It doesn't really work to compare a human with a fae, does it?
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025
552 points (98.1% liked)
Microblog Memes
7548 readers
2745 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sean Connery and Patrick Stewart looked like they were 55 between the ages of 25 and 85. Conversely, Paul Rudd and Joseph Gordon-Levitt looked like they were 15 between the ages of 15 and 40.
Aging is weird.
It was interesting when I realized that Patrick Stewart was my age in the first season of Next Generation.
load more comments
(9 replies)
Brodie-Sangster doesn't look that young in all his pictures but Connery does look about 55, like he never was a young adult, just a kid then immediately a middle aged man.
load more comments
(1 replies)
When "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" was shot, Harrison Ford was 47. Sean Connery was 59 and played the father of Ford's character.
Let's not body shame 12 year old dad's now.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I am still stuck on the fact that the kid from Love Actually is 34. I...I don't want to process that.
He was 25 when Love Actually was filmed. Probably. I don't look back.
People do seem to have aged more rapidly until a few decades ago. Perhaps all the cigarette smoke weathered them.
Also probably time spent in the sun.
load more comments
(3 replies)
T vs E
Sean looks 56, while Thomas looks 12.
No need to call out Sean Connery for his early-onset twink death.
Those mf start smocking at 12, by 35 they look 50 already.
smoking?
All my homies love wearing a loose dress to age up.
Are you s'mocking me?!?
load more comments
(1 replies)
I guess.
My work here is done.
Me, a classical student of principia statisticalia and an avid disciple of reasoning: 'hmm, yes the UK has at least 2 (two) actors, one could infer'
What else are we supposed to get from this? I might be little tired.
Left could pass as 50, right could pass as 13 yet they are both 34
I think what they mean is the picture is implying it's due to generational changes when you could find a younger looking 34 year old then and an older looking 34 year old now. It's a sample size of one. By definition that's argument from anecdote, there's no way you can infer generalities from that without being hasty.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
the penis mightier
"Le Tits Now, Alex"
“I’ll take ‘Le tits now’ for $800”
I forgot the punchline but your mother's a whore Trebek
I mean, to be fair, I'm 10 years older than Connery in that picture, and he still looks older than me. Dude was born old.
He was born in 1930. Not exactly a great time to be an Englishman.
Wait, why? The war was over when he was a teen. He enjoyed decades of progressive social reform
Britain still felt the effects of rationing for years and years after the end of WWII
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I'm 20-years older and that's about how my wrinkles are ATM.
This looks like a ventriloquist promo poster
And the other dude has a baby face, but looking closely I can see that he's older.
Half the difference here is the fact that modern actors have a better skincare routine. Connery probably smoked, too.
load more comments
(1 replies)