How tall sean connery

In while Connery was 13 years he dropped out of school then joined the Royal Navy, He was later discharged from the navy on medical grounds because of a duodenal ulcer, a condition that affected most of the males in previous generations of his family.

Connery was married to Diane Cilento actress from to They had a son, actor whose name is Jason Connery. In her autobiography in , she reported that Connery was mentally and physically abusing her, which he responded by saying that hitting a woman is no big deal. The mean comments stirred up a heavy conversation with the public; this led to Connery canceling his appearance at the Scottish parliament, stating that he had been misquoted and that any abuse of women was unacceptable.

He later remarried Micheline Roquebrune in the year His height is 1. In he was looking for extra money, so he helped out in some backstage at Kings Theatre, and this launched him to get opportunities. His breakthrough came when he finally committed himself to a film series, but he had an understanding that if they were successful, his life would change drastically, so Connery took the role of British secret agent James Bond. He played in the first five Bond films: Dr.

All seven films were successful. Connery was portrayed as James Bond was nominated as the third-greatest hero in cinema history by American Film Institute. As of November , Connery has accumulated most of his wealth from acting. In The Hunt for Red October is a thriller film released that earned pretty well at the box office, and Sean Conner was the first person to get benefit from it. Connery was about age at this point. Connery was a bit before my time but I've saw the films later.

Without specific scrutiny, I used to perceive Connery to be of average height and actually thought Roger Moore looked taller in his own right!

Connery wasn't just tall but was a big boned guy overall. Note that he has big hands relative to most people, even those of comparable height. Wonder if he has lost any inches with age. Moore, Brosnan and Dalton were also up against some very big men. Unlike guys like Hasslehoff and Selleck who always looked very noticeably tall on screen. Might have been that huge bodyguard in You Only Live Twice which affected my perception but I had actually thought of him as an average height guy when I was younger!

I was surprised when I first read 6'4 for Clint too. He looked a big guy. He looked the tallest bond easy! But now a would say hes 6'. A didnt know daniel craig was only 5'10". But you can tell in the bond films they make him look much taller as if hes 6ft at least! But a great actor despite not makeing the big 6 footer!!!! Tall guy, but never looked 6'2. He is old now. If it can be found, it would be interesting. Definitely as a young actor he was happy to have himself listed in the Spotlight directory at 6ft 2.

I agree that Hackman at peak maybe have been a small smidge higher, though theres only a few comparables from A Bridge Too Far. Michael Caine is right on even with Connery at peak but before Hackman retired Caine did look to maintain more height with age than Hackman. When Eastwood was obviously losing height, as was apparent comparing his loss of height relative to the same people viz Morgan Freeman over several years, he never seemed to lose his advantage in photos with Hackman, AS IF Gene was shrinking in equal proportion.

Anyway, nothing available in years to estimate Gene's current standing. As Eastwood currently stands, it's difficult to envisage current Gene being topped by Clint as he once was - but anything is possible. It would be quite a dramatic photo if one was to see contemporary Hackman now standing a bit taller than contemporary Eastwood. Connery seemed to maintain maybe a little more height around the turn of the century. Who know really nowadays, but I'd bet Connery was somewhat the more height conscious in general of the two.

Both are long gone from the limelight. There is a question mark on his health, but of course he is near 90 as you said. All the way back to Michael Caine firmly denied reports claiming that he said that Sean had Alzheimer's.

I checked and life expectancy for this disease is between 3 and 11 years, though some surviving up to 20 years. However, say you were diagnosed at 75 yo, you're closing in on average life expectancy anyway. Sean has been appearing in public less and less since around which can still be normal for someone getting up in years like Sean. Last pics I saw of him outside there appeared a hint of vacancy in his eyes.

I also read that he was having difficulty understanding the plots in the last several movies he made. Again, this can all go with normal aging and perhaps signalled Sean it was time to retire.

I understand you have Sean at a strong 6'2" peak. I guess him a bit less, 6'1. I certainly see comparisons that suggest 6'2" but others that suggest not quite there, so for me it's just a case of averaging it out. Generally, we all don't stand to attention as if ready to be measured. Our natural postures usually hold a bit extra in reserve if we expressly straighten. This is probably the case more so in older people whose postures are that much more declined.

Over a series of photos at the same event, Clint can appear shorter, taller and then shorter again which I think is due to his randomly standing to his full potential then slouching again. Just my take on it. The last photos I saw he wasn't with anyone of known status or known height, just his carer and some other guys, some of whom appeared to be big dudes.

He still looked reasonably tall within himself, well proportioned but notably somewhat thinner with natural age related muscular atrophy. Certainly not displaying the same relative height loss as Eastwood. Any photos with anyone else of note since Andy Roddick back in ? Even back then, as compared to Roddick, Sean appeared 6ft or not much over that mark but was also not standing perfectly straight. That's about the meanest fight you'll ever see in the movies. Roger Moore admitted to being a pacifist and, in his Bond movies, violence is shown as playful roughhousing in which nobody ever really gets hurt.

Killing and beating people up is all just a lark, which always struck me as grotesque in its immorality. Daniel Craig returned Bond to the sense that violence is a terrible thing. Craig won me over as James Bond about five minutes into Casino Royale, when he kills the double agent in a sordid, brutal brawl in a public washroom and then, for a second there, seems to regret the killing. Also, Craig's Bond eschews the breezy little quips that are completely absent from any of Fleming's books, and which were juvenile and smirking even when Connery made them.

The Bond books are widely derided today because of their unabashed sexism, racism and snobbery, but the character in the book seems like a real human being, and moreover somebody you could actually like and admire. James Bond as Fleming wrote him can feel fear and remorse, and does not sleep with women and heartlessly discard them, as he does in the movies. In several of the books, Bond does not sleep with the Bond girl at all.

He is also a heavy smoker and very nearly a habitual drunkard. He is a man and not a cartoon character, although his age seems to be a constant 36, regardless of the year.

Oddly, there are no children in any of the books or movies. Bond has no interest in parenthood, nor do any of the characters he ever runs into. And of course, he never worries about birth control, as why would you if you live in a strange land with no inhabitants under the age of twenty-one?

A clinical assessment of his literary personality traits might identify him as Path. High functioning. Never shaken or stirred. If that was the intention for the character then I would say Sean nailed it and far better than any other Bond.

Also I guess Bond gave birth to the classic one liners of the action hero. Bond allays her concerns and replies that it is just the right size for him. Double Oh Behave! Puts a different connotation on the numerical significance of Suffice to say Bonds fellow agent Just a plastic ring that displayed two different images when tilted one way or another.

Well, the first image was and when I tilted the ring the image of Sean Connery appeared. I exclaimed "who's the old guy? That's not James Bond. What an idiot. Wish I had that ring now. Found something like it online Click Here. Not that I knew then that he had assumed any mantle, he was just Bond. I assumed he played the role as intended. Very upper class and at least in that regard I found Moore believable. I only saw that Connery had played the role well after the fact.

Just me perhaps, but Sean came across that much less refined, his working class roots evident. Don't get me wrong, he still played it very cool, intelligent and highly capable. I read Connery's bio years back. As you said, Connery left school very early, at age 13 in fact. The interesting thing was that he had a tremendous thirst for knowledge and strong desire to improve himself.

As such, he set himself the task of devouring "must" read literature. He basically educated himself from the point at which he left school and continued to do so throughout his career. Perhaps being privy to Sean's actual beginnings prejudices my view but in his playing of Bond, I can see an intelligent, self educated guy, well aware of the upper class ways and finer things in life feigning to have come through the upper class channels and having the panache to float it among the less critical but also displaying unconcealable evidence of a man hewn through no nonsense working class ways and definitive action.

Basically, Sean combined the best of both worlds in approximating himself to be upper class but being even more believable as someone possessing sufficient intelligence, looks, physique and athleticism to carry out the achievements afforded to Bond. A combination of upper class style and working class substance that Moore did not bring to the table.

As to a lot of actors playing themselves, I agree. Even if their portrayals are still within the realms of their own true character, there is still scope to "act" in so far their putting themselves wholly into the context of the story and replicating how they would act and feel if they were actually in the situation.

Then there are other actors who put in absolute chameleon performances even if one off. It's pure acting at it's best all the way down the line. They are completing acting outside themselves and totally believable in doing so. He was Karl Childers full stop. That's how good Thornton was. Marlon Brando, who often gets picked as the greatest actor in movie history, actually did have a personality brutish, hypersexual and narcissistic that was very close to that of Stanley Kowalski in Streetcar Named Desire, which is why that role is his only really powerful piece of acting.

When he tried to be a versatile character actor most notably in Mutiny on the Bounty he often failed. Also my own guess is that 90 percent of any actor's talent in the first years of his stardom is down to his or her physical appeal. Beauty is practically a requirement for women, but not necessarily for men. The only male star I can think of who had no gifts other than physical beauty which, to be fair, is the right word is Arnold Schwarzenegger.

He really did look magnificent when he was young but his real life personality dominated all the parts he played. Since he is a friendly, good-natured and happy man, he was always miscast as the brutal, violent men he played in the movies. If he had had a personality like Charles Bronson, who in real life was an angry misanthrope, he would have been perfect in all his movies.

Connery is an interesting case of an actor who really was successful playing a character with a personality different from his own. For one thing he left school at a very young age, so he had to compensate for a heavy personal handicap in playing the upper class, public- schooled James Bond. His physicality, like Schwarzenegger's was so dominant that it got him through the door, but once through it he actually learned to occupy the room it opened into it. Unlike Schwarzenegger.

IMO the key was that Sean turned the role more into himself rather than strictly fitting himself into the book described character. How can any other actor beat Connery in a role in which he played a large measure of himself?

Hoagy Carmichael? Perhaps an indirect way for the author to indulge and describe Bond as looking like himself. I also read that Connery coincidentally bore a strong resemblance to the original character drawn for the comic strip which was first released in some 4 years before Sean first played the role.

So of course I can't imagine Bond looking like somebody else. And especially not Roger Moore. Connery was not just any tall, handsome Brit, in the same way that John Wayne was not just any large, tough American. Connery was the last word in good looks and suave cool, and has never been topped. Daniel Craig, who is a better actor than Connery, is emotionally spot on as Bond. He's tough, athletic, upper class cool and intelligent.

But he's handicapped by his looks. He has sandy hair, and a blunt, overmuscled body. And he's too short. The Bond of the books is described as looking like Hoagy Carmichael. Google up pictures of Carmichael and that guy is not even close to Connery in looks and virility. Ian Fleming underestimated how Bond should have looked, and Connery set him straight. Connery made Bond the phenomenon that the character eventually became.

The second most fortunate casting in movie history is Boris Karloff as Frankenstein's monster. It is nearly ninety years since the movie Frankenstein came out, and everybody today understands that the monster looks like Karloff. And of course, ninety five percent of Karloff's performance in that part is down to his perfect monster face.

Good casting is overwhelmingly based on the physical characteristics of the actors cast. For example, having worked with both, Kevin Costner said he viewed Connery as the bigger star popular but Hackman as the greater actor ability. A lot of people haven't read the books from which described characters are sourced - so they are none the wiser as to what the character is supposed to look like physically while others who have read the book often mould the character subjectively in their own minds eye.

A tall, strong, good looking Alpha type will fundamentally work for a lot of roles and it worked for Connery in the Bond role even though Sean didn't exactly uphold the refinements of the book described Bond. Likely already known by all but interesting to note that Ian Fleming was not thrilled with the choice of Connery before eventually warming to it. His first choice was Richard Todd who IMHO was an excellent actor who might've floated the belief in the potentials of the character physically but who was well below the designated Bond height of 6 feet.

Could certainly be out of bed, ish during the day. Today probably around a weak 6'1". Movies are industrial products designed to turn a profit, and Wayne and Presley could always be counted on to make movies profitable by the simple act of starring in them. Wayne could still sell tickets when he was a sick, old man. I wouldn't watch an Elvis movie sober, unless you paid me four dollars a minute, But you really can't argue with Presley's appeal, strange as it seems to me.

Of course, my estimates of who are the greatest movie stars are closely tied to my age. I was a teenager in the sixties, when my enjoyment of movies was most intense, so the stars I pick as the greatest were also the ones who were most popular at that time. There are probably people who love Tom Cruise and Dwayne Johnson, but they are quite a bit younger than I am. Ask people from earlier generations, and they would pick Gary Cooper or Marilyn Monroe.

Arguably the most popular movie star in the history of movies was Rudolph Valentino, whose death caused female fans to collapse in hysterics. It's a tie: John Wayne and Elvis Presley. Both men made numerous movies that would have flopped if other actors had been cast in the parts they played in them.

Meaning "most popular" rather than "greatest". I agree, a large number of Wayne's films weren't anything special but his presence made them what they are. Nearly all of Elvis's films were crap but he had a huge presence. Always enjoyed Viva Las Vegas in particular. Sinatra and Dean Martin too, the original Ocean's 11 is a disappointing film, but they make it what it is.

Jimmy Stewart and Cary Grant were in a class of their own though in making virtually every film they ever starred in good. I think there's only one film of Stewart's which I didn't like! Saw Goldfinger a few weeks back, Connery looked about an inch taller than Gert Frobe, though you could argue for him.

The Reacher books are best-sellers, but the two movies made from Reacher novels were duds because Tom Cruise, who bears no physical resemblance to the Reacher of the books, was cast in the lead. Much of the appeal of the Reacher character is that he is a physical giant, so Cruise was wrong right out of the box, and can never be made to fit the character in the books. A short Jack Reacher is as jarring as a six foot tall Frodo.

Height really does matter in casting. Why was Gary Oldman hired to play Dracula, anyway? Dracula must be tall. Connery as Bond was physically perfect- in fact Connery was bigger, stronger and handsomer than the Bond of the books.

In the first movie, Dr. No, Connery's working class origins were fairly obvious- he was a truck driver in an expensive suit, trying to pass himself off as a toff. It wasn't until the third installment, Goldfinger, that Connery finally acquired the right upper class vibe, possibly because his newfound wealth allowed him access to real upper crust Englishmen, which he then successfully imitated.

But it was his physical appearance that got him there. At any rate, certainly once an actor assumes a role and it is successful it is hard to objectively divorce them from that role and imagine someone else playing the character with equal or greater success - even IF someone may well have done so. Point being, the success of the Indiana Jones franchise wasn't just based on the essence of the character and supporting story- IMO it was also anchored in Harrison Ford the actor, his own physical presence and how he chose to play the character.

I like Selleck but I can't imagine him bringing the same qualities and success to the role - and I think Ford's body of work and adaption to roles otherwise backs that opinion. I like Connery too - but I see more Connery the actual man than Connery the actor in most of his roles and if you like Connery the man then you will likely accept him in the role - even if he's playing a Russian Submarine commander with a Scottish accent - lol. Thanks Sandy. Connery deserves more credit than anyone, other than Ian Fleming, for the Bond craze.

One of the original choices for the actor to play Bond was David Niven, which would have been absurd, and would have sunk the franchise with the first movie. Roger Moore was a terrible choice to play Bond but, by the time he took over the role, the series had become so well established that even Moore couldn't wreck it, and that was thanks to Sean Connery.

Casting is probably the most important step in making a successful movie, beating out even the script. Now and then you get a movie that succeeds in spite of indifferent casting Star Wars, for example , but usually when a movie hits it is because of the appeal of at least one major star in it.

This is why movie stars are paid so much. Who is the greatest movie star of all time? I'm not exactly a Bond fanatic, but if I have to see one, I try to plump for one with the six two Sean playing the plum part!

He was brilliant in Marnie too, a film I first saw at the tender age of nine. My friend, Rosemary, who lived three doors away, saw it too, and we were both really rather freaked out! Here's hoping this finds you well and happy, All the best! And the perfect height. Suppose Christopher Lee had been cast as Bond.

Too tall, although perfectly dark, handsome, aristocratic and cruel. Proportions has nothing to do with height. For full functionality of this site it is necessary to enable JavaScript. Here are the instructions how to enable JavaScript in your web browser. The tall, handsome and muscular Scottish actor Sean Connery is best known for being the original actor to portray the character of James Bond in the hugely successful movie franchise, starring in seven films between and Some believed that such a career-defining role might leave him unable to escape it, but he proved the doubters wrong, becoming one of the most notable film actors of his generation, with a host of great movies to his name.

This arguably culminated in his greatest acclaim in , when Connery won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his role as an Irish cop in The Untouchables , stealing the thunder from the movie's principal star Kevin Costner. His mother, Euphamia C. Maclean, was a cleaning lady, and his father, Joseph Connery, was a factory worker and truck driver. He also has a brother named Neil Connery, who works as a plasterer in Edinburgh.

He is of Irish and Scottish descent.