It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Sean Connery in The Spy Who Loved Me:
http://images1.snapfish.com/232323232fp:<6>nu=3246>9<3>:8:>WSNRCG=348832<337325nu0mrj
Now that's what I call service! ;-)
Good job, M_D. I think Connery would've been a good matchup for Agent Triple X.
Sean Connery in Octopussy:
http://images1.snapfish.com/232323232fp:;8>nu=3246>9<3>:8:>WSNRCG=348833<7;4325nu0mrj
Not as good, I've gotten lazy, lol
Thanks.
Don't expect 'em too soon.... ;-)
Actually now that I think about it, someone on this very forum had a GREAT George in TLD poster. It was back when the forum was 'keeping the british end up'. Wonder if there's any way to get it again?
Here's a quick Dalton in OHMSS (didn't put too much effort into it...)- though I don't really think this would have worked- I mean the man himself said he was too young. That said, I tried to find a decent 'young' picture of Dalton, but they were pretty slim...
Timothy Dalton in OHMSS:
http://images1.snapfish.com/232323232fp::8>nu=3246>9<3>:8:>WSNRCG=348854;653325nu0mrj
Back on topic, THIS would have been much better (not my work though....)
Sean Connery in OHMSS:
http://www.hmss.com/films/ohmss67/ohmss67.jpg
http://images1.snapfish.com/232323232fp:;:>nu=3246>9<3>:8:>WSNRCG=349596983:325nu0mrj
Sean Connery in AVTAK
http://images1.snapfish.com/232323232fp:<2>nu=3246>9<3>:8:>WSNRCG=3495973557325nu0mrj
Connery would have been simply awesome in both LALD and TMWTGG under the able direction of GF and DAF Director Guy Hamilton.
Sean would have brought far more gravitas to the role and replaced the silliness that plagued both TSWLM and MR and I'm not talking about the fantasy elements of either film. I'm talking about Moore's lame Laurel and Hardy shenanigans at the pyramids ( the absolute lowest point of the series IMO) not to mention Moore's other slapstick encounters with Jaws. Rog could not bring the menace. Sean brought the danger in spades though, yet tempered by his wry humour. Sean delivered the one-liners and double entendres much better than Moore ever did.
We got the complete Bond package with Sean. Danger and style. He would have carried this right through to the era's final action scene on the Golden Gate bridge. But its all moot. Sean wanted no part of Bond after DAF.
The greater tragedy I think though is that Eon didn't swallow its pride and bring back George for the entire 7 picture Moore run. Lazenby could have been convinced to return.
Moore ideally never should have been cast, mainly because he moves like an ox.
I must admit that i'm gratefull that Tim the role down for such a reason, if that didn't show you his dedication (turning it down not for the money, or the role being beneath him, but for his age and not believing someone that young would be convincing in the role), I don't know what will. The problem was, that he left the part far too early.
Now if you don't mind, i'm gonna go and sit in the corner and contemplate how the series should have gone through the 1990's with Dalton. :-W
Just saw Sir Sean Connery in two WW2 Films:
LONGEST DAY
BRIDGE TOO FAR
I think you have to say SIR SEAN maybe the BEST all round ACTOR of the 6.....So Far.
Don't MISUNDERSTAND ME, These 6 Men are all FINE, FINE ACTORS.....
But Sir Sean seems to have THAT SLIGHT EDGE....
Like Mr. Cary Grant who almost was the First BOND, JAMES BOND.
Connery has it. What ever THAT is.
That is why EVERY ACTOR in Hollywood or Pinewood wants to be in any FILM with him.
B-)
It will be called the "Ultimate Connery Complete Series, super blu-ray digital Bond Deluxe Pak" and all future new home video releases will come in both the theatrical version with the actual actor, and the Connery digitally enhanced Ultimate edition.
Got to love technology. It's coming, any year now.
In that sense I'm glad we have the likes of Lazenby and Moore to inject the films with a new spirit after a few films. When doing a marathon, I always have double feelings concerning OHMSS and LALD. On the one hand I'm slightly troubled by the prospect of not seeing Connery for a while, yet on the other hand those other guys bring a new dynamic to the Bonds and they portray a somewhat different Bond. Boredom is out of the question that way.
I too can have such a love for a Bond actor like Connery or Moore, that I don't believe I would ever mind seeing them in a myriad films. In fact, in 2002, I was all for Brosnan doing a fifth film. I accepted him in the role and behaved like a loyal (and most apologetic) fan. Now, however, I couldn't be more satisfied with the coming of Craig. Suddenly the series reached a freshness I refuse to believe could have been established with Brosnan. In the same way I doubt that Connery would have worked all that well in TSWLM or MR, two film I hold close to my boyish heart. Those films would have been different with Connery part of them, perhaps for the better of them, perhaps for the worse. But Moore's presence I must admit is one of the prime reasons I love watching these films. And that is not to say that after AVTAK I always grasp for air knowing that the next time, Dalton fills the shoes. I'm glad, for even though I love Moore as Bond, even in the much criticised AVTAK, the vitality that Dalton brought to TLD feels like emptying a can of Red Bull after a lazy afternoon nap.
We shall forever keep wondering about Bond's ways had this or that actor remained in the part or gotten the part or whatever. It shall forever spark our imagination, our fantasy even and I like that. Yes, I love wondering about Bond and where Bond might have gone in hypothetical cases. That said, I'm rather pleased with the way things have been going for real. Seeing those six faces on many a fan's poster art always fills me with joy. It's a nice bunch and they all brought something to the series. Perhaps in the future, digital technology will allow a young Connery to be Bond once more. Go ask Fincher how he did it in such films a Benjamin Button and The Social Network and you never know we could have Sean Connery starring as Ian Fleming's James Bond 007 in Bond 26. But would I want that? Let's just say I'm quite pleased with Connery's legacy. His blood still runs through Bond's veins and he shan't ever be forgotten. But a new face, body and energy every so often helps revitalise the series over and over again.
Sure we can talk about who our favourites and least favourites of the actors are until the cows come home but the fact remains that they ALL contributed to the series in some way.
IMO, I imagine EON has in their vaults some kind of 'limit' in time of an actor's tenure as Bond. A Bond lasting too long hurts the franchise, as would a succession of actors only doing 1 film. I dare say ever since Moore was cast, EON has got it in the head that a tenure should not last over 5/6 films, and/or 10 years.
DN - Connery
FRWL - Connery
GF - Connery
TB - Connery
YOLT - Connery
OHMSS - Connery
DAF - Moore
LALD - Moore
TMWTGG - Moore
TSWLM - Moore
MR - Moore
FYEO - Dalton
OP - Dalton
AVTAK - Dalton
TLD - Dalton
LTK - Dalton
GE - Brosnan
TND - Brosnan
TWINE - Brosnan
DAD - Brosnan
CR - Craig
QOS - Craig
23 - Craig
24 - Craig
I'm definitely a Connery + Brosnan fan, but I think Sean was starting to look old already in DAF. And like someone pointed out, DAF was the first sign (pre Moore) that the series were taking a slightly more comedic approach, which would've fit Roger pretty well. That plus the fact that Roger is almost three years older than Sean, it would've been nice to see him start and stop a bit earlier IMO. That way we would've seen Sean in OHMSS (!) and skipped Lazenby (nothing against him, pretty decent but could've done without him).
A lot of folks would've liked to have seen Dalton do Goldeneye. While Dalton is one of my faves, I think Pierce fitted Goldeneye pretty well too. Dalton could've started a bit earlier though, taking over from Roger on FYEO (which would've suited Dalton pretty well). Still too bad Tim never got his third... history to me points out that the actor is very good in the Bond part around then.
Secondly, Connery, despite only being 41 at the time, was aging terribly and looked pretty bad in DAF. If he'd gone to play to role he only would've looked worse and worse. Moore's youthful appearance, despite being 2 years older than Connery, was essential in reinvigorating the series. Plus LALD with Moore was critcally more well-recieved than DAF and made substantially more money. Honestly I think LALD was better than Connery's last 2 outings which were huge disappointments in my opinion. And what makes you think Connery's bored attitude and habit of sleep-walking through wouldn't have continued and gotten worse over the years? It would've been terrible.
It's something that I don't like what they've done to the series in recent years that's all
Just to add, Connery was essentially done as Bond by the time of 1967, and even then he said so himself he had had enough of playing the part, only to be lured back by a then astronomical sum to return for an ill advised sixth time four years later
Connery was at his absolute best between 1962-63, and it's a shame Goldfinger was such a poor release, when he was still very fit and able, although did redeem himself with a fine performance in Thunderball, but really then, should of stepped down from the part of Bond but sadly decided to carry on and it ended in a bit of a shambles for one of the best James Bonds ever in the very end. Can't really add NSNA in this, as it was merely a spoof entry and not even an official release but Connery DID overstay his welcome in the end
Interesting comparison. In this thread you speak of how the Moore films may have been different with Connery.
However in the opposote thread it sounds like you are saying you can see the Connerys and OHMSS as more or less playing out exactly the way they are. Only with Roger Moore in them.