Ok, I am all in favour of freespeech and the infamous "IMO" however, I cant let this topic go by without some riposte.
Firstly Jarvio you state it is one of the weaker Bonds, then you say it isn't your favourite...at the risk of sounding literal there is a difference. GF is not my favourite 007 film either, but I appreciate its production levels, the well crafted script and plot, the excellent acting (esp. Connery and Frobe) and the action sequences, which while often short are taut and frequently vicious.
The parts that drag as you call it (and i am assuming you mean the extended sequences in Switzerland and the Kentucky stud farm) are integral to the development of the plot. They also build the relationship between villian and hero which has seldom been bettered. Since GF every villian has an "audience" with Bond where the two protagonists meet and assess each other. Some are done well (LTK when Bond is entertained at Sanchez's villa, TMWTGG at the kick boxing tournament, OPY and the sumptious dinner feast) but none match the 4 or 5 scenes of interplay between 007 and GF.
Bond's character is vulnerable in GF (as it was in DN and FRWL) and this is the appeal, also something most reviewers liked about CR. He is smart, quick witted and physically able, but he is still prone to make mistakes. It was almost the last time we saw a "human" Bond. By TB he was almost as much a gadget as Qs inventions. That works fine in the o.t.t. world of MR and TSWLM, but not when you have Connery prowling the film like a caged tiger, with a barbed comment, a knowing glance and a raffish air. He isn't, as you say, out of character; this is his character. It's the closest anyone has come to Fleming's Bond. The fact he is beaten up and struggles to solve each part of the puzzle appeals much more than the straight forward plotting of the '70s.
Neither GF or Oddjob are weak villians. I find it strange you say the scripting is goo. It is precisely the scripting which illuminates potentailly one-dimensional characters (like the mute Korean bagman Oddjob).
In fairness your comments about the climax are worth a cent or two; both the bomb deactivation scene and the slightly rushed fight with GF do seem a little undercooked. I think this is partly an editorial problem. Peter Hunt was a great cutter, but he does have a tendancy to overextend some action scenes and the bomb sequence is one of them. The climatic fight is much too short, GF is a huge man and Bond deals with him much too easily. I always felt this was a disappointing finish to a great film (tho' i the death scene is marvellous)
Finally, I think GF needs more than anything to be understood as the benchmark for all that came after it. Several commentators have said that AVTAK has similar plotting (it does) and Ive mentioned the 1-2-1 between 007 and his adversary. But lets not forget the world of James Bond simply could not be the same again when he strips off his wetsuit to reveal a tuxedo, when a guard is thrown from an Aston Martin by an ejector seat, when Bond is nearly castrated by a laser beam, when Shirley Eaton is covered in gold paint, the list goes on and on......
I think overtime, GF isn't going to rank as many people's favourite Bond film, but I do believe most observers will recognise it as the film which developed and drove the series further than any other.
but I appreciate its production levels, the well crafted script and plot, the excellent acting (esp. Connery and Frobe) and the action sequences, which while often short are taut and frequently vicious.
{[] You have no idea how much it delights me reading things like this.
The parts that drag as you call it (and i am assuming you mean the extended sequences in Switzerland and the Kentucky stud farm) are integral to the development of the plot. They also build the relationship between villian and hero which has seldom been bettered.
Absolutely. In fact, my single favourite scene in the film was the scene in which Bond and Goldfinger discussed Goldfinger's scheme. This was a scene in which nothing much happened, save for two brilliant actors delivering the performances of their lives.
By TB he was almost as much a gadget as Qs inventions.
Although I concede that in the post-GF era, Bond was less 'vulnerable' than he was in in DN-GF (save for OHMSS of course), I have never thought of Bond as a gadget or a superhero. I think that to ever describe Bond as a gadget is a step too far.
Neither GF or Oddjob are weak villians. I find it strange you say the scripting is goo. It is precisely the scripting which illuminates potentailly one-dimensional characters (like the mute Korean bagman Oddjob).
Indeed. Oddjob could have been a nothing villain, but instead he became IMO one of the most interesting and greatest henchmen of all time. It's worthing noting that many, if not most, cinematic henchmen owe a debt to him. Jaws, one of my favourite villains, certainly owed a debt to him.
In fairness your comments about the climax are worth a cent or two; both the bomb deactivation scene and the slightly rushed fight with GF do seem a little undercooked.
I don't agree on this. The bomb deactivation scnee was IMO appropiately tense, while the fight with Goldfinger (whilst short) was extremely skillful and a great measurement of Bond's abilities.
I think overtime, GF isn't going to rank as many people's favourite Bond film
How can you say this? GF, the Citizen Kane of Bond films not be a favourite of many people? I am shocked to my very core that this may be so.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
The parts that drag as you call it (and i am assuming you mean the extended sequences in Switzerland and the Kentucky stud farm) are integral to the development of the plot. They also build the relationship between villian and hero which has seldom been bettered.
Absolutely. In fact, my single favourite scene in the film was the scene in which Bond and Goldfinger discussed Goldfinger's scheme. This was a scene in which nothing much happened, save for two brilliant actors delivering the performances of their lives. :
By TB he was almost as much a gadget as Qs inventions.
Although I concede that in the post-GF era, Bond was less 'vulnerable' than he was in in DN-GF (save for OHMSS of course), I have never thought of Bond as a gadget or a superhero. I think that to ever describe Bond as a gadget is a step too far.:'([/quote]
I think i described him as almost as much a gadget
I think overtime, GF isn't going to rank as many people's favourite Bond film
How can you say this? GF, the Citizen Kane of Bond films not be a favourite of many people? I am shocked to my very core that this may be so. :'
I think at the start of my dialouge i mentioned something about the term "favourite", which is a subjective opinion not an objective one; objectively GF is IMO (how i hate that!!!) the best 007 movie by a long way, i even ranked it that on this site, but for different personal reasons I prefer other Bond films. It may be 007s Citizen Kane, but that doesn't stop me liking OHMSS or Casablanca more.
Comments
Firstly Jarvio you state it is one of the weaker Bonds, then you say it isn't your favourite...at the risk of sounding literal there is a difference. GF is not my favourite 007 film either, but I appreciate its production levels, the well crafted script and plot, the excellent acting (esp. Connery and Frobe) and the action sequences, which while often short are taut and frequently vicious.
The parts that drag as you call it (and i am assuming you mean the extended sequences in Switzerland and the Kentucky stud farm) are integral to the development of the plot. They also build the relationship between villian and hero which has seldom been bettered. Since GF every villian has an "audience" with Bond where the two protagonists meet and assess each other. Some are done well (LTK when Bond is entertained at Sanchez's villa, TMWTGG at the kick boxing tournament, OPY and the sumptious dinner feast) but none match the 4 or 5 scenes of interplay between 007 and GF.
Bond's character is vulnerable in GF (as it was in DN and FRWL) and this is the appeal, also something most reviewers liked about CR. He is smart, quick witted and physically able, but he is still prone to make mistakes. It was almost the last time we saw a "human" Bond. By TB he was almost as much a gadget as Qs inventions. That works fine in the o.t.t. world of MR and TSWLM, but not when you have Connery prowling the film like a caged tiger, with a barbed comment, a knowing glance and a raffish air. He isn't, as you say, out of character; this is his character. It's the closest anyone has come to Fleming's Bond. The fact he is beaten up and struggles to solve each part of the puzzle appeals much more than the straight forward plotting of the '70s.
Neither GF or Oddjob are weak villians. I find it strange you say the scripting is goo. It is precisely the scripting which illuminates potentailly one-dimensional characters (like the mute Korean bagman Oddjob).
In fairness your comments about the climax are worth a cent or two; both the bomb deactivation scene and the slightly rushed fight with GF do seem a little undercooked. I think this is partly an editorial problem. Peter Hunt was a great cutter, but he does have a tendancy to overextend some action scenes and the bomb sequence is one of them. The climatic fight is much too short, GF is a huge man and Bond deals with him much too easily. I always felt this was a disappointing finish to a great film (tho' i the death scene is marvellous)
Finally, I think GF needs more than anything to be understood as the benchmark for all that came after it. Several commentators have said that AVTAK has similar plotting (it does) and Ive mentioned the 1-2-1 between 007 and his adversary. But lets not forget the world of James Bond simply could not be the same again when he strips off his wetsuit to reveal a tuxedo, when a guard is thrown from an Aston Martin by an ejector seat, when Bond is nearly castrated by a laser beam, when Shirley Eaton is covered in gold paint, the list goes on and on......
I think overtime, GF isn't going to rank as many people's favourite Bond film, but I do believe most observers will recognise it as the film which developed and drove the series further than any other.
Absolutely. In fact, my single favourite scene in the film was the scene in which Bond and Goldfinger discussed Goldfinger's scheme. This was a scene in which nothing much happened, save for two brilliant actors delivering the performances of their lives.
Although I concede that in the post-GF era, Bond was less 'vulnerable' than he was in in DN-GF (save for OHMSS of course), I have never thought of Bond as a gadget or a superhero. I think that to ever describe Bond as a gadget is a step too far.
Indeed. Oddjob could have been a nothing villain, but instead he became IMO one of the most interesting and greatest henchmen of all time. It's worthing noting that many, if not most, cinematic henchmen owe a debt to him. Jaws, one of my favourite villains, certainly owed a debt to him.
I don't agree on this. The bomb deactivation scnee was IMO appropiately tense, while the fight with Goldfinger (whilst short) was extremely skillful and a great measurement of Bond's abilities.
Yes, you are right...have a mint julip on me....
Although I concede that in the post-GF era, Bond was less 'vulnerable' than he was in in DN-GF (save for OHMSS of course), I have never thought of Bond as a gadget or a superhero. I think that to ever describe Bond as a gadget is a step too far.:'([/quote]
I think i described him as almost as much a gadget
I think at the start of my dialouge i mentioned something about the term "favourite", which is a subjective opinion not an objective one; objectively GF is IMO (how i hate that!!!) the best 007 movie by a long way, i even ranked it that on this site, but for different personal reasons I prefer other Bond films. It may be 007s Citizen Kane, but that doesn't stop me liking OHMSS or Casablanca more.
Based on her sheer disregard for your inquiry 'Nique, I think you have your answer!
-Roger Moore