Goldeneye in Review

Sharky wrote:

We need Blueblood here to defend his baby... oh and to piss off Khan.

To hell with that!

And yes, they Frogs are showing surprising cultural moxie. More than the bloody Yanks and Limeys.

I thought the whole Cossack storyline was a bit naff. Bean was too young for it. Plus it was supposed to be one of Trevelyan's primary motivations for screwing over Blighty and yet it's barely explored.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Vesper wrote:

Except making Trevelyan Bond's Best Mate instead of his mentor. I've never really been able to buy that.

GoldenEye's fatal weakness.

If only because Bond doesn't really have close friends.

Quote :

I also think Xenia is way better in France's draft.

I'm not too sure. She comes off a bit as Fatima-lite as opposed to Fatima-amplified. Also while it's somewhat absurd, the orgasms and the thighs of steel are far more cinematic than chakra points. It's also the kind of surreal absurdity only Bond can pull off.

Trevelyan's lackeys in the final film are a lot more unique and identifiable than in France's draft. Same goes for most of the characters, actually. Zukhovksy is far better not being Kerim Bey 3.0.

The Cossak thing is better than the "The Cold War is over, there is no good or bad now, the world is up for grabs" motive of Trevelyan in France's draft. It would've worked a lot better with an older actor, though as I recall, they have it written it so it's possible (his parents escaped the purge and killed themselves. He could easily have been born after 1945).

Even with Fierstein's "Sexist misogynist dinosaur" schtick, it's still the best script post-Dalton. Shame most of Brosnan's line deliveries in this one sound like they're straight from a rom-com.

It also does the whole "the world has changed, Bond must prove his relevancy" thing better than Never Say Never Again did.

I'm gonna shut up now because I suspect I'm starting to sound like shadowonhertwat

Vesper wrote:

If only because Bond doesn't really have close friends.

Exactly. Hard to buy he's got a friend in the service after thirty years of a friendless Bond. Kind of a mistake, IMO. Would be quite humanizing for the character if Bond could get in a chat with Tanner or some equivalent about golf and/or some assignment.

Vesper wrote:

Also while it's somewhat absurd, the orgasms and the thighs of steel are far more cinematic than chakra points. It's also the kind of surreal absurdity only Bond can pull off.

Yeah, but is such a "cinematic" device worth sitting through this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hK9PBcRM9c&t=25s ;)

I also liked the line about how she had several ways to kill Bond.

Vesper wrote:

Zukhovksy is far better not being Kerim Bey 3.0.

I noticed that about Bond's ally in France's draft, too.

Vesper wrote:

The Cossak thing is better than the "The Cold War is over, there is no good or bad now, the world is up for grabs" motive of Trevelyan in France's draft.

What I really liked about Augustus Trevelyan was he was present from pretty much the beginning of the film - more of a chance to explore the character. Alec doesn't ever get explored beyond the graveyard scene, and then he just becomes an anti-England one-liner machine.

Vesper wrote:

Even with Fierstein's "Sexist misogynist dinosaur" schtick, it's still the best script post-Dalton.

It's annoying, because you can really see the Feirstein lines from a mile away. "A very...thorough...evaluation....." Ooh, sexy.

Vesper wrote:

It also does the whole "the world has changed, Bond must prove his relevancy" thing better than Never Say Never Again did.

To be honest, I think NSNA is pretty cracking stuff up until the cut to the Shrublands interior. Bond is far more active in the title sequence than what we've come to expect from Roger at that point, and I even don't mind the title song. :oops: The M scene is biting and feels quite in line with Fleming's older Bond...oh, a Bentley, cool...then that joke about peeing into a cup from across the room. :pale:

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Vesper wrote:

If only because Bond doesn't really have close friends.

Exactly. Hard to buy he's got a friend in the service after thirty years of a friendless Bond. Kind of a mistake, IMO. Would be quite humanizing for the character if Bond could get in a chat with Tanner or some equivalent about golf and/or some assignment.

What about Leiter and the whole previous film being set on another of of Bond's "friends"?

Personally felt that was a little extraneous. The idea that Bond would be Leiter's best man is patently ridiculous. The revenge plot could have been set up far better, IMO, and the film gets off on a pretty poor foot in how it gets Bond involved with Krest, Sanchez and the like.

Quote :

I also liked the line about how she had several ways to kill Bond.

I didn't mind it but picturing it being executed on film, it just seemed cheesy. I did like how she was still within the KGB, though the script was confusing by never clarifying her role within it. Like I said, Jensen's Xenia and John's Ourumov easily eclipse the henchmen as presented in the film.

Quote :

What I really liked about Augustus Trevelyan was he was present from pretty much the beginning of the film - more of a chance to explore the character. Alec doesn't ever get explored beyond the graveyard scene, and then he just becomes an anti-England one-liner machine.

I mostly agreed with you reading the script already knowing the film, however I remember the intrigue and suspense over who this Janus was when first watching the film (fortunately unspoilt by the trailers) and ultimately thinking it's still handled better. That's one major thing I think Caine improved on in his rewrite (well, I assume it was Caine) - there's some intrigue and mystery to the plot and you see it build into what it does. In France's draft it's all handed to the audience on a platter, and doesn't really escalate much as a threat as the film builds.

Quote :

It's annoying, because you can really see the Feirstein lines from a mile away. "A very...thorough...evaluation....." Ooh, sexy.

Yet another reason why I'd love to see all the drafts for this one. I know he's responsible for the female M and then presumedly the MI6 scenes (I remember Wilson states in the commentary they weren't sure whether to bring back Moneypenny and the like until later in production)... but I can't for the life of me picture him writing something as wry as the Moneypenny exchange.

I remember an interview where Feirstein claims he writes with Sean Connery's voice in his head... which does not help when you're dealing with Pierce Brosnan

Has one of my favourite bloopers in Bond that you can notice without the assistance of a replay - that was definitely a dummy used in the police car after Bond totals it with the tank.

Not to be confused with Bond girls who were dummies.

Not as obvious as the dummy that was used to land on the cake in AVTAK. I'm still astonished they didn't just hire some stunt guy for that.

There's a shot during the bit of the TSWLM train fight in which Jaws is 'bouncing' 007 off of the cabin roof interior where you can see it ain't Rog or a stuntman, too.

Dog Bond's arse seems to have made an appearance in this thread. I think we should pause for a moment's contemplation.

Contemplation? Is that what you call it?

ambler wrote:

Dog Bond's arse seems to have made an appearance in this thread. I think we should pause for a moment's contemplation.

Salomé wrote:

Contemplation? Is that what you call it?

Perhaps the word 'accommodating' would be more appropriate.

What's this thread about, again?

Such nice cheeks, too ...

ambler wrote:

Dog Bond's arse seems to have made an appearance in this thread. I think we should pause for a moment's contemplation.

I suggest we consult the Book of Genitals, chapter 6, verse 9.

I think the entire opening sequence of the film didn't make much sense.

If I rewrote it, 006 should had just killed 007 at the beginning; that whole elaborate set up was for naught.

M would had thought both 006 and 007 were killed in the mission.

Also, if Ourumov was part of 006's elaborate setup to defect from MI6; why have the guards shoot at Bond with live ammo (when Bond was running down the runway) and risk killing him?

Also, how did Bond enter the facility by bungee jumping off the dam and then ended up exiting next to a mountain with a runway with no dam anywhere in sight?

Wouldn't have been easier if he just parachuted down near the runway at night doing a HALO jump?

Finally, that was a pretty big explosion; no way 006 and Ourumov would had survived that, especially Ourumov who was standing on the runway (unless he had the time to run back inside the facility in whatever time remained in the 3 min countdown).

j7wild wrote:

I think the entire opening sequence of the film didn't make much sense.

If I rewrote it, 006 should had just killed 007 at the beginning; that whole elaborate set up was for naught.

M would had thought both 006 and 007 were killed in the mission.

Also, if Ourumov was part of 006's elaborate setup to defect from MI6; why have the guards shoot at Bond with live ammo (when Bond was running down the runway) and risk killing him?

Also, how did Bond enter the facility by bungee jumping off the dam and then ended up exiting next to a mountain with a runway with no dam anywhere in sight?

Wouldn't have been easier if he just parachuted down near the runway at night doing a HALO jump?

Finally, that was a pretty big explosion; no way 006 and Ourumov would had survived that, especially Ourumov who was standing on the runway (unless he had the time to run back inside the facility in whatever time remained in the 3 min countdown).

imo, the logic holds up pretty well in Bond terms, 007's conviction would sell 006's death, but it wasn't automatic that Bond should escape Orumov returning the bowed British infiltrator as spy exchange would achieve the same end and possibly bump him up the Russia hierachy. Bond escaping changed the situation somewhat and Trevelyan only just escapes with his face intact.

I agee the geography of the sequence is more difficult to sell but tbh its a bit like the exahust port of the Death Star, there is a weakness in the defences that is exploited, showing Bond wandering through another mountain and up several tens of stairwells for the next 3 hours wasn't nescessary imo, I was quite happy to accept 'where he exited was some distance from where he entered' etc

As for the parachute...well if that was the stunt they wanted to present then yes it probably would have worked, but if you assume radar or electronic tracking made that impossible a bungee jump just about becomes credible.....at least in the context of this slightly larger than life Bond film. Indeed 006 likely got in 'some other way' maybe by parachute? ^^.

The dive after the plane is the 'moment too far' imo but all in all after 6 years this is a celebration and reminder of what made Bond that bit special and for those less pretentious times it worked pretty well I think.

Sigh, this one is a bit difficult to explain my feelings on. GE is a very well produced return for Bond, but that's really it's only real strength. The story as presented is excruciatingly underdeveloped and when you really look at it, so much so that very little actually happens in the entire film.

Plus it is the first Bond to be self-conscious of itself. This is what is in Brosnan's performance that most people pick up on as reserved, quiet or boring. He is fully in his element as a death dealing machine of the British government, yet is reflecting on the overall meaning of his existence and why he continues to even do the job in the midst of changing times. This ties into the post-Cold War setting, and if the film had really explored this, then it would have possibly been great. But no, it doesn't.

In fact, at almost every turn it's as if the producers decided to tone things down in order to be more approachable to theater audiences. They suddenly realized that if they just brought 007 back, then maybe they could get away with it all.

The single best thing about the film is its style.The whole film has a Euro-thriller influenced look and unbelievable amount of swagger that perfectly ties in with Brosnan's suave and reflective 007.

The characters are well played, but this helps little with a story that never really takes the time to delve into anything. GE also straddles the line between analog and modern digital technology, furthering the post-Cold War setting.

The direction is solid, cinematography is nice, locales fit the film, but the big winner here is the sound mix. Oh goodness is it ever! GE was released in the midst of the sound wars of the 1990's where both Dolby and DTS constantly tried to outdo each other with bigger soundtracks. GE has an incredible bass presence, and a subwoofer track which will knock you down. Track down an original DVD or Laserdisc to hear what I mean, as the newer editions were remixed.

I also really enjoy the score, though some tracks are a bit tiresome, and the end song is atrocious.

All in all, a decent to good try, but staggeringly empty at its core.

If only the film could have been as good as the teaser trailer...still one of the finest trailers ever made.

This sent chills down the spine in 1995. Suave, sophisticated, exciting, witty, intelligent, cool, enthralling...Bond was back.

Yep ... Brozzer shooting the 'On One Man' to make '007', and then approaching the camera and addressing us with 'You were expecting someone else?' is still as cool as fuck 8) .

hegottheboot wrote:

The single best thing about the film is its style.The whole film has a Euro-thriller influenced look and unbelievable amount of swagger that perfectly ties in with Brosnan's suave and reflective 007.

I agree w/ that. I particularly like the film's use of shadow. And Campbell shoots the character in a way that seems really enamoured of him.

Brosnan pulls an equivalent sort of trick, but unfortunately ends up playing Bond like an actor who is thrilled to be playing Bond.

I didn't hate Goldeneye's score nearly as much as everyone else did. Yes, there were some "quirky" elements to it, but Serra also produced one of the soundtrack's most commercially re-used pieces: Run, Shoot and Jump. I can't possibly remember the amount of different movie trailers that started using that track.

But based upon the overall sound of Goldeneye (example: the music used to enhance the mysterious mood surrounding Natalya's email contact with Boris, and meeting Boris at the church), the group Enigma might have been a more suitable choice than Tina Turner.

Blunt Instrument wrote:

Yep ... Brozzer shooting the 'On One Man' to make '007', and then approaching the camera and addressing us with 'You were expecting someone else?' is still as cool as fuck 8) .

I remember going to see Apollo 13 in 1995 and that trailer played before hand and in all honesty I couldn't concentrate on Ron Howard's movie after that, fine film that it is, I mean it's truly excellent, but from that trailer onwards I could not wait for GoldenEye and when I first saw it (I was 11) I was a little disappointed. I thought it had a great opening, boring middle and great ending, but as time has went on and I've gotten older, I've come to love it even more, it's a great mix of plot driven Bond and silly escapist Bond. We've got Fleming touches like Bond brooding going after his former colleague and best friend, creepy grave yard scenes, an emotional charge and yet a femme fatale who likes to crush men with her thighs (quite an eye opener at such a young age) and the villains housing himself in a control centre full of extras at the end. Definitely Pierce's finest moment as 007 and in all honesty, looking back on it now, I think they struggled to top this one (although for what it's worth, I love Tomorrow Never Dies, I remember going to see that two years later as a thirteen year old and thinking it was the best movie ever made, but that's a review for another thread I feel).

I saw it before Batman Forever, which made the GE trailer the highlight of that particular cinema trip .