/fa/ - Fashion

>>14043397
>>14043418
I'm 29, and look more like 19, come to think of it. I also don't think I have impressive facial hair, which I normally shave clean every other day. As for how Sean Connery looked, men of his generation were probably more likely to look more robust and aged, contrasted against current standards in the West. Smoking and alcoholism were much more frequent during the early and middle years of the 20th century, and on an individual basis, genetics, diets, and lifestyle choices have their affects, whether slight or significant for certain kinds of people, then or now. Men looking as mature as more movie lead actors looked, around that time, is pretty infrequent, or even rare nowadays in Hollywood. I don't know enough about British cinema, but they probably go for actors with looks about the same as American Hollywood does. Here, in my post's picture, is George Lazenby in 1969 or 1970, not depicted in Bondian fashion, but rather Peacock Revolution late 1960s, early '70s fashion, an outgrowth of the earlier Mod and British Rock inspired fashions, more flashy and mainstream by 1968 and 1969. Lazenby also looked rather aged for the age of 29, by today's standards. Even if they may look decidedly above their numerical ages, by current fashion and health standards, they were handsome and talented enough during their younger and middle adult years to portray James Bond.