Sam Mendes says Sean Connery Skyfall cameo was ‘discussed’

But admits return of former Bond would have been ‘problematic’

 

 

Skyfall flirted with a Sean Connery cameo, according to director Sam Mendes in an interview with The Huffington Post.

Be warned that this story contains minor spoilers for Skyfall.

As unlikely as it sounds, it seems the return of the original James Bond was considered (as if there wasn’t enough 50th anniversary nostalgia in the film as it stands).

Although it would have meant the actor would have to take a retirement-sabbatical, Connery’s name was mentioned in connection with the Albert Finney role.

When THP asked Mendes if there was any thought of approaching Connery for the role of Kincade, the gamekeeper on Bond’s Scottish family estate, the director responded:

“There was a definite discussion about that - way, way early on. But I think that's problematic. Because, to me, it becomes too... it would take you out of the movie. Connery is Bond and he's not going to come back as another character. It's like, he's been there.

“So, it was a very brief flirtation with that thought, but it was never going to happen, because I thought it would distract.”

As smile-inducing as thought of Connery returning to the franchise is, we have to agree with Mendes on this one. It’d have been a meta-step too far.

Skyfall is currently smashing box-office records in the UK, and will open in the US on 9 November 2012.

Read our official Skyfall review.

Would you have been up for a Connery cameo in Skyfall? Have your say below…

Comments

    • TheShamrock

      Nov 7th 2012, 12:48

      Phew! Would have thrown up the Timecop quandry of 'same matter can't occupy the same space'........

      Alert a moderator

    • trist808

      Nov 7th 2012, 12:57

      I personally wish Mendes had had a bit more faith in the idea, what a way to celebrate Bond's 50th Anniversary than having none other than Connery cameo in the latest adventure, and no I don't think it would have been overkill, if anything it would have been the cherry on top of an already delicious cake. I think it would have been amazing and it would have worked so well, Connery actually being Scottish for one thing, no disrespect to Albert Finney, but just think ... those of you who have seen the film ... he would have been fantastic in the role and "Welcome To Scotland" would have gained instant icon status had Connery said it.

      Alert a moderator

    • SiMan

      Nov 7th 2012, 14:23

      Although not something i'd probably want to see, i'd always thought that yuo could have introduced an idea that the James Bond persona is something that is pyschologically embedded into different agents who exhibitted certain characteristics (eg orphans, nymphomaniacs, not bothered about killing, like travelling abroard, good with gadgets, etc). That way, it could be seen that all the bond films are chronological and the different actors are playing different 'Bonds'..........maybe could have worked if they could make it seem more believable than i explained, but i like i said, i'd rather they didn't do that.......so this whole comment was a bit pointless.....

      Alert a moderator

    • SiMan

      Nov 7th 2012, 14:25

      ...and also, although it maybe would have been a cool cameo, i can see their point that it would almost detract from the movie in terms of the audience would not be thinking of Kingcade as a character, but someone being played by an actor who used to play bond.

      Alert a moderator

    • trist808

      Nov 7th 2012, 14:58

      @SiMan, that has been a long held belief/theory by many people and would explain why he's been around for 50 years; the idea that each actor actually represents a new different agent taking on the codename of "James Bond 007", which would be a nice way of explaining his longevity ... however, where this falls down is how, apart from the Craig era, all the Bonds have links and reference each other too much. The worst being Bond's marriage to Tracy in On Her Majesty's Secret Service (played by Diana Rigg). Lazenby's Bond marries her, then in Diamonds Are Forever, Connery's Bond goes after Blofeld for revenge for her death. Moore's Bond visits her grave in Octopussy and Dalton's Bond makes reference to it in Licence To Kill, when Della throws her garter at Bond and Feilx mentions that 007 was married once, a long time ago. This strand alone unfortunately binds at least four actors together as playing the same man, the same character ... all of that said, with Craig, they rebooted the franchise and you could conceivably say that the new guy has taken over the codename and is separate from all that continuity. This is why I think they could have made Connery's cameo work, but I get what you (and Mendes) are saying, I think it would have been a huge leap of faith by the audience. Again though, with that beard, full thick Scottish accent and performed in the right way, I think it could have worked ... I think it was a missed opportunity, not that Connery would have agreed to it anyway, he refused to come back in the last Indiana Jones film as Jones Snr, so would have most likely said no anyhow.

      Alert a moderator

    • McSerious

      Nov 7th 2012, 16:37

      Its a nice thought, but in practice I believe it would have been a bad idea. Albert Finney did a fantastic job in the role anyway, I think its a little disrespectful to think it would have been a good idea to replace him with a novelty cameo.

      Alert a moderator

    • alexr

      Nov 7th 2012, 17:00

      @trist808 Besides which, the beginning of GoldenEye (I believe) is actually set before 1989, when Dalton was supposed to be James Bond. But then, I suppose he had resigned in License to Kill, so another 'Bond' could have been activated. I would love them to cover this when they make the transition from Craig to the next Bond. I would also like to see a return of other 00 agents on assignment and Bond either assisting/assisted by them, or Bond picking up their assignments himself after they are killed...

      Alert a moderator

    • alexr

      Nov 7th 2012, 17:05

      Actually, GoldenEye begins in 1986, effectively erasing Dalton from the timeline, unless we assume that the Bond movies are not actually set in any particular year... Could we perhaps have a previous Bond return as a villain, having been betrayed by his country and left for dead. I reckon Craig could pull this off in his final movie. He could turn from hero to villain during the story and be killed by another agent, with hisdeath qualifying as the new guy's second kill, confirming his 00 status and leading to him taking over as the new 007.

      Alert a moderator

    • chrismart

      Nov 7th 2012, 17:51

      Bond movies for me aren't set in any particular year, hence why it was good to see the DB5 back in the new film - with it's guns behind the lights. I prefer to think of them as just being more consecutive missions. The idea of Bond being more than one man is for me ludicrous, though i can understand why some people have come to the idea. It's this idea that Bond movies aren't set in any particular year that makes the old films stand the test of time and still be as good now as they were back then. The Cold War is just the backdrop of the time that the film was made hence why they are the enemy, just like nowadays a lot of films/TV series seem to hold the enemy as being from the middle-east, they just play on the fears of the audience at the time. Fortunately, the recent Bond films have refrained from this cliche, using more imagination in where the enemy may come from i.e. international terrorism (LeChiffre) and big corporations (QUANTUM)

      Alert a moderator

    • Hadouken76

      Nov 7th 2012, 21:06

      The storyline was compelling enough without the need to shatter the narrative for the sake of a novelty cameo.

      Alert a moderator

    • Indianabones

      Nov 7th 2012, 23:12

      @alexr Skyfall seems to have covered an ex agent coming back after being left for dead for revenge as such on M.....as well as Golden Eye covering that as well.....

      Alert a moderator

    • 2Dglasses

      Nov 7th 2012, 23:15

      im mostly glad they didnt, although i am slightly amused by the thought of having brosnan as ronson (?...the guy from the very start who was never really explained), and then dench say "he didnt make it" while looking right at the camera and holding up a picture of him surfing an iceberg.

      Alert a moderator

    • alexr

      Nov 8th 2012, 10:07

      @indianabones Good counter arguement, but those agents weren't 007. As much as I like Trevelyan and Silva as villains, they still felt a little too inferior. Trevelyan was brash and too cocky, while Silva (admittedly a cunning and intelligent man) still made the age old mistake of believing Bond dead without checking for the body... Bond MAKES SURE his target is dead. That's the cold callousness of the man, and what I think makes an ex-007 a perfect candidate for a villain.

      Alert a moderator