Why is Goldfinger the odd film out?
JayCobb1045
Posts: 79MI6 Agent
I was talking about the Bond films with someone who enjoys them, but is not an avid follower, and they asked me a question I didn't have a good answer for - why did the producers stick Goldfinger in when they did, in the middle of a set of films that otherwise has SPECTRE as either tangentially or directly framed as the villain.
DN, FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS, and DAF are all Bond vs SPECTRE. We have all heard of the Blofeld Trilogy, but I for one have never heard of the SPECTRE Sextet. The next time I have 12 hours to spare I think I'll sit down and watch those six in a row, leaving Goldfinger out.
It is my understanding that the producers wanted to lead out with Thunderball, but because of McClory problems, they opened with Dr. No and went from there. Regardless, it is clear at least by FRWL that they were interested in drawing the SPECTRE connection between the first two, as they mention as much in the dialogue. They know they have Thunderball in the wings once legal troubles are ironed out, and they're at least aware of other Fleming stories that involve Blofeld - so why break up an otherwise tidy series of films with an odd entry about a random villain that isn't connected?
Any theories or actual answers are welcome!
DN, FRWL, TB, YOLT, OHMSS, and DAF are all Bond vs SPECTRE. We have all heard of the Blofeld Trilogy, but I for one have never heard of the SPECTRE Sextet. The next time I have 12 hours to spare I think I'll sit down and watch those six in a row, leaving Goldfinger out.
It is my understanding that the producers wanted to lead out with Thunderball, but because of McClory problems, they opened with Dr. No and went from there. Regardless, it is clear at least by FRWL that they were interested in drawing the SPECTRE connection between the first two, as they mention as much in the dialogue. They know they have Thunderball in the wings once legal troubles are ironed out, and they're at least aware of other Fleming stories that involve Blofeld - so why break up an otherwise tidy series of films with an odd entry about a random villain that isn't connected?
Any theories or actual answers are welcome!
Comments
To say nothing of explicitly mentioning and defining SPECTRE in DN.
It has long been my belief that they didn't have Goldfinger with SPECTRE for the simple reason that they feared losing casual fans. Face it: aside from Bond, how many film series (not TV series) have had the same hero facing the same bad guy organization over and over and over? Remember, at least two ideas for having Indiana Jones fight the Nazis again, plus Nazis in Temple of Doom were all nixed because it would just come across as having Indy fighting the same bunch of guys over and over again. Likewise, I think this is why you never saw an effort to revisit Quantum in SF.
"Same Bad Guys Fatigue" really DID hurt a few series--even TV series--that opened with a bang and went out with a whimper. Unless we are explicitly told the character is a specialist against a particular group of bad guys (think Jack Bauer, and to a lesser extent, Luke Skywalker), the plot point starts to get old. At no point is Bond ever told in the film series to be part of MI6's Anti-SPECTRE Section (or whatever), so him fighting the same bad guy organization would inevitably get stale. You needed to have him prove his mettle against someone else.
Since a great deal of people who watched Goldfinger whom I asked about tend to say "that's where he takes a break from fighting the guy with the cat and stops the Chinese from nuking Fort Knox" (never mind that they're Koreans--it's only mentioned in the film that Oddjob [who is mute and communicates via fairly universal hand and arm gestures, so the Chinese could probably understand him] is Korean, Mr. Ling is heavily implied to be Chinese, and most people made the jump that the mooks were working just as much for Mr. Ling as Auric Goldfinger). A lot assumed Goldfinger was working for the North Koreans or the Chinese, especially given that he says he's bound for Cuba in a US Government-marked aircraft, implying the Cubans were given a "don't shoot him down" order by, well, somebody (likely the Soviets, who were working in concert with the North Koreans--remember, Kim Il-Sung is nominally pro-Soviet until 1973).
In sum, I think "taking a break from fighting the guy with the cat" probably worked out well in the end. It avoids "Same Bad Guys Fatigue" and Goldfinger's actual plan (destroying the American gold market while profiting off it) is also pretty coherent and simple compared to some of the SPECTRE plans.
They didn't have the rights to CR.
LALD had potential racial problems.
TB was in a legal quagmire.
FYEO was a collection of short stories.
TSWLM had been critically savaged.
OHMSS was only published that month.
YOLT wasn't finished.
TMWTGG hadn't been written.
Leaving MR, DAF, and GF. GF had a wonderful villain, memorable henchman, opportunities to shoot in such locations as Switzerland and Fort Knox, a bonkers plot.... making it a natural choice.
Good point, although since Ian Fleming was still alive and in contact with the filmmakers (who wanted to keep at least somewhat to the plot), they had to know that DAF was something of a lead-in to OHMSS and therefore may have wanted it on hold. MR? Well, there were so many "secret agents fighting ex-Nazis" films out there in the late 1950s-early 1960s that they probably wanted to avoid a cliche. Still, I think the question JayCobb1045 is asking is more or less "why wasn't Auric Goldfinger a member of SPECTRE?" vs. "why did we see GF when we did?" After all, the novel Goldfinger was a member of SMERSH.
Ugh, sorry! Shows you what four hours of sleep gets you.
The book? I wonder why... ?:)
Thank goodness for that! {[]
No, the Film.
Still, DAF is definitely canon. It's an official Eon film starring Connery & co, based on Fleming (well, the first part anyway), wonderfully scored by John Barry. It has weaknesses like any other Bond film, but it is undeniably canon whatever Mr Glen (who didn't work on it) says.
Well, that makes more sense!
I also agree with this. Perhaps it's simply not part of his "personal canon" (if you're a Star Wars or Star Trek fan, you'll know what that term means), however.
By the way, I also agree with Sir Hillary Bray. Having a SPECTRE-associated Auric Goldfinger, as he appeared on the big screen, would kinda ruin the complete megalomaniacal psychosis and feeling of total control over everything he does inherent to the character (whom you could argue was the first character to radically deviate from the books in persona). I just couldn't see him answering to anyone but himself.
orders .
- Dalkowski's "take a break from the same bad guy" theory was what I always assumed, with a dash of avoiding McClory tossed in for good measure. On a personal level, I see it both ways. I like the idea of taking a break, but I also really love the idea of a massive six picture story arc (with sub villains along the way of course). It's almost like a video game with level bosses along the way and the big boss waiting at the end.
- I don't have as much of a problem with Goldfinger being a member of SPECTRE as many of you seem to. I think he could have existed as a sort of Le Chiffre type - SPECTRE's financier who launders all their money through gold bullion or some such. With him handling the money, he could have retained an air of superiority and independence while still being a part of the organization.
- I've heard Glen's comment about DAF before and I just don't get it. Does anyone remember the context?
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/skyfall-bluray-doesnt-match
to pay for agents etc.
When I think about it, Goldfinger does separate itself quite a lot from the established formula created by DN & FRWL. I especially love it because it is essentially Auric's film - we spend as much time with him as we do with Bond unlike most of the other main villains from the Connery era who were held off a lot until the 3rd act and/or shrouded in secrecy.
DN he saw as basically a mystery story (Strangways & Trueblood have been killed- why? Bond is assigned to find out) and FRWL as a suspense story (the audience see most of the plot before Bond does, and want to see how he gets out of it). GF he saw as a duel between two supermen, and he wrote the script that way.
*Example- In Fleming's novel of GF, there's more detail on the golf game and less on the raid on Fort Knox. Maibaum reversed that- in screen terms the Fort Knox scenes have more impact than a game of golf, though it is possible to write those the other way.
I absolutely love the golf game in the film, I almost find it relaxing to watch :007)
Over pretty quick.