It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
There's one fantastic line that stuck in my mind though. "The difference between a poor Golf shot and a great one is the same as the difference between a plain woman and a beautiful one. Millimetres. "
Whatever its faults, it achieved an aesthetic approach that really emphasized the more visceral and visual elements of the Bond fantasy world. In the book, we don't even witness the death of Jill via gold paint, or the inside of Fort Knox. Maibaum and Hamilton recognized the striking imagery that Fleming only hinted at and brought it out on screen.
Hamilton's later entries were less than stellar, but he understood his medium better than Terence Young did and managed to rise above the source material. Fleming correctly panned Young's films as inferior adaptations, but I've always been curious what he'd have thought of Goldfinger had he lived to see it.
The film though, IMO sits on a cinema pedestal for sheer exciting Bondian entertainment.
Interesting, Young is almost sainted in Bond circles, but yes it was Hamilton's film that really put Bond over the top. Fleming might have really liked the extra zip. Fleming himself wrote with a flair.
This is not to take away from the Young films. His first two efforts I think are superb, but Fleming might really have liked Hamilton's more flamboyant touch, moreso than Young's solid efforts.
The book might be a lesser work according to PK but Flemings writing is bloody brilliant. WHile I have no interest in golf whatsoever the man writes about the game in such a way that you actually want to sign up for golf yourself. And the match and its innuendo is one of the highpoints in Flemings writings (I find it more exciting than the cardgame in MR).
Both media are excellent in their own way, and will be revisited many more times in my future.
The novel I thought had some flaws, I thought the character development of Goldfinger was weak and no sense of irony whatsoever. The movie downplayed the sexual deviancy of Goldfinger.
I dislike the film. But it's still better than the novel.
Although that's usually the case, I feel differently in regard to "GOLDFINGER". Like you, I found the movie disappointing. However, I have an ever lower opinion of the novel.
Oh, and for the record I find Terence Young superior to Guy Hamilton.
That's one of the greatest incipits I've ever read and one reason for given the novel a closer look. I think that the novel is as good as the film and it is the popularity of the latter that outshines the former (but that would be contradictory to the majority of fans here that don't really idolize the film version.)
I had collected most of the 60's Pan paperbacks by the time I was 10 and although I never read them properly I used to flick through them quite a lot.
I also thought that the intro lines of Goldfinger were tantalising but I couldn't work out why James Bond would have been eating Bourbon biscuits in the airport ? It was only as an adult when reading the book that I realised he had polished off a couple of double whisky's...!!
Gosh that really made me laugh! I can just picture Bond munching biscuits, crumbs falling down, thinking about the man he killed...
Bourbons!!! Brilliant - GF as written by Alan Bennett:
'The Mexicans death affected Bond greatly. He was on his way back from the parish jumble sale, which in his opinion had been somewhat of a failure due to Mrs Featherstone insisting on a tombola rather than a raffle, and had just missed the 29 bus so was forced to walk down the Ancoats Rd. As he popped a mint humbug in his mouth a fine grey drizzle had moved in from over the steelworks covering him in a cold mist as he trudged past the haberdashers and approached the cemetery.'
Supervillains do what they want, even if the less adventurous, lower level criminal mind might do things by the book. Criminals by definition I don't believe are terribly rational people.The jails are full of them. They are prone to making mistakes, as most of them serve their own vanities.
Fleming did good work demonstrating how truly deranged many criminal minds are. Bond was able to exploit their considerable vanities.
GF I find to be one of Fleming's most entertaining books. I especially like that Bond is at his smartass best.
Both Oddjob and GF, are on the receiving end of some great Bond barbs. Bond is especially unkind to Oddjob, but the guy eats cats, so screw him.