Recognising strength – The Woman with the Golden Bullet — Licence to Queer
Sam Rogers
Andrea Anders drives the plot of The Man With The Golden Gun. So why is the character often overlooked when people talk about Bond Girls? On the film’s 50th anniversary, Sam Rogers explores how The Man With The Golden Gun was produced on the cusp of massive social change - and how this is reflected
https://assets.squarespace.com/universal/default-favicon.ico
Licence to Queer
Andrea was a character that I enjoyed and rooted for. I was aware that she wasn’t the reason I was watching a Bond film, but this film’s narrative is driven by her actions, and knowing that she wanted Bond’s help to escape from Scaramanga and ultimately failed to do so leaves a sour taste. As I got older, the character and her plot line stood out to me and actually frustrated me as she’s dropped from the film as it enters a bonkers final act (that I still adore, despite my feelings about Andrea’s exclusion).

After watching Octopussy and seeing Maud Adams performance as the title character, I could understand why she was more memorable and beloved in the Bond community. She has more of a leading role in that film and her character is quite the 180 from Andrea. Yet, I would always go back to The Man With The Golden Gun and think “Andrea deserved better and I love Maud’s performance”.

The inception of this article most likely stems from my original article for Licence To Queer, ‘Bury Your Bond Girls’. Andrea was an example of a character I used to demonstrate how certain Bond Girls are exited from the films in similar ways to many gay characters in media, with the easiest way to write them out being to just kill them. Unlike other characters, especially in this era, we do get a greater overview of what her life is and the struggles that she’s going through. It’s from here that I wanted to shine a light on Andrea and consider why I feel strongly towards her.

A questionable era – Portrayals in the 1970s

I don’t think it’s too out there to claim that the Bond Girls featured in 70s films are perhaps the weakest of the franchise. I believe this is due to many female characters being poorly written, given a lesser amount of strength and agency and utilised more as pawns of male characters in one way or another. Tiffany Case, Plenty O’Toole, Solitaire, Rosie Carver, Mary Goodnight, Andrea Anders and even Anya Amasova all struggle to be seen as vehemently strong female characters when weaker elements of their characterisations overshadow their strengths (whether it’s their intellect, physical strength, comedic personality, their femininity etc.). What’s infuriating is that many of the female characters in 1960s Bond films don’t appear to fit in this same category to me.

Granted, some do share similar stories and character types with 60s characters such as the abused mistress Domino, the double-crossing Fiona Volpe and personal pilot Pussy Galore sharing some attributes with Andrea Anders, Rosie Carver and Corinne DuFour respectively. However each of the three aforementioned characters have at least one opportunity to really prove themselves and distinguish themselves as strong women. Domino ultimately kills her abuser Emilio Largo (stopping her own abuse and actively helping the mission). Fiona, whilst dying, does so after completing a series of steps that led SPECTRE to almost complete its mission and being close to killing James Bond. And Pussy is able to keep up appearances and switch the lethal gas canisters and warn the CIA of Goldfinger’s plan and is only detected by him once the plan has been thwarted.

Unlike these characters, Andrea isn’t able to truly escape her abuser, Rosie doesn’t get close to killing Bond and is played for laughs rather than a legitimate threat and Corinne is shown as naïve and helpless, receiving one of the most brutal deaths of the franchise. With these characters and more, including Honey Ryder, Aki and Tracy Bond, I can easily say that in general, women in 1960s Bond appear to be much “stronger” than most of the women of the 1970s.

Part of me believes that Andrea is ahead of her time, especially as a character brought to life in the middle of the 1970s, a time that was seeing an emergence of second wave feminism. The cultural impact of this cannot be understated with issues such as reproductive rights, workplace discrimination, and sexual harassment being at the forefront of this activism. This movement also helped to bring attention to the broader issue of gender inequality, and contributed to important legal and social changes, such as Title IX in the USA in 1972 (prohibiting sex-based discrimination in education) along with the legalisation of abortion in 1973, five years after it was made legal in the UK. This period of feminist activism is often seen as a critical turning point in the history of women's rights.

Feminist scholars have noted that the feminist movement of the time challenged traditional gender roles and stereotypes, leading to more complex and nuanced representations of women in film. Some have also argued that the rise of feminist film theory during this era helped to further analyse and critique mainstream Hollywood depictions of women. Overall, it seems that second wave feminism played a key role in changing the way women were represented in film during the 1970s.

The effects of this can be seen as the decade closes and the 80s begins, with characters such as Dr Holly Goodhead, Melina Havelock, Octopussy, Magda and Fatima Blush all being stronger characters and much more well-rounded compared to many characters in the early-mid 1970s. This is reinforced by a lot of these characters leading the charge and being more active participants: Dr Goodhead’s CIA background and NASA experience enables herself and Bond to go to space to defeat Drax; Melina saves Bond with her crossbow at least twice and provides a means of escape from Gonzales’ henchmen; and of course we have Octopussy’s and Magda’s fighting prowess and Fatima’s insane schemes to defeat Bond (made better by a devilishly camp performance from Barbara Carrera).

“I need 007”

Andrea Anders sticks out to me and always has done. Within this script of amazing one-liners is a serious storyline about an abuser and someone trying to survive that abuse. As a child, I always liked her character, and I found her shocking demise was frightening, eerie, and also very sad. The older I’ve gotten, the more I see the intricacies of her character and storyline and appreciate her importance to the film regardless of whether the writers and producers saw that themselves. I’ve mentioned in previous articles focusing on female characters (such as Tracy Bond, Elektra King and women who didn’t survive their films) that Bond girls can be seen as a middle ground for gay men who don’t see themselves in media. Historically, and even in modern times, gay men (and other members of the LGBTQ+ community) have learned to hide parts of themselves as the world around them doesn’t provide representation for them to associate with. I look at Andrea and see someone who wants to be free and escape an unhappy life, but that’s easier said than done. She is trapped in a seemingly endless loop of being stuck on Scaramanga’s island, travelling to retrieve his golden bullets, and having sex with him prior to his assassinations. Until she can escape, she needs to get on with the situation she’s in and find the right opportunity to break free and essentially “come out” of hiding.

As the title of this section suggests, she needs help from James Bond. Whilst this may make someone initially believe that she is weak, I believe the important thing to note here is that she is the one who instigates it. To me, that’s an incredibly strong thing to do because there is so much risk involved. Andrea hasn’t randomly met Bond and blurted out her troubles; she has brought him in and has created a situation that gives her an opportunity to escape. As far as the audience is aware, Andrea is a relatively normal woman who just so happened to have met the wrong man and is now stuck in an abusive and loveless relationship. Whatever power she did have has been taken and it appears that she can only physically leave Scaramanga when doing a task for him, ensuring that she returns.

Scaramanga himself, whilst quite charming to others, is sadistic in how he treats Andrea. He uses her for pleasure, as if she is his second servant. He appears to have more love for his primary servant/assistant, Nick Nack than he does his own mistress! Andrea is “his property” and he likes to know where she is and what she’s doing. It’s interesting to wonder if Tom Mankiewicz and Richard Maibaum (who each wrote/influenced the screenplay of the film) were aiming for audiences to engage with this and see the relationship as abusive. Through our eyes and a 2024 lens, it’s quite easy to conclude that the treatment of Andrea by Scaramanaga is wrong and that his “ownership” of her in all aspects should be judged. 50 years ago, was that totally the same case? The year that this film came out (1974) was the year that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act was passed in the US, which meant that women could be universally allowed to open up a bank account in their own name. So for some contemporary audiences, the idea of Andrea being property to Scaramanga may not have been such an alien idea. With this context in mind and the positioning of this abusive relationship, it does appear that the film was ahead in its time for acknowledging an unhealthy, abusive relationship, and the victim attempting to escape from it.

“I’ve dreamed of you setting me free.”

In The Man With The Golden Gun, Andrea Anders is commonly referred to as the secondary Bond Girl, with the primary female character being Mary Goodnight. Both characters play different roles within the story and contrast each other in numerous ways which can benefit and hinder them.

Goodnight is portrayed as loyal and resourceful, but somewhat ditzy and clumsy. She is a fellow agent who supports Bond during his mission and has been around him before (in a professional and implied personal capacity). Throughout her time in the film, Goodnight is positioned as comic relief rather than being a skilled field agent. This positioning of her character leaves her being trapped a total of three times! The first, in Bond’s closet (whilst he has sex with Andrea), the second, in the boot of Scaramanaga’s car during a chase with Bond (before it turns into a plane) and finally, she takes on Andrea’s role as a kept woman on Scaramanaga’s island (complete with a bikini to wear for the entirety of the final act).

Andrea, on the other hand, is portrayed as a more vulnerable character in the story. There appears to be more of an arc created around her which, unfortunately, is dropped entirely once she is killed off. Both female characters ultimately are in need of rescue by Bond but, with Andrea positioned as a woman in distress, it changes the tone of the film, which is mostly mid-70s camp. This makes her storyline feel out of place, especially when themes of abuse, coercion, power dynamics, and tragedy are in play.

Overall, the key difference between Mary Goodnight and Andrea Anders lies in their characterisation and roles within the narrative. Mary Goodnight, despite not being the most progressive character, is still a strong-willed, independent ally to James Bond, while Andrea Anders is a more complex character caught in a tumultuous situation beyond her control.

Despite her unfortunate end I try to look at Andrea’s inclusion in the film as positively as possible. She understood the situation she was in and figured out how she could get out of it. Though she needed a man (James Bond) to help her do this, she puts in a lot of work herself, including getting Scaramanga’s fingerprints on the golden bullet and sending it on to MI6 with a forged note. We as viewers aren’t sure if she’s trained to use a gun, but she still has one for protection, whether or not she got this herself or if it was given to her by Scaramanga. Unfortunately we don’t get much more characterisation from her as she’s very much a kept woman and, as the secondary Bond Girl, this puts her in a very limited position.

Whilst I commend the producers for going in the in this direction for the character and for portraying a relationship like this, it could’ve been handled much better.

One of the main criticisms that I and many other people have is that the Andrea storyline completely changes the tone of the film and seems at odds with what the film is trying to set itself up as. This is apparent most in two hotel room scenes, the first when Bond attacks Andrea and the other when she reveals that she sent the golden bullet to MI6 (when, moments before, Bond and Goodnight were about to sleep together after another camp exchange). With the latter scene in mind, it appears that the two female leads are being portrayed side-by-side against one another with one character acting seriously and the other being focused on her relationship with Bond. It makes it difficult to truly invest in either of them as fully realised characters. In an ideal world, Goodnight and Andrea would have met, with the former looking to protect Andrea whilst still focusing on the mission at hand.

“Who knows? He may even use one of those little golden bullets on you. That would be a pity, because they’re very expensive.”

The above quote, from Bond during his interrogation of Andrea sticks out to me so much more as an adult. Not only does he prophesise Andrea’s death but he also basically states that the golden bullets are worth more than Andrea’s life. The disregard for her as a person and bringing up something that Andrea herself has probably thought about makes this scene much colder and makes me understand why some audiences don’t like this scene and why Andrea’s role in the film is viewed negatively.

The character of Andrea has been analysed from a feminist perspective by various scholars. Some argue that she is portrayed as a tragic mistress, manipulated and controlled by the male villain, Scaramanga, whilst also being used by our lead character. Others point out that she is a victim of circumstance, given limited choices in a male-dominated world. Her character has been seen as problematic in terms of representation of women in Bond films, but also as a reflection of the societal norms and values of the era in which the film is set.

What makes Andrea complex is that despite being trapped as Scaramanga's mistress, following his orders and being under his influence, she manages to help Bond by revealing Scaramanga's plans and initially retrieving the Solex Agitator. Additionally, her character is sympathetic as she is shown to fear Scaramanga and his violent tendencies. So despite the potential negative representation that Andrea could represent, I believe that she is well-written (on the whole) as, although she is initially presented as a typical Bond Girl, she has more depth and agency than many other characters in the franchise.

It's open to interpretation whether or not Andrea Anders from The Man With The Golden Gun is a "bad" character (in the sense that to many audience members, she’s just another Bond Girl and is in a weaker Bond film). She is portrayed as a woman who is under the control of the villainous Francisco Scaramanga, and she assists Bond in his mission to stop him. Some may criticise her for being a victim rather than a strong female character, while others may view her as a sympathetic figure who is trapped in a difficult situation. Ultimately, it's up to individual viewers to decide how they feel about the character.

The views of the audience

In July 2023, I created a 24-hour Twitter poll asking people what they thought about Andrea to gauge what some people thought of her. 96 people voted on four categories:

● Excellent – A favourite 28%

● Very good – But could be better 32%

● Fair – She does her part 36%

● Poor – Who’s Andrea? 4%

Of course, this is a very small pool of results but it does display how polarising a character Andrea is with a small majority believing that her character is fair, whilst the very good and excellent categories come second and third respectively. Thankfully, only 4% believed that the character was poor but the results overall don’t conclusively contribute to the argument that Andrea is a key component in The Man With The Golden Gun.

The poll did allow for people to comment and share their views which included:

“I honestly prefer Anders to Octopussy, if only for her tragic arc. There’s greater emotional relevance I think, even if in many ways she’s a standard sacrificial lamb Bond girl.” – Jordan Gill @KJordanGill

“I went with (very) good but could be better purely because I don’t think it’s the best written film. I think she is superb and much better as Anders than Britt Ekland is as Miss Goodnight.” – Liam Reid @ltreidy67

“She’s probably the best secondary Bond girl in the series. She is the emotional heart of the film – what makes it work. She’s what makes me want the villain to lose. Also, great acting.” Matthew M. Foster @MatthewMFoster

“She was close to being a great character, her demise came a little too early for me and I wish she had a little more to do. You don’t really get to know her well enough, granted she is pitiful from the start and Maude expresses it well. Well done performance with what she had.” Tyler Beamer @Beams78

“I prefer Andrea to Octopussy because of the BRILLIANT idea of making her the one who sent the bullet essentially crafting a FRWL (From Russia With Love) emotionally driven story of a character and intrigue. The problem is the rushed production and two scripts mashed together never fully gel.” Damn Fool Idealistic Crusader @DamnFoolCrusade

These were some fantastic comments that helped confirm some of my own thoughts whilst acknowledging alternative opinions on the character.

Recognising strength

Andrea Anders is one of the most overlooked and underappreciated characters in James Bond. For general audiences, she’s just another Bond Girl and, to many a Bond fan, she’s the other character that Maud Adams plays who doesn’t achieve the heights of Octopussy. For me? Andrea adds a certain gravitas that The Man With The Golden Gun needs, but also doesn’t necessarily deserve. Andrea’s presence elevates the entirety of the piece. The loss of Andrea does leave a large gap in the film’s final act and unfortunately leaves us with the stereotypical trope of a person wanting freedom and ultimately not getting it (or seeing their tormentor get their just desserts). The only consolation is that she most likely died with hope, which is far more than what she had at the beginning of the film.

Overall, Andrea Anders represents what a female character in Bond can be. Complex, proactive, elusive, stylish and imperfect. Dare I say ahead of her time? I do. Andrea Anders was and is the strength of The Man With The Golden Gun.