Connery's Bond still quintessential? Possible Spoilers

2»

Comments

  • L JonesL Jones Posts: 131MI6 Agent
    Quintessential means the most perfect embodiment of something.


    No, I don't think Connery was the "quintessential" James Bond. No such cinematic or literary Bond existed for me.
  • Scribe74Scribe74 San FranciscoPosts: 149MI6 Agent
    minigeff wrote:
    chrisisall wrote:
    minigeff wrote:
    Connery was a fecking gorilla when cast as Bond,
    knuckle scraping piss artist
    Don't mince words MG, how do you REALLY feel? :))

    Connery is a dick. Yes he's good at Bond, and Henry Jones Snr. but apart from that, utter codshit.

    I get sick and tired of people sniffing this guys backside just because a) everyone else says so and b) cos he was the first.

    Agreed!

    I will say that Connery's Bond was cool . . . but today the portrayal is very dated. My two favorite Bonds are Dalton and Craig . . . and both suit their time and place perfectly.
  • CmdrAtticusCmdrAtticus United StatesPosts: 1,102MI6 Agent
    osris wrote:
    Now in regards to the original cinematic version of Bond (not Fleming's Bond but Terrence Young's/EON's version), Connery is obviously "quintesssential" since he was the original and did the 60's Bond's. People who are unfamiliar with Fleming's Bond (like my wife and my friends) and are around my age always point to Connery for that very reason. It is why Weissmuller will always be THE Tarzan and Rathbone THE Sherlock Holmes. That's why all the other actors will pale to them to a certain extent. Connery's light touch combined with his ironic/wry manner and dead seriousness when the scenes called for it was how Bond was defined to audiences and any other approach is considered not authentic.

    Yes, I see what you mean. In a way, there are two Bonds: the literary one and the cinematic one. I suppose most of the disagreements people get into over the portrayal of Bond by various actors is that they either want them to be like the literary Bond or the cinematic Bond.


    Very true. That's the problem the producers had from the beginning. They thought the literary Bond was too dark for the audiences, so Young thought Dr. No needed a light touch and humor. They kept that up until Moore, then increased the humor to the baffoon level in his entries. They brought it back down a little with Dalton then back to the Connery level with Brosnans entries. When they rebooted with Craig, they were able to get it darker and closer to the literary Bond. Hard to say if they will keep it that way when another actor takes over.
Sign In or Register to comment.