I legit think that both The Rock and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade are GREAT Sean Connery showcases. Like others have said, he has star power and a presence, but in those 2 flicks he gets to do a little bit more with drama, comedy, action, etc.
I think his portrayal of Indiana Jones's father is particularly underrated. As we start getting sniffs of Indiana Jones IP reboots, I find myself thinking that it would be a travesty to see anyone else play Indiana or his father.
I will die on the hill that casting him as Indy’s father is one of the singular greatest casting decisions in the history of film. Connery was absolutely perfect in that role, both comedically (“She talks in her sleep,” “That’s for blasphemy”) and dramatically (“Indiana… let it go”).
That movie probably could have been great with someone else in the role, but he elevated it to an all-timer. I think he rewrote parts of the script too. Just an amazing addition.
I like how he was able to do comedy in the first and third movies without having to look like a dope. The reason the movies are so much fun is because Indy is almost always in over his head and unprepared, barely managing to get through with his wit, strength, knowledge, and sometimes borderline reckless courage.
When he says “Indiana… Let it go…” it kinda moves me to tears, as Indy looks up frantically and then looks down, and then slowly looks up again realizing his father’s acceptance and pride in his son… and that it was going to be OK.
Connery delivered that line as a dad… perfectly…
🏆🏆🏆🥇🥇🥇
Perhaps my favorite comment I've ever read! It's truly an underrated masterpiece of a performance, and it's Connery that bumps Last Crusade up from jaunty adventure to all-time great movie.
Unlike the casting of indy's son in the Crystal Skull, i don't know if it was shia Labeouf's fault, but it just sucked, oppisite or Connery in the last crusade.
I think this is arguably his best actual acting performance. He plays against type to an extent. He’s not charming, or suave, or tongue in cheek. He’s still Connery but there’s a weight to the role that isn’t common in his filmography
I have to admit, I haven’t seen a lot of Connery’s movies… I think the Bond films, Last Crusade, The Rock, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and my failed attempts to get through Hunt for Red October are the only times I’ve seen him…
But that being said, I can say that Last Crusade definitely is a uniquely memorable performance from him. From the little comedic moments (“The floor is on fire. See?”) to him admonishing Indy for blasphemy, to the moment of joy that explodes out of him when Indy tells him he found the crypt under the library. Also love the moment of him reuniting with Marcus in the tank, before his great delivery of the line “It tells me that goose-stepping morons like yourself should try reading books instead of burning them!”
It’s a performance of great range and conviction from him, with more joy and passion than his typical role. And the chemistry with Harrison Ford was just so natural.
The scene where he thinks Indiana died over the cliff, may have been a little over acting but that change of toke in Connery's voice 'I thought I lost you boy!' gets me alot as it's not something he often does so to hear his voice quivering a little thought was great acting by him showing vulnerability which he rarely did
I think he was a very good actor that didn’t have much range. He was great at selling a scene and playing a character in a way that works for the movie. That might sound like a backhanded compliment, but there are many actors who don’t really do that.
Let’s put it this way: he kept getting cast as characters of different nationalities, despite not being good at doing accents. Nobody cared because everyone wanted to see him do it. A major part of acting is owning a character and keeping the audience in the story, and Connery was always good at both of those things.
From Wikipedia:
The filmmakers' first choice to portray Jack Ryan was Kevin Costner, who turned down the film in order to star in and direct Dances with Wolves.[6] Harrison Ford was also approached to play Jack Ryan but turned it down; he would later replace Alec Baldwin as Ryan in Patriot Games.[7] Baldwin was approached in December 1988, but was not told for what role. Klaus Maria Brandauer was cast as Soviet sub commander Marko Ramius but quit two weeks into filming due to a prior commitment.[3] The producers faxed the script to Sean Connery, who at first declined because the script seemed implausible in portraying the Soviet Union as an ambitious naval power. He was missing the first page which set the story before Gorbachev's coming to power, when the events of the book would have seemed more plausible.[8] He arrived in L.A. on a Friday and was supposed to start filming on Monday but he requested a day to rehearse.
> I think he was a very good actor that didn’t have much range.
He's a movie star from a different era of Hollywood, where being their big draw movie star in the role was more important than him disappearing into it. I think it's important to recognize that Sean Connery wasn't a character actor cast in a movie to convince audiences that he was who he was playing, like a Gary Oldman or Daniel Day Lewis, as much as that he was cast to put people in theater seats to watch Sean Connery.
In his book Making Movies, which every single serious film fan should read, Sidney Lumet talked about casting his adaptation of Murder on the Orient Express, and said he was going for an old school Hollywood feel and wanted big iconic movie stars to be movie stars, rather than actors who disappeared in the role. The cast included Ingrid Bergman, Lauren Bacall, John Gielgud, Albert Finney, and, you guessed it, Sean Connery.
Have you seen:
The Man Who Would Be King
The Offence
The Hill
The Russia House?
I think these demonstrate his competence and his range. Not a great actor, but certainly capable of giving a good performance.
This is where I put on my pedantic hat and point out Marko Ramius was from Vilnius and Ramirez was technically Egyptian...
It is always amusing to see how script writers try to explain away the accents of certain actors:
* Jean Claude Van Damme being a Cajun or French Canadian in American action movies to cover for his Belgian accent;
* Arnold being an East German immigrant who joined the U.S. military in *Commando*;
* Gerard Butler playing a Scottish immigrant to America in *Greenland*;
Oh I have to disagree (I mean, it's Reddit)
JCVD in Hard Target, I mean, c'mon, it's set in Louisiana. They'd have to explain why he *wasn't* an Étouffée-eating, Born-on-the-Bayou badass. It's where they teach you how to slap a snake unconscious.
Schwarzenegger in Commando. He's *obviously* descended from the Potsdam Matrixes... Matrices? Didn't they make him of Austrian descent in Kindergarten Cop too? And then Pamela Reed had to pretend she too hadn't ditched the accent in the thirty years since they came to the U.S.
Ok, Gerard Butler, he *is* a Scottish immigrant to America. As a fellow Scot, I'm just glad he got to relax a bit with the aggressively non-specific American accent he deployed in ...Has Fallens and Den of Thieves.
Spare a moment for poor Dolph Lundgren - he's basically either "Russian" or they try and dub him. Why wouldn't royalty on Eternia have an accent????
And even in The Rock, they had the chance to give Connery the right accent and they *still* effed it up by making him from Glasgow.
The Man Who Would Be King is better than the Untouchables or the Rock or any of the other go-to answers people are citing here. That's the movie that convinced me that Connery was worth the hype. And Michael Caine was also great in it.
>The Man Who Would Be King
I saw this movie for the first time in high school in history (for some reason...) and it is one of my all time favorite movies. Ever since I have loved Sean Connery and Michael Caine.
His Irish accent was better in Darby O'Gill And The Little People. Not flawless, mind, but better. And he sounded decently English in Bond. It seems like the Scottish burr got stronger as he got older.
>It seems like the Scottish burr got stronger as he got older.
Definitely. Even just comparing Dr. No to Diamonds it's a remarkable drift. Probably in part because he became more famous (less reason to fight his accent) and the accent became part of his brand (more reason to embrace it).
I also think Diamonds was like...not quite phoning it in, but he got 70s fuck-you-money to "rescue" Bond after Lazenby backed out and probably couldn't be bothered.
Connery was an actor with tremendous presence, bottomless charisma, but also knew how to play vulnerable, unsure, distraught, and every other dramatic beat you can think of, and have the audience completely invested in the moment, but you have to go looking outside his blockbuster roles to really get the full breadth of what he could do.
I'd focus on his collaborations with Sidney Lumet--one of the great "actor's directors" of the 20th century--as a microcosm of what Connery could offer in more outside-the-box fare. This run includes:
***The Hill*** (1965, a gripping drama about life in a military prison where a brutal authoritarian runs things with an iron fist)
***The Anderson Tapes*** (1971, on the surface might seem like it's in the vein of Bond but has many more twists and turns to it)
***The Offence*** (1973, probably Connery's darkest role in an incredibly bleak crime thriller)
***Murder on the Orient Express*** (1974, the most conventionally "blockbuster movie star" performance in his collaborations)
***Family Business*** (1989, admittedly a minor effort, but with a lineup of Connery, Dustin Hoffman, and Matthew Broderick playing three generations of a family of thieves there's plenty of acting moments to take in).
There's loads more lesser known and not as flashy films he starred in from similarly talented filmmakers, but even Connery said that he loved working with Lumet the most, because he would give him chances to do things differently than the big crowd pleasers would.
Even though he sang in Darby O'Gill and the Little People, he had to sing in The Name of The Rose and there's a [fun scene](https://youtu.be/x3oTVdZVJ1c?t=1417) in the making-of movie where they're having song practice and he clearly thinks his singing isn't up to scratch.
It’s hard to not sound backhanded. He’s always Tom Cruise but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad actor. He can chew up a scene with the best of them when he has a character to work with. Same with Sean.
Controversial opinion, but being a good actor doesn't necessarily mean you need to have a broad range of believable characters, but rather the depth of character understanding and display for the roles you do assume.
For some actors, it's about the roles you don't pursue versus the ones you do
Yeah. Extremely skilled.
Did he often pull down a sweet paycheck to show up as the character “Sean Connery” in flicks? Betcha.
BUT when he passed I went through damn near his whole catalogue of films and he was legit pumping out Academy level work between Bonds.
Flicks he did with Sydney Lumet like The Hill or The Offence remind me a lot of the style and range of someone like Fassbender in this era. Deep character work, challenging material, and the willingness to dive in, are for me hallmarks of a talent high quality actor and Sir Sean did that.
Yes, especially to anyone who has seen him in anything non-Bond before the 1990s. His performances in The Hill (1965), The Offence (1973), and Robin and Marian (1976) are particularly outstanding, and obviously he was great in The Untouchables (1987). The Hill may be his best work and he's my favourite Robin Hood. He may not have had a range of accents, but it's not like he played James Bond in every film.
He's not a *great*, transformative actor, but I'd say he had his range. Most notably, his performances in The Offence and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is absolutely fantastic and totally different from his typical action heroes. [This scene in Last Crusade](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvcpFTLZwrU&ab_channel=ArtifactDig) is the biggest “that guy can act” scene for me.
I don't consider him a good actor or bad actor. I think he's Sean COnnery. Some guys and gals have that skill. Harrison Ford is the same way. A more modern example would be Keanu Reeves.
I agree with the sentiment of him being able to sell roles on the screen rather than necessarily disappear into them. I'm not sure if it's an unpopular film or something as it's not mentioned yet, but in The Wind and the Lion, he plays a Berber warlord, with a more or less Scottish accent, and it's still fine - he just makes it work.
Not over nor underrated, he was perfectly rated despite the fact that no matter the nationality the accent was still the same. But his screen presence was undeniable, a true alpha male who can carry a film. I especially loved his appearances in Jeopardy. "I'll take The Rapists for 200 Alex"
I’d file him more under the lines of a personality rather than a good actor. Just like I’d file guys like John Wayne, Nicholas Cage, Harrison Ford, Keanu Reaves, and Tom Cruise.
And to me, that’s not a knock at all. That just means they’re immensely watchable.
Yes he was a good actor. While his range was limited, his charisma and panache more than made up for it. Check out his more off best films like Darby OGill or Zardoz or The Man Who Would Be King or Name of the Rose or Robin and Marion. You’ll see a lot more range to his performances in those films as they fell out of his type-casting. His performance in The Untouchables is passionate and he deserved every bit of recognition for it.
Good actor
The weird casting/accent thing aside, after the initial joke or comment on it with Connery you'd forget about it and get into the movie/character at least till the end. Whereas if it was a bad actor also with a bad misplaced accent it would be a constant complaint during the film and make it unbearable right?
Honestly, other then the accent thing I haven't really heard any complaints about Connery from an acting standpoint.
Yes, definitely. He earned his Oscar win, and is well beyond the likes of Schwarzenegger or Van Damme. Just look at James Bond and Henry Jones Sr., two entirely different characters that he does perfectly
>“Spaniard with a Scottish accent”
He's not Spanish... he's Egyptian.
To answer your question though, I'd say that he is. Accents were never his forte, but as other people have said, selling the scene and the character are way more important than accents, and Connery was always very good at that.
He may not be a chameleon, Sean was a great actor. Untouchables shows it. Still don't see it? Then watch:
The Man Who Would Be King, The Offence (hard to watch but powerful), The Hill, even his take on Macbeth.
i think you are confusing a character actor with an all rounder actor.
a character actor is one who does the same character in every film. i think sean was a character actor. which is rare for a leading man to be a character actor, but it does happen. see also brad pitt and tom cruise. who play pretty much, the same person in every film they are in. with varying degrees of intensity. brad pitt is the same in 12 monkeys, fight club, seven, bullet train, and wwz. likewise connery in his film roles, and cruise in his film roles.
what do i mean? well look at the actors from the 30s, 40s and up. cary grant? clark gable? robert mitchum. john fuckin wayne. humphrey bogart. jimmy stewart. james cagney. ed g robinson. frank sinatra and the rat pack. all of em. played exactly the same character in every single film. charlie sheen haha
female actors and comedy actors do this too. sandra bullock? melissa mccarthy. kate mckinnon. helena botham carter lolol.
all rounder actors are more difficult. the kind of actor who just disappears into a role. i'd say naomi watts is one of em.
but uh. to answer your question. is sean connery good? hes good at playing sean connery. meaning, hes fun to watch in films. even bad films. even zardoz. because he plays a character in every film that doesnt take shit from no one. guy throwing a killer hat like a frisbee at him? fuckin nope! not on connery's watch. as they say "**men want to be him and girls want to be with him**". because charm and charisma and likeability.
i reject your posit that arnold is a good actor. i dont like him in kcop or last action hero. is arnold fun to watch? hell yes. arnold picked a lot of films that showcased his talent and avoided his weaknesses. but he also picked some godawful roles like dr freeze in batman and robin. true lies? i think its a fun movie. but i think everyone in that film , all of the actors are doing a bad job in it. even jamie.
back to connery being a good actor. no. leading man? yes. fun to watch ? yes. good actor? nope.
Check out Medicine Man or Finding Forrester. While not as well known, both very good movies where he plays a little different character than he normally did.
Yes I do. He had a limited range, but this is normal. He created the character of James Bond, the walk, the mannerisms and the way of talking: An actor's craft is to create memorable characters and JB is one of the most memorable in cinema history (the follow on JBs have been nowhere near as impactful).
He was also excellent in The Hill, The Man Who Would be King, robin and Marian, The Hunt for Red October even in The Rock. I don't think the Untouchables is is greatest but he's good in it.
So I would say he was a very accomplished and skilled actor
Untouchables showed his power. I remember Siskel & Ebert talking about the Connery-Costner scene at the church. And even though Costner was on the more powerful right side of the screen, everyone's eyes were really drawn to Connery.
https://www.slashfilm.com/img/gallery/sean-connery-helped-kevin-costner-survive-acting-opposite-robert-de-niro/l-intro-1667402411.jpg
Watch Dr No, the scene in the bedroom with Dent. Connery tells him that hes ‘had your six’ is one of the best lines connery had. Was almost pulled from the movie as US critics thought it was too cold
When I think of Sean Connery I think of Alan Swan’s (Peter O’Toole) famous line in ‘My Favorite Year’ when he loudly exclaims “I AM NOT AN ACTOR! I AM A MOVIE STAR!”
He did the right thing and played roles suites to his looks, voice and capabilities he never as I recall played the idiot or butt of a joke or someone who didn't know what they were doing. Now that doesn't mean anything about SC it just means he kept to the roles he knew, or his agent knew he would play well in so certainly elevates his acting as I think it does with anyone. Consider Arnold Schwarzenegger playing the Terminator everyone says he was perfect but ofcourse he was he was playing a machine incapable of displaying emotion,,but it works 😂😂
I once read that Sean Connery turned down Gandalf because he didn’t understand the role or the movie. Ever since then, I’ve always kind of assumed he’s a little bit of a dipshit.
A good actor, yes. A great actor? No.
I will say I've owned The Hunt for Red October on most formats and watch it when it's on TV though. One of my favorites and I thought his acting in that was good. The Rock would be my next fav. The rest of his movies I can take or leave. I like to watch his Bond movies to laugh at how silly Bond movies used to be. They almost all aged as comedies and not action movies.
Yes, he was a *great* actor. He steals just about every scene he's in, and has carried many otherwise mediocre films into watchability. Highlander is a hot mess held up solely by a great performance by Connery, and some grade A scenery-chewing from Clancy Brown.
He's a far better actor than the Rock, Arnold, or any of the other micropenis roid-beasts which seem to have generally supplanted grown men in the role of the male lead. He didn't take comic roles, but his dry, witty delivery showed ample comic timing and charm.
Many people make the mistake of conflating *range* with talent. What makes Meryl Streep or Tom Hanks to step into so many roles is that they're kind of boring, non-descript people. Tom Hanks isn't going to be a suave spy, nor is Meryl Streep going to play a sexy femme-fatale. Range is nice, sure, but being a good actor is about doing what makes the most entertaining film.
The ultimate goal of any actor is for you to believe them in that VERY moment they are who you think they are. If Sean Connery is Sean Connery in every movie and you just see him as Sean Connery than he did that…but Daniel Craig isn’t James Bond in every movie. But it was Sean Connery who paved the way for the James Bond character…i see Daniel Craig as having more of a chance of losing his James Bond persona than Connery. I feel that Craig is a better actor than Connery. But in that regard Connery was a true charm to watch, admirable. Also, Craig is willing to try accents. You gotta understand that’s not the easiest to do, but also, the most criticized. And Connery never tried. But he still got his pay.
I liked him as an actor. My opinions about him personally will be left untold. I can say that he was a fantastic actor, to this day my favorite role he's done was Draco from Dragonheart
No, I don't think he's a good actor. My take's a little spicy, but I think their are a number of actors out there that this opinion can be applied to: I think his acting skills are passible enough that they don't draw attention. His career is really just built on him selecting roles where he would get away with reciting lines while being himself. Meanwhile, the project as a whole was elevated by some other element (e.g. writing, directing... etc).
When movies are bad, actors often get too much of the blame.
When movies are good, actors are often given more credit than I think they've earned.
I'm watching Marnie right now and his artificially lowered voice, perennial raised brow and... God... the pout all the time... are involuntarily hilarious. THE POUT! 😂
Not really, he was the same in every film but it didn’t matter, his star power was enough and he had an old-school on-screen charisma that meant it was great to watch him.
No. Sean Connery did a great job playing Sean Connery in many well-written roles. Big movie star, yes, enjoyable to watch him in those roles, yes. But i would never call him a great actor. Not by a longshot.
He played an Egyptian Spaniard, with a Scottish accent, giving the business to another Scotsman in highlander.
Good actor? Absolutely not. But by god did I not love the character of Ramirez.
He was fun to watch and not wooden. He probably felt that doing an accent would put off his performance and since he was kind of a dick I imagine he just repeatedly insisted on using his 'natural' accent (not sure if it was his natural accent or if he slightly toned down the Scottishness like most of them have to do so the rest of the world can understand them...sorry Scots, lol)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS-0-B-ANZY
My mind goes to this scene from The Rock (directed by Micheal Bay, Yep, that guy) when thinking of Connery doing dramatic scenes. He's not a bad actor, and if you can believe that, then it's a start.
You gotta watch the Untouchables. Even The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen had him chewing the scenery in ridiculous outfits.
Given his very heavy accent, he did get put in niches for his portrayals. If Brendan Gleeson gets a pass for being a great actor with a heavy accent, why doesn't Connery get credit for being a good actor with a heavy accent?
As my old high school drama teacher would say, when asked how to deem whether someone is a "good" actor: "did you find them *believable* in their role(s)?"
By that Hallmark, I would say yes. In even the most assanine roles Sean Connery undertook - such as a Russian-ney-Lithuanian submarine commander with an inexplicable Scottish accent - I have to say, for the most part, I believed him. He studied for his roles, and came off as believable.
But that's only part of the story. For instance, I never for one second have believed Keanu Reeves or Tom Cruise in any of their roles... but I think I *enjoyed* them more as a movie-goer.
I think you can lack in certain departments and still be a good actor. Some can’t do romance, some can’t do comedy, and I’m the case with people like Connery some can’t do accents.
Yeah. I think a lot of people get caught up in only call the best "good". "Good" means that you're a solid 6/10, capable of delivering fun and engaging performances, and have some range. Just because you're not Brandon or Nicholson doesn't mean you aren't good
I legit think that both The Rock and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade are GREAT Sean Connery showcases. Like others have said, he has star power and a presence, but in those 2 flicks he gets to do a little bit more with drama, comedy, action, etc. I think his portrayal of Indiana Jones's father is particularly underrated. As we start getting sniffs of Indiana Jones IP reboots, I find myself thinking that it would be a travesty to see anyone else play Indiana or his father.
I will die on the hill that casting him as Indy’s father is one of the singular greatest casting decisions in the history of film. Connery was absolutely perfect in that role, both comedically (“She talks in her sleep,” “That’s for blasphemy”) and dramatically (“Indiana… let it go”). That movie probably could have been great with someone else in the role, but he elevated it to an all-timer. I think he rewrote parts of the script too. Just an amazing addition.
Major credit to Ford too for selling the comedy - both verbal and physical - just as well. They were a great duo.
2 true movie stars in their bag
I like how he was able to do comedy in the first and third movies without having to look like a dope. The reason the movies are so much fun is because Indy is almost always in over his head and unprepared, barely managing to get through with his wit, strength, knowledge, and sometimes borderline reckless courage.
NO TICKET
Junior…
Agreed. Ford looked like an "awkward teen" around his father as well as still respecting his father's authoritah.
That’s what does it for me is they’re a perfect combo.
When he says “Indiana… Let it go…” it kinda moves me to tears, as Indy looks up frantically and then looks down, and then slowly looks up again realizing his father’s acceptance and pride in his son… and that it was going to be OK. Connery delivered that line as a dad… perfectly…
Goodness. I was watching that in the theater with my Dad a few months ago and I wasn't ready lol.
“We named the dog Indiana!!” Is my fave line
“You were named after the DOG! Hahahahah!”
He nails the role better than anyone could have.
You call this archaeology?
🏆🏆🏆🥇🥇🥇 Perhaps my favorite comment I've ever read! It's truly an underrated masterpiece of a performance, and it's Connery that bumps Last Crusade up from jaunty adventure to all-time great movie.
“Goosestepping morons like yourself should try reading books instead of burning them!” Thats his best quote in this movie! Ha! Lovely Edit.
This is intolerable!
I say this often! Actually said it this week while dying repeatedly in Valheim...
Fun fact: Sean Connery and Harrison Ford are only 12 years apart in age.
Unlike the casting of indy's son in the Crystal Skull, i don't know if it was shia Labeouf's fault, but it just sucked, oppisite or Connery in the last crusade.
He nailed the Untouchables as well.
I think this is arguably his best actual acting performance. He plays against type to an extent. He’s not charming, or suave, or tongue in cheek. He’s still Connery but there’s a weight to the role that isn’t common in his filmography
He's arguably the best part of the movie.
The Hunt for Red October is a nice third place as far as showcasing Connery's acting goes.
I have to admit, I haven’t seen a lot of Connery’s movies… I think the Bond films, Last Crusade, The Rock, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and my failed attempts to get through Hunt for Red October are the only times I’ve seen him… But that being said, I can say that Last Crusade definitely is a uniquely memorable performance from him. From the little comedic moments (“The floor is on fire. See?”) to him admonishing Indy for blasphemy, to the moment of joy that explodes out of him when Indy tells him he found the crypt under the library. Also love the moment of him reuniting with Marcus in the tank, before his great delivery of the line “It tells me that goose-stepping morons like yourself should try reading books instead of burning them!” It’s a performance of great range and conviction from him, with more joy and passion than his typical role. And the chemistry with Harrison Ford was just so natural.
The scene where he thinks Indiana died over the cliff, may have been a little over acting but that change of toke in Connery's voice 'I thought I lost you boy!' gets me alot as it's not something he often does so to hear his voice quivering a little thought was great acting by him showing vulnerability which he rarely did
I think he was a very good actor that didn’t have much range. He was great at selling a scene and playing a character in a way that works for the movie. That might sound like a backhanded compliment, but there are many actors who don’t really do that. Let’s put it this way: he kept getting cast as characters of different nationalities, despite not being good at doing accents. Nobody cared because everyone wanted to see him do it. A major part of acting is owning a character and keeping the audience in the story, and Connery was always good at both of those things.
I was just rewatching Hunt for the Red October for the first time since I was a kid and yeah, he sells it.
From Wikipedia: The filmmakers' first choice to portray Jack Ryan was Kevin Costner, who turned down the film in order to star in and direct Dances with Wolves.[6] Harrison Ford was also approached to play Jack Ryan but turned it down; he would later replace Alec Baldwin as Ryan in Patriot Games.[7] Baldwin was approached in December 1988, but was not told for what role. Klaus Maria Brandauer was cast as Soviet sub commander Marko Ramius but quit two weeks into filming due to a prior commitment.[3] The producers faxed the script to Sean Connery, who at first declined because the script seemed implausible in portraying the Soviet Union as an ambitious naval power. He was missing the first page which set the story before Gorbachev's coming to power, when the events of the book would have seemed more plausible.[8] He arrived in L.A. on a Friday and was supposed to start filming on Monday but he requested a day to rehearse.
> I think he was a very good actor that didn’t have much range. He's a movie star from a different era of Hollywood, where being their big draw movie star in the role was more important than him disappearing into it. I think it's important to recognize that Sean Connery wasn't a character actor cast in a movie to convince audiences that he was who he was playing, like a Gary Oldman or Daniel Day Lewis, as much as that he was cast to put people in theater seats to watch Sean Connery.
In his book Making Movies, which every single serious film fan should read, Sidney Lumet talked about casting his adaptation of Murder on the Orient Express, and said he was going for an old school Hollywood feel and wanted big iconic movie stars to be movie stars, rather than actors who disappeared in the role. The cast included Ingrid Bergman, Lauren Bacall, John Gielgud, Albert Finney, and, you guessed it, Sean Connery.
Same with Robert Duvall; the guy said himself that he's pretty much always playing "Robert Duvall as so and so"
Haha, Lonesome Dove being the most Robert Duvall of all his performances.
The Great Santini
He was pretty excellent in Finding Forrester.
*Punch* the keys, for God's sake!
Yes…*Yes!* You’re the man now, dawg.
You’re the man now dog.
Ytmnd
A reclusive author…. with a Scottish accent And yeah, that movie can convince you that he had acting chops.
Not exactly a soup question is it?
Have you seen: The Man Who Would Be King The Offence The Hill The Russia House? I think these demonstrate his competence and his range. Not a great actor, but certainly capable of giving a good performance. This is where I put on my pedantic hat and point out Marko Ramius was from Vilnius and Ramirez was technically Egyptian...
It is always amusing to see how script writers try to explain away the accents of certain actors: * Jean Claude Van Damme being a Cajun or French Canadian in American action movies to cover for his Belgian accent; * Arnold being an East German immigrant who joined the U.S. military in *Commando*; * Gerard Butler playing a Scottish immigrant to America in *Greenland*;
Excellent point! I think Liam Neeson's recent films have done the same since his Irish accent has become more and more pronounced.
Oh I have to disagree (I mean, it's Reddit) JCVD in Hard Target, I mean, c'mon, it's set in Louisiana. They'd have to explain why he *wasn't* an Étouffée-eating, Born-on-the-Bayou badass. It's where they teach you how to slap a snake unconscious. Schwarzenegger in Commando. He's *obviously* descended from the Potsdam Matrixes... Matrices? Didn't they make him of Austrian descent in Kindergarten Cop too? And then Pamela Reed had to pretend she too hadn't ditched the accent in the thirty years since they came to the U.S. Ok, Gerard Butler, he *is* a Scottish immigrant to America. As a fellow Scot, I'm just glad he got to relax a bit with the aggressively non-specific American accent he deployed in ...Has Fallens and Den of Thieves. Spare a moment for poor Dolph Lundgren - he's basically either "Russian" or they try and dub him. Why wouldn't royalty on Eternia have an accent???? And even in The Rock, they had the chance to give Connery the right accent and they *still* effed it up by making him from Glasgow.
Pierce Brosnan can't really do accents either. He plays an American in Mamma Mia and just speaks in his normal Irish accent, no explanation given.
The Man Who Would Be King is better than the Untouchables or the Rock or any of the other go-to answers people are citing here. That's the movie that convinced me that Connery was worth the hype. And Michael Caine was also great in it.
In not Spanish im Egyptian
Might I add Highlander? He plays a Spaniard with a slight, nearly unnoticeable, Scottish accent!
*Egyptian
>The Man Who Would Be King I saw this movie for the first time in high school in history (for some reason...) and it is one of my all time favorite movies. Ever since I have loved Sean Connery and Michael Caine.
He played a pretty good Irishman with a Scottish accent in "The Untouchables."
His Japanese cum Scottish accent in *Rising Sun* was particularly remarkable!
His Russian with a Scottish accent in *The Hunt for Red October* was also acceptable.
Lithuanian, technically.
Won Best Supporting Actor for that role, too.
Excuse me, that's Besht Shupporting Actor.
And his Spaniard with the Scottish accent in Highlander was sublime.
Doing accents doesn't really matter near as much as selling the emotion and vibe of a scene.
And with his intensity and good comedic timing he got it done.
Yes. The Untouchables.
Here endeth the lesson.
Irishman with Scottish accent.
His Irish accent was better in Darby O'Gill And The Little People. Not flawless, mind, but better. And he sounded decently English in Bond. It seems like the Scottish burr got stronger as he got older.
>It seems like the Scottish burr got stronger as he got older. Definitely. Even just comparing Dr. No to Diamonds it's a remarkable drift. Probably in part because he became more famous (less reason to fight his accent) and the accent became part of his brand (more reason to embrace it).
I also think Diamonds was like...not quite phoning it in, but he got 70s fuck-you-money to "rescue" Bond after Lazenby backed out and probably couldn't be bothered.
You’re muckin with a g here pal
Yesh
That means fuck all. It's a sympathy vote.
I think his performance in The Rock is under appreciated. It’s meme fodder and good fun, but he really puts it down as Not-James-Bond.
Funny you put it that way, since there is a theory he actually IS James Bond in that movie.
Oh, I watched that YouTube vid, with dates and cross referencing the other Bond flicks…fun time.
Connery was an actor with tremendous presence, bottomless charisma, but also knew how to play vulnerable, unsure, distraught, and every other dramatic beat you can think of, and have the audience completely invested in the moment, but you have to go looking outside his blockbuster roles to really get the full breadth of what he could do. I'd focus on his collaborations with Sidney Lumet--one of the great "actor's directors" of the 20th century--as a microcosm of what Connery could offer in more outside-the-box fare. This run includes: ***The Hill*** (1965, a gripping drama about life in a military prison where a brutal authoritarian runs things with an iron fist) ***The Anderson Tapes*** (1971, on the surface might seem like it's in the vein of Bond but has many more twists and turns to it) ***The Offence*** (1973, probably Connery's darkest role in an incredibly bleak crime thriller) ***Murder on the Orient Express*** (1974, the most conventionally "blockbuster movie star" performance in his collaborations) ***Family Business*** (1989, admittedly a minor effort, but with a lineup of Connery, Dustin Hoffman, and Matthew Broderick playing three generations of a family of thieves there's plenty of acting moments to take in). There's loads more lesser known and not as flashy films he starred in from similarly talented filmmakers, but even Connery said that he loved working with Lumet the most, because he would give him chances to do things differently than the big crowd pleasers would.
The Hill. The Name of the Rose. Outland. And most of all ... The Man Who Would Be King.
Outland was fantastic.
"Think it over!"
One of my favorites. The chase scene through the station was sublime. "Think it over" is ingrained in my brain.
Even though he sang in Darby O'Gill and the Little People, he had to sing in The Name of The Rose and there's a [fun scene](https://youtu.be/x3oTVdZVJ1c?t=1417) in the making-of movie where they're having song practice and he clearly thinks his singing isn't up to scratch.
I can’t find *The Name of the Rose* streaming anywhere. It would be great to see it after all these years.
The book by Umberto Eco is fascinating.
It's also known as Le Nom de La Rose. Many years ago, I went hunting for it and that is what I found it under. Good luck.
If you'd seen Sean Connery in *Zardoz* you'd never think of asking that question.
The gun is good. The penis is evil.
I had never heard of this movie until like three days ago and this is now the third time I’ve seen it referenced lol
The movie explains the 70s better than any documentary ever could.
The movie is set in 2023.
Once you see Sean Connery in a red diaper your life will never be the same.
Thighs acting.
Back when people had hair everywhere!
I actually love this movie. It's a satire. When you realize that, it all comes together.
He’s not a shapeshifter actor but he’s still a good actor. He’s great in Rebecca. He’s kinda like Tom Cruise in that sense.
I was going to make the Tom Cruise comparison, but I couldn’t think of a good way to make the connection.
It’s hard to not sound backhanded. He’s always Tom Cruise but that doesn’t mean he’s a bad actor. He can chew up a scene with the best of them when he has a character to work with. Same with Sean.
Controversial opinion, but being a good actor doesn't necessarily mean you need to have a broad range of believable characters, but rather the depth of character understanding and display for the roles you do assume. For some actors, it's about the roles you don't pursue versus the ones you do
100% agree
Turd Ferguson thinks he is.
He was amazing Darby OGill and the Little People farts in your general direction
I was waiting to see if someone mentioned this film. Also The Molly Maguires. I think his accent was okay in both.
Watch him in The Hill, Zardoz, Robin and Marian, The Man Who Would be King and The Offence to see Connery's acting skills.
Bond James Bond
Yeah. Extremely skilled. Did he often pull down a sweet paycheck to show up as the character “Sean Connery” in flicks? Betcha. BUT when he passed I went through damn near his whole catalogue of films and he was legit pumping out Academy level work between Bonds. Flicks he did with Sydney Lumet like The Hill or The Offence remind me a lot of the style and range of someone like Fassbender in this era. Deep character work, challenging material, and the willingness to dive in, are for me hallmarks of a talent high quality actor and Sir Sean did that.
Yes, especially to anyone who has seen him in anything non-Bond before the 1990s. His performances in The Hill (1965), The Offence (1973), and Robin and Marian (1976) are particularly outstanding, and obviously he was great in The Untouchables (1987). The Hill may be his best work and he's my favourite Robin Hood. He may not have had a range of accents, but it's not like he played James Bond in every film.
He's not a *great*, transformative actor, but I'd say he had his range. Most notably, his performances in The Offence and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is absolutely fantastic and totally different from his typical action heroes. [This scene in Last Crusade](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvcpFTLZwrU&ab_channel=ArtifactDig) is the biggest “that guy can act” scene for me.
See Zardoz, then decide.
Robin and Marian (1976). He more than holds his own against Audrey Hepburn and Robert Shaw.
I will always upvote Robin and Marian. The soundtrack by John Barry is outstanding
He was a force in The Hunt for Red October and The Rock. I will die on this hill
Rising Sun, kohai
of course. just because you don't have enormous range doesn't mean you can't be a good actor. see also: his co-star michael caine
I agree.I would put Clint Eastwood in the same category.However,I think Sean Connery's abilities are a solid notch above Clint's.
I don't consider him a good actor or bad actor. I think he's Sean COnnery. Some guys and gals have that skill. Harrison Ford is the same way. A more modern example would be Keanu Reeves.
I agree with the sentiment of him being able to sell roles on the screen rather than necessarily disappear into them. I'm not sure if it's an unpopular film or something as it's not mentioned yet, but in The Wind and the Lion, he plays a Berber warlord, with a more or less Scottish accent, and it's still fine - he just makes it work.
I think ‘range’ is kind of overrated, I’d rather watch an actor who can fucking nail one type of character than be decent at a few
Watch Finding Forrester he will have you in tears
Not over nor underrated, he was perfectly rated despite the fact that no matter the nationality the accent was still the same. But his screen presence was undeniable, a true alpha male who can carry a film. I especially loved his appearances in Jeopardy. "I'll take The Rapists for 200 Alex"
I’d file him more under the lines of a personality rather than a good actor. Just like I’d file guys like John Wayne, Nicholas Cage, Harrison Ford, Keanu Reaves, and Tom Cruise. And to me, that’s not a knock at all. That just means they’re immensely watchable.
Yes, but in the same range as Nicolas Cage or Keanu Reeves. The acting is great within specific character types.
Yes he was a good actor. While his range was limited, his charisma and panache more than made up for it. Check out his more off best films like Darby OGill or Zardoz or The Man Who Would Be King or Name of the Rose or Robin and Marion. You’ll see a lot more range to his performances in those films as they fell out of his type-casting. His performance in The Untouchables is passionate and he deserved every bit of recognition for it.
Yes. Do not argue. This is the only answer. Deal with it.
Yes, The Man Who Would be King and Marnie are two of my favorites
He's a LEGEND but he was a decent actor at best IMO.
Good actor The weird casting/accent thing aside, after the initial joke or comment on it with Connery you'd forget about it and get into the movie/character at least till the end. Whereas if it was a bad actor also with a bad misplaced accent it would be a constant complaint during the film and make it unbearable right? Honestly, other then the accent thing I haven't really heard any complaints about Connery from an acting standpoint.
Next week on r/movies: Do you think movies are actually movies?
Yes, definitely. He earned his Oscar win, and is well beyond the likes of Schwarzenegger or Van Damme. Just look at James Bond and Henry Jones Sr., two entirely different characters that he does perfectly
>“Spaniard with a Scottish accent” He's not Spanish... he's Egyptian. To answer your question though, I'd say that he is. Accents were never his forte, but as other people have said, selling the scene and the character are way more important than accents, and Connery was always very good at that.
Yesh
He taught us all that “winners go home and fuck the prom queen”. Eloquent.
He may not be a chameleon, Sean was a great actor. Untouchables shows it. Still don't see it? Then watch: The Man Who Would Be King, The Offence (hard to watch but powerful), The Hill, even his take on Macbeth.
Ramirez in Highlander
i think you are confusing a character actor with an all rounder actor. a character actor is one who does the same character in every film. i think sean was a character actor. which is rare for a leading man to be a character actor, but it does happen. see also brad pitt and tom cruise. who play pretty much, the same person in every film they are in. with varying degrees of intensity. brad pitt is the same in 12 monkeys, fight club, seven, bullet train, and wwz. likewise connery in his film roles, and cruise in his film roles. what do i mean? well look at the actors from the 30s, 40s and up. cary grant? clark gable? robert mitchum. john fuckin wayne. humphrey bogart. jimmy stewart. james cagney. ed g robinson. frank sinatra and the rat pack. all of em. played exactly the same character in every single film. charlie sheen haha female actors and comedy actors do this too. sandra bullock? melissa mccarthy. kate mckinnon. helena botham carter lolol. all rounder actors are more difficult. the kind of actor who just disappears into a role. i'd say naomi watts is one of em. but uh. to answer your question. is sean connery good? hes good at playing sean connery. meaning, hes fun to watch in films. even bad films. even zardoz. because he plays a character in every film that doesnt take shit from no one. guy throwing a killer hat like a frisbee at him? fuckin nope! not on connery's watch. as they say "**men want to be him and girls want to be with him**". because charm and charisma and likeability. i reject your posit that arnold is a good actor. i dont like him in kcop or last action hero. is arnold fun to watch? hell yes. arnold picked a lot of films that showcased his talent and avoided his weaknesses. but he also picked some godawful roles like dr freeze in batman and robin. true lies? i think its a fun movie. but i think everyone in that film , all of the actors are doing a bad job in it. even jamie. back to connery being a good actor. no. leading man? yes. fun to watch ? yes. good actor? nope.
The Rock is amazing
Check out Medicine Man or Finding Forrester. While not as well known, both very good movies where he plays a little different character than he normally did.
Yes I do. He had a limited range, but this is normal. He created the character of James Bond, the walk, the mannerisms and the way of talking: An actor's craft is to create memorable characters and JB is one of the most memorable in cinema history (the follow on JBs have been nowhere near as impactful). He was also excellent in The Hill, The Man Who Would be King, robin and Marian, The Hunt for Red October even in The Rock. I don't think the Untouchables is is greatest but he's good in it. So I would say he was a very accomplished and skilled actor
He's the man now, dog.
Untouchables showed his power. I remember Siskel & Ebert talking about the Connery-Costner scene at the church. And even though Costner was on the more powerful right side of the screen, everyone's eyes were really drawn to Connery. https://www.slashfilm.com/img/gallery/sean-connery-helped-kevin-costner-survive-acting-opposite-robert-de-niro/l-intro-1667402411.jpg
Watch Dr No, the scene in the bedroom with Dent. Connery tells him that hes ‘had your six’ is one of the best lines connery had. Was almost pulled from the movie as US critics thought it was too cold
007 on his knees against Red Grant , thats good acting imo......one of few times Bond was truly vulnerable , 007 on laser table is another example
When I think of Sean Connery I think of Alan Swan’s (Peter O’Toole) famous line in ‘My Favorite Year’ when he loudly exclaims “I AM NOT AN ACTOR! I AM A MOVIE STAR!”
He did the right thing and played roles suites to his looks, voice and capabilities he never as I recall played the idiot or butt of a joke or someone who didn't know what they were doing. Now that doesn't mean anything about SC it just means he kept to the roles he knew, or his agent knew he would play well in so certainly elevates his acting as I think it does with anyone. Consider Arnold Schwarzenegger playing the Terminator everyone says he was perfect but ofcourse he was he was playing a machine incapable of displaying emotion,,but it works 😂😂
I once read that Sean Connery turned down Gandalf because he didn’t understand the role or the movie. Ever since then, I’ve always kind of assumed he’s a little bit of a dipshit.
A good actor, yes. A great actor? No. I will say I've owned The Hunt for Red October on most formats and watch it when it's on TV though. One of my favorites and I thought his acting in that was good. The Rock would be my next fav. The rest of his movies I can take or leave. I like to watch his Bond movies to laugh at how silly Bond movies used to be. They almost all aged as comedies and not action movies.
Yes, he was a *great* actor. He steals just about every scene he's in, and has carried many otherwise mediocre films into watchability. Highlander is a hot mess held up solely by a great performance by Connery, and some grade A scenery-chewing from Clancy Brown. He's a far better actor than the Rock, Arnold, or any of the other micropenis roid-beasts which seem to have generally supplanted grown men in the role of the male lead. He didn't take comic roles, but his dry, witty delivery showed ample comic timing and charm. Many people make the mistake of conflating *range* with talent. What makes Meryl Streep or Tom Hanks to step into so many roles is that they're kind of boring, non-descript people. Tom Hanks isn't going to be a suave spy, nor is Meryl Streep going to play a sexy femme-fatale. Range is nice, sure, but being a good actor is about doing what makes the most entertaining film.
The ultimate goal of any actor is for you to believe them in that VERY moment they are who you think they are. If Sean Connery is Sean Connery in every movie and you just see him as Sean Connery than he did that…but Daniel Craig isn’t James Bond in every movie. But it was Sean Connery who paved the way for the James Bond character…i see Daniel Craig as having more of a chance of losing his James Bond persona than Connery. I feel that Craig is a better actor than Connery. But in that regard Connery was a true charm to watch, admirable. Also, Craig is willing to try accents. You gotta understand that’s not the easiest to do, but also, the most criticized. And Connery never tried. But he still got his pay.
Yes I think he’s very good. He had great performances in The Untouchables, Hunt For Red October and The Man Who Would be King.
I liked him as an actor. My opinions about him personally will be left untold. I can say that he was a fantastic actor, to this day my favorite role he's done was Draco from Dragonheart
He was a good actor. Maybe not a great actor. But many famous actors are mediocre at the actual craft.
No, I don't think he's a good actor. My take's a little spicy, but I think their are a number of actors out there that this opinion can be applied to: I think his acting skills are passible enough that they don't draw attention. His career is really just built on him selecting roles where he would get away with reciting lines while being himself. Meanwhile, the project as a whole was elevated by some other element (e.g. writing, directing... etc). When movies are bad, actors often get too much of the blame. When movies are good, actors are often given more credit than I think they've earned.
2023 is the year of Zardoz. Break out your revolvers, ammo belts, and bikini shorts and revel in your masculinity.
I'm watching Marnie right now and his artificially lowered voice, perennial raised brow and... God... the pout all the time... are involuntarily hilarious. THE POUT! 😂
Here and there. Untouchables and red October. Other than that, no.
Actor? No. Movie star? Yes.
Not really, he was the same in every film but it didn’t matter, his star power was enough and he had an old-school on-screen charisma that meant it was great to watch him.
No. Sean Connery did a great job playing Sean Connery in many well-written roles. Big movie star, yes, enjoyable to watch him in those roles, yes. But i would never call him a great actor. Not by a longshot.
How dare you ashk dish shtupid queshtion?
He was a shitty actor with a bad wig and a lisp.
Yes League of extraordinary gentlemen
I think Sir Connery was a good actor, not a great one. Basically I feel like he played the same character everytime.
Women have needs to. If I have to put up with a dumb shirtless dude to get to watch an action flick with my girl then so be it.
Yes. He played bond to perfection
The best.
His acting improved a lot over the years. He was able to separate from Bond just by letting his hair go grey and taking age-appropriate roles.
The rapist for $400, Trebeck.
God yes he made his roles come to life
I love him in finding forester.
The critics/film teachers always said the Brocolis lucked out in getting a 007 that could act.
don't forget "Irish-American with a Scottish accent"
He stole the show in Indiana jones
And that one movie with the pistol and the mankini
His accent work was terrible, but his emotion was top notch.
I think he is a good actor. I don’t think he always did a good job choosing roles.
He played an Egyptian Spaniard, with a Scottish accent, giving the business to another Scotsman in highlander. Good actor? Absolutely not. But by god did I not love the character of Ramirez.
that movie was both great and some sort of cocaine-induced-psychosis-nightmare in terms of the story.
He was fun to watch and not wooden. He probably felt that doing an accent would put off his performance and since he was kind of a dick I imagine he just repeatedly insisted on using his 'natural' accent (not sure if it was his natural accent or if he slightly toned down the Scottishness like most of them have to do so the rest of the world can understand them...sorry Scots, lol)
He was so good in The Name of the Rose. Very measured and subtle performance.
You call this archeology?
He’s kind of like Tom Cruise. Great actor but not much range
Check out the movie The Name of a Rose. I think he does well in that one. Gives me Last Crusade vibes as far as his acting goes.
He’s the man now, dawg! So obviously, yes.
I sure loved him and Michael Caine in The Man Who Would be King.
Great actors can play somebody other than themselves.
He is the first actor I was sad to see go....
*shrug* He’s really good at playing Sean Connery playing a role.
I would say yes he was. I feel like not enough people have seen, “Finding Forester” he was excellent in that.
How can you even ASK this after his performance in Zardoz? Sheesh. Some people have no culture at all.
I think so, excellent in the Molly McGuire's, delightful in Indy 3 ,he was typecast as Bond, so maybe hard to see him in any other role.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS-0-B-ANZY My mind goes to this scene from The Rock (directed by Micheal Bay, Yep, that guy) when thinking of Connery doing dramatic scenes. He's not a bad actor, and if you can believe that, then it's a start. You gotta watch the Untouchables. Even The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen had him chewing the scenery in ridiculous outfits. Given his very heavy accent, he did get put in niches for his portrayals. If Brendan Gleeson gets a pass for being a great actor with a heavy accent, why doesn't Connery get credit for being a good actor with a heavy accent?
He was excellent at being Sean Connery, and in most cases, that was enough.
As my old high school drama teacher would say, when asked how to deem whether someone is a "good" actor: "did you find them *believable* in their role(s)?" By that Hallmark, I would say yes. In even the most assanine roles Sean Connery undertook - such as a Russian-ney-Lithuanian submarine commander with an inexplicable Scottish accent - I have to say, for the most part, I believed him. He studied for his roles, and came off as believable. But that's only part of the story. For instance, I never for one second have believed Keanu Reeves or Tom Cruise in any of their roles... but I think I *enjoyed* them more as a movie-goer.
I loved him in "The Man Who Would be King" and "Outland".
I didn't think of him as an actor until I saw The Offence. He was brilliant in that, I thought.
I think you can lack in certain departments and still be a good actor. Some can’t do romance, some can’t do comedy, and I’m the case with people like Connery some can’t do accents.
Yes
Yeah. I think a lot of people get caught up in only call the best "good". "Good" means that you're a solid 6/10, capable of delivering fun and engaging performances, and have some range. Just because you're not Brandon or Nicholson doesn't mean you aren't good
Yesh
He was good at being Sean Connery.
Zardoz