Lulu on her last tour.

This is overall a very well done review of the strengths and weaknesses of "The Man With The Golden Gun"(1974). But the narrator fails to recognize that not only is John Barry's music score from that Bond film only at best "serviceable", but in fairness to Barry, it was blatantly obvious and quite understandable that after creating 3 excellent Bond music scores (i.e., "FRWL"(1963), "Goldfinger"(1964) and "Thunderball"(1965)) and 3 masterpiece Bond film music scores (i.e., "YOLT"(1967), "OHMSS"(1969) and "DAF"(1971), Barry had simply reached the bottom of his creative well as far as Bond music. No music composer no matter how brilliantly talented can turn out excellent music scores every single time, year after year after year! Even Barry's music score for "Moonraker"(1979) although at times very good, is nonetheless overly praised and simply indicative of his running out of fresh ideas for the Bond films. Also, will narrators of videos stop using the grammatically incorrect non-word "anyways"!! The word is "anyway"! There is no letter "s" at the end of that word!

​@michaelbarlow6610 Thanks for pointing out the "anyways" problem; I'll try to do better. Also, Barry's score for this is my least favorite of all his 11 Bond scores (see my Soundtracks ranking video), though you'd probably be pissed to see where I put Goldfinger and YOLT.

@stephenjarvis534. My only problem with the music score for "Goldfinger"(1964) is that it is too harsh sounding. "YOLT"(1967) is rightly widely regarded as one of John Barry's 3 masterpiece Bond film music scores!

That's an important distinction to make, and I'm glad you can do that. :) My lists are always about favorites, not "bests".

I saw this when I was 16 - and one of my favorites. 😃 Yes, it bogs in the middle, but the last 45 minutes are great. From the Thai kickboxing forward.

Its my favourite at the moment.

The destruction of Scarrys lair looks cheap by today's CGI.

The film should have concentrated on the rivalry between those two. All this stuff about Solar Power was a waste.

@ricardocantoral7672 totally agree

Welcome aboard. I said Thunderball, but there are plenty of mistakes that I've made like that in other videos. No joke, I record each section of these videos 3 times, and I still miss things. When I was editing the video, there was one bit where I kept saying "Mary Goodlight," so I quickly had to re-record that.

Ok snowflake 😂

Yes, but Scaramanga just left a real gun with the mannequin?

@@stephenjarvis534I think so: I just put it down to lazy script-writing, similar to when Hip drives off and leaves Bond behind so they have an excuse for the boat chase sequence.

@@stephenjarvis534I think so: I just put it down to lazy script-writing, similar to the way that Hip leaves Bond behind so there's an excuse for the boat chase sequence.

​@@stephenjarvis534 yes I imagine that all the weapons are live and Scaramanga and NikNak know this and use them to cheat if required

I can't wait to see the hate I get for my A View to A Kill review. It's one of my least favorites, but I know there is a vocal group that really love it.

You get a thumbs up, but I have to disagree that Live And Let Die "was unintentionally a racist movie." (And this perspective from a black man who was around 13 years old at the time). Sure. Fleming's novel was adapted to tap into the blaxploitation craze, but this time with a white guy for the win. But I believe the screenwriters were very careful to depict black antagonists as strong, smart, and, for the most part, ahead of the game. Audiences in 1973 were not disturbed by some of the movie's dark moments because overall they were too buzy laughing and applauding a fun James Bond movie for crissakes!

@@tomchris60 yeah but this part of the bond was criticized alot by people. The writers had no clue what blaxpoilation was and how important it was to the community. Well live and let die wasn't a horrible movie but it was the one that was pulling down the franchise until the spy who loved me was released

Live and Let Die did have rather dated stereotypes but it could have been must worse like the book.

Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. My problem isn't that Bond sleeps with her, or that that's a key aspect of the Bond Women; my problem is more that she's a main Bond Woman who seems to be aware that she's the sex object, and virtually contributes nothing else to the plot. If your name is on the poster, I expect you to do something to help move the story forward, beyond being the prize at the end. The only thing she does is lead Bond to Scaramanga's base, which is only because she happens to have a tracker on her and not because she does anything of her own accord to deliberately lead Bond to the hideout. Plenty of other Bond Women also actively do something to help their films besides being the eye candy. Honey Rider guides Bond on Crab Key, Tiffany Case is part of the smuggling operation, Kara Milovy leads the raid to rescue Bond, Wai Lin disables the stealth boat, etc. Goodnight virtually does little helpful, and her active motivation seems to be sleeping with Bond. That seems rather insulting for a woman who is a fellow field agent of Bond's to be so superficial like that. Just wanted to make it clear that I'm not dinging her for not being a roaring feminist icon. I just feel like most Bond Women are better than the brainless bimbos people think they are, and it's a shame when Goodnight is one of the few that seems to validate a flawed perception that keeps people away from this series.

@@stephenjarvis534 She's supposed to be the main Bond girl in this film? Really? Because objectively I'd say that both Goodnight and (honestly not Octopussy) were both minor Bond girls. Similar to Aki, or the Mastersons in Goldfinger. Significant impact, but far from pivotal - that's the role they play. And so do the two Bond girls here. Not the only Bond film where there isn't a "main" Bond girl. Honestly I don't think it's possible to state the characteristics of what makes a "good" Bond girl. Then to judge the rest of them accordingly. It's not just that the franchise has lasted 60 years. But, far more importanly, the Western world's cultural view on women has changed so much during this timeperiod that comparisons become almost ludicrous. To the point that Connery's portrayal of Bond would see him cancelled in seconds.

@xJavelin1 I'm not really sure I understand that viewpoint of not having a main Bond Woman in this film, whereas I could totally see that point with the other examples you offered. In regards to the second part, you are absolutely correct about perceptions changing and that makes it hard to define such a large group by universal standards, since some of them would not apply to one group or the other. However, when offering a review on something, you are obviously judging it by personal standards (I would never presume to be offering the final authority on the subject). But then, I feel like if I take what I understand of your point to its further conclusion, then there is virtually little about earlier films that I can critique since it holds the protective barrier of "it's of a different era, so you can't judge it by modern standards". Which seems to be a disservice to films as a whole to say they can't hold up over time.