The brilliance of Goldfinger...Explain please?

Elvedetto

Afternoon everyone! I joined this forum to get in touch with fellow Bond fans, but also to ask a simple question:

Goldfinger is mostly in everyones personal top 3. Can anyone explain this? I get it is the first time the DB5 appears and all, but i think the storyline is just so weak... Maybe its just me ) Hope some fans can inspire me to like this movie!

Chriscoop

For me it has many iconic elements and some great dialogue, the score is fantastic and it set a tone that later bond films would follow. The film borrows from the book, but isn't a faithful production, I find the book has regular lulls and I'm not as invested in its story once bond becomes goldfingers aide.
But just think, the Miami scenes, Oddjob, pussygalore, the db5 scenes, bond and Oddjob's showdown.... Iconic bond moments set to an incredible score -{

BTW goldfinger is not one of my most loved or watched, and personally I can't rank the films..... I love them all.

Number24

I think it's because Goldfinger was the first time they found the Bond formula. Many (most?) Bond movies have followed the same formula since, some better and others not. Goldfinger was perhaps when Bondmania struck and James Bond became a phenomena and not just a series of spy flicks.

Chriscoop

^ that too

heartbroken_mr_drax

I am part of the group that doesn't rate the film that highly. I agree it's a classic and it is brilliant - I've just tired of watching it (again and again, a typical Bond fan problem!) mostly because the production style, Bond not doing anything and the boredom setting-in after arriving in Kentucky. I also don't like little things like the overuse of sets and green screens when not needed (Miami hotel for example).

Number24

I think objectively speaking (if that's possible) it's a mediocre Bond film. FRWL is in my opinion a better movie. It's the context that makes it special - the first huge Bond movie and the first to use the formula.

Elvedetto

Thanks for the stories so far. What annoys me the most in the entire movie, and maybe im being controversial as hell, but that is the gold painting scene. Absolutely stupid ) it never returns in the entire movie, he never kills someone in the same fashion again, its never mentioned...just absolutely stupid ) but the whole movie would never make it in my top 10, think not even in the top 20 but really love all the stories from fellow bond fans

Dutchfinger

Elvedetto wrote:

Afternoon everyone! I joined this forum to get in touch with fellow Bond fans, but also to ask a simple question:

Goldfinger is mostly in everyones personal top 3. Can anyone explain this? I get it is the first time the DB5 appears and all, but i think the storyline is just so weak... Maybe its just me ) Hope some fans can inspire me to like this movie!

Hi Meran! Welcome aboard! Good to see you around over here as well !

I think the power of Goldfinger lies in the complete picture it forms. Connery at his peak, a brilliant villian and henchmen, great production design with Fort Knox, the classic sound track, the DB5, Pussy Galore, the iconic pre title sequence, the golden chick on the bed. But above all, that Goldfinger did most elements we now consider 'a typical Bond film' for the first time. It established the formula. And while the plot is far from deep, the film is great fun from start to finish and I feel it deserves a lot of the praise it gets :007)

Firemass

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

I also don't like little things like the overuse of sets and green screens when not needed (Miami hotel for example).

Those are awful! Something I never noticed until blu-ray.

Nevertheless, Goldfinger will always be the quintessential Bond film. Even if it doesn't hold up in some aspects it still contains all the definitive elements of what makes 007 popular.

The mini-movie pre-title sequence
A classic theme song
Connery in his prime
The Aston Martin with gadgets
Imposing henchman Oddjob
Memorable girl Pussy Galore
Iconic scene of the girl painted gold
...

What does FRWL have that would be memorable or iconic? Not much compared to Goldfinger. Even if FRWL is considered a better Bond film, it still would not be the definitive one.

heartbroken_mr_drax

The comments in here as to why GF is considered iconic are bang on. It's all about setting the formula-standard (not the standard) and GF certainly did that.

Barbel

This is Goldfinger, Mr Elvedetto. All my life I have been in love with its characters, its brilliance, its divine score. I appreciate any enterprise which will increase its stock- which is considerable.

Yes, there are weaknesses which become apparent on multiple viewings (as with most movies) and these are mainly with the plot as well as technology moving on, but it's all carried off with panache. It's a good example of style over substance- "it ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it".

And I agree with what Jeroen says above! {[]

Higgins

If you have to ask .......

Charmed & Dangerous

One thing which hasn't been mentioned is that it also set the blueprint for the humour in the films. Dr No and FRWL are pretty humourless by comparison, but Bond's scenes with Q, his use of one-liners and just the general sense of the cast having a ball, set the pattern for future films. And Connery is just so polished and confident and oozes sex-appeal. -{

thesecretagent

For me it's Connery. He has so much presence, I don't think it's been topped since. I like Odd Job and Goldfinger, the Aston, the women, - I agree the plot drifts off and I'm not a great fan of Pussy and her flying circus. But it's definitely in my top five.

Napoleon Plural

Context counts for a lot. It's a great family film. In that sense, it's like The Sound of Music, The Great Escape, anything you can sit down and enjoy, great scenery, great music and good jokes.

You lose that as solitary viewing, that sense of shared laughter. You want something more intense, usually.

walther p99

The thing about Goldfinger is usually any iconic scene that's talked about from the Golden girl to the laser table happens around the first hour or so, its the last hour in Kentucky that I think tanks the film in my opinion.

Chriscoop

Same with the book walther p99, first half is good, then it lulls for me.

Agent Lee

It's not really one of my favs. I like it a lot, but I've always thought it was a bit overrated. Compared to From Russia With Love, its story isn't nearly as strong, and compared to the rest of Connery's tenure in the role, it's a bit underwhelming in the second half. It gets a lot of credit for establishing the Bond formula (as it good) but I think the formula is improved on immediately in Thunderball, and in many films afterword. To me the most important thing about Goldfinger is that every Bond film after it can be judged by how well it either executes or subverts (or both) its established formula.

Barbel

Slightly off-topic, but this is one instance where the film improves on the book IMHO. Richard Maibaum was very conscious of the book's strengths (Goldfinger himself as a character, for instance, and the symbolic duel (Maibaum's word) between him and Bond) and weaknesses (stealing all the gold from Fort Knox isn't technically possible; Goldfinger's reason for not simply killing Bond at Enterprises Auric is stronger in the film; etc) as he wrote his screenplay.

Mr_Osato

You have to understand the Goldfinger phenomenon if you see when it was made: The movie oozes class, if you look at the locations, the clothes, the DB5. This was a world unknown to so many people. Plus it is such a fun movie. Connery was at his absolute finest here: so in control, comfortable.

Plus like others mentioned, it set the tone for the movies to follow: the PTS, The boombastic theme song, the Bond girls, the Q scenes, again the DB5, the gadgets, the megalomaniac villain, the soundtrack from Barry.

I still love Goldfinger, it is an all time classic with iconic moments.

zaphod99

Number24 wrote:

I think objectively speaking (if that's possible) it's a mediocre Bond film. FRWL is in my opinion a better movie. It's the context that makes it special - the first huge Bond movie and the first to use the formula.

I agree. I'd take FRWL over GF. I love the look and the gloss of GF but the saggy middle is a negative.

Revolver66

I saw Goldfinger at the cinema late last year on a giant screen in Melbourne. Having seen it countless times before, I didn't expect to take anything new from it, but I did. And what I took is just how well made it is. If one can be objective about these things, I would say that it is technically in the best 2 or 3 films made in the series. Now I'm not necessarily saying that it's in my top 2 or 3 (though it is in my top 5 ) but Goldfinger is just so well made. Everything right from the direction, the editing, the score, the production design, and the script is just first class. The character of Bond has never had more of a presence than in Goldfinger, and the title villain is brilliant. Quite possibly the best one in the series. The Fort Knox caper is also ingenius and is one of the best villain schemes. Obviously the film was a smash and became a cultural phenomenon and there are many iconic moments, and these factors definitely play into why Goldfinger is so revered. And there are different reasons as to why Goldfinger did tap into the culture the way that it did, but when you strip everything away, I think you find that the essential reason why the film is a classic is because it is just a great movie. One that came along at the right time, but still a great movie -{

Revolver66

Elvedetto wrote:

Thanks for the stories so far. What annoys me the most in the entire movie, and maybe im being controversial as hell, but that is the gold painting scene. Absolutely stupid ) it never returns in the entire movie, he never kills someone in the same fashion again, its never mentioned...just absolutely stupid ) but the whole movie would never make it in my top 10, think not even in the top 20 but really love all the stories from fellow bond fans

By the way, welcome Elvedetto Out of curiousity, what are your top 3 Bond films?

Gala Brand

It's like a dream. Most of it doesn't make any sense but you carried along with all the crazy scenes. A car with machine guns and an ejector seat! Laser beams! A girl covered in gold (you cannot actually kill somebody that way)! An Asian guy who kills people with his bowler hat! Irradiating Fort Knox. It's like Hitchcock's North by Northwest, another dream-like film with crazy scenes and its own internal logic.

Directors try to duplicate GF (most recently Spectre) but cannot. It's one of those happy accidents where everything came together to produce a great film.

bigzilcho

Goldfinger has flaws, no question. which Bond film hasn't? But its flaws are overwhelmed by the sheer joy of its filmmaking. it has always oozed class and sophistication and set the standard of how a Bond film connects with an audience.

The great Italian director Fellini was a big fan at the time, and its very telling that one of the world's greatest filmmakers responded to the movie like a kid with a shiny toy at Christmas. Which, I think, is the enduring charm of the film: it has always felt like it was made with a sense of sheer fun.

Best film in series? No. But forever enjoyable.


"No. Masterson. Jill Masterson. And she's covered in paint. Gold paint."

Gassy Man

Geez, where to begin?

Goldfinger has one of the strongest storylines of any Bond film. It's character-based rather than merely fill-in-the-blanks plot formula. The ego of the villain, Goldfinger, drives the entire story. He is so inadequate as a man, that only his insatiable desire for gold lifts him out of whatever depression makes his life otherwise miserable. That James Bond is exactly the kind of man he will never be explains why he is so infuriated with Bond.

This is reinforced all throughout the film, from Bond's joke about having an inferiority complex to Goldfinger's murderous rage over being cuckolded to Goldfinger's constant need to cheat in order to measure up against Bond (and then still failing) to his gassing of his rivals only after basking in their admiration of his plan.

Speaking of his plan, it's one of the few in a Bond film that actually is clever. Goldfinger isn't holding the world for ransom or stealing anything -- only he is. In one fell swoop, he stands to completely destabilize the economic systems of the western world. If that isn't inspired, I don't know what is. Moreover, he's aiding the communists in doing it.

The film's iconic characters and playful aesthetic also make it rise well above its contemporaries, as well as every other Bond film. It may seem easy to do jokiness, but it's not. Actors and writers will tell you it's far easier to do drama than comedy. But Goldfinger does both, ablly. It's an adult fairy tale, and in this sense, it captures the spirit of a lot of Fleming's books, which walked that find line between reality and fantasy.

The score is simply pitch perfect, and the directing is right on target -- so much so that Guy Hamilton would never eclipse it in his career.

The actors knock it out of the park, and though I don't care for Cec Linder's Felix Leiter all that much, he serves the purpose of the story.

Lastly, it is sophisticated. It doesn't take sophistication to make something brutally real. That's just copying reality. But to create the world in which Goldfinger takes place and to give it dimension and expression from start to finish is no easy task. One misstep, and the whole thing unfolds, yet Goldfinger -- from its jokes to its clothes to its set ups -- stays on point all the way through. It's a truly adult film, when that word means "for grown ups" rather than pornographic.

Matt S

Excellent post, Gassy Man. It explains why Goldfinger is the ultimate Bond film. No Bond film in decades has come close to what it did.

Revolver66

bigzilcho wrote:

Goldfinger has flaws, no question. which Bond film hasn't? But its flaws are overwhelmed by the sheer joy of its filmmaking. it has always oozed class and sophistication and set the standard of how a Bond film connects with an audience.

The great Italian director Fellini was a big fan at the time, and its very telling that one of the world's greatest filmmakers responded to the movie like a kid with a shiny toy at Christmas. Which, I think, is the enduring charm of the film: it has always felt like it was made with a sense of sheer fun.

Best film in series? No. But forever enjoyable.


"No. Masterson. Jill Masterson. And she's covered in paint. Gold paint."

Apparently Barry's Goldfinger score was Fellini's favourite film score of all time -{

CoolHandBond

To truly grasp the majesty that is GF you really had to be there when it was released. There was only two others to compare it to at that time and the third outing eclipsed both of those in style and adventure. Aside from Felix the casting was impeccable, the plot was brilliant, the action was terrific, the DB5 sublime, the music astounding and Sean was so masterful he was coolness personified.

After 50 odd years it is still a joy to watch, as are all the 1960's Bond's, they really can't be matched by anything that came afterwards.

Napoleon Plural

Gassy Man wrote:

Geez, where to begin?

It's a truly adult film, when that word means "for grown ups" rather than pornographic.

Not that one wouldn't want to see a pornographic Goldfinger, with starring roles for Dink and Jill Masterton in a Texan hayloft/Miami Beach suite.

Napoleon Plural

Oh, and while this might belong on the vinyl thread, it's possible that John Barry's score only really delivers in analogue rather than digital sound - it's the sexy feel of it, whereas digital just cleans everything and strips it off nuance.