I completely missed that bit. Must rewatch the film.
I’m aware, it doesn’t avoid the fact that he was smuggling gold personally rather than getting his (many) henchmen to do it for him. Not complaining, as, if he had used henchmen, we’d have been deprived of their fantastic face off at the golf course.
Again, not really an issue for me. You make a good point, but, by the same logic, they could’ve melted the gold into the body of a more apt car for a henchman who could’ve passed across without attracting attention the way Goldfinger himself would, but then the story wouldn’t have been as interesting to watch, as it’d be a small smuggling story, not a Bond movie.
I’m now picturing a 2cv with gold bumpers and wing mirrors.
1 Like
Also, we must not forget Goldfinger’s ego. He simply can’t leave this to a mere henchman, he’s simply got to do it himself.
3 Likes
This little guy could sneak across though…
2 Likes
…stable genius he is? 
It’s worth pointing out in regards to the “shower scene” that part of Severine’s luring the guy into the apartment, being bait for the kill, was a bucket of champagne and 2 glasses.
I say that not in relation to the current debate, but to say that Severine might not have been luring Bond to the boat for a fling…
1 Like
That’s a cool detail.
I tend to be laughing at that point. Bond getting a Dr No reference tickles me no end.
I´d say that champagne (as a promise for seduction) is her method for luring people in.
Even more of a signifier for her nefarious ways - she is not an innocent victim anymore, she has become a dangerous assistant to Silva. Still she might hope to escape that. Or does she?
That’s one of the really good things about SKYFALL - all the characters are conflicted, ambiguity is stressed, not reduced (as in so many other blockbusters).
2 Likes
Thank guys, for the explanations.
I never got that scene, so this is realy cool! I will watch skyfall very soon, it’s not realy my favorite Bondmovie and after I saw it a couple of times in the cinema, didn’t watch it a lot, but that scene bothered me from the first time I saw the movie. Great!
I agree that many people just consume the films, but greater attention is being paid to images and how they are consumed. Such analysis is nothing new–it goes back as far as D.W. Griffith and THE BIRTH OF A NATION–and gaining prominence as more voices enter the discussion.
I look forward to the discussion, especially since I am shut out of an important aspect of it as a gay man with no children. Being gay has also spurred an interest in aesthetics as it intersects with general culture, which is another reason I enjoy the Bond novels and films so much.
1 Like
I don’t know if many of you have seen the trailer for Sam Mendes’ new war film, 1917?
If you have, take a look at this Skyfall trailer, done in the same style:
Very well done! It makes me want to re-watch it.
1 Like
That was brilliant
1 Like
Apologies if this has already been discussed at all, never mind at length.
There has been a well documented ‘discussion’ about the gloves worn in an early released (during production) press still for the Shanghai sequence that had Bond wearing gloves. It was later realised that these gloves should never have been worn if he was to be able to use the Walther with the derma-thingy.
Later, it was surmised that all filmed shots of Bond wearing the gloves had to have some digy-manipulation to remove gloves and to see just bare hands, to allow the aforementioned derma-thingy to work for the trigger action.
But in the scene showing Bond trying to hold on to Rapace’s character on the lift, before he fell to his death, Bond is once again seen wearing the ‘press still’ gloves. And thereafter not, in a scene where he is rummaging through an attaché case…
Old news?
The CGI hands thing was made up. The scene actually required Bond to be wearing gloves, it’s why Patrice slips from Bond’s grip.
Really? So in all scenes leading up to grabbing Patrice, he doesn’t wear gloves. Pops them on to let Patrice slip and then takes them off again to rummage through the case???
edit: just rewatched it, after the Road To Perdition shout out, you see him holster his gun and put his gloves back on. He then is holding his right glove in his left, gloved, hand when looking through the case.
This internet rumour, started when it was cool to hate on Craig on a weirdly personal level, is total bollocks
Sorry, I didn’t catch the Perdition reference??
You see him put his gun back in his pocket, but not put the gloves back on. But yes, you are right about the one gloved hand when looking in the case.
Anyway…
The pausing because he thinks he’s been spotted, but it turns out the killer was just looking at his own reflection. The same thing happens in Road To Perdition, but it’s Craig as the killer looking at his own reflection.
1 Like