If From Russia With Love was the film in which the James Bond franchise found its voice and its legs, then Goldfinger is certainly the film in which the franchise hit its stride. It’s consistently in the top 2 or 3 of any list of favorite Bond films, and it certainly is the film that set the series towards its iconic standards. This is the film where James Bond became James Bond.

From the iconic Aston Martin with its oil slick, bullet proof windows , front & rear machine guns, and ejector seat to the pun-is-certainly-intended Bond Girl Pussy Galore, to Sean Connery really settling into the character, this film has everything that made the Bond films what they became. Not to mention the fact that some of the most famous and popular scenes in the series appear in this film.

• Bond entering the hotel room to see Jill Masterson dead, painted head to foot in gold paint.
• Oddjob to decapitating the statue with his razor-sharp bowler hat.
• Bond strapped to the table as the laser inches towards his crotch and asking Goldfinger if he expects him to talk, to which Goldfinger retorts, “No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!”

I had seen Goldfinger before, but not for a long time. As I was watching it, and thinking about From Russia With Love, I was thinking about how close they were in quality and entertainment. I think there are a couple of subtle things that give Goldfinger a slight edge in terms of making it a better film, and they’re all from the screenwriting perspective. First off is the one-liners. There are far fewer of them in Goldfinger and they’re much more effective and funnier because they’re more strategically placed and thoughtfully used. One of the great lessons of screenwriting is that less is more, and the fact that there are fewer one-liners makes them a lot more effective with far fewer groaners.

The other thing is the tension in the climax. The script is written in such a way that you’re literally wondering how things are going to turn out at the end. The writers created a scenario in which it looks like it will be impossible for Bond to win, and the stakes are very, very high. If Goldfinger succeeds in his plan, the entire economy of the west will collapse and the Chinese will dominate the world’s financial system. (Sound familiar? More on that in a moment). The screenwriters then went on to write in a plausible solution that creates a dramatic and satisfying climax in that plot line.

Finally, as in the other Bond films to date, there is a very solid Hero’s Journey. Although Goldfinger does have a much stronger 3-Act structure than From Russia With Love. The three acts can be broken down as follows:

• Act 1: Bond figuring out who Goldfinger is
• Act 2A: Bond figuring out Goldfinger’s plans
• Act 2B: Bond figures out Goldfinger’s plan, but is captured
• Act 3: Bond escapes and tries to stop Goldfinger

Perhaps that sounds like an over-simplification, but the fact that the plot can be broken down that easily shows how strong it is and how tightly and cleanly they crafted the story.

Finally, one topic I’ve been neglecting a little bit is the cultural impact of the Bond films and how they reflect the world in which they exist. Obviously the Cold War was  a huge theme in a lot of these films, but there have also been prescient moments throughout the series. Showing the Chinese attempting to circumvent our currency system in order to become a world economic power was forward thinking. Bond films are quite often thought of as being nothing more than popcorn movies that provide audiences with little more than escapism and entertainment. But if you look deeper into the series and into each film, the Bond films also show the more complicated aspects of our existence and how what we do affects the world around us. The Bond films are much deeper than they’re given credit for, and Goldfinger started to create the series’ depth.