24 replies to this topic

[vednam]

I grew up with Pierce Brosnan as "my" Bond. The first few Bond films I saw starred Brosnan. The image I always had of Sean Connery was of an old bald guy with a beard and white hair. When I learned that Connery had played the first (and definitive) Bond, I had a very hard time visualizing him as James Bond. Sure, he was older, as expected. But the baldness and beard was the problem for me compared to, say, Roger Moore who sort of looked like what you'd expect James Bond to look in his 60s or 70s.

Even now, after having watched all the Bond films, it's difficult at times to accept the fact that the guy in DN and FRWL is the same guy as the bald, white-bearded Connery of today.

I realize that many people who grew up with Connery as their Bond will not be able to relate, but maybe some of the younger people can. Anyway, just a little observation.

[BlackFelix]

I understand completely. I also couldn't quite wrap my head around Connery being the original 007, he looked quite different. Until "Goldeneye" was released Bond-films played no significance in my youth...so there was no exposure. Sean Connery was probably most notable as "the guy who was Indiana Jones'" father, lol.

[Colossus]

I can understand that. Though for me i wasn't even familiar with anything of his other than Bond at the time!
There was a thread here that talked about how he's basically has two different screen images, Bond and the wizened elder figure. Heh.

After the 60's wrapped he kind of went out of the spotlight in the 70's. It wasn't until the late 80's when he was in The Highlander, won that Oscar and was in Indy 3 that he came back in the spotlight.

It's interesting that you mention DN and FRWL and don't add more, because after those he started going into a spiral of incredible physical change. Someone remarked that between FRWL and Thunderball, the two years looked like he aged 10. The bulky meaty Thunderthighs with his narrowed eyes seems to be the younger version of modern-day Connery. But the DN/FRWL one really does look like someone else, lanky, more bulbous head, rounder eyes, slicked back hair. Must've went on a crazed eating binge once he hit stardom before Goldfinger, and then bulked up for Thunderball.

Edited by Colossus, 23 June 2008 - 08:08 AM.

[vednam]

I can understand that. Though for me i wasn't even familiar with anything of his other than Bond at the time!
There was a thread here that talked about how he's basically has two different screen images, Bond and the wizened elder figure. Heh.

After the 60's wrapped he kind of went out of the spotlight in the 70's. It wasn't until the late 80's when he was in The Highlander, won that Oscar and was in Indy 3 that he came back in the spotlight.

It's interesting that you mention DN and FRWL and don't add more, because after those he started going into a spiral of incredible physical change. Someone remarked that between FRWL and Thunderball, the two years looked like he aged 10. The bulky meaty Thunderthighs with his narrowed eyes seems to be the younger version of modern-day Connery. But the DN/FRWL one really does look like someone else, lanky, more bulbous head, rounder eyes, slicked back hair. Must've went on a crazed eating binge once he hit stardom before Goldfinger, and then bulked up for Thunderball.

That's exactly why I mentioned only DN and FRWL. Those early films are where the contrast is most apparent.

If you look at Connery in DAF, it's easier to see that as the same guy he is today. On the other hand, I don't think Connery in DAF looks a whole lot like our collective image of James Bond (being overweight, with bushy eyebrows, a bad toupee, and graying).

[Skudor]

When I was growing up I didn't even realise there had been more than one Bond (there had only been three at that point though). I also had no concept of the different eras - that the older Connery flicks were 20 years old by then.

[Kalel577]

It's interesting that you mention DN and FRWL and don't add more, because after those he started going into a spiral of incredible physical change. Someone remarked that between FRWL and Thunderball, the two years looked like he aged 10. The bulky meaty Thunderthighs with his narrowed eyes seems to be the younger version of modern-day Connery. But the DN/FRWL one really does look like someone else, lanky, more bulbous head, rounder eyes, slicked back hair. Must've went on a crazed eating binge once he hit stardom before Goldfinger, and then bulked up for Thunderball.

That happened a lot back in the day with struggling actors who finally hit major stardom or, at the very least, a steady paycheck. Take note of the dashing William Shatner of the first episodes of the first season of "Star Trek" and compare him to the William Shatner of the final episode "Turnabout Intruder" for another such example. Now, actors are much more painfully aware of such considerations.

[David_M]

You raise an interesting concept here, and that is that we tend to think of people being the way they were when we first "met" them. For instance, it's hard for me to imagine my grandfather as a young man, but no matter how old they get, my kids will always be "my little boys" in my mind.

So it makes perfect sense to me that you think of Connery as an old man, even as you're watching him walk around young on your DVDs. On the flip side, Connery has no doubt benefited over the years from the fact that millions of moviegoers will always see him in their mind's eye as James Bond, no matter how old or out-of-shape he may become. They "met" him as a young man, and they'll always see that spark of youth in him.

When I was growing up in the 70s, neither Sean nor Roger were ancient in my mind, but Sean suffered from being very much the "60s Bond." The fashions seemed so out of date and, worst for me, his hair was so greasy-looking with that Vitalis or Brylcreme or whatever it was he used. I thought he looked more like a crook than a hero. Ironically with the passage of time those 60s fashions look classy again while Roger's plaid sportcoats and bell-bottom pants are pretty godawful, but as a kid Roger was very much "with it" while Sean to me was a square old dinosaur...and not particularly good-looking.

[sharpshooter]

The age thing doesn't really bother me at all. Sure, Connery looks different today than he did in the 60s, that's to be expected. Once something is captured on film, it is preserved in a time warp that will span the generations for all to enjoy. Connery started playing Bond 46 years ago with Doctor No, and laid down arguably the definitive take on the character. It is just unforgettable and the stuff of legends that people are still talking about it today.

[BlackFelix]

That happened a lot back in the day with struggling actors who finally hit major stardom or, at the very least, a steady paycheck. Take note of the dashing William Shatner of the first episodes of the first season of "Star Trek" and compare him to the William Shatner of the final episode "Turnabout Intruder" for another such example. Now, actors are much more painfully aware of such considerations.

Agreed! Shatner's weight would ballon throught each season, but by the start of the next season he'd manage to lose it..only to gain it back, plus a few! During the 1980's Shatner looked different in theStar Trekfilms. For a man (at the time) in his 50's he was in good shape through the first 4 films. Perhaps it's the hairline? In the 60's series Shatner had a stylized haircut much like Sean's ala Goldfinger. In the films he had a combed-back blow-dry look that changed his facial apperance.

Sean Connery is more than just weight, he's recognizable through the weight gain...just a mild distraction. He gained weight as each film progressed, but he was so obviously weight conditioning he looked fit. Sean has a athletic frame so if he didn't constantly weight train he's appear over-weight; Diamonds Are Forever. However in Never Say Never Again his weight is much closer to the late 60's than it had been in years, and he looks like the same guy from You Only Live Twice but older. I think the hair and facial hair are the factors that make him look differently.

Edited by BlackFelix, 24 June 2008 - 03:37 PM.

[David_M]

Agreed! Shatner's weight would ballon throught each season, but by the start of the next season he'd manage to lose it..only to gain it back, plus a few! During the 1980's Shatner looked different in theStar Trekfilms. For a man (at the time) in his 50's he was in good shape through the first 4 films. Perhaps it's the hairline? In the 60's series Shatner had a stylized haircut much like Sean's ala Goldfinger. In the films he had a combed-back blow-dry look that changed his facial apperance.

Shatner's hair in the films (by now, almost certainly not his own) gave his face a more rectangular appearance, which did make him look a lot different than the TV show. He's struggled with his weight all his life, which explains how he could start each season trim (after a summer to get in shape) and put on weight as the season wore on and he had less free time for the gym.

One sign you're a true Trekkie is when you look at a collection of stills of Shatner in Kirk's chair -- with no other references -- and guess not only the season in which it was taken, but which episode, based mostly on his weight and hairstyle. I'm a bit embarrassed to admit I can do just that.

As to how film preserves one on film, there's a spooky moment in the DVD commentary to one of the Trek films were Shatner and Nimoy see DeForest Kelley on screen and note how odd it is to have film keep bringing back to life someone who's passed on, and even odder to know someday someone will be looking at their footage and thinking the same thing.

Edited by David_M, 24 June 2008 - 04:16 PM.

[BlackFelix]

Shatner's hair in the films (by now, almost certainly not his own) gave his face a more rectangular appearance, which did make him look a lot different than the TV show. He's struggled with his weight all his life, which explains how he could start each season trim (after a summer to get in shape) and put on weight as the season wore on and he had less free time for the gym.

One sign you're a true Trekkie is when you look at a collection of stills of Shatner in Kirk's chair -- with no other references -- and guess not only the season in which it was taken, but which episode, based mostly on his weight and hairstyle. I'm a bit embarrassed to admit I can do just that.

As to how film preserves one on film, there's a spooky moment in the DVD commentary to one of the Trek films were Shatner and Nimoy see DeForest Kelley on screen and note how odd it is to have film keep bringing back to life someone who's passed on, and even odder to know someday someone will be looking at their footage and thinking the same thing.

I believe that commentary was on the Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home! It's all ironic I suppose. I too can tell what part of each season an episode is by judging Shatners weight and hair! Season 3 is fairly obvious because he appears heavier by at least 10-20 pounds than when the show first started...notice in season 3 he doesn't wears his tight green tunic at all. Shatner even in his prime was always a bit stocky..I think he's built fairly similar to Connery.

In recent interviews with Shatner he basically explained he spent his free time re-writing (uncredited) episodes because there wasn't enough character motivation or the plot wasn't entierly clear...he spent his remaining time rehearsing his lines and then onto the set for filming. It must have been near impossible to maintain any condition.

[David_M]

I believe that commentary was on the Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home! It's all ironic I suppose. I too can tell what part of each season an episode is by judging Shatners weight and hair! Season 3 is fairly obvious because he appears heavier by at least 10-20 pounds than when the show first started...notice in season 3 he doesn't wears his tight green tunic at all.

Plus the shirts on everyone are a different material in Season 3, a shinier polyester looking fabric. He's also let his hair grow out a lot, in keeping with the times.

Nice to find a fellow geek here.

In recent interviews with Shatner he basically explained he spent his free time re-writing (uncredited) episodes because there wasn't enough character motivation or the plot wasn't entierly clear...he spent his remaining time rehearsing his lines and then onto the set for filming.

If you're to believe his co-stars, he "re-wrote" the scripts to take all their lines and reassign them to Kirk.

I'm not so sure Shatner and Connery had similar builds. Connery always seemed taller and more broad, while Shatner tended towards a barrel chest and shorter legs.

In an effort to find SOME link to Connery, and bring this thread back on topic, it was always interesting to me that Shatner shaved his chest for the TV show (except the pilot, where we glimpse his chest hair). I always put it down to simple vanity, but then I thought, "Why?" Why would a bare chest look better than a hairy one?

And then I figured it out (well, okay I read it somewhere). As late as the 60s, chest hair on men was considered borderline obscene (as were navels on women! Go figure), so Shatner and other TV and movie stars were forced to shave in the interests of good taste. When Connery hit the scene, he changed the rules, another way in which the early Bonds pushed the boundaries of what you could do on screen. To hear some tell it, Sean's hairy chest was as ground-breaking as Clark Gable going without a t-shirt in "It Happened One Night." So in addition to making the world safe for bald men everywhere, Sean also opened doors for the likes of Burt Reynolds and Tom Selleck. Interesting.

[Colossus]

One sign you're a true Trekkie is when you look at a collection of stills of Shatner in Kirk's chair -- with no other references -- and guess not only the season in which it was taken, but which episode, based mostly on his weight and hairstyle. I'm a bit embarrassed to admit I can do just that.

That is ridiculously amazing... and yet the same time a diehard Bond fan can tell what Bond movie it is just by looking at a promo pic of the actor.

[DaveBond21]

Well I grew up in the Moore era and as a kid, I found Moore's adventures better than the Connery ones because they featured more cars smashing into each other and Jaws!). But as I got older I realised how good the 60's Bond films are, for different reasons.

I am only 33 but I realised I was getting older when I heard Harrison Ford described as "that old guy" by a kid on a train. I never thought Ford would ever be described as an old guy! But of course that is what he is to kids growing up now.

[MkB]

And then I figured it out (well, okay I read it somewhere). As late as the 60s, chest hair on men was considered borderline obscene (as were navels on women! Go figure), so Shatner and other TV and movie stars were forced to shave in the interests of good taste. When Connery hit the scene, he changed the rules, another way in which the early Bonds pushed the boundaries of what you could do on screen. To hear some tell it, Sean's hairy chest was as ground-breaking as Clark Gable going without a t-shirt in "It Happened One Night." So in addition to making the world safe for bald men everywhere, Sean also opened doors for the likes of Burt Reynolds and Tom Selleck. Interesting.

Oh really? That is very interesting! I'm 30 so I didn't witness the 60s, and I thought Connery was a specimen of the "old-fashioned male" with hairy chest, typical of the 60s, and that this trend had tended to disappear in favour of the "metropolitan male" with hairless chest. I didn't figure Sean was an exception in fashion in his own time and changed the rules on screen!
Thanks for mentioning that.

[DaveBond21]

And then I figured it out (well, okay I read it somewhere). As late as the 60s, chest hair on men was considered borderline obscene (as were navels on women! Go figure), so Shatner and other TV and movie stars were forced to shave in the interests of good taste. When Connery hit the scene, he changed the rules, another way in which the early Bonds pushed the boundaries of what you could do on screen. To hear some tell it, Sean's hairy chest was as ground-breaking as Clark Gable going without a t-shirt in "It Happened One Night." So in addition to making the world safe for bald men everywhere, Sean also opened doors for the likes of Burt Reynolds and Tom Selleck. Interesting.

Oh really? That is very interesting! I'm 30 so I didn't witness the 60s, and I thought Connery was a specimen of the "old-fashioned male" with hairy chest, typical of the 60s, and that this trend had tended to disappear in favour of the "metropolitan male" with hairless chest. I didn't figure Sean was an exception in fashion in his own time and changed the rules on screen!
Thanks for mentioning that.

Chest hair goes in and out of fashion. It was back in the mid-90s, with famous men sporting bushy chests (including Brosnan). But it seems to be back out of fashion again now (including our Daniel).

[Safari Suit]

I am only 33 but I realised I was getting older when I heard Harrison Ford described as "that old guy" by a kid on a train. I never thought Ford would ever be described as an old guy! But of course that is what he is to kids growing up now.

I heard a kid say to his mom recenty when looking at a IJ4 sticker album "Mommy, Indiana Jones looks old now!"

[Mr. Blofeld]

Anyone else know why Sean's hairstyle changed so drastically from Goldfinger to Thunderball? It was pretty consistant from Dr. No through Goldfinger (parted at side), but then it changed for Thunderball and YOLT (brushed all the way over), and then mutated horribly in DAF (disheveled toupee) -- all three in just under 9 years!

What happened?

[WC]

Anyone else know why Sean's hairstyle changed so drastically from Goldfinger to Thunderball? It was pretty consistant from Dr. No through Goldfinger (parted at side), but then it changed for Thunderball and YOLT (brushed all the way over), and then mutated horribly in DAF (disheveled toupee) -- all three in just under 9 years!

What happened?

Connery was still experimenting with toupees!

Now where is that thread which discusses Connery's changing physical appearances throughout his films? I know it was posted here before but I can't seem to find it.

[double o ego]

I grew up with Pierce Brosnan as "my" Bond. The first few Bond films I saw starred Brosnan. The image I always had of Sean Connery was of an old bald guy with a beard and white hair. When I learned that Connery had played the first (and definitive) Bond, I had a very hard time visualizing him as James Bond. Sure, he was older, as expected. But the baldness and beard was the problem for me compared to, say, Roger Moore who sort of looked like what you'd expect James Bond to look in his 60s or 70s.

Even now, after having watched all the Bond films, it's difficult at times to accept the fact that the guy in DN and FRWL is the same guy as the bald, white-bearded Connery of today.

I realize that many people who grew up with Connery as their Bond will not be able to relate, but maybe some of the younger people can. Anyway, just a little observation.

I was 10 when GE came out, so I pretty much adopt Brosnan as my Bond even though Dalton had 2 outings during my early sesame street years ; ). However, I love the fact that Connery was THE Bond and to me, no one holds a candle close to his awesome prtrayal. You see, I understand that 1962 isn't 1995 and nor is it 2006. Connery like you and I is just a human being, however, he's one of the lucky ones who seem to get better with age. Look at Connery in films like, the hunt for red october, the rock, entrapment, rising sun, hell even LOEG, he looks pretty damn good for an older guy and one thing I've noticed is, that in all his films post Dr.No he's maintained a screen presense and magnetism that is hard to ignore.
Personally, I feel lucky to be a Bond fan and even luckier enough to recognise and appreciate raw talent in Connery not just for being the best James Bond but for his acting dexterity in general.

[DamnCoffee]

I understand completely. I also couldn't quite wrap my head around Connery being the original 007, he looked quite different.

I see where you're coming from. I couldn't get my head around it either. When I was a kid Roger was my Bond, All I watched was his Bond movies. I think I watched The Spy Who Loved Me the most, it wasn't untill I saw Goldfinger when I really started to accept Connery in the role, I couldn't accept Brosnan for a while either. But I did eventually.

[Dell Deaton]

Literally fell into this Thread from looking at the BlackFelix profile (seems he can pick me out at any distance when we find ourselves at the same local establishment ).

Interesting and nice blend of Connery and Shatner commentary here. Curious overlap.

Wonder how many people of that era are cross-over fans....

[DR76]

When I was growing up, both Moore and Connery were Bond to me. Then along came Dalton in the late 80s and at the same time, I discovered George Lazenby and OHMSS. End the end, I gave up trying to associate one actor with the role.

Edited by DR76, 06 August 2009 - 09:27 PM.

[jaguar007]

I grew up with Pierce Brosnan as "my" Bond. The first few Bond films I saw starred Brosnan.

I'm so sorry

Just kiddining

I grew up in the 70s during the Moore era, but I was first introduced to 007 by my mother on ABC TV. I don't know if I first saw Connery or Moore (the first film I saw in the theater was TSWLM). I had always known there was two James Bonds (I didn't discover OHMSS until the early 80s).

[DAN LIGHTER]

The Bond films have been on the Televsion so many times since before I was born I never had a problem releating Connery,Lazenby or Moore to the role. I cant say I have ever thought of Connery as old and bold. even though he is. I can see where you are coming fron though vednam.