Are Bond villains really so antisocial that they don't even tell each other to just shoot James in the face as soon as any of them get the chance? No elaborate formal dinners, no meandering discussions, no arrogant diatribes... just blammo in the head-o.
The baddest of the Bond villains actually have their movie named after them, like Dr. No and The Man With The Golden Gun. My own favorite is Auric Goldfinger, whose deliciously vile deviousness is nicely captured in the climactic scene where he pretends to be a U.S. military officer and shoots his own ally in front of American soldiers to escape, then orders those same soldiers forward and shoots all of THEM in the back. Naughty.
However, despite all his gilded wickedness, Goldfinger's big evil plan really makes no sense: he wants to detonate an atomic device inside the vault of Fort Knox to make America's gold supply radioactive for 58 years, thereby rendering his own stash of gold that much more valuable. A few issues, Auric:
1) So what, if the gold is radioactive? This is the real world, not World Of Warcraft. Gold's currency-backing power is largely symbolic, and you can just exchange ownership markers instead of actually lugging the stuff around. As if the U.S. government is really doling out Social Security payments in little bags of jingly coins.
2) Goldfinger was released in 1964, so 58 years will already be up in ten years. Which means he'd basically kind of inconvenience the world for half a century. Villainy!
3) Everyone knows there isn't really any gold in Fort Knox, anyway. The government blew it all on insidious covert military operations.