›

Then and Now; This Week - Spectre

24567…20

Comments

  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,872
    Like many, I too saw FRWL for the first time as a teenager, who had already been introduced to the Bond films via the 70's and 80's Roger Moore films. I always liked it. It was thrilling. Dark, dangerous. An espionage film, with a fantastic story and intriguing characters. But it was probably lost on me a little because I was used to the action, the stunts, the Roger Mooreness that I had become used to.
    I never thought it was a bad film, heaven forbid. Just a different type of Bond film. More adult.
    Today FRWL could easily be my favourite Bond film. It's always a treat to watch. A film I think is an example of near perfect film making. I'm not even bothered by the helicopter attack and Spectre boat chase. They don't ruin the film.
    This is a Bond film that is very, very hard to match. A true classic.

    Then - 0
    Now - 8
  • BeatlesSansEarmuffsBeatlesSansEarmuffs
    Posts: 3,564
    As I’ve mentioned earlier… my first Bond films were a triple bill of DN, GF and TB at around the age of 12. At about that time I was avidly collecting the Bond trading cards that came with an inedible stick of gum…yes, I threw away the gum…so I knew all the highlights of FRWL, but never actually saw the film itself until many years later. At that time, in the early ‘80s, I was working on Berkeley CA’s fabled Telegraph Avenue, and a small repertory cinema there held a Bond retrospective, over six weeks, of all the 007 films that had been released up until then. On one particular weekday evening each week, two films would be shown in a fairly random order. The only Bond films I had yet to see were OHMSS, YOLT, and FRWL. You’d better believe I took advantage of the opportunity! It really didn’t matter what film was paired with the missing (from my experience) ones, I went and saw them all. All except the double bill with MR, I really didn’t like that one! My attitude toward FRWL at the time was: “That’s the way a true Bond film is SUPPOSED to be! Why can’t the rest of them be like that? What’s wrong with this Roger Moore clown anyway?”

    Okay, so my attitude has evolved just a bit since then. (But still, Roger, you DID dress up as a clown!) At the time, I nearly took FRWL for granted. Just one more to tick off on my bucket list and why can’t they all be like that? Today I have FRWL ranked as my favorite of all Bond films, and see the first four Connery entries as the cinematic equivalent of nirvana. I have come to find some value in even the lesser Moore films, as less IS more after all…but still, to my mind, Sean Connery IS James Bond (just as they told us in all those ads back in the day) and FRWL is the toppermost of the poppermost to me!

    THEN: 0
    NOW: 9

  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    Keep 'em coming chaps.
    BeatlesSansEarmuffs wrote:

    Today I have FRWL ranked as my favorite of all Bond films, and see the first four Connery entries as the cinematic equivalent of nirvana...

    Darn tooting!

    Any more views before we move on to Goldfinger?

  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    All righty then, let's me on to Goldfinger, but not before we've had a look at FRWL's results;

    Then: 0
    Now: 9

    A convincing win there. From Russia With Love is such an undulated joy.

    Goldfinger

    Then –
    I can't remember when I watched Goldfinger first. It’s part of the pop Zeitgeist. It was, however, when I was very young. Goldfinger was part of my childhood. And I expect it was for many a young boy. I did not know the name James Bond, and all its fabulous connotations at that time, but I definitely remember Goldfinger, with its larger than life vibe.

    When I caught the Bond bug, after seeing The World Is Not Enough in the cinemas, I proceeded to get all the Bond VHS's, starting with the four mentioned above. Then when my pocket money recovered, I bought both Goldfinger and The Spy Who Loved Me. (Buy Bond, Get Bond Free!) and that confirmed it: Goldfinger was really 24 carat gold!

    Now –
    As I've gotten older, Goldfinger has slipped down the pecking order. It was a cast iron top five Bond film, but now it's sitting outside the top ten. Casino Royale and Skyfall have both pushed Goldfinger out. It's not that I don't enjoy Goldfinger as much, but just other films have surpassed it. On repeat viewings the pace in the second half is an issue, but Goldfinger cemented James Bond as a pop culture icon. And for that, I am eternally grateful.

    Then - 1
    Now - 0
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I first saw GOLDFINGER in the cinema in 1981, at the age of 15. I had seen both Lazenby and Moore on the big screen before, but this was my first Connery film and I was blown away by absolutely everything.

    The PTS has never been surpassed. Barry and Bassey are both on top form. Connery is at his coolest. The sets are beautiful. The cinematography is glittering with a magic 60s sparkle that was and is no more. Oddjob is one of the best henchmen. Nothing needs to be said about the countless iconic moments and lines.

    I love this film as much today as the first time I saw it.

    Then-Now: It s a draw.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    I'm with you @royale65. I just watched GOLDFINGER last week for the first time in a few years.

    Then-
    I can't remember when I saw it first, but it was certainly after I first saw FRWL and after seeing many of Moore's 70's Bond films. So I immediately compared it to those. I much preferred it to FRWL at the time (being a lot younger and less worldly) but did not think it was as good as Moore's films (because the gadgets seemed more outdated and everything seemed less modern). So I enjoyed it, but not all all that much. I really liked the Aston and Oddjob, but did not really appreciate all the other iconic scenes as much.

    Now-
    Unfortunately, it has fallen down the ranks with each successive viewing for me. I compare it to the more outlandish Bond films (since it has ample gadgetry in it) and for me, the newer films (particularly Moore's later turns) are superior in that respect. As a pure thriller however, it is beaten by FRWL (which is now a top 2 film for me), CR, & even SF. I too find the 2nd half quite dull, except for the great Oddjob/Bond fight in the end, so sadly this iconic film is somewhat mediocre for me. I don't really find Connery all that impressive here either, and think he's better in DN, FRWL, TB & even DAF (despite toupee and porky appearance). I've tried to love it, but just can't somehow.

    Then - 3
    Now - 0
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited June 2015 Posts: 12,459
    Jumping in to quickly add my tally for FRWL - one of my very favorite Bond films! (and novels)

    Then -
    First viewing on video, in the late 70's I think or early 80's. I never caught it on TV back in those decades. I loved it. But then, I have always enjoyed old movies. So the hats on men, very archaic attitude, everybody smoking, etc. didn't faze me. I thought Sean was great and so was Daniela. It seemed like a gritty, suspenseful spy film - not a raucous, fantastic adventure (I love both kinds of Bond films, though). I got it, right away, and loved the atmosphere, writing, the acting, the whole shebang.

    Now -
    I still love it and appreciate it just as much. I honestly do not feel a difference in my estimation of the film from back then and now. I can't have a tie, can I? Since I am more seasoned myself (and marinated!) I'll have to choose NOW if I must choose.

    Then - 1

    Now - (I never realized we were tallying these until someone else mentioned it!)

    WAIT - I just read @Thunderfinger had a draw. I am changing mine to a tie, also. Tie/draw/whateveryoucallit. HOW do I write that? (1 for each??)

    Goldfinger in a little while ...

  • CrabKeyCrabKey
    Posts: 1,517
    Then: By the time GF came around, expectation was off the chart. My accidental discovery of DN blew me away, which led to finding out what I could about Bond, which in turn amped up my anticipation of FRWL. The things I loved about DN were amplified in FRWL. And then of course came the juggernaut of hype for GF. Everything about GF was huge. From the opening screams of those horns and Shirley Bassey singing the title song, GF delivered on its promise. The obvious question became how do you top this?

    Now. The first four SC films still remain high on my list, even though GF slips a bit.
    I am with the film until the gas is released by the flying circus, then the film gets a bit clumsy. I know the falling soldiers are faking it, but it still looks silly dropping so fast.
    Here the series begins its trend of huge climactic battle sequences that we'll see repeated in TB, YOLT, OHMSS, and DAF. Quite a few leaps in logic and reality in this one, but for the most part fun.

    For me a Bond film at the movies was a special event. There was a special feeling and thrill in the old days, something I no longer felt after LALD. After LALD, it was less about excitement and anticipation than the hope that film wouldn't disappoint. TLD came close to rekindling that earlier feeling. In modern times CR comes closest.

    For me, GF loses a bit of its original luster.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The huge climactic battle scenes bore me, that is one thing GF got wrong.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    edited June 2015 Posts: 7,314
    Ah, Goldfinger. My father's favorite Bond film. This is one of the first ones that I sat down and watched from beginning to end. He made sure of that. Unlike DN and FRWL, which took years to understand and appreciate, GF's impact was immediate for me. I'm sure it's this accessibility that made it so popular at the time and has helped to maintain it's spot at the top of many people's "Best Of Bond" lists. I do remember thinking some parts were a little silly (even then) but I was entertained enough that I didn't hold it against the film. I'd say that I basically feel the same way today. So I think this one is a tie for me.

    Then - 4
    Now - 0
    Draw - 2
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    Ah, more memories! A real variation across the age groups.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited June 2015 Posts: 4,441
    I re-rank GF and MR back last year where there stay quike after DAD released.

    16. Quantum of Solace (2008)
    17. Dr. No (1962)
    18. Goldfinger (1964)
    19. Moonraker (1979)
    20. Die Another Day (2002)
    21. Casino Royale (2006)
    22. Skyfall (2012)
    23. Thunderball (1965)

    Where some people show disrepect and give some movies lower rank then 4/10 i don't do that. GF always get 6 or 6.5. GF is my AVTAK and AVTAK is my GF.

    GF is mabey over-rated by some people because Fleming died before the movie was released.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,872
    Goldfinger

    Then
    I would've been in my early teens the first time I saw Goldfinger. I don't recall exactly how old I was. But I was given the impression at the time, that this was the piece de résistance of OO7, the Godfather of all Bond films. And for many years it was a film I greatly admired. If you're told for so many years, and by so many people that Goldfinger is the best Bond film, then as an adolescent you can get caught up in the mass opinion. Critics and everyone else seemed to hail Goldfinger to be a best of Bond.
    It certainly was entertaining. Has an uber cool Connery, some lovely ladies to look at, great villains and enough lines to quote to satisfy any film fan.

    Now
    What was once great is still highly entertaining and for the most part a very good film. There is still a lot to enjoy in this film, the PTS for example is one that is hard to beat. Connery still looks interested in playing Bond, and the villains are also some that are so memorable and wonderfully played. However the film does get a little flat when we arrive in Kentucky. The start of the superBond begins, some areas look a little weak ( I put this down to director Hamilton) for example, the revolving number plates on the DB5. Why show it if you're not going to use it? Some of the storytelling and edits are also sloppy. How did Felix and Ambush get from the hangar with the tied up pilots, to the top of the control tower in the seconds between shots of the plane in its descent during the films climax. And the less said about Cec Linder as Leiter the better. I don't recall noticing these errors so much in the first two films.
    However, the film does have enough going for it, despite a few areas that I can do without to keep it as a bona fide classic.

    Then - 5
    Now - 0
    Draw - 2
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    Thank you gents. There seems to be a pattern. Any more views?
  • BeatlesSansEarmuffsBeatlesSansEarmuffs
    edited June 2015 Posts: 3,564
    I'll try to get mine up there tomorrow. For the record, though, the score will stand:

    Then - 6
    Now - 0
    Draw - 2
  • sunsanvilsunsanvil Somewhere in Canada....somewhere.
    Posts: 260
    Wait...are we allow to say draw? I thought the point here was you had to chose....
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    There's no hard and fast rules in this game ;-)
  • BeatlesSansEarmuffsBeatlesSansEarmuffs
    edited June 2015 Posts: 3,564
    Gold…FIN…ger (Bwah BWAH Bwah!) Shirley Bassey’s voice echoes down through the ages…

    It’s hard to understand the impact this film had on the cinematic world of its time if one wasn’t alive then. Those of us who lived through that time know full well… others are encouraged to watch “The Goldfinger Phenomenon," available on the GF Special Edition DVD and currently up for viewing on YouTube. Suffice to say: it’s entirely possible that the Bond film series may have fallen by the wayside during some of the lean years, if not for the timeless power of this singular entry!

    This is the first film in the series to codify the Bond format. The eyecatching PTS, the bombastic, radio friendly theme song, the iconic villain with the outlandish plot and colorful henchman…the gorgeous, willing women, the incredible gadgets, the clenched knuckle death traps, the clash of armies at the climax of the film, with total disaster just a moment away and Bond at just the right spot to save the day in the crucial moment…this is the definitive Bond film, now and then and unto forever… As I’ve mentioned earlier, this was one of the first three Bond films that I saw one Saturday afternoon in the mid sixties, and at the time it was my favorite of the bunch. When Connery as Bond gives a quick shoutout to the Beatles early in the film, it’s not that he’s bad mouthing his fellow Brits, rather, he’s giving them a wink & a nod… “Hey, lads, it’s just us here at the top peak of pop culture right this moment! Who’d’ve thunk it, eh? Let’s enjoy it while we can!”

    As much as I enjoy this film now, nothing can match the impact it had then.
  • sunsanvilsunsanvil Somewhere in Canada....somewhere.
    Posts: 260
    I got to see Goldfinger in the cinema setting several times in the 80s. As a much younger man, I do recall being absolutely in awe of it all what with the car, the painted girl, and yes even the soundtrack. I was swept up in the shear pageantry of the whole thing. Years later I do love the film, but look at it with a more critical eye. The first and second act are classic. The aerial shot into Miami still puts a huge smile on my face, the golf sequence alone is worth screening the film for, but the final act feels somewhat heavy handed today. Once they land in Kentucky it takes on an almost comedic tone, and I just cant take the whole Fort Knox thing seriously whereas I think I was so enchanted way back when that I just failed to notice.

    A close, close call for me, but I give it a Then, just by a hair.

    Then - 8 (I assume BeatlesSansEarmuffs is a Then vote?)
    Now - 0
    Draw - 2
  • BeatlesSansEarmuffsBeatlesSansEarmuffs
    Posts: 3,564
    Indeed I am.
  • DRush76DRush76
    Posts: 533
    I really appreciated the photography and music featured in "DR. NO", along with Jack Lord's performance. But . . . I still can barely stand the movie.

    "FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE" remains my fifth favorite Bond movie, even if I find the movie's last half hour a little shaky. As for "GOLDFINGER", I still loathe it.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited June 2015 Posts: 15,690
    While I really enjoy GF, I've never able to replicate watching the film for the first time as a young teen. I was in awe at the whole thing: catchy music, stunning cinematography, gorgeous women, awesome gadgets and car, thrilling villains and super-mega-uber badass Connery.

    Then - 9
    Now - 0
    Draw - 2
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,536
    GF was one of my favourites when I was younger. I loved every second of it - thought it was the second coolest Bond film ever made! As time went by, I began to notice the flaws in the story and the ridiculousness of certain moments. But having read the novel, I rebuilt some of my respect for GF on the basis of considering it perhaps the only Fleming adaptation to truly outshine the novel. I could go for a 'draw' then but I'm more inclined to go for a 'then'.

    Then - 10
    Now - 0
    Draw - 2
  • BeatlesSansEarmuffsBeatlesSansEarmuffs
    edited June 2015 Posts: 3,564
    @DarthDimi – GF is one of the few movies that largely follows the novel, but also deviates from it substantially in several instances. Most movies either follow the novel fairly closely (DN, FRWL, TB, OHMSS) or deviate substantially and never look back (YOLT, DAF, everything from Roger Moore onward.) GF does both. I’ll be detailing these deviations in my mini-review of GF the novel in the Sir Henry’s topic thread fairly shortly, but here’s one that demonstrates the type of improvements made for the movie: Fleming only has Tilly Masterson tell Bond that Goldfinger killed her sister by painting her gold. Essentially, the action occurs of-camera. In the movie, famously, Bond recovers from a blow delivered by the shadowy hands of Oddjob, to find Jill dead in his bed, painted gold. It’s one of the most famous scenes in the movie, but it doesn’t actually occur in the book. Fleming only tells the audience that it occurred, the movie SHOWS the audience that it occurred…and the movie is the stronger presentation of the two because of changes like this.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    BeatlesSansEarmuffs wrote:
    Suffice to say: it’s entirely possible that the Bond film series may have fallen by the wayside during some of the lean years, if not for the timeless power of this singular entry!

    As much as I enjoy this film now, nothing can match the impact it had then.

    I quite agree @Beatles. What ever our opinions on Goldfinger, we can at least recognize its value, its iconography, to the series as a whole. It may be not too much of a stretch to say if Goldfinger wasn't as big as it was, the Bond franchise would not be here.

    Any more views on Goldfinger, before we unleash Thunderball?




  • DRush76DRush76
    Posts: 533
    I've said it before and I'll say it again. For me, "GOLDFINGER" is crap.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,690
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That was helpful.

    The message or the chap?
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    edited July 2015 Posts: 4,421
    And on that illuminating bombshell, let's move on to our next Bond film -

    Thunderball

    Then –
    Unlike Goldfinger, I remember the circumstances in which I saw Thunderball quite vividly. Again I caught this film on ITV. Curiously, it was the year that the National Lottery “Thunderball” was first played. I remember me and my mate arguing about it. He would say, “Thunderball is a lottery!”, to which I'd retort, “And it's also a Bond film!”.

    Before I watched Thunderball, I spent the entire night playing Mario Kart on the N64, at a mate's house. So, as I snuggled down to watch Thunderball, I promptly fell asleep after the main titles. So bearing that in mind, I wasn't overly keen to see it again. It must be boring, right?

    Fast forward a few years to 2001. My parents bought me the remaining Bond films for Christmas. I watched Thunderball and On Her Majesty's Secret Service in one sitting. And both were prodigiously good. Thunderball with its vitality and colour. Perfect for a rainy Xmas, to be transported to sunny Nassau!

    Now -
    I enjoy Thunderball more as I've gotten older. In fact, Thunderball and Goldfinger have effectively switched. The reason being Terence Young's more brutal depiction of 007, as opposed to Guy Hamilton's stylised violence. Another top ten Bond film.

    Edit - thanks @DarthDimi for reminding me -

    Now
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,536
    Thunderball

    Some people say this one is boring.
    Some people say this film is poorly made.

    But not me. TB was the first Bond I sat through from start to finish as a child and I loved every moment of it! This is the Bond that got me hooked instantly, that introduced me to the man, his manners, his enemies, the formula and the music. As a child, I would not have accepted a single bit of criticism towards TB.

    Nowadays, I realise the film is not as perfect as I once thought it was. But I'm still a big fan, probably in part because of my nostalgic love for the film. I would go for stale, but since it's more helpful to choose something, I will choose

    then
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,816
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Thunderball

    Some people say this one is boring.
    Some people say this film is poorly made.

    But not me. TB was the first Bond I sat through from start to finish as a child and I loved every moment of it! This is the Bond that got me hooked instantly, that introduced me to the man, his manners, his enemies, the formula and the music. As a child, I would not have accepted a single bit of criticism towards TB.

    Nowadays, I realise the film is not as perfect as I once thought it was. But I'm still a big fan, probably in part because of my nostalgic love for the film. I would go for stale, but since it's more helpful to choose something, I will choose

    then

    I can't add anything to this.
Sign In or Register to comment.