Many people look at Sean Connery as their favorite Bond, but I guess I just don't see why ?

1678911

Comments

  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,148
    @ProfJoeButcher
    Goldfinger and Largo are a different type of villains so Bond reacts to them differently as well.
    Dr. No is wealthy but Bond recognizes that money is not his primary motivator, but rather a desire to prove his superiority despite the challenges he has faced - not so with Goldfinger and Largo.
    Both men are extremely wealthy individuals who live in luxury and enjoy the good things in life, something Bond equally appreciates and can relate to.
    Connery may show less overt animosity towards them but what's never in doubt is how he relishes every opportunity to upstage them, another aspect of Bond's character Connery mastered better than anyone that followed.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,437
    Connery will always be my favourite. He is compelling to watch whenever he's on the screen. That iconic first utterance of "Bond, James Bond." is delivered with the right tone, a slight pause, the danger it hints at and the confidence is amazing. Connery also had the great advantage of doing some of the better Fleming works as the producers discarded continuations after the attache case was mentioned in GF.

    I always recall the quote of Connery being like a panther. Light on his feet and ready to unleash at any moment. I can see that in a lot of his performances. He elevates DAF and basically carries NSNA.
  • Posts: 15,127
    R1s1ngs0n wrote: »
    @ProfJoeButcher
    Goldfinger and Largo are a different type of villains so Bond reacts to them differently as well.
    Dr. No is wealthy but Bond recognizes that money is not his primary motivator, but rather a desire to prove his superiority despite the challenges he has faced - not so with Goldfinger and Largo.
    Both men are extremely wealthy individuals who live in luxury and enjoy the good things in life, something Bond equally appreciates and can relate to.
    Connery may show less overt animosity towards them but what's never in doubt is how he relishes every opportunity to upstage them, another aspect of Bond's character Connery mastered better than anyone that followed.
    Let's not forget that the circumstances where he meets them are completely different. He's made a prisoner of Dr No after trespassing on his island and taking direct enemy actions against him. With Goldfinger and Largo, it's in a social setting, where he must show a veneer of civility.
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,148
    Ludovico wrote: »
    R1s1ngs0n wrote: »
    @ProfJoeButcher
    Goldfinger and Largo are a different type of villains so Bond reacts to them differently as well.
    Dr. No is wealthy but Bond recognizes that money is not his primary motivator, but rather a desire to prove his superiority despite the challenges he has faced - not so with Goldfinger and Largo.
    Both men are extremely wealthy individuals who live in luxury and enjoy the good things in life, something Bond equally appreciates and can relate to.
    Connery may show less overt animosity towards them but what's never in doubt is how he relishes every opportunity to upstage them, another aspect of Bond's character Connery mastered better than anyone that followed.
    Let's not forget that the circumstances where he meets them are completely different. He's made a prisoner of Dr No after trespassing on his island and taking direct enemy actions against him. With Goldfinger and Largo, it's in a social setting, where he must show a veneer of civility.
    thats-true-kramer.gif
  • edited June 2022 Posts: 3,327
    [ My apparent nitpicking is honestly a result of me just wondering why I never connected as much to Sean as many fans have (he was the third or fourth Bond I saw).
    That may have something to do with it. Usually your first Bond is the one you stick with. Mine was Connery in GF. I saw it first time as a kid when it came on TV, mid 1970's.

    My dad probably influenced me too, telling me Connery was the Bond from the books, and Moore just wasn't Bond. He was The Saint.

    And that was my experience through the 70's and 80's until Dalton came along. The `other fella' from OHMSS didn't really register with me as a child, until I saw the film properly mid 1980's. My earliest memory of OHMSS was probably late 70's, seeing the scene on TV when Lazenby escapes on the cable car wire, and saying to my Dad `who's this?'
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited June 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Always loved the famous anecdote that Sir Rog told on various chatshows, where he was in a restaurant with his son and Connery walked in.
    'Dad, there's James Bond!'
    'But Christian, I'm James Bond.'
    'No, dad, I mean the real one!'
    That yarn never gets old. Moore had a great line in self-deprecating humour, it's one of the things that was endearing about him.
  • Posts: 1,632
    [ My apparent nitpicking is honestly a result of me just wondering why I never connected as much to Sean as many fans have (he was the third or fourth Bond I saw).
    That may have something to do with it. Usually your first Bond is the one you stick with. Mine was Connery in GF. I saw it first time as a kid when it came on TV, mid 1970's.

    My dad probably influenced me too, telling me Connery was the Bond from the books, and Moore just wasn't Bond. He was The Saint.

    And that was my experience through the 70's and 80's until Dalton came along. The `other fella' from OHMSS didn't really register with me as a child, until I saw the film properly mid 1980's. My earliest memory of OHMSS was probably late 70's, seeing the scene on TV when Lazenby escapes on the cable car wire, and saying to my Dad `who's this?'

    On ABC in the US, the first time that OHMSS was shown on American TV, they split it into two nights, and started it mid-story, then went back and caught up. Ugh ! How could the producers have allowed such nonsense ! Please, don't ANYONE complain any more about Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson and their choices as producers !
  • ^This.^
  • edited June 2022 Posts: 2,918
    Did the producers really have much say in how the films were presented on TV? My impression was that they signed off on the broadcast rights, pocketed the cash, and that was it. They knew the films would have to be edited for content and length, but only a madman could have anticipated what ABC had in store for OHMSS.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited June 2022 Posts: 3,154
    True. The first time you see the ABC cut of OHMSS is a real jaw-dropper - and not in a good way!
  • Posts: 3,327
    Since62 wrote: »
    [ My apparent nitpicking is honestly a result of me just wondering why I never connected as much to Sean as many fans have (he was the third or fourth Bond I saw).
    That may have something to do with it. Usually your first Bond is the one you stick with. Mine was Connery in GF. I saw it first time as a kid when it came on TV, mid 1970's.

    My dad probably influenced me too, telling me Connery was the Bond from the books, and Moore just wasn't Bond. He was The Saint.

    And that was my experience through the 70's and 80's until Dalton came along. The `other fella' from OHMSS didn't really register with me as a child, until I saw the film properly mid 1980's. My earliest memory of OHMSS was probably late 70's, seeing the scene on TV when Lazenby escapes on the cable car wire, and saying to my Dad `who's this?'

    On ABC in the US, the first time that OHMSS was shown on American TV, they split it into two nights, and started it mid-story, then went back and caught up. Ugh ! How could the producers have allowed such nonsense ! Please, don't ANYONE complain any more about Barbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson and their choices as producers !

    Would they have had a say in how that was televised by ABC?
  • Posts: 15,127
    Revelator wrote: »
    Did the producers really have much say in how the films were presented on TV? My impression was that they signed off on the broadcast rights, pocketed the cash, and that was it. They knew the films would have to be edited for content and length, but only a madman could have anticipated what ABC had in store for OHMSS.

    I've seen some TV airing when they put the PTS after the credit for some reason. And they really badly cut it. The result was jarring to say the least. In YOLT, you see the gunbarrel, then the space shuttle for a second, a glimpse of Bond shot, then the credit/song, the a second of the funerals, then space shuttle again and full pts, the back to funerals.
  • Posts: 1,917
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    The Bond books were well known.

    That's true, especially from 1958 or so onwards after the comic strip adaptations of Fleming's Bond novels began in the Daily Express newspaper.

    In Britain, yes, but in the U.S. and likely many other countries, they didn't sell well. The early novels had changed titles and it wasn't until President Kennedy named FRWL one of his 10 favorite books, which was around the time the films were being made and then they exploded in popularity. The character was obscure enough distributors considered releasing DN on the drive-in circuit, but somebody got the good sense to give it a proper release.
  • Posts: 1,632
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    The Bond books were well known.

    That's true, especially from 1958 or so onwards after the comic strip adaptations of Fleming's Bond novels began in the Daily Express newspaper.

    In Britain, yes, but in the U.S. and likely many other countries, they didn't sell well. The early novels had changed titles and it wasn't until President Kennedy named FRWL one of his 10 favorite books, which was around the time the films were being made and then they exploded in popularity. The character was obscure enough distributors considered releasing DN on the drive-in circuit, but somebody got the good sense to give it a proper release.

    Understood, but please note that Drive-Ins back were GREAT places to enjoy a Bond film ! Seriously, though. Those rather tinny speakers ? When the Bond music blared through them it raised those speakers to the highest level of their experience ! And - BIG screen ! Screens that large would not be seen again until the IMAX theaters opened. While the IMAX theaters are known for their superb sound - and I know a lot of this is rooted in nostalgia - those drive-in speakers helped make a Bond film exciting !
  • Posts: 1,917
    Since62 wrote: »
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    The Bond books were well known.

    That's true, especially from 1958 or so onwards after the comic strip adaptations of Fleming's Bond novels began in the Daily Express newspaper.

    In Britain, yes, but in the U.S. and likely many other countries, they didn't sell well. The early novels had changed titles and it wasn't until President Kennedy named FRWL one of his 10 favorite books, which was around the time the films were being made and then they exploded in popularity. The character was obscure enough distributors considered releasing DN on the drive-in circuit, but somebody got the good sense to give it a proper release.

    Understood, but please note that Drive-Ins back were GREAT places to enjoy a Bond film ! Seriously, though. Those rather tinny speakers ? When the Bond music blared through them it raised those speakers to the highest level of their experience ! And - BIG screen ! Screens that large would not be seen again until the IMAX theaters opened. While the IMAX theaters are known for their superb sound - and I know a lot of this is rooted in nostalgia - those drive-in speakers helped make a Bond film exciting !

    Oh yeah, I agree. I meant they were going to bury the film so it didn't have a real chance at an audience. I saw LALD and FYEO the first time on a drive-in screen. Would also see rereleases and OP after I had seen it in a theater. Great memories.
  • edited July 2022 Posts: 526
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    DAD? TWINE? No one was more smarmy than Brozz... Connery had more presence in his little finger, than most actors have in their entire being. He carried poor films on his shoulders. Magnetic, most can't keep their eyes off of him... A genuine movie star.
  • Posts: 654
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!
    I’d rather sit down right now and watch either of those 2 films than any of Craig’s. Fun, like Bond films should be and once were.
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,148
    peter wrote: »
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    DAD? TWINE? No one was more smarmy than Brozz... Connery had more presence in his little finger, than most actors have in their entire being. He carried poor films on his shoulders. Magnetic, most can't keep their eyes off of him... A genuine movie star.
    Couldn’t have said it better. I actually quite like Brosnan in most of his other roles but greatly dislike him as Bond.
    Connery looked effortlessly cool and self-confident, but Brosnan’s smugness and pretty boy mannerism just plain irritate me.
  • Posts: 1,917
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    If Connery's many dark one-liners were dumb in your opinion, please share which Bond actor's one-liners you preferred, and we can debate from there. His DAF comedic lines were a nice stretch, actually.
    R1s1ngs0n wrote: »
    peter wrote: »
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    DAD? TWINE? No one was more smarmy than Brozz... Connery had more presence in his little finger, than most actors have in their entire being. He carried poor films on his shoulders. Magnetic, most can't keep their eyes off of him... A genuine movie star.
    Couldn’t have said it better. I actually quite like Brosnan in most of his other roles but greatly dislike him as Bond.
    Connery looked effortlessly cool and self-confident, but Brosnan’s smugness and pretty boy mannerism just plain irritate me.

    Part of the problem with Brosnan taking over as Bond was the whole born to play Bond preconceived notion. I don't disagree he was the right man to play the role at that time, but in delivering the hybrid of Connery and Moore without improving on them then he gives you what you expect and nothing more and therefore doesn't especially stand out.

    He was fine, but of the other five, there are things they did that you can pick out that makes them stand out.
  • edited July 2022 Posts: 3,327
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    FRWL and GF - think of these 2 and they don't get much better.

    As for versatile - have you seen The Offence? And Connery is still the only Bond to have won an Oscar.

    Horrendous opinion.

  • Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.
  • M16_CartM16_Cart Craig fanboy?
    Posts: 541
    Was. Until Craig.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,154
    Same, I have to say. Connery was the first Bond I saw (as a kid, on UK tv) and I couldn't even conceive of ever preferring anyone else as Bond. When Craig was cast, I couldn't even imagine him in the role. But, yes, as it turned out, CraigBond resonated with me more and on a more personal level. Who'da thunk...
  • Posts: 3,327
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.

    Agreed. And I doubt this will ever change.

    Craig rivalled Connery when CR was first released, but sadly it was short lived. His tenure went downhill rapidly, cementing his legacy as probably the worst Bond of the entire franchise with NTTD.
  • M16_Cart wrote: »
    Was. Until Craig.

    I personally think that’s a bit of a stretch but I respect your opinion.
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.

    Agreed. And I doubt this will ever change.

    Craig rivalled Connery when CR was first released, but sadly it was short lived. His tenure went downhill rapidly, cementing his legacy as probably the worst Bond of the entire franchise with NTTD.

    I wouldn’t say NTTD cements him as the worst Bond. Even his films that I despise like QOS, and Spectre, he’s been a highlight of them. But then again, I hold all of the Bond actors in high esteem.
  • Agent_Zero_OneAgent_Zero_One Ireland
    edited August 2022 Posts: 554
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.
    And Connery's performance is the best part of NSNA.
  • Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.
    And Connery's performance is the best part of NSNA.

    It’s a considerably stronger performance than the ones he gave in both YOLT and DAF, but that film always puts a sour taste in my mouth due to the circumstances behind its production. It just comes across as such a cynical attempt to shove a Middle Finger in the face of Cubby Broccoli and EON, and Connery plays a huge part in that cynicism.
  • Posts: 3,327
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    You’re just singling out two of his very worst Bond films just to make your point. Connery from Dr. No to Thunderball is just unmatched by any other Bond actor period.
    And Connery's performance is the best part of NSNA.

    It’s a considerably stronger performance than the ones he gave in both YOLT and DAF, but that film always puts a sour taste in my mouth due to the circumstances behind its production. It just comes across as such a cynical attempt to shove a Middle Finger in the face of Cubby Broccoli and EON, and Connery plays a huge part in that cynicism.

    Yes I agree. And some of the creative choices were abysmal (song and titles over the opening action sequence, the awful soundtrack, the action sequences weren't tightly paced, etc.)
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,218
    peter wrote: »
    Never was a fan of Connery. Smarmy, not a versatile actor, and his one-liners were dumb. Think of these films: Diamonds are Forever, Never Say Never Again—-you don’t get much worse than these two!

    DAD? TWINE? No one was more smarmy than Brozz... Connery had more presence in his little finger, than most actors have in their entire being. He carried poor films on his shoulders. Magnetic, most can't keep their eyes off of him... A genuine movie star.

    Neither were smarmy.
Sign In or Register to comment.