than the somewhat brutish, arguably more complex chap he was in Dr. No and From Russia With Love.

    March 27, 2012 at 3:17PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    David D.

    The last time I saw the film I noticed something startling. From the beginning of the raid on Fort Knox to the line "What kept you?" James Bond doesn't utter A SINGLE WORD. Nothing. No dialogue from the hero WHATSOEVER in what, fifteen, seventeen minutes? That is absolutely inconceivable today.

    March 27, 2012 at 7:59PM EST Reply to Comment
    • A_monty_talkback_profile

      Monty Jack Plus, 007 has virtually NOTHING to do in a heroic sense for pretty much the entire second half of the film...he's the villain's hostage for all that time. That'd NEVER happen today...Bond would be shooting machine guns and leaping off exploding buildings and kicking ass for the entire last reel. Only Connery could play Bond so that he managed to seem totally calm, cool and in-control despite the fact that he does pretty much NOTHING for almost half the movie.

      March 28, 2012 at 10:05AM EST
  • Mp

    MotionPicturesComics

    I love this series, Drew! Goldfinger has long been my very favorite Bond film. It has everything that's great and wonderful about the Bond films: an incredible theme song, a gorgeous and ridiculously-named woman, an iconic villain, a menacing henchman, a preposterous death-trap, great action and witty dialogue. Sometimes I laugh with the film ("I told the stewardess liquor for three") and sometimes I laugh at it (the instantaneous collapsing into unconsciousness of the hundreds of Fort Knox soldiers and bystanders, something rendered only more ludicrous when you realize that they were all FAKING yet still collapsed to the ground in perfectly choreographed synchronicity) but I love it through and through. (OK, with the slight exception of Bond's they'd-definitely-call-it-rape-today "seduction" of Pussy Galore...) But Mr. Connery's delivery of the line "I must be dreaming..." is perfection indeed.

    March 27, 2012 at 10:39PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Yodachilliresize_bigger_talkback_profile

    BigAl6ft6

    My favourite bit in the whole movie is when Bond throws the gold brick at Oddjob and it just bounces off him as he smiles and there's a one second "Oh shit!" reaction shot of Bond that may be one of the biggest laughs in the entire series.

    March 28, 2012 at 1:06AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Fastbak Another great bit is the old lady with the machine gun! Alfred Hitchcock even said he wished he thought of that!

      March 28, 2012 at 11:04AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Fastbak

    I also agree with you about the hilarity of the gangsters in the rumpus room scene, Drew. They're always make me laugh "Hey what are ya tryin' to pull Goldfinger?" "I don't do business with Chicago!"

    March 28, 2012 at 4:46PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Me_talkback_profile

    Roadshow

    I have always been unable to understand the love this entry in the series gets.
    I appreciate that (as someone born in the '80s) I have always come to this movie from a different cultural perspective and with different expectations of movies but I am mystified as to Goldfinger's popularity.

    Granted there are certainly iconice moments, as Drew has pointed out, but they can't overcome the awful sense of inertia generated by the film.

    For example, the golfing scene is INTERMINABLE. I'm sure it's about 10 minutes but in my mind, it's 30. A 10 minute scene of men playing golf (Even if Bond is frustrating Goldfinger's cheating) is terribly uncinematic.

    Second, the hero of this film is Pussy Galore; it is her choices and her actions that defeat Goldfinger. Bond (as other commenters have pointed out) really does nothing in the second half of the film.
    And to add insult to injury, she is convinced to make this choice after a rough tumble in the hay with Bond.
    The idea that the entire film turns on the fact that a woman (a lesbian!) cannot resist Bond's charm and so she wrecks the entire plan?
    Ridciulous and anti-climactic.

    I'm really glad Drew is doing this series and I'm tempted to seek out the books (Which I've never reead) because of it but I just had to get my anger at this film out!!
    *

    April 27, 2012 at 6:39AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    James McMahon

    Hi yet again, Drew. Still totally loving these reviews. Keep up the good work.

    I must have read nearly a hundred reviews of each of these films, but you manage to say something new, and in such an entertaining way. You obviously have great affection for these early Bond films, as I do, too.

    You mentioned that the title credits end with an image of fire on the “skin of the last girl.” I just wanted to mention, there was only one girl used throughout the credits, and if you didn’t know, you’ll like the fact that it’s Margaret Nolan, who plays Dink in the poolside scene with Bond which immediately follows the titles sequence.

    You also mention that Bond is captured in Switzerland at Auric Enterprises because he rushes to see if Tilly Masterson is OK. He shows a similar soft heartedness toward a women in the scene that follows when he breaks free from his vehicle escorts in the motor convoy returning him to Auric Enterprises and makes a mad dash for escape. An old woman toting a machine gun steps out of a guard house to block his way. She directs an ineffectual spray of rounds at the DB5’s windscreen, but Bond veers away rather than run her down to escape, and in consequence, he’s captured. The rest of the film would have gone very differently had Bond truly been the cold hearted killer he’s often made out to be.

    May 2, 2012 at 6:18PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    James McMahon

    Hi Drew. One more thought. You mentioned that in the novel both Tilly Masterton (note the spelling. It was changed to “Masterson” for the movie) and Pussy are lesbians, but that it’s only hinted at in the movie. The most overt sign of that was when Bond first meets Pussy on Goldfinger’s jet and attempts to chat her up. She tells him he can lay off the charm because she’s “immune.”

    But you didn’t mention in your review of From Russia With Love that Colonel Rosa Klebb is also a lesbian in Fleming’s book and that the film makers tried to retain that in the movie, too. They were a little more obvious about it than they were with Pussy in Goldfinger,too.

    When Klebb interviews Tatiana she complements her on her beauty and trails her hand across the seated Tatiana’s leg, pausing to rest it on her knee before continuing. Tatiana is clearly upset by the gesture.

    I’m looking forward to your review of You Only Live Twice.

    May 2, 2012 at 6:27PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web