Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Doctor No Sean Connery vs. Diamonds Are Forever Sean Connery


13 replies to this topic

#1 Chicago103

Chicago103

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 90 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 24 February 2006 - 12:26 AM

I posted this in another thread but it got me thinking and I thought I would post my thoughts here.

Seeing Sean Connery in Diamonds Are Forever shows he was at his expiration date looks wise at that point, comparing Doctor No Connery with Diamonds Are Forever Connery is like comparing the young Elvis with the old Elvis. It makes you woner what the happened to him in that time, it looks like he aged 20 years in just 9 years!

The smooth, suave, sexy Connery Bond that everyone talks about on here is really the guy we were introduced to in Doctor No and continuing in From Russia With Love and Goldfinger and in Thunderball and You Only Live Twice to an extent as well even though he is already starting to show some wear and tear in the latter two. All of this is gone however by the time Connery is in Diamonds Are Forever, nearly everything certainly in terms of his looks is just a shadow of his former suave self and he has been reduced to a typical looking middle aged man and only being 40/41 years old, three years younger than his successor Moore and roughly the same age as Dalton was in TLD and Brosnan in GE and yet these three men looked way younger in their first Bond movie than Connery did in DAF.

The question I have is to anyone's knowledge was Connery suffering from some kind of drug and alcohol addiction at the time of DAF that made him look older?

Edited by Chicago103, 24 February 2006 - 12:39 AM.


#2 Harmsway

Harmsway

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 13293 posts

Posted 24 February 2006 - 12:37 AM

I think the problem is just that Connery had gained a lot of weight. If he took the time before shooting to get into shape again, he would have looked *much* better.

That said, I do like the way he looks during his "chat" with Marie in the pre-title sequence.

#3 Chicago103

Chicago103

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 90 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 24 February 2006 - 12:51 AM

Another thought I have is Never Say Never Again Sean Connery, I think Roger Moore looked alot younger in Octopussy. Sean was 52/53 years old when NSNA was filmed, the same age Pierce Brosnan is today and I think Pierce looks considerably younger than NSNA Connery, Dalton also looked younger in his early 50's as well, I cant say with Lazenby though. It could just be that Sean just has older looking genes while Roger and Pierce have younger looking ones. Thats why I think it was time for Connery to go after DAF, he just looked too old for the part already and irrespective of people's opinions of AVTAK Moore looked more the part in 1973-1985 than Connery would have at that same time in spite of Moore being three years older IMO.

I can see why Sean has chosen to wear a beard in most of his post-NSNA movies because he looks much better as a bearded gracefull old man.

Edited by Chicago103, 24 February 2006 - 12:55 AM.


#4 Flash1087

Flash1087

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1070 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 24 February 2006 - 03:51 AM

I always thought that too...Roger has about three years on Sean, AFAIK, but Sean looks much older, always has. Maybe Roger just carries it more gracefully.

#5 TheSaint

TheSaint

    Commander RNR

  • Veterans Reserve
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3067 posts
  • Location:Bronx,NY

Posted 24 February 2006 - 03:57 AM

I find it ironic that Sean was in better shape in 1983 for NSNA than he was in 1971 for DAF.

#6 WC

WC

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1415 posts

Posted 24 February 2006 - 08:50 AM

I always thought that too...Roger has about three years on Sean, AFAIK, but Sean looks much older, always has. Maybe Roger just carries it more gracefully.


I dunno. Roger looks more like an old codger now than Sean does. I don't see Roger playing in any action films. He looks more a frailer old man than Connery, who seems in better shape these days than in the 70s before NSNA when he wasn't doing very much.

#7 Scottlee

Scottlee

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 2592 posts
  • Location:Leeds, England

Posted 24 February 2006 - 09:21 PM

Although Connery obviously looks better in Dr No than he does in DAF, I've always thought he looks fine in the latter, and that to focus on him supposedly being a few pounds overweight is nit-picking. I have one or two problems with DAF as a film but Connery's appearance is not one of them.

#8 CowboyFunk22

CowboyFunk22

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 102 posts

Posted 24 February 2006 - 09:42 PM

I too find it hard not to notice Connery's looks in Diamonds are Forever. He had some unfortunate sleazyness to him that he never projected in the ealier movies. Perhaps it was a difference in cameras, attire, or hair but Sean seemed like a greasy dude in the movie.

Fast foward to NSNA and his appearance is commendable. He's certainly looks older, but the overall package doesn't make you feel something is off.

For me there are two Sean's, an old one and a young one. Either he is the youthful Bond, or the graceful looking old guy with a beard. DAF Sean is a missing link. Maybe even Sean himself hadn't really accepted his changing looks at that point. How would he have known that he would look as iconic in his older years as he did in his younger ones?

Edited by CowboyFunk22, 24 February 2006 - 09:44 PM.


#9 crheath

crheath

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 704 posts

Posted 24 February 2006 - 09:48 PM

Connery looked good in his first 3 films mainly because those were the ones in which he enjoyed the role. After that, he got tired of it and stopped working out, gained weight, etc.

#10 Tarl_Cabot

Tarl_Cabot

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10505 posts
  • Location:The Galaxy of Pleasure

Posted 24 February 2006 - 09:57 PM

Sean has the opposite of a "baby's face". He's always looked older, that's just his look; Moore on the other hand actually looked better in his 40s than he did in his 30's as he was more dashing(less baby fat) and less pretty. Sean did gain some pounds and clearly wasn't in shape when he made Diamonds...maybe he was hired last second and not able to shape up? I don't think actors were expected to be in fantastic shape back then anyway...the hair is also unflattering compared to years prior. He looked better in NSNA...But I don't think it was drugs. As I said, he just has an older look/soul and was probably living the high life of fine restaurants, like stars such as Marlon Brando ultimately succumbed to....


This is actually a very interesting thread: Brosnan is a skinny guy who I thought would never gain a pound as long as he lived...and he certainly did!

I wonder if Craig would be appealing to fans in 5 years if he gains 20 lbs!? :D :tup:

One thing cool about Laz/Tim...we never saw them decline, appearence wise. :D

#11 Problem Eliminator

Problem Eliminator

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 219 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 24 February 2006 - 11:11 PM

He had some unfortunate sleazyness to him that he never projected in the ealier movies... Sean seemed like a greasy dude in the movie... DAF Sean is a missing link.


I agree. Though not enough to detract from enjoying the movie, Sean's physique in Diamonds is definitely lacking. Not only does his weight/appearance fluctuate throughout the film (due of course to shooting scenes out of order), but in several spots he does indeed seem "greasy"- a far cry from his early appearances as 007. I find it particularly evident and somewhat shocking in the PTS when we get our first glimpse of him. Yikes!

My guess is that the protracted negotiations to find a star for the film left SC with little time to physically prepare when they finally persuaded him to come back. As pointed out by others, his indifference to the role likely played a part as well.

Looks aside, his charisma and old pro's grace kick in instantly and buoy an otherwise wacky and camp film the whole way. Diamonds may not be classic Sean or vintage Bond, but it's a lot of fun.

#12 JimmyBond

JimmyBond

    Commander

  • Executive Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 10559 posts
  • Location:Washington

Posted 27 February 2006 - 04:46 PM

I never had a problem with his appearance in DAF, it's his appearance in You Only Live Twice I find lacking. Sean still had his youthful good looks but he had put on a few pounds and you can tell, plus the fact that he pretty much sleepwalks through the role doesnt help matters.

I found he had an old pro look to him in Diamons (as someone above mentioned).

#13 Turn

Turn

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6837 posts
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 28 February 2006 - 02:15 AM

I think in the early films, Sean was still hungry and still probably did some working out to achieve his stardom. After he became a star through Bond, he obviously enjoyed himself more and allowed himself to gain some weight and enjoy some of the perks of his fame. He began showing some more weight in YOLT. He particularly looks out of shape in his ninja outfit in the volcano. There wasn't much he could do about his hair, thus the bad hairpiece in DAF.

I really don't mind his appearance in DAF. Based on the fight with Franks, he could still whip on people. And the emphasis was lighter, so an incredibly lean Connery was not such a big deal. Moore wasn't exactly shirtless in his Bond films.

#14 Colossus

Colossus

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1490 posts
  • Location:SPECTRE Island

Posted 28 February 2006 - 11:11 PM

Actually he began showing more weight in TB. He was flawless looking in the first three films embodying the bony-faced, slim look of Fleming's character.
By 1965 he probably wouldn't be the envisioned look for the producers had they for instance started the franchise in 1965 instead looking for a Bond-looking person.