38 replies to this topic

[jaguar007]

I just saw a blurb on TV that for the 50th Anniversary of GQ they are releasing 10 (I think) covers for the 50th Anniv issue about the most stylish men of all time. One of the covers is a 1960s era Sean Connery.

[urhash]

Cool. I found this on the gq website with regards to Connery and their anniversary



Sean Connery

All the actors who

[Cruiserweight]

I just saw a blurb on TV that for the 50th Anniversary of GQ they are releasing 10 (I think) covers for the 50th Anniv issue about the most stylish men of all time. One of the covers is a 1960s era Sean Connery.

I'd agree to that.

[mccartney007]

Sean Connery may have been stylish during the 60's, but he's pretty much been a wreck since then. Roger Moore IS stylish and always has been.

[sharpshooter]

That picture of Connery above just reeks coolness.

[avl]

Sean Connery may have been stylish during the 60's, but he's pretty much been a wreck since then. Roger Moore IS stylish and always has been.

Yes - bit the difference is that Connery in the 60s had a timeless quality (as the picture above amply demonstrates) understated cool. Rog is stylish in a more 70s flamboyant way that looks dated now.

[007Bond]

I just saw a blurb on TV that for the 50th Anniversary of GQ they are releasing 10 (I think) covers for the 50th Anniv issue about the most stylish men of all time. One of the covers is a 1960s era Sean Connery.

I'm glad to read that !

[jaguar007]

Sean Connery may have been stylish during the 60's, but he's pretty much been a wreck since then. Roger Moore IS stylish and always has been.

Yes - bit the difference is that Connery in the 60s had a timeless quality (as the picture above amply demonstrates) understated cool. Rog is stylish in a more 70s flamboyant way that looks dated now.

Hey now. We all know that Safari Suits are timeless and here to stay

[Santa]

Sean Connery may have been stylish during the 60's, but he's pretty much been a wreck since then. Roger Moore IS stylish and always has been.

Rog is the man.

[LadySylvia]

I just saw a blurb on TV that for the 50th Anniversary of GQ they are releasing 10 (I think) covers for the 50th Anniv issue about the most stylish men of all time. One of the covers is a 1960s era Sean Connery.

Sean Connery? To be honest, I would not have chosen him. His Bond from the 60s always seemed to look like a neat, conservatively-dressed British businessman.

As for Moore's "flamboyant" style from the 70s, it only seemed that apparent to me in his first two Bond films. From THE SPY WHO LOVED ME until A VIEW TO A KILL, his style seemed a lot less flamboyant. However, I do consider him, Lazenby and Brosnan to be the three best-dressed Bond.

Edited by LadySylvia, 20 September 2007 - 07:13 PM.

[Turn]

I just saw a blurb on TV that for the 50th Anniversary of GQ they are releasing 10 (I think) covers for the 50th Anniv issue about the most stylish men of all time. One of the covers is a 1960s era Sean Connery.

Sean Connery? To be honest, I would not have chosen him. His Bond from the 60s always seemed to look like a neat, conservatively-dressed British businessman.

As for Moore's "flamboyant" style from the 70s, it only seemed that apparent to me in his first two Bond films. From THE SPY WHO LOVED ME until A VIEW TO A KILL, his style seemed a lot less flamboyant. However, I do consider him, Lazenby and Brosnan to be the three best-dressed Bond.

Funny, I can't recall Connery ever having sported a bowler or umberella. His look seems rather timeless in the '60s Bond films, save for the shoes he takes off the guy he kills who did in Henderson in YOLT.

As for Rog's style, I can't help but think of those big bellbottom tux pants he wears in the gunbarrel from Spy onward. They should've changed that in the '80s.

[LadySylvia]

Funny, I can't recall Connery ever having sported a bowler or umberella. His look seems rather timeless in the '60s Bond films, save for the shoes he takes off the guy he kills who did in Henderson in YOLT.

I just don't see it. I'm sorry. In fact, it seems like another excuse to put Connery on the pedestal as the "ultimate Bond". Which seems to be becoming a little redundant to me.

[jaguar007]

I mean no disrespect to Roger Moore or any other Bond, but lets face facts, Sean Connery's James Bond created a cultural trend in the 1960s that no other Bond has, and that few actors ever do.

It is not a statement on which James Bond certain people prefer, it is cultural style. I love RM as The Saint in the 60s (much more than I ever did his portrayal of James Bond), heck I even own a 1968 Volvo 1800 with license plate SAINT and named my son Simon, but the 1960s Connery was much more stylish and made more of a culture influence than a 1960s or 1970s Roger Moore.

[Santa]

I mean no disrespect to Roger Moore or any other Bond, but lets face facts, Sean Connery's James Bond created a cultural trend in the 1960s that no other Bond has, and that few actors ever do.

It is not a statement on which James Bond certain people prefer, it is cultural style. I love RM as The Saint in the 60s (much more than I ever did his portrayal of James Bond), heck I even own a 1968 Volvo 1800 with license plate SAINT and named my son Simon, but the 1960s Connery was much more stylish and made more of a culture influence than a 1960s or 1970s Roger Moore.

Do you mean Sean Connery or the 'Head of Wardrobe' for Bond films in the 60s though? I don't think they're the same thing.

[RJJB]

There is an excellent book entitles Dressed to Kill published in 1996 that looks at James Bond and his contribution to style. There is no denying that the intial style is neat and conservative, and as someone mentioned earlier, timeless. If you leaf through the book, the images of Connery, Lazenby, Dalton and Brosnan reflect that that look. By contrast, the pictures of Moore show how the producers changed Bond's wardrobe to be more reflective of the times. Many of those shots are very dated and laughable.

[avl]

Sean Connery may have been stylish during the 60's, but he's pretty much been a wreck since then. Roger Moore IS stylish and always has been.

Yes - bit the difference is that Connery in the 60s had a timeless quality (as the picture above amply demonstrates) understated cool. Rog is stylish in a more 70s flamboyant way that looks dated now.

Hey now. We all know that Safari Suits are timeless and here to stay

Now that i agree with. Rog rocks the Safari Suit in a way no man has done before,or since!

[avl]

Hey Rog fans, I don't think anyone would deny Rog is a very stylish man, and a legend to boot.

What I meant was for better or worse Rog as Bond was a creature of 70s, where colours were a little brighter, and widths a little wider, that dates the look.

Connery as Bond (leaving aside DAF, and the pink tie fiasco ), can not be dated so easily. His suits are conservative in the best sense of the term - stylish, impeccable even, and crucially, understated. Connery always looks good, and never looks like he is trying to look good (which arguably Brosnan suffers from). That aesthetic is what gives him the edge.

[David_M]

Well of course it should be rememebered that whatever air of style Connery exuded in the 60s was largely thanks to Terrence Young, who transferred his own fashion-sense and savoir-faire to a guy who was more comfortable in jeans and polo shirts. And while Connery kept up the stylish look even off-screen in the Bond years, soon enough he went back to his casual wear, and some dreadful stuff by the 70s.

The point being, GQ should credit Young and EON's marketing department equally with Connery and give the "most stylish" award to 60s Bond, not Connery himself. It's not really fair to put him on the same list with guys like Muhammed Ali, Givenchy or JFK, all of whom I assume picked their own clothes.

As for Roger, naturally he suffered from being Bond in the 70s, arguably the worst era for fashion since the days of pantaloons, but if you compare his outfits to what many men of the era were wearing, he was actually a model of restraint. If you don't believe me, check out the excellent Plaid Stallions website for gems like this:



On the other hand, Roger did have a hand in designing his own clothes for "The Persuaders", and some of THAT stuff was insane. Lord Brett Sinclair seems to have shopped in the same stores as Mr. Furley from "Three's Company."

[LadySylvia]

I mean no disrespect to Roger Moore or any other Bond, but lets face facts, Sean Connery's James Bond created a cultural trend in the 1960s that no other Bond has, and that few actors ever do.

That's because he had the good luck to be the first actor to portray Bond on a silver screen. And Bond - even before 1960s - was a little different from the spies previously shown in the theaters. Which is why he was something new. If it had not been Connery, it would have been someone else.

I guess I just get tired of people claiming that Connery's Bond was the greatest thing since Swiss cheese. I really don't view him as better than the other five Bonds hired by EON.

As for Roger, naturally he suffered from being Bond in the 70s, arguably the worst era for fashion since the days of pantaloons, but if you compare his outfits to what many men of the era were wearing, he was actually a model of restraint. If you don't believe me, check out the excellent Plaid Stallions website for gems like this:

Roger Moore's clothing style was in that manner for THE FIRST DAMN TWO MOVIES he had made. He had abandoned that style by the time he did The Spy Who Loved Me.

Edited by LadySylvia, 22 September 2007 - 03:11 AM.

[Turn]

I mean no disrespect to Roger Moore or any other Bond, but lets face facts, Sean Connery's James Bond created a cultural trend in the 1960s that no other Bond has, and that few actors ever do.

That's because he had the good luck to be the first actor to portray Bond on a silver screen. And Bond - even before 1960s - was a little different from the spies previously shown in the theaters. Which is why he was something new. If it had not been Connery, it would have been someone else.

I guess I just get tired of people claiming that Connery's Bond was the greatest thing since Swiss cheese. I really don't view him as better than the other five Bonds hired by EON.

And maybe some of us who appreciate Connery and see his Bond films for the timeless classics they are tired of your constantly reminding us how little you think of him.

Do me a favor and show me your proof that Richard Johnson, Patrick McGoohan, Cary Grant, David Niven or anybody else would have succeeded in the Bond role in 1962 and made it a worldwide sensation. Until then, stop coming into any thread that says anything faintly positive about Connery and repeating your same, tired moanings of how overrated you think he is. We get it.

[mccartney007]

I think the problem here is that the editors of GQ said "Sean Connery" when they should have said "Sean Connery as James Bond" because that is obviously what they are talking about. Roger Moore manages to be stylish for the changing times -- he, personally, managed to be stylish in just about every decade he's been around and he still knows how to dress. Some of his looks may be dated, but they were still stylish for the times.

[LadySylvia]

And maybe some of us who appreciate Connery and see his Bond films for the timeless classics they are tired of your constantly reminding us how little you think of him.

What is the matter? I have to get on my knees and worship the ground that Connery walks upon? Get real! I grew up with watching both him and Roger Moore as Bond. And as far as I'm concerned, they were both great. Then I discovered Lazenby and Dalton in the 1980s and thought they were both great. I thought that Brosnan was pretty damn good in the 90s. And I'm also a fan of Craig's.

What is it? I'm only supposed to view Connery as the definitive Bond? I'm not allowed to appreciate ALL SIX ACTORS - equally - who have played Bond for EON?

Also, I don't view all of Connery's Bond movies as real classics. Only two. I'm not allowed to harbor this view? And I just don't view his clothes style in the Bond movies of the 1960s as something special. I just don't. Why is that so damn difficult for you to accept?

Edited by LadySylvia, 23 September 2007 - 04:15 AM.

[jaguar007]

we are not arguing about your preferance as to who is James BOnd. I like all of them to a certain extent myself. The point is that Sean Connery in the 60s was a style icon. Fact. It has nothing to do with personal preferance. I am currently attening the Bond Collector Weekend and the discussion came up among many Bond fans as to what the BOnd series would have been like if Moore,Patrick McGoohan or Richard Burton had been cast. Everyone unanimously agreed that the Bond series probably would have never achieved the success that it did without Connery as the first screen Bond. He was unique; someone different that the public embraced.

[avl]

Its quite hilarious how Moore's fans jump onto this thread as evidence of yet another slight against their man. I'm a Dalton fan, but you'd never see me claiming the style crown for TD - he looked like he shopped at Burtons in LTK.

Fact is, Connery as Bond (yes yes, thanks to Terrence Young etc) is a style icon, and Roger Moore as Bond is simply not, unless you feel that blazer and flared slacks is the look.

Was Moore a good Bond? Of course. Was he as good as Connery, or better? Thats up to you. Is he a style icon? He is an icon of 70s style, but that I'm afraid, is not the same thing at all.

[urhash]

I do agree Roger's style was relatively restrained compared to others in the 'decade that style forgot', but I don't think that alone puts him in the same class as Connery's Bond.

[LadySylvia]

Do me a favor and show me your proof that Richard Johnson, Patrick McGoohan, Cary Grant, David Niven or anybody else would have succeeded in the Bond role in 1962 and made it a worldwide sensation. Until then, stop coming into any thread that says anything faintly positive about Connery and repeating your same, tired moanings of how overrated you think he is. We get it.

You don't have any damn proof that they would not have made Bond a success in 1962. So why don't you stop getting worked up over the fact that I'm not in the habit of putting Sean Connery on a pedestal, above the other Bond actors?

Edited by LadySylvia, 24 September 2007 - 04:51 PM.

[RJJB]

Your problem, Sylvia Honey, is that you keep harping on your dislike for Sean Connery. That's fine. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. But you keep whining about "am I not entitled to have my own views". And you are so condescending in your responses, as though anyone else is wrong. I could have a full time hobby answering all the responses praising Roger Moore, but it would get very old. You seem to have this one-woman mission to knock something that many people like. All it does is make you very ugly here and on the other boards you infest.

And Connery may have been lucky enough to be the first cinematic Bond, but that's something you can't change. No matter how much you dislike it, anyone who follows Connery in the role is going to be viewed as a replacement by the world at large.
Connery, right or wrong, set the standard. I'm sure it galls you no end, but that's life.

As for you getting on your knees...

Edited by RJJB, 24 September 2007 - 05:42 PM.

[Judo chop]

Your problem, Sylvia Honey, is that you keep harping on your dislike for Sean Connery.

In Sylvia

[Santa]

I'm not.

[Turn]

[quote name='Judo chop' post='776272' date='24 September 2007 - 18:23'][quote name='RJJB' post='776263' date='24 September 2007 - 12:37']Your problem, Sylvia Honey, is that you keep harping on your dislike for Sean Connery.[/quote]

In Sylvia