Foldginger
[spoilers follow]
Goldfinger is often held up as *the* Bond film. It's where many of the tropes that later films deployed were originated. But before we start on that, let's talk about a couple of other things.
First, in the books, Bond is a sociopath. He kills without compunction and is rarely troubled with the least emotion. OHMSS strikes a queer note because Bond falls in love.
But Bond is no more, no less misogynist or racist than the world around him. And yes, the culture was the way it was, so he reflects that.
Film Bond is a bit different. He varies emotionally. But he's *way* more sexist than the world around him. He's a pig. And it's really unlikely women would respond to him the way they do. Whereas in the books, there's nothing really unnatural. He quips, he's charming, he philanders a bit.
Does Bond reflect the 1960s? Well, obviously, women were not to the fore. They weren't in reality or in the culture. They were often presented as appendages to the men.
But look. In Goldfinger, Bond rapes a lesbian and she likes it. What do you, what can you make of that? My view is that the producers hated women. There's a vein of woman-hating throughout the series and it's driven from the top. Because there are different writers and any one of them could have chosen a slightly different way to present Bond. They present other things differently. He becomes more stunty, more actiony, more aggro, more murdery (in one place in Thunderball, he tells Leiter that "of course I didn't" kill a bad guy. But throughout, he demonstrates hatred of women. Worse in the first few films, where we've noted sexual assaults and women drawn very poorly. Here, we have a "strong woman" and he just rapes her because he's stronger.
For me, this is like a shadow over Goldfinger, which revolutionised the series and opened the door to its longevity. But what else you got? There are some neat scenes: the laser orchidectomy is unforgettable of course, the fight in the barn great up to the point Bond rapes Pussy, and a whole lot of fiddling around and golf. I think it works because Goldfinger himself is such a great character. He's a lot of fun and when he's around, the film is fun.
It's largely what you'd consider standard Bond. But of course it was produced before there even was really a standard Bond. But I really feel its high reputation is slightly overblown. The oneliners are a bit clunky, the script a bit shopworn, the action a bit lacking to be honest .Connery is Connery and I think probably at his best in this film, although that one piece with the ubertight shorts will give me nightmares for some time to come. The settings are a bit ho hum and it was obviously filmed on set. Like many sixties films it's a bit underlit too.
I don't think I can go higher than C. It's fine. But it's not amazing.
posted by Dr Zen @ 7:42 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home