Big Mi6 James Bond film ranking game - A few stats!

11820222324

Comments

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 8,983
    OK, I can only confirm @Creasy47's observations. I have it at No. 7, but without my nasty habit of finding both SF and NTTD excellent, it would be within the top 5. Although I rate my present top five 9/10, and I'd give DN "only" 8/10. Anyway, great movie, especially considering that famously it cost less than just the volcano set in YOLT.
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,120
    4th place. A ground-breaking film that got practically everything right from the get-go.
    An experiment that was made with a relatively modest budget, on which some of greatest creative talents collaborated to create a cultural phenomenon.
    Too many highlights for me to count, it’s about as perfect a debut as one could dream of, starring the original and best ever 007, Sir Sean Connery.
  • edited August 30 Posts: 3,968
    11 for me. Actually I think it's the first time I'd put this film just outside my top ten since being on these forums and doing these lists.

    I think it's a great first Bond movie. You can't beat Bond's introduction with the shots of his hands, the cigarette being lit, and of course the reveal and iconic line. Classic stuff, one of the best character introductions in cinema! I like how the film sets things up with the murder of Strangways and his assistant, with us seeing how this has affected the security line of MI6. It builds up a sense of anticipation for Bond.

    The film's adaptation of the book is a bit mixed overall, but it has plenty of positives. Ultimately the book, while brilliant, follows on from FRWL and is consequentially about Bond slowly gaining his confidence after his near death experience, and of course navigating a tricky political situation where his superiors don't want Crab Key being investigated. It's actually a relatively brisk read, and after a couple of low key attempts on his life Bond ultimately decides to investigate Dr. No. The film obviously can't quite do that, but we get a genuine sense of danger with Mr. Jones' initial interception of Bond, a few added attempts on his life, and of course Leiter following him from the sidelines (I love how the film plays the latter as we're not entirely sure whether he's a friend or foe, and it keeps us on our toes). The addition of Professor Dent also adds an extra step in the mystery, and I like how we get an initial (albeit faceless) appearance of Dr. No with an uneasy looking Dent. Again, it really builds up our expectations of the villain. The tarantula scene is brilliant (worth saying they're not fatally poisonous to my knowledge, but it looks a lot better onscreen than a centipede).

    I also love the little subversion this film does with the source material when No says to Bond to put back the steak knife. Obviously in the book him taking it is the thing that ultimately saves him. It's a small thing, and probably a bit of an in reference to those who have read it, but it's cool.

    Connery is great. Jack Lord is one of the best onscreen Leiters, although he doesn't have much to do. Wonderful first appearances by Lee and Maxwell, and Andress as Honey Rider. I'm glad the film kept her backstory, albeit in a much more trimmed down version, of her encounter with the landlord. Connery does some great acting in that scene too with him looking uncomfortable. Great set design of Dr. No's lair. The Bond theme slaps too!

    I have a few criticisms of this film. Unfortunately compared to the later Bond films there's sometimes a lack of polish and creativity with the filmmaking/storytelling. Quarrel's death is an example for me - the scene is just a bit too dark to really see the actors' facial expressions, the 'Dragon' looks quite cheap even in the context of the film, there's a strange lack of score which leaves the audience a bit cold, and it seems to half adapt the book which is strange (Bond in the film seems to start walking towards Quarrel's corpse. Unlike the book, however, he doesn't say anything about the men killing his friend, and in Fleming's work he's even allowed the opportunity to apologise to Quarrel's body. In the film it comes across as very random with Bond saying nothing. Personally, I think Connery could have done a wonderful job if they'd adapted the scene more faithfully, and it would have added more emotional stakes to his first encounter with No. It falls a bit flat here unfortunately). While the Bond theme is excellent, the rest of the music in this film is pretty dated (I'm really not a fan of the 'Three Blind Mice' song at the beginning. Seems very on the nose, and it cuts the Bond theme off very randomly). Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange. For some reason the film sees fit to adapt the scene from the novel where Bond has to trade in his Beretta for a Walther. It's a great scene in the book but random and unnecessary here. Then of course we have the death maze from the novel which is not actually a death maze in this film but instead a vent. It's something that often confuses people. Dr. No's death, while fitting with his metal hands ultimately leading to his demise, is a bit underwhelming in terms of how it's shot. It's just not quite as polished or gripping as it could be, and I think it's due to a lack of creativity with the filmmaking rather than a lack of budget.

    Connery's performance sells the film, but an issue I have with this one is that Bond is pretty much one step ahead the entire time. It's quite a contrast to the book. Personally, I prefer FRWL where Bond himself isn't sure exactly what kind of situation he's going into, and is even a bit conflicted about playing Tanya. It's just a more interesting dynamic and gives Connery more to do. Again, he's great here though, and it's more a preference than outright criticism. I'll also say that what Young and Connery did with this first Bond appearance was really important going forward with the series.

    Overall it's a great Bond adventure, but not the best. And actually I think that's a good thing. I think even by FRWL the series quickly bettered this first attempt, and did so many other times. But this ultimately set things off.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 30 Posts: 16,211
    This came in at #25 for me. Which isn't to say it's not a good or important film, because it is, but in terms of James Bond films it's just my least favourite and the one I'm least likely to watch. Compared to the other films which came after (so it's obviously not its fault) I just don't like it as much. The music is terrible, the plot is pretty so-so (exciting for the time but less-so nowadays), Bond is actually really quite brittle and unlikeable throughout the whole thing and the story is one which subsequent films made more familiar and added more interesting elements to, and I just get more entertainment value from other ones. There's lots to commend it as a classic, but I just don't choose to watch it very often and it's far from my favourite.
    It's not its fault that it was improved upon.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange.

    To be fair, in many ways the abstract dots opening the gunbarrel sequence make less sense without the computer noises!
  • Posts: 7,380
    I have to admit I put DN at #20. It has been higher in my lists, and to be honest, I could have put it 4 or 5 places higher this time. Despite its status as first 007 film, and yes, many iconic scenes, Bonds intro, Honeys entrance, the cold blooded shooting of Dent, it's not a Bond I revisit often. I was never keen on Wisemans villain, I find him a bit robotic, and there isn't really a standout action scene. I do think FRWL was a huge step up, but I should probably watch this more often and have more appreciation of it!
  • edited August 30 Posts: 3,968
    mtm wrote: »
    This came in at #25 for me. Which isn't to say it's not a good or important film, because it is, but in terms of James Bond films it's just my least favourite and the one I'm least likely to watch. Compared to the other films which came after (so it's obviously not its fault) I just don't like it as much. The music is terrible, the plot is pretty so-so (exciting for the time but less-so nowadays), Bond is actually really quite brittle and unlikeable throughout the whole thing and the story is one which subsequent films made more familiar and added more interesting elements to, and I just get more entertainment value from other ones. There's lots to commend it as a classic, but I just don't choose to watch it very often and it's far from my favourite.
    It's not its fault that it was improved upon.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange.

    To be fair, in many ways the abstract dots opening the gunbarrel sequence make less sense without the computer noises!

    Haha, probably. Still, it's always been a bit odd to me. The initial computer noises are like some sort of stock sound effect from a 1950s sci fi B movie. I don't really get a sense of 'gun barrel' from it. Again, it feels much more sci fi.

    It's more the Bond theme getting cut off during the titles for this weirdly goofy song that annoys me. It's obviously been written to come off as a stereotypical calypso song... about some killer assassins... very strange choice.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,120
    It's my #4, a far better film than most that succeeded it. The likes of DAF, LALD, TMWTGG, AVTAK, TWINE, ... are practically insults compared to the magic that DN brought. Yes, it's the cheapest of the bunch, and most likely the second most 'low-key' of them all. But it's also a film that, despite its somewhat limited resources, does many things right from the get-go. Wiseman is not just good as the villain, he's awesome. Ursula is not just a good Bond girl, she's one of the most alluring and endearing. The locations and sets are not just serviceable, they are magnificent. And Connery is astonishing in his debut. The music could have been better but the Bond Theme is absolutely legendary. It's the first film, but it's also a bloody good film. Commanding my respect and admiration in every possible way, DN is first and foremost a fast-paced, well-written, entertaining Bond film.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 8,983
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange.

    To be fair, in many ways the abstract dots opening the gunbarrel sequence make less sense without the computer noises!

    Those aren't computer noises. It's the static and beeping and hissing and also some Morse code (don't ask me to decipher it) from radio communications of the period and refers to Strangways' activities reporting to MI6. Fits totally ok for me and never bothered me.
  • Posts: 3,968
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange.

    To be fair, in many ways the abstract dots opening the gunbarrel sequence make less sense without the computer noises!

    Those aren't computer noises. It's the static and beeping and hissing and also some Morse code (don't ask me to decipher it) from radio communications of the period and refers to Strangways' activities reporting to MI6. Fits totally ok for me and never bothered me.

    Ah, kinda makes sense. Although it's always felt a bit weird for me hearing it as the first sounds of a Bond movie.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited August 30 Posts: 3,787
    Quite high for me at #3, yep, I love it, the first Bond film, Connery was at his best, everyone was at their best, for me, it got and understand what Bond should be compared to the films that came out later, and I even think that it portrayed Bond better than what Craig did in Casino Royale, although great but still not on par with how Connery played the character in here, there's a mystique, swagger, cool, and suaveness in it, especially the most iconic scene of how he killed Professor Dent, very calculated, but still underlining the sense of complexity by showing Bond having a deep thought after killing him, and of course, of how he's desperate to find Honey Ryder to the point where he had punched one of Dr. No's men when he had failed to give Bond the answer, so it also highlighted some dash of humanity and vulnerability (especially him looking shattered and torn).

    Ursula Andress as Honey Ryder may be a bit lacking in acting department (and even dubbed) but considering that the character was not much demanding, it's fine, she did it without any disappointment, she and Connery had chemistry, the character of Honey Ryder, that's said is better in the book than the film with the fleshing out of her character more, although I prefer her wearing underwear in the film (I don't want to see nudity like in the book, yikes! 😅).

    Joseph Wiseman, while covered in yellowface, at least was much more convincing than Connery will do later on in You Only Live Twice, he's menacing as a villain and threatening, but like Honey Ryder, the character, although great as it is in the film, is so much better in the book too, there's a sense of mysterious atmosphere and intrigue.

    I would've liked an extended Obstacle course like in the book, I understand the exclusion of the giant squid, but I wish what Bond had suffered in the book was shown in the film so Dr. No's death would be much more of a relief, the same for Bond stealing his gauntlet.

    Although, it's also a film that had improved upon the source material in some aspects like the death of Dr. No, I love it, the book meanwhile was lame due to Dr. No dying of being filled by a bird guano, in the film, it's much better with the way there's a fight scene between the two and was shown that Dr. No was lost and succumbed to his death by falling off a chemical.

    I also liked the appearance of Felix Leiter, to which if my memory serves didn't showed up in the book.

    It may have poor technical aspect, but what we are expecting? It's a film very much made in a bygone era of early 60s (1962), where technology was not very much enhanced, and I could get past through it for how great the film is in terms of performances and script, heck, I think it's so much better than the cinematography of The Man With The Golden Gun, For Your Eyes Only and even more vibrant looking than Thunderball.

    I liked the beautiful setting of Jamaica, and the set design by Ken Adam of the Crab Key and Dr. No's lair, the Maurice Binder title sequence is pretty looking too, very similar to Charade, and of course, Monty Norman's version of the James Bond Theme, very iconic, although Three Blind Mice is a bit out of place in an otherwise, glamour presentation and opening, the same goes for Underneath The Mango Tree, sounded like a Nursery Rhyme, it could've been better without those, the scores were great too.

    Overall, it's a great film, worth watching and equally as great as the book (albeit in their own rights).
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 30 Posts: 16,211
    007HallY wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    This came in at #25 for me. Which isn't to say it's not a good or important film, because it is, but in terms of James Bond films it's just my least favourite and the one I'm least likely to watch. Compared to the other films which came after (so it's obviously not its fault) I just don't like it as much. The music is terrible, the plot is pretty so-so (exciting for the time but less-so nowadays), Bond is actually really quite brittle and unlikeable throughout the whole thing and the story is one which subsequent films made more familiar and added more interesting elements to, and I just get more entertainment value from other ones. There's lots to commend it as a classic, but I just don't choose to watch it very often and it's far from my favourite.
    It's not its fault that it was improved upon.
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange.

    To be fair, in many ways the abstract dots opening the gunbarrel sequence make less sense without the computer noises!

    Haha, probably. Still, it's always been a bit odd to me. The initial computer noises are like some sort of stock sound effect from a 1950s sci fi B movie. I don't really get a sense of 'gun barrel' from it. Again, it feels much more sci fi.

    Yeah that's fair, I'm not quite sure what the intent was or why Binder wanted to evoke a computer. I don't know if you know, but the sounds are actually from a piece of work by Daphne Oram, a pioneer of avant garde electronic music ('musique concrète'), and a sometime member of the BBC Radiophonic Workshop, which was probably most famous around this time for Delia Derbyshire's amazing arrangement of the Doctor Who theme. Quite funny that both James Bond and Doctor Who began with the Radiophonic Workshop's music.
    007HallY wrote: »
    It's more the Bond theme getting cut off during the titles for this weirdly goofy song that annoys me. It's obviously been written to come off as a stereotypical calypso song... about some killer assassins... very strange choice.

    Yes, agreed there. It's probably amazing that we got as much of Barry's version of the theme there as we did, Monty Norman can't have been happy about it.
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Not sure what's going on with the sound effects during the gun barrel either, very strange.

    To be fair, in many ways the abstract dots opening the gunbarrel sequence make less sense without the computer noises!

    Those aren't computer noises. It's the static and beeping and hissing and also some Morse code (don't ask me to decipher it) from radio communications of the period and refers to Strangways' activities reporting to MI6. Fits totally ok for me and never bothered me.

    Sorry, no: it's computer age music! But yeah, maybe it is supposed to link into the signalling, or maybe missile toppling (whatever that is exactly!) or something.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,408
    Number six for me. I love the atmosphere. It’s eerie. There’s a murder mystery to solve, an eccentric villain who seemingly owns the hearts, minds and fears of a swath of people, and no one can be trusted. It feels like it’s a film from the previous decade, mainly due to the soundtrack, I believe. Connery was too cold for my liking (and was quite snappy and curt), but overall I find this film oozes with atmosphere and tension. I love it’s simplicity and it’s a great launching pad for the series…
  • Vinther1991Vinther1991 Denmark
    Posts: 64
    Dr. No is #9 for me. Great film. I like the low-key simplicity of it, it has a brilliant set-up, nice atmosphere, some good classic detective work. Lots of classic scenes and characters. Only complaints is Honey Ryder becoming a tedious damsel in distress after the terrific intro scene, and a climax that is rushed and forgettable.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    edited August 30 Posts: 8,983
    mtm wrote: »
    Those aren't computer noises. It's the static and beeping and hissing and also some Morse code (don't ask me to decipher it) from radio communications of the period and refers to Strangways' activities reporting to MI6. Fits totally ok for me and never bothered me.

    Sorry, no: it's computer age music! But yeah, maybe it is supposed to link into the signalling, or maybe missile toppling (whatever that is exactly!) or something.

    OK, after reading up on Daphne Oram (never heard of her) it seems that it was actually created as "music" for the movie. But it does sound exactly like the messy radio noises I heard when playing around with the tuning button of the family radio (which could receive short and long wave in addition to regular "AM/FM") when I was six years old or so, which is about the time of Dr. No. I remember distinctly that I even chanced to stumble upon some encrypted voice messages that were obviously from the Soviets or East Germans for their agents in the West (seemingly random numbers, read in German, separated by "Achtung!"). I only realized much later what this was when I found a recording like that in some movie, probably on TV.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,211
    I don't think it was made for the movie, the sound editor licensed a bit of one of her existing tracks- 'Atoms in Space' I think. Frustratingly it's not available to hear in its original version.

    Oh yeah- numbers stations! They are so spooky, not least because you know they're for actual spies!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited August 30 Posts: 7,075
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    OK, after reading up on Daphne Oram (never heard of her) it seems that it was actually created as "music" for the movie. But it does sound exactly like the messy radio noises I heard when playing around with the tuning button of the family radio (which could receive short and long wave in addition to regular "AM/FM") when I was six years old or so, which is about the time of Dr. No. I remember distinctly that I even chanced to stumble upon some encrypted voice messages that were obviously from the Soviets or East Germans for their agents in the West (seemingly random numbers, read in German, separated by "Achtung!"). I only realized much later what this was when I found a recording like that in some movie, probably on TV.

    That's really fascinating. You did a bit of Bondian work yourself then ;)

    Concerning DN, I can only echo all the good stuff that's been mentioned though I'd like to add one more: Quarrel. One of the very best allies in the series.

    I ranked it 12th, just inside the top half.

    Just a few scenes I'm not too sure about: the car chase, the vent escape and the dragon tank.

    Overall though I think it's a superb film.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 8,983
    @GoldenGun, I just noticed you put the ranking into your starting post. Thank you!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited August 30 Posts: 7,075
    My pleasure. It was a good suggestion from your part!
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,106
    TSWLM was the film that started my fandom into James Bond, as a young boy it really captured my imagination. The excitement and thrills of this one man who could save the world...without superpowers!
    Using these cool gadgets, and being cool along the way, whilst he battled evil men in super cool lairs with a henchman with metal teeth. What young boy didn't want some of that in the UK in the early 80's?
    TSWLM is one of those films that saved the franchise, GE and CR being another two.
    Cubby's first sole Bond film in charge, and he really upped the ante. He threw everything into Spy and made a film that was exciting, beautifully shot and most of all a lot of fun.
    It moves around in my rankings sometimes higher, but never outside of my top ten.

    It came in at my number 8.

    DN on the other hand is a film that I didn't see for a while in my youth, when I did I was probably 9 or 10. It was okay, not super exciting or large in scale like most of the Bond films I was used to viewing. (mostly the Roger Moore entries)
    As I've grown older the debut film for James Bond has really made an impact on me, to the point where it resides as my second favorite Bond film.
    I think it's the simplicity of this film. It has two locations, with most of the film is set in Jamaica. It's so lush and colourful, looking like an idyllic island paradise.
    Sean Connery is just amazing in his first performance as James Bond, effortlessly cool and suave whilst also showing his dangerous side when the time is right. The killing of Professor Dent is cold and brutal but fits the style of the film.
    Honey is still the Bond girl to which all others are measured, she's not a damsel in distress and can look after herself. Obviously, Bond does rescue her in the end but not because Honey is a poorly written character along for the ride. She serves a purpose and is a strong female character. Unlike for example Tiffany Case or Mary Goodnight.
    Dr. No himself is a villain given very little screen time, and like the shark in Jaws, I think this benefits the character and the film. We're teased before his reveal by a scene where we hear only his voice, or his shadow. He's kept ominous in the back ground till the latter stages of the film. Wonderfully played by Joseph Wiseman.
    It is for me a truly wonderful film that I always enjoy watching. Its a true Bond classic and will likely never drop out of my top 5.

    Currently my number 2 just behind...
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,787
    I guess we would open the Top 5 with TLD (it would be the next based on my prediction).
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited August 31 Posts: 7,075
    Please take your time to consider the first part of our top 10:

    10. Octopussy
    9. Thunderball
    8. GoldenEye
    7. The Spy Who Loved Me
    6. Dr. No

    I will start revealing the top 5 on Monday. But feel free, like @SIS_HQ already did above, to predict what will happen :)
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,120
    My guess for the top five:
    5. TLD
    4. GF
    3. OHMSS
    2. CR
    1. FRWL
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited August 31 Posts: 16,211
    I would guess CR will be top, with OHMSS and then GF behind.
  • Posts: 7,380
    I think FRWL will top it! I'm just happy that 4 out of the 5 remaining are all in my top 5 list!
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited August 31 Posts: 7,075
    Remaining 007's:
    - Sean Connery (2 out of 6)
    - George Lazenby (1 out of 1)
    - Timothy Dalton (1 out of 2)
    - Daniel Craig (1 out of 5)

    Eliminated:
    - Roger Moore (7 films, highest at #7)
    - Pierce Brosnan (4 films, highest at #8)

    Remaining directors:
    - Peter Hunt (1 out of 1)
    - Martin Campbell (1 out of 2)
    - Terence Young (1 out of 3)
    - Guy Hamilton (1 out of 4)
    - John Glen (1 out of 5)

    Elminated:
    - Lewis Gilbert (3 films, highest at #7)
    - Sam Mendes (2 films, highest at #11)
    - Marc Forster (1 film, at #15)
    - Cary Joji Fukunaga (1 film, at #18)
    - Roger Spottiswoode (1 film, at #19)
    - Michael Apted (1 film, at #24)
    - Lee Tamahori (1 film, at #25)
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,106
    I've still got 3 of the five remaining, OHMSS, CR and FRWL.

    GF would've gone out in 7th and TLD in 6th spot.

    However, the remaining 5 are nonetheless worthy to be still in the running.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,075
    Getting towards the big finale here, with our top 5, starting with our #5:

    GOLDFINGER (1964)
    Directed by Guy Hamilton

    72a459ab85b279cfa2a2431a68d33ce5a1bd54e8ac43a4537fda33495ccad8d4.jpg

    "You are a clever resourceful man, Mr. Bond."

    The blueprint of so many other Bond films that followed it obtained four gold medals and one bronze. It was also ranked 4th on three occasions and 5th on two.

    Six more members rated it between 6th and 10th, while three other participants had it either at 12th or 13th.

    Only three ratings were lower than 13th: one 18th, one 21st and one penultimate place.

    Usually a top 3, and very regularly the number one, on most critics' lists, this one scores a tad lower in this contest. Still though, a 5th spot remains a strong showing for GF nonetheless.

    GF acquired 158 points in total.
  • Posts: 7,380
    GF is at 10 for me! I have to say I don't hold it in as high regard as I used to. Of course it's the Bond that set the template. It has a fantastic villain in Gert Frobe, Harold Sakata is a rop range henchman, the pts, the golf match, the Aston, the one liners, a clever updating of the novel ( destroying the Gold instead of stealing it) Shirley Eatons gold Lady. But then it has a weak leading lady, I've never found Honor Blackman appealing, the whole Kentucky farm section really slows it down, ( and with Bond sitting around doing nothing!) and I don't find the finale as exciting as I used to! Strange too, how Basseys iconic song, I don't like listening to anymore, maybe because I've heard it so much!! I prefer FRWL, but GF is still classy Bond!
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,120
    Gold medal for me, always has been and always will be.
    Everything I love about Bond, this film delivers in spades.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,787
    #8 for me.

    I'll admit it's a film that's so iconic, people overlook its flaws, at least not in this forum, but in the general public perception, I will list down the pros first:
    * Goldfinger is a menacing villain.
    * There's a tension everytime Bond is investigating Goldfinger.
    * It's a fun to watch
    * Gert Frobe sold and owned the role of Goldfinger himself.
    * Sean Connery is at his most cool, the invention of the cinematic Bond and the film that skyrocketed Bond to stardom in the Hollywood.
    * The theme song by Shirley Bassey is good and haunting.
    * The PTS is great, an improvement over the one in From Russia With Love.
    * Great cinematography (particularly in Switzerland).
    * Oddjob is a great henchman, one of the best henchmen/women of the series, very threatening, scary and intimidating, he's tied along with Red Grant for the best (no, sorry I don't consider Jaws as a great henchman, mostly due to him being comical and downright Cartoonish, then, I'd have Dario from Licence To Kill for the third or second place, then Fiona Volpe after him).

    So, okay, as for the cons, I'n afraid but those are major ones:

    * Bond seemed a bit incompetent in this film, it's always Felix who was active in doing things, he literally did nothing, and even became a damsel in distress, as he had spent the third act mostly in captive.
    * The Kentucky scenes were dull looking and not at particularly exciting.
    * I don't know, again, what Britain or MI6 had anything to do with Goldfinger's plot in Fort Knox, why they need to be involved in there? I get Felix since it's the CIA's job, they're Americans, but what it had to do with Britain? I just don't get it, would it affect them in some way? I don't know.
    * Bond's actions, aside from being a literal damsel in distress, did some terrible acts like slapping a woman on her rear and forcing himself upon Pussy Galore (at least in the book, there's a permission and consent from Pussy herself, it's she who liked it, it's she who had showed an interest in Bond, but in the film, it's more worse, because Bond did it without any of her consent, he had literally forced himself upon her, almost like a rape).
    * The dubbing, Jill Masterson's voice (Shirley Eaton) was noticeably similar to Honey Ryder (Ursula Andress), obviously done by the same voice actress, then Gert Frobe's dubbing too was also obvious in some scenes.
    * The pacing was slow in the third act too (again, the whole Kentucky section).
    * The military men all falling to sleep like dominoes when the smoke was released is a bit silly, almost comical and unrealistically portrayed.

    Overall, it's fine in its position at #8 (in Top Ten), it's a great film, but given its flaws (mostly major), it could never top the films that I have in my Top Five, it's a Top Ten worthy of a Bond film and I do recognize the merit that this film did in the Bond history, it did many firsts for the series and cemented Bond's position in the Cinema World, it's iconic, so I would still thank this film for it, that's where it would ends.
Sign In or Register to comment.