There are some films that are English Classics. According to the recent cinema season, Goldfinger is one of them. There's arguably much better British movies - Ipcress File (if we're talking spy films), the Python films, the Long Good Friday, anything by Danny Boyle, and much more - and movies that are much more British movies too. (In fact, how much of Goldfinger is set in Britain? About 7 minutes). But very few of them star James Bond, or have Iconic sixties symbolism like a minibus hanging over a cliff. So there's always commercial considerations to bear in mind.
Which is why its Goldfingah! night. Certainly the shortest 007 film I can think of (106 minutes; a good 40 minutes shorter than Casino Royale), and now in a one off digital showing for the evening. Thankfully, it was preceded by an interesting talk by a local journalist and bond fan, and a short talk about Digital projection by the head projectionist - and then straight in. No trailers. No BBFC logos. Just Bond. Pure Bond.
Now, there's not much I can say about Goldfinger. You either know it, or you don't. it's bond, so you already know whether you like it or not. Its very interesting to point out though, that bond is indeed in this film a sexist, misogynistic dinosaur - rife with the patronising attitudes of the time. Swoon! As bond and bond alone is the only man in the world who can turn a woman from a screaming lesbian avenger to a confirmed mommy wanna be (as outlined in the line "I must have appealed to her maternal instincts"). However, its even in the incidental details that his rich misogyny is noted - the entire seduction takes place on a Stud Farm, where bond is surrounded by mares for the breeding. In this case, the subtext that bond is the stud and Pussy Galore is the breeding mare (maternal instinct) is astoundingly sexist. I squealed with laughter when I noticed that for the first time; its a testament to the new digital print that the details such as "Stud Farm" written on the side of a car become apparent. Or the date of Goldfingers Tax Disc (August 64), for example. Certainly comparing it to the last time a digital master was made its a vast improvement.
The digital master, by the way, is the 4K digital scan of the original negatives as used for the recent 2006 Ultimate Edition DVD. Its obvious from the quality here - projected onto the cinema screen - that its intended for a Hi-Def or Blu-Ray release eventually. The quality of the print is lurid and astounding - the colours pop off the screen in a saturated style more reminiscent of Michael Bay than anything else, but this may have a lot to do with the then very recent use of colour film when it was made - Colour film only really came into popular usage a couple of years earlier and many films made about that time were still in Black and White (The Longest Day, anyone?). Accordingly it has quite a relatively basic colour palette due to the simplistic emulsions and processing in use at the time. The Reds are really red and sharp, the colours standing out. The print looks better than you've never seen it look before, as all the scratches and blemishes are now gone - just looking at the original masted used for the now out of print original DVD release from 2000 its obvious to see how much work has been done. However, you've never seen the sixties look so good.....except if you were there. its a beautiful looking restoration.
Went to tescos afterwards, and went home.
No comments:
Post a Comment