VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1[2]3 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:27:34 06/27/01 Wed
Author: Rich
Subject: I'm trying to get out of my SFX-buying addiction, unless I really want to read something in it. After all, there's only so many articles you can read about Buffy The Fucking Vampire Slayer, isn't there? Apparently even Joss Whedon's mum read the last SFX and went "not that shit again! How many more times!"

I've only seen the film version of Quatermass and the Pit, but I'd love to see the TV ones. Apparently (God, he's gonna mention Who again - watch out!) Season Seven of Who ripped it off hook, line... etc.

Oh - what am I talking about? I saw the John Mills 70s revival one when I was younger. That wasn't very popular, was it? Anyway, one from the archives...


CONTINUING THE WISDOM OF GOLDEN WEB AWARD-WINNING RICH ON THE SEAN CONNERY SEASON:


GOLDFINGER (1964)

The Degeneration of Bond

Goldfinger, the third in the Bond series, should, in many ways, be considered the worst of the three. There is the contrived storyline, that has Connery playing an entirely reactive role throughout. The megalomanic villain that goes to the trouble to explain his plan in detail to associates he's about to kill. The increased reliance on gadgets (though for once, Q introduces a gadget Bond doesn't get to use in the movie - the ejector seat*), the silly names for girls (Pussy Galore, anyone?) the grandoise set-pieces and the unrealistic wisecracking. Perhaps most importantly, Bond reveals he's not a fan of the Beatles. Whereas prior outings had given us a niave Bond, here we get a smug incarnation that finds constant amusement despite his own ineptitude throughout. Possibly the only thing he succeeds in is in turning Pussy to his side. However, despite - or perhaps, because of - these elements, Goldfinger succeeds. Noticeably pacier than the earlier vehicles, boredom never sets in amidst all the incredulity. The pinnacle of the 60's Bonds and one of the best-worst movies ever.






* Okay, when I wrote this fucker I'd gone to the bog when the ejector seat bit came on. I should have guessed they'd used it... or at least checked my facts. So much for Mr.Research! And while this review is rough around the edges (whadda ya mean, "what's new"?) it's at least better researched than the guy before me that went "I think this was the second Bond film". I mean, for fuck's sake!!

I hope this bastard loads, Voy seems to not accept my stuff when I come on late at night... it wouldn't let me send a Mr.T. update last night... he was the only one who picked both people up for nomination this week... Bobby Zee again proves unpopular, while everyone's getting sick of Bernie Clifton's ostrich. Will Jim Jimmer win the prize?

[
Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Replies:




Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.