best film: This category is lacking that big monolith for the great Sean Connery. But still, The Hill from Sidney Lumet in 1965 is skillfully shot, features a great set piece (the title of the film) and is immaculately written and acted (specifically, by Connery). Alfred Hitchcock’s entry Marnie (1964 – same year as Goldfinger) and Hitchcock’s acolyte Brian De Palma’s entry The Untouchables (1987) are probably the silver and bronze.
best performance: Sean Connery is among the best actors in cinema in the years 1964, 1975 and 1987 as well – but it is The Hill (from 1965) that stands atop the rest. It is a perfect anti-hero story worthy of the best of Humphrey Bogart, William Holden or Paul Newman. Connery is intelligent and resilient and, like the film, unflinchingly intense. If all someone knows of Sean Connery is the James Bond series and maybe Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade – this is exhibit A of what you need to see in regards to appreciating Sean Connery as an actor.

Connery as Joe Hill here opposite Harry Andrews in Sidney Lumet’s 1965 film The Hill. This is Connery at thirty-five (35) years old, a massive star after the James Bond films (this made in the middle of that initial run), with something to prove as far as acting chops is concerned.
stylistic innovations/traits: Sean Connery was a Scottish actor born in 1930 with twenty-two (22) archiveable films spanning from the late 1950s to the early 1990s. Sean Connery is often cited as the best James Bond and probably rightly so (though Daniel Craig has earned a seat next to Connery at the table) with those second (From Russia with Love) and third (Goldfinger) entries regarded as the pinnacle of the series. In a few James Bond films Connery is merely sufficient (Never Say Never, You Only Live Twice) and he lacks some confidence in the first one (Dr. No) – but he is primed for those two in 1963 and 1964. This is Connery at the top of his game with The Hill and Marnie also coming during the mid-1960s. John Huston’s The Man Who Would be King in 1975 was his best work in some time at that point in his career – and then a few years before Anthony Hopkins had a late age resurgence in the early 1990s after Silence of the Lambs, Connery had one in the late 1980s and early 1990s starting with The Untouchables (his sole Oscar nomination – and a win for it). Connery is charming as Harrison Ford’s father in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade – which is a fitting homage given how much Steven Spielberg used Bond as a blueprint for his Indiana Jones character and films. Overall, Connery may be more regarded by cinephiles as a star than a great actor – he was tall and handsome and the Bond films were enormous financial successes – so perhaps that all played into his reputation as a talent being a bit overlooked.

Connery in the third (3rd) James Bond entry – 1964’s Goldfinger. Connery played Bond seven (7) times, six (6) of them landing in the archives.
directors worked with: Terence Young (3), Sidney Lumet (2), Alfred Hitchcock (1), John Huston (1), Terry Gilliam (1), Brian De Palma (1), Steven Spielberg (1), John McTiernan (1). There are just far too many Guy Hamilton, Richard Lester, and Lewis Gilberts here.

The Untouchables (1987) is an important film for Connery for a few reasons. One, since Connery does not have that towering Lawrence of Arabia film and performance – he needs that cluster of films at the top (both for the film and performance) to help his cause – and The Untouchables is certainly part of that group at the top. The film also sparked a run of four strong films (The Untouchables, Last Crusade, The Hunt for Red October, The Russian House) in the late 1980s and early 1990s – a sort of comeback for Connery.
top five performances:
- The Hill
- Goldfinger
- The Untouchables
- The Man Who Would Be King
- From Russia with Love

Connery here with Michael Caine in John Huston’s The Man Who Would Be King (1975). Connery’s destiny speech is some of his finest work. This is an easy watch two-hander featuring two gods of screen acting in Connery and Caine. This is Richard Burton and Peter O’Toole in Becket (1964) or even Paul Newman and Robert Redford in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969).
archiveable films
1957- Hell Drivers |
1959- Darby O’Gill and the Little People |
1962- Dr. No |
1962- The Longest Day |
1963- From Russia with Love |
1964- Goldfinger |
1964- Marnie |
1965- The Hill |
1965- Thunderball |
1967- You Only Live Twice |
1974- Murder on the Orient Express |
1975- The Man Who Would Be King |
1975- The Wind and the Lion |
1976- Robin and Marion |
1977- A Bridge Too Far |
1978- The Great Train Robbery |
1981- Time Bandits |
1983- Never Say Never Again |
1987- The Untouchables |
1989- Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade |
1990- The Hunt for Red October |
1990- The Russia House |
Does the argument for Connery lie beyond the top 5 or more in his talent/skill level? I guess I’m a little confused why he’s over Cotton or even Ford to be honest, especially for how much you weight strength of filmography. I know strength of filmography isn’t everything, but it seems Connery has 1 MS and 4 HR/MS to his name, while, like we discuss on the 2010 actor page, Cotton has not just 3 MPs, but 3 HUGE (Kane, Third Man, Ambersons) MPs along with another easy MS in Shadow or Doubt. (Maybe even more impressive adds to his resumes too, im not too familiar with his work beyond this). And Ford has 5 films graded as either MPs or fringe MPs (Raiders, Empire, Star Wars, Blade Runner, 2049), along with a HR/MS in The Fugitive and a pair of HRs in Temple of Doom and Witness.
I’m not even trying to play “gotcha” or anything. Just curious what the reasoning is, I’ve only seen 3 of the films in top 5 anyways
@Matthew- Thanks for the comment. So first off, without spoiling too much, there is not much separating Sean Connery, Joseph Cotten and Harrison Ford. But certainly, for Cotten and Ford, just raw talent is never going to be in their corner comparing them with really any of the other actors on this list. Being in great films is definitely important, but giving a good performance in them is also crucial. Connery has given one of the best performances of the year more often than these two. There are only two other actors tied with Connery (and it is not Ford or Cotten) left. Blade Runner and The Third Man are far better than The Hill, but one does not leave The Hill wondering if another lead actor would have been better.
@Matthew- I didn’t realize The Fugitive was upgraded to HR/MS. Very cool. I’m a big fan of the film.
I get what you’re saying, and I guess I could push back a little and say something along the lines of “well Connery is also more talented than Eastwood and there is 30 slots separating them”, but believe me, I get that it is more complicated than that (Eastwood’s overall resume is considerably stronger than Cotton or Ford to start) and I think it can get a bit wishy-washy when trying to find that perfect balance of performance strength and film strength (and even more difficult when you have to somehow articulate it to someone else, I think it’s more intuitive or gut-feeling than tangible I guess… THOUGH I suppose I could get cute with it and try to develop some kind of metric system where the relative strength of a performance (as represented by a number) is the anchor and that number fluctuates based on the strength of the film…but I digress haha). You imply that Cotton and Ford are right around the corner so probably best to not split hairs here, I get the logic for the Connery placement for sure
And how many best of the year performances do all 3 of these guys have? I thought they all had 4
Ford had 1977, 1981 & 2017.
Cotton had 1942, 1943 & 1949.
I think it’s Welles next. 1941, 1949, 1958 &… idk.
@KidCharlemagne – Welles also has a mention in 1965 for Chimes at Midnight. Four total is impressive, he’s a great actor.
@KidCharlemagne, @Matthew, @Harry – sorry, there are two actors with four yearly mentions left (after Connery now) and Welles is one
According to the 1941 page Cotton also has a mention for Citizen Kane, no?
@Matthew- It is 1941, not 1942- but it is still 3
@Matthew- I’m already using the “kind of metric system where the relative strength of a performance (as represented by a number) is the anchor and that number fluctuates based on the strength of the film” … and Eastwood has 5 mentions
Very impressive then. I will trust the process!
@ KidCharlemagne- Ryan Gosling would be the other one..(2010, 2011, 2016, 2017)
@Drake – You mention Connery being known as “The James Bond” and not just one of the James Bonds, although as you say Daniel Craig has perhaps are argument himself. Do you factor in these sorts of things to rankings? That is things related to culture influence; for example someone being iconic like Connery as James Bond. Clint Eastwood was mentioned on this page, certainly Eastwood and John Wayne are extremely iconic actors and of course they have much stronger resumes than Sean Connery which is why they are rightfully ranked much higher on the list.
@James Trapp- I do not factor in these sorts of things – this is more description (can’t talk about Connery without talking about James Bond) or color