They were the main inspiration for me always ordering double forward pleated trousers, and I'm sure for many others also. Because of a relatively slim cut, and Connery being Connery, he took a traditional (almost fuddy duddy) style and made it "cool".
One thing I've learned though, particularly by looking at those trousers more carefully, and the slightly adjusted versions Connery wears in subsequent Bond films, is that the trousers are really cut too trim to wear pleats as the pleats open somewhat. That of course goes against the traditional lesson that if you want a very trim pant leg, don't get pleats.
The below photo shows the famous Dr No trousers and even here it seems that the pleats open a touch (and the pant leg is quite trim):
To me, it is still a beautiful trouser however.
For the next movie, From Russia with Love, the trouser rise was lowered somewhat and it seems the tailor trimmed the pant leg also. This photo of Connery with Ian Fleming during filming shows this quite well:
Here the pleats are clearly opening up, which indicates that the trousers are indeed "cut too trim for pleats".
And interesting variety is the trousers worn in Thunderball as seen below (they seem to have pleats that are "lowered" compared to those in From Russia With Love):
So where am I going with this? I guess I find that all the above trousers still look damn good, even though, from a tailor technical point of view they shouldn't as the pleats open way too much (in case of the two latter trousers),
Is this just an illusion because with Connery's physical proportions he'd make any trousers look good, or is there something more to it? Should we revisit the never trim pant leg with pleats mantra?
BaB