Connery's physical appearance in DAF
SeanIsTheOnlyOne
Posts: 541MI6 Agent
Hi everyone,
I always had a problem with Connery's physical appearance in Diamonds Are Forever. After all, he was only 40 at that time and "still in pretty good shape" in the two movies released before: The Molly Maguires (1970) and The Anderson Tapes (1971).
In DAF, he looks overweighted from head to toe and the scene where Bond gets undressed in front of Tiffany just after Plenty's "jump" shows it well. It becomes obvious when she puts the ashtray on his belly !
I definitely don't understand why Cubby didn't say anything during the shooting. What happended for God's sake ?
I always had a problem with Connery's physical appearance in Diamonds Are Forever. After all, he was only 40 at that time and "still in pretty good shape" in the two movies released before: The Molly Maguires (1970) and The Anderson Tapes (1971).
In DAF, he looks overweighted from head to toe and the scene where Bond gets undressed in front of Tiffany just after Plenty's "jump" shows it well. It becomes obvious when she puts the ashtray on his belly !
I definitely don't understand why Cubby didn't say anything during the shooting. What happended for God's sake ?
Comments
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
We all know Sean was reluctant to return but taking care of your body from the first day of shooting to the last is not an option when you play James Bond, it's a duty. I'm just surprised Cubby didn't say a word about that.
I don't know if it would have changed the quality of the film but at least, it would have been pleasant to see him as classy as in the sixties.
Even before NSNA. Take The Man Who Would Be King (1975) for instance. He looks great to me.
I admire your enthusiasm, but that is not how Connery was and still is ticking.
After GF, the James Bond role became an annoyance, a burden, he always felt that he received too little money for his part and there was hardly any ‚duty feeling‘ to be on his peak when playing Bond.
It was not even about money, he could have probably gotten even more money out of it, if he‘d continued after DAF and I am pretty sure any criticism would have made him much less cooperative ( than he even was back then) .
So Cubby was well advised to keep his mouth shut and people where still lining up to see Connery bloated as Bond.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
DAF vies with DAD in propping up my list.
So it's unlikely that Cubby would want to rock the boat for any reason, particularly as United Artists' David Picker had gone out on a limb to get Connery back. The prospect of telling Connery to stop dodging salad would undoubtedly have sent him chicken oriental.
Maybe I'm biased - I love DAF, it was the first Bond I saw at the cinema and the scene where Bond swings above the Whyte House was one of the seminal moments in my life - but I think Connery gives a brilliant performance in DAF.
He ranges from humour ("Don't tell me - St Peter?") to controlled anger (when he slaps Plenty with his driving glove); his fight scene with Peter Franks looks brutal enough; he's suave in parts and when he shoots Blofeld's double, he looks deadly.
For some reason, I have a certain affection for DAF. Perhaps because it was the first Bond film with Connery I ever saw as a child. But I don't consider it as a good movie. The plot is ridiculous and I don't like Connery's performance in this one. We can see the man is fed up and except the elevator fight, the coffin scene and the soundtrack, it's difficult to find any real interest in DAF.
Connery's look in Diamonds Are Forever is disappointing though. I can't remember exactly what I thought when I saw the movie when I was young. I probably didn't mind that much. But I vaguely recall feeling that the look of Bond that evolved from Dr. No to You Only Live Twice really changed with Diamonds Are Forever.
One of the Bond books mentioned that Connery's laziness or disinterest, I can't remember the word they used, with Bond started with You Only Live Twice. But I like that one because it's exotic. Bond is still running around and climbing the mountain. And he still comes off as a continuation of the character from Dr. No.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
Connery's hair loss started before Dr No and the toupees they used in the sixties were very good. This one is terrible !
I would have fired the costume designer for that
What you say about the lighting is very interesting because there are some pics showing the man with a perfect (fake) haircut.
I love this one for instance:
He looks five years younger and his massive eyebrows don't seem too aggressive. Replace the Strip by Tokyo streets and you get a YOLT promo pic !
TBF he was overweight for YOLT but did lose it in between films as for Shalako and the above mentioned.
Looked good in First Great Train Robbery and in shape for Zardoz though is get up is rubbish!
But same for NSNA really, he just didn't look quite right, seemed better in Highlander, he had more vitality.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
About 8 months after DAF wrapped. This being one of the 2 films United Artists were to finance as part of his DAF deal, there were fairly strict time limits on how quickly the films were to be shot.
(The second was never made.)
I actually like the way he looks in NSNA. Right (fake) haircut, eyebrows trimmed and not overweight. Remember he was 52 during the shooting and in the movie they insist on the fact Bond is no more the fit young man he used to be, which is why M sends him to Shrublands. I even think he looks terrific in the Tango scene.
Personally, while I thoroughly enjoy DAF, I recognise the film's defects. One of them isn't Sean Connery. He no more phones this performance in than he does the one in YOLT. I do agree he looks somewhat battered. That didn't particularly bother me when I first saw it and while it is noticeable, it doesn't particularly bother me now. All in all, I think it's rather a charming, tongue in cheek performance and his slightly weighty look doesn't effect this. He still gets the girls and does a fair amount of derring-do. The fights though (Peter Frank's excepted) do seem rather slight, suggesting this older Bond isn't quite in shape (Bambi & Thumper - really ? Connery probably looks at his most flabby here )
The best of the film is the aforementioned White House sequence (beautifully shot by Ted Moore) the John Barry soundtrack & the humour. Like most of the Moore adventures 007 is almost an afterthought.
No, what does rankle is the lack of a genuine threat. Lots of scrapes but nothing to seriously ruffle the mature, experienced, know-it-all unruffleable James Bond. ( "Pity about your liver , Sir... Well, if the collars and cuffs match... Wrong pussy... I was out walking my rat... Is that who it was? Just proves no one's indestructible... etc")
I do agree that NSNA with it's clear allusions to 007's age handles Connery's slight weight gain better.
Well, when I see your username I guess you're in love with this movie
Yes, and I like Marmite too lol.
In support of others who remark that Connery looked out of shape in DAF, my namesake might have quipped: "People say Bond has the body of Sean Connery. When they see what he's done with it they'll be madder than hell!"
What's even more interesting is that he looks much more fit and very convincingly as what the young Bond of DN, FRWL, GF, and TB would look like as an older middle-aged Bond in several films he did some years later.
Three that immediately come to mind are A Bridge Too Far ('77); Cuba ('79) in which for all intents and purposes he really looked like an older version of Bond; and Outland ('81).
I guess Connery was just going through a phase around the time of DAF where he really didn't care. Of course as mentioned by others, the bad toupee, uncropped brows, and used car salesmen suites didn't help either.
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
It appears Connery just did DAF because they were willing to pay him whatever he wanted and he probably just considered it reparations to make up for his believing he was underpaid for his previous Bond films.
That being said, despite the bad hairpiece, bushy brows and paunch, Connery still brought the goods in that great elevator fight scene in DAF. Those scenes in Amsterdam were classic Bond and if the rest of the film could have matched that standard, DAF would have been a classic and we probably wouldn't be talking about Connery's appearance.
The reality is, Connery did not look his best in YOLT, but that was more from a weight standpoint (the hairpiece and brows were fine).
I think in OHMSS they upheld the “nice” look of Bond and his world to keep up standards, but IMO it was an artificial portrayal of the true culture of the day.
For LALD, I think they carried forward the “real” look and feel of culture as they did in DAF, except that time it was Bond and not the villain who looked artificially preened above the other characters, like how he looked while visiting Harlem and even in sequences in which he dressed down for the occasion like in the scenes in Louisiana in which he still looked neat and stood out in his environment. In the end, it’s a decision in every Bond movie in how to strike a balance between portraying relevance in the real world vs. the fantasy elements of Bond.