Kevin's Watch

The transformation is complete: Bond is no longer an "spy" in the espionage term, but a military special forces operative who can blow up a facility while wearing a tuxedo!

I could point out how problematic it is that Bond rapes a lesbian and turns her straight, but honestly I wouldn't be saying anything new on the subject. Bond is a juvenile male power fantasy, and a product of the times. At the time, this is how "men" were expected to behave. Mad Men is great at showing not only the sexual dynamic, but also the cost to personal relationships that resulted from it.

Bond though is interesting because of how he changed just over the course of a few movies. He's not the gumshoe detective anymore, gathering information and trying to solve a puzzle. It's all gadgets, guns, women and booze ("I told the stewardess to have liquor for three on board." "Oh? Who are the other two?" "There are no other two.")

In spite of the cultural shock I get from watching this film, it was technically the best of made of the first three. The special effects were definitely better; but the pacing was better as well.

Unfortunately, Bond's witticisms were also in full display, and they were just painful. If you're going to try to be clever, you either need to actually be clever, or you need to be aware that you are not. Whomever wrote his quips (whether they were lifted from the books or made up for the movies) was neither clever nor self aware; but then, I doubt such a hyper-masculine power fantasy could be made by someone either clever or self aware.

I'm starting to realize something about this series: it's been said that period pieces tell us more about the time they were made than the time they are about, and I think that the Bond movies, spanning fifty years and counting, are going to be a fascinating view of history for me. Especially when the actors change out, seeing the new takes on a theme, and the new directions the series goes in.

I'm considering doing these reviews in blocks (one for each actor) instead of individual films, but I don't think I'll watch them fast enough for that to be practical.[/spoiler]

Rigel wrote:Bond is a juvenile male power fantasy, and a product of the times. At the time, this is how "men" were expected to behave. Mad Men is great at showing not only the sexual dynamic, but also the cost to personal relationships that resulted from it.

Bingo. If you never saw it, Ewen McGregor in Down With Love channels both Rock Hudson and James Bond via his character of Catcher Block (ladies' man, man's man, man about town). (we will leave the irony of Rock Hudson being caricatured as a man's man for another thread).

Its dated social mores notwithstanding, Goldfinger is still considered by many to be not only the best Bond movie from Connery but the best Bond movie, period. Somehow all the elements--the plot, the characters, the tone, the pacing of the scenes, etc clicked into place, resulting in a cultural icon

Ms. Galore's orientation is very understated in the movie as compared to the novel. She isn't so much Auric's underling as she is a well-paid professional doing a job for him--she trained her flight crew members herself. No offense to Honey Rider but Pussy Galore is the first "capable" Bond girl, a trend which--oddly--really wouldn't resurface until the Moore era.

This was a memorable one for me. I was a huge fan of Odd Job.

--A

now that is an iconic image.

Pussy Galore. My God man, if nothing else you have to admire the sheer balls it took to name a character Pussy Galore.

Doc Hexnihilo wrote:Pussy Galore. My God man, if nothing else you have to admire the sheer balls it took to name a character Pussy Galore.

even as a kid I wondered how that was allowed.

I don't know. Were there the same connotations in 1959? (When people regularly had a gay old time.) Perhaps this was the origin ...