98 replies to this topic

[Dr.Carl Mortner]

Yup - you read that right: I think Sean Connery is tremendously overrated as Bond, even if he is pretty great. Not so much among hardcore Bond fans like us, but by the general movie-going public.

It's frustrating to me that people are touting decades-old opinions to put Connery on top of Moore as the quintessential James Bond. Especially considering he took as many jokey liberties with Fleming's character as Moore ever did. Thinking about DAF and NSNA, I fail to see much of a difference between Moore's take on the character and Connery's.

At least Moore maintained an enthusiasm for the role to the very end. In fact, he's still enthusiastic about it to this day, while Connery does everything in his power to distance himself from the role that made him a star. It seems that a good portion of Connery's days punching the clock at EON were spent whining about money and feeding a deepening megalomania.

Personally, I think Connery played Fleming's Bond letter-perfect one-and-a-half times: in Dr. No and most of FRWL. Meanwhile, Moore captured the role perfectly in FYEO and much of TMWTGG (just because the movie stank didn't mean his performance reeked too). So, if they're neck-and-neck, why is Connery lauded and Moore bashed?

[ray t]

connery is lauded because he was the 'original', the cinematic protype....and he was the reining bond at the franchise's commercial/cultural zenith.

FRWL is looked upon as the quintessential cold war motion picture while the inflation-adjusted success of the trio (in rapid fire succession '64 to '67) GOLDFINGER / THUNDERBALL / YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE have only been surpassed by the first 3 star wars movies, jurrasic park, and (this year) the LOTR trilogy....pretty plain and simple, i'd say.

connery also benifitted from a rich treasure trove of untapped fleming material which was adapted very well to the screen.

by the time moore was cast, bond mania was gone, and the screen writers, by and large, no longer had the juciest fleming at their disposal.....

btw, who is "bashing" roger? the CBN folk, in the aggregate, are not.....

[iain]

I think we are confusing Connery as Bond and Connery as a man. As Bond he was superb for the most part. However, I am sick and tired of hearing his whining about how much money he made compared with the films. Its all well and good to say where would the Bond films be without Connery, and the answer is debateable. However there can be little question as to where Connery would be without the Bond films.

The box office for the Connery movies is a little misleading. Remember that back in those days you had to go to the cinema to see a Bond film. You could not just wait for the DVD or video to come out or watch it on pay per view for a fraction of the price of a cinema ticket.

Also, when people talk about the adjusted gross numbers, are they taking the amount earned and converting it into todays money or are they taking the number of tickets sold and converting it into todays ticket prices. I think the two figures would be very different.

[ray t]

Originally posted by iain

Also, when people talk about the adjusted gross numbers, are they taking the amount earned and converting it into todays money or are they taking the number of tickets sold and converting it into todays ticket prices.  I think the two figures would be very different.

not too different...i recon the rankings 1 through 20 wouldnt be materially altered.

[Turn]

Yeah, everything kind of levels off when comparing box office eras. So people went to see the early ones over and over again. They were in far fewer theaters than now, and think about the ticket prices.

And this thread seems to be pitting Moore against Connery. A lot of people put Connery over not just Moore, but Brosnan and other Bonds too. Then again, a lot of people who never saw Connery in his day or Moore for that matter, are drawn to Brosnan, and in the future to his successor.

Connery's frustration over the money is understandable. He worked his tail off and got little out of it while others got millions. It made his career on one hand, but on the other, he had the misfortune of being in a time when actors didn't get nearly what they do now in salary or other perks. I'm sure Sean would have liked a 3-year break between his Bond movies.

Come to think of it, why even worry about what the general public thinks? At CBN, there are people who love each different actor's Bond.

[iain]

Connery is my favourite Bond of all time. I just feel that he should quit complaining about how much money he got and be thankful that he got the part at all.

[SamuelKevlar]

I agree Dr Carl. Connery is overrated. I don't see that much in him as an actor in general, and I especially don't like his whining. He stands just above Lazenby in my book. Dalton was the best.

+The above was an opinion. Please only take it as such.+

[kevrichardson]

Originally posted by Dr.Carl Mortner

Personally, I think Connery played Fleming's Bond letter-perfect one-and-a-half times: in Dr. No and most of FRWL. Meanwhile, Moore captured the role perfectly in FYEO and much of TMWTGG (just because the movie stank didn't mean his performance reeked too). So, if they're neck-and-neck, why is Connery lauded and Moore bashed?

Wow! Just one and a half times as Bond .There are some who feel different . Since you are discounting ThunderBall and Goldfinger ! A great dealof importance is attached to Connery simply because he was the first! Unlike say who is the best Sherlock Holmes . There will all ways be some who feel Basil Rathbone is the best , while others like Peter Cushing.. Still Connery is very important ,and his Bond is not to be discounted . Example i was on the mi6 website ,which had a story on just how many Britons watched FRWL . The half James Bond film ,closed to 5 million watched a 40 year old film . Thats a powerful statement about a actor .

[iain]

Connery was also blessed with being in the best written films. No clown suits or outer space for him.

[kevrichardson]

Originally posted by iain
Connery was also blessed with being in the best written films.  No clown suits or outer space for him.

Wrong on the outer space thing ! In You Only Live Twice and Diamonds Are Forever , both have Outer Space as a theme .

[iain]

Yes, but Bond was not up there in a silly looking spacesuit. He did put a spacesuit on in YOLT, but was discovered before making himself look too ridiculous.

[kevrichardson]

Originally posted by iain
Yes, but Bond was not up there in a silly looking spacesuit.

He wore a space suit in YOLT . Still he failed to lift-off.

[iain]

Beat you to it. I edited my own post. But man, you are quick.

[Robinson]

Originally posted by iain
Connery was also blessed with being in the best written films.  No clown suits or outer space for him.

What is it with y'all and Moore's clown suit in Octopussy?! In the context of the scene and the situation, it works. There's actually tension and drama in that scene. Think about it, Bond has to don a disguise to evade capture and infiltrate the circus tent in order to disarm a nuclear weapon. The significance of Bond imploring Octopussy to believe him in order to persuade the general is monumental, because he's at the end of his rope. Bond isn't immediately believed and he's forced to yell about the bomb in order to force the issue.

To me this is the equivalent of John McClane running barefoot over broken glass in "Die Hard."

[BONDFINESSE 007]

Originally posted by Robinson


What is it with y'all and Moore's clown suit in Octopussy?! In the context of the scene and the situation, it works. There's actually tension and drama in that scene. Think about it, Bond has to don a disguise to evade capture and infiltrate the circus tent in order to disarm a nuclear weapon. The significance of Bond imploring Octopussy to believe him in order to persuade the general is monumental, because  he's at the end of his rope. Bond isn't immediately believed and he's forced to yell about the bomb in order to force the issue.

To me this is the equivalent of John McClane running barefoot over broken glass in "Die Hard."

you are so right robinson, its not like james put it on for the hell of it, there was a reason for it, and you do what you gotta do to get the job done

[iain]

My point was that in the Connery films the writers did not put Bond in this type of situation.

[DLibrasnow]

Well Connery was better than both Brosnan and Dalton, but Roger Moore will always be 007 in my book....

[Dr.Carl Mortner]

Perhaps I was a little hard on ol' Sean. You know what it all really boils down to? I'm 30 years old and throughout my entire life the older generation (the baby boomers) seemed to act like the '60s were the be-all and end-all and nothing ever since was quite as good. They supposedly had the best music, the best movies, the funnest times and - yes - the best Bond. And I think the generations since have merely echoed those sentiments.

When I was 10 years old, I saw a TV commercial for NSNA. I asked my mom who this "new guy" was playing Bond. She stifled her laughter. It was pretty funny in retrospect;P. But it highlights the fact that - for a lot of people my age and older - that Roger Moore WAS James Bond to us.

[Icebreaker]

*reads title of thread...re-reads it...reads it again*

Connery...overrated? Uh...Connery is the best Bond. Period. Roger Moore took Bond so far AWAY from Bond that is almost sad. But then again, I am a Bond fan that says Dr. No, From Russia With Love and Licence to Kill are the best Bond flicks. I like a masculine Bond that will fight his way out of a situation rather then sweet-talk his way out. So I guess thats just me.

Everybody sees Bond differently, I happen to think Connery is the best merely because he took such command in Dr. No. I think in Moore's first outting in LALD, he kinda just 'blended in' it wasnt as stand out as Connery in Dr. No. Sean, could really just take command of a scene...and thats what I like best about a Bond.

Sean Connery IS James Bond



~ICeBReaKeR

[Kingdom Come]

People have a tendancy to follow in packs. Connery they say, was/is the best - like has been said, becasue he was the first cinematic Bond. I two agree, he is overated.

[Jim]

Originally posted by Dr.Carl Mortner


At least Moore maintained an enthusiasm for the role to the very end. In fact, he's still enthusiastic about it to this day, while Connery does everything in his power to distance himself from the role that made him a star. It seems that a good portion of Connery's days punching the clock at EON were spent whining about money and feeding a deepening megalomania.  

The comparison here appears to be between Sean Connery as a person and Roger Moore as a person rather than Sean Connery as James Bond for two hours or so and Roger Moore (or anyone else) as James Bond for two hours or so.

I'd agree that as a person, Sean Connery would appear to be a bit of a miserabalist. Does that render him an overrated James Bond? Is there any fit comparison between the two concepts? Are there any conclusions to be drawn at all from that? Are man and portrayal really the same thing and can one extract any valid criticism of the one from a perception of the other? Seems a bit thin, that.

[Genrewriter]

I agree. Who a person is in real life doesn't have a whole lot to do with how he is on the screen. Being miserable in real life, or a great guy for that matter has no bearing on the quality of a fictional character being presented on screen.

[Mister Asterix]

I don’t think it is a matter of Connery being overrated so much as the other actors being underrated. I believe Connery deserves the accolades he has received for his portrayal of our man Bond. However, the other four actors deserve more praise for what they have done with the role.

[Dr.Carl Mortner]

To those who have said that I'm comparing the men rather than their portrayals, you may be partly right - it's a big red herring.

However, it is frustrating that Connery gets all these accolades for his Bond portrayal and doesn't seem to want them, while Moore remains a promoter of the series and gets no respect.

My point is that THEY'RE JUST AS GOOD, with Moore perhaps a little bit better. I'm just weary of the inequality.

[BONDFINESSE 007]

well i must tell the truth, roger was bond to me, and i know how i felt when one of his bonds would start....i thought he was god, and i thought that was gone when dalton took over, but when brosnan took over that feeling came back....and i gotta tell yall brosnan is my roger moore of this day and time i love him as bond and i just cant hide that hero worship feeling i get when i see brosnan playing bond and when he does his last....whenever that is, it will pain me just like it did when roger did his last

[Double-Oh-Zero]

Well, even though Connery is my favourite Bond personally, I will say that he can sometimes be very overrated. But then again, so can Brosnan and Moore. It all depends on who you ask and who you like best. Just by skimming through people's posts I can tell who they like and who they feel is overrated. When I started watching the Bond films, Connery's were the first ones I watched, so I think that has an effect on you, along with who you grew up with, etc. Still, I guess I'm in what you call the Brosnan Generation, and he still isn't my favourite. Like I said, who you favour and who you dislike in the role has an effect on your opinion. Hell, someone could say that Lazenby or Dalton is overrated, but with vaalid points, it's plausible. I think Connery's reasons for being overrated were simply that he was the one that breathed life into Bond, and started the entire franchise and Bondmania. Like someone else stated, Moore's films weren't as huge as TB or YOLT when they were released.

Connery doesn't really "whine" (whatever that is saying) that much anymore. If you watched the Oscars, you could clearly hear Steve Martin's Bond-related joke about him, and the Bond theme playing loudly while Sean walked on. He didn't seem to be annoyed at all, and I think he's grown to accept it by now. The only time he was bitter about it was around the time of YOLT, the height of Bondmania. Honestly, I can't blame Big 'Tam for that. I mean, the Japanese press refused to call him Sean Connery, and just referred to him as James Bond. How do you think you would feel if you were in his position, with 5 films under his belt within 5 years?

[Jaelle]

Originally posted by Robinson
What is it with y'all and Moore's clown suit in Octopussy?! In the context of the scene and the situation, it works. There's actually tension and drama in that scene.

Absolutely. I think the suit adds so much to the drama of the whole sequence---and it shows how Bond manages to keep his dignity even in the most trying of circumstances. It's a great scene, gets to me every time.

[Genrewriter]

I agree, it's another moment that only Roger could have pulled off. The others would have looked rather silly, even if they played the scene the same way as Moore did.

[iain]

I thought that Roger looked rather silly. I don't doubt that he played it well, I just don't think that the writers should have put him in that position in the first place.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Sean's Bond isn't overrated but his appeal post Bond certainly is. He has become a tired, sleepwalking star. Look at the trailors for LXG. It's Sean doing his same old Shhhhhtick. I like Sean the best (although Tim Dalton is better in certain respects) but his career since The Hunt for Red October has been mainly a waste of time.