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
Two word answer: Definitely, yes
He looked his best here, and in my opinion, defined James Bond here.
It is the James Bond from FRWL, or rather Connery's Bond from FRWL, that Daniel Craig is trying so hard to recapture. He is getting there slowly, but even now, Connery's FRWL performance is better than anything Craig's done in my opinion. It is definitely his defining performance.
I think TB comes a close second. He's super confident in that one and has still not dropped to the phone-in performances he delivered in YOLT, DAF & NSNA.
Goldfinger is up there too, but I personaly prefer his work on FRWL and TB
Wholeheartedly agree.
I can rewatch FRWL & TB over and over for Connery's performances alone. His line-delivery, physical acting and timing are near-on perfect.
That being said, yes I agree that FRWL is Sean's very best stint as 007.
I really find it a difficult question to answer. I really like to treat Terence Young's Bond films as a trilogy. They all have the look and feel of what Terence Young intended. And then "Goldfinger", by Guy Hamilton, comes across as the most cheesy one. "Thunderball" was perhaps the biggest on-screen production until then, 1965, but it was also the one with less gadgets IMO. Thank God the gadget-laden Aston Martin only had an understated performance. Foremost what mad "Thunderball" work for me, was the villain's plot: Hijacking atomic boms. It's at least way more believable than...uhm....making the US-gold-supply radio-active??
Having said that, I think Sean Connery was at his best...and felt at complete ease....in the Terence Young-trilogy "Doctor No"-"From Russia With Love"-"Thunderball". And then I can't choose if Connery gave his best performance in either FRWL or TB. But I'd go for TB. For me that is Connery's best performance. After that it all went downhill. Although I did like Connery in DAF until the end of the first half of the film.
To me those would be his lesser performances as Bond but everyone has their own view. That's what makes these discussions so interesting. :)
No GF is!
That is true. He did seem bored, but he had nailed the role by then, and the confidence was just coming out of him. The real boredom for me started to show in YOLT when he appeared to be going through the motions, although you could argue it may have started in TB.
Similar to Moore in MR (despite that movie's failings, Moore was in top form & exuded confidence).
Connery was at his most cavalier in TB, certainly - but to my mind it doesn't come across as boredom, per se. He is at his most insolent & most arrogant ever in Thunderball. Downright 'bad arse', if you like :D
I don't see it. The twinkle is still there. Super confidence and swagger by that point.
To answer the OP: Yes. But I see his first four performances as equally perfect, so pick one.
Yes, yes he does. In From Russia With Love, it's there, but stating with Goldfinger, that edge has gone.