Friday 25 March 2011

Blogalongabond #3: Goldfinger

4 comments:

  1. Well, 'Goldfinger' is a massively popular film, both at the time of release and now, when it seems that many people still believe it to be the best of the entire canon.

    Personally, I find this flaccid little tale something of a damp squib after the magnificence of 'From Russia With Love', mainly because nothing actually happens for a good hour or so after the pre-title sequence. Whether this has anything to do with it being the first in the series not to be directed by Terence Young, I don’t know, but there are plenty of really wonderful-looking shots and sequences which tend to suggest that Guy Hamilton wasn’t the problem. However, “iconic” shots aside (Jill, lifeless, painted in gold and laid on a bed, Bond tied to a golden table, being menaced by a laser, etc.), there is very little going on in this film until the final few minutes, by which time the momentum has been lost.

    It is not, be any stretch, a bad film, per se, but it is one which relies on John Barry far too much to get it out of trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I should add that it could be worse, it could be 'Thunderball' or 'You Only Live Twice'. But they are waiting in your future.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I've never understood the passion for 'Goldfinger'.

    Bond gets locked up for half the film because he gets scared of a big mirror, and it's Felix, Pussy and the bomb defusing bloke who actually save the day.

    Connery gets doubled or is acting to back projection for a lot of it as well.

    I'll go and spam another media now.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks James, I should check this more regularly for comments and suchlike. As I stated, the plot is utter bollocks, but it's imbued with an audacious zest that glosses over its many shortcomings. Basically, I always enjoy watching it.

    ReplyDelete