[Four Aces]

Parade magazine, found as an insert in most major Sunday newspapers here in the U.S., posted its survey results on who the next Bond should be. Of the readers polled, the overwhelming majority selected 45-yr. old Adrian Paul.

Am I clairvoyant or what?

4A

P.S. It was also suggested that Connery come back as "M".

This post has been edited by Four Aces: 27 June 2004 - 07:27 PM

[Agent 76]

Go Adrian!

[Loomis]

Four Aces, on 27 June 2004 - 19:26, said:

Of the readers polled, the overwhelming majority selected 45-yr. old Adrian Paul.

Leave it to the professionals.

[Four Aces]

Loomis, on 27 June 2004 - 14:49, said:

Four Aces, on 27 June 2004 - 19:26, said:

Of the readers polled, the overwhelming majority selected 45-yr. old Adrian Paul.

Leave it to the professionals.

Hahahahaha! LMAO!

Yeah like the "professionals" have really got their stuff together on picking the new Bond?

4A

[Loomis]

Four Aces, on 27 June 2004 - 21:41, said:

Yeah like the "professionals" have really got their stuff together on picking the new Bond?

Hmmm.... how do you know they haven't, 4A?

I mean, the professionals have so far given us Connery, Lazenby, Moore, Dalton and Brosnan. Not too shabby. Mr Joe Average would probably pick George Clooney or Brad Pitt if given free rein.

[Max Zorin]

I'd put able trust in the "professionals". Say what you will about The Powers That Be, they've managed to keep the series popular and relevant for over 40 years.

[zencat]

Interesting. Could this be a PR plant to warm people up to the idea of Paul as Bond? I find it a bit surprising that a Joe average poll would pick Paul. Heck, even I'm not sure who the guy is.

And who's taking these "surveys" anyway? If they had conducted them online, I think we would have found them, the way we canvas the net for all things Bond.

Curious stuff. Good find, 4A.

[Agent 76]

[quote name='Loomis' date='27 June 2004 - 20:49']
[/QUOTE]
Leave it to the professionals. [/quote]
which are you talking about? Eon? cough..cough... or perhaps P & W?

[Qwerty]

zencat, on 27 June 2004 - 18:15, said:

Interesting. Could this be a PR plant to warm people up to the idea of Paul as Bond? I find it a bit surprising that a Joe average poll would pick Paul.

I concur. Doesn't seem to be number one on the list, but there you have it.

[Loomis]

[quote name='Agent76' date='27 June 2004 - 22:19'] [quote name='Loomis' date='27 June 2004 - 20:49']
[/QUOTE]
Leave it to the professionals. [/QUOTE]
which are you talking about? Eon? cough..cough... or perhaps P & W? [/QUOTE]
Well, Eon. Yes. They've picked five Bonds so far, and they've always chosen well (even the much-maligned Lazenby is now getting his due recognition as a decent choice, albeit one who could never win since Connery cast such a long shadow at the time).

As for these surveys, well, they're ten a penny. In the UK, Robbie Williams ends up winning most of 'em. Or some "EastEnders" star. They're worthless. As for the idea that this may be a PR stunt to warm people up to the already-cast (in secret) Adrian Paul, I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. No way will Paul ever be Bond.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Adrian Paul is too old now at 45 and he's a weak actor. Looks good for the part though.

[Xenobia]

Hey Aces....nice to see you back here.

The pick of Mssr. Paul does not surprise me. Jackman has said no, Owen has said no, and along comes Mr. Paul who does have fame courtesy of the Highlander franchise, but not enough notability to demand a high paycheck.

There is one problem with this...James Bond has short hair, but Adrian Paul looks best with a ponytail.

BTW...Sean Connery will come back as M when the Weinstein brothers take over the series.

-- Xenobia

[Johnboy007]

I wouldn't mind seeing Adrian Paul as James Bond.

[Seannery]

Qwerty, on 27 June 2004 - 23:21, said:

zencat, on 27 June 2004 - 18:15, said:

Interesting. Could this be a PR plant to warm people up to the idea of Paul as Bond? I find it a bit surprising that a Joe average poll would pick Paul.

I concur. Doesn't seem to be number one on the list, but there you have it.

Adrian Paul would be a fine Bond and asking around in recent times I have found a lot of people concurring with that view. So the results of this nation-wide poll by a reputable magazine came as no suprise at all. The only suprise was the ease of his victory--Parade said he won "hands-down". Most impressive. He is an underrated actor and a good fit for Bond as the people in this poll concur with. That said perhaps the producers blessed these results to come out now to warm up the idea of Adrian Paul as the new Bond as zencat speculates.

[sheryl318]

The following is an exerpt from the June 27, 2004 Parade magazine.
Parade conducted a "Who Should Be the Next James Bond Poll.
PAUL WON HANDS DOWN!!


"Adrian Paul, 45 the former Highlander star won hands down. One reader wrote: He's tall, dark and overwhelmingly handsome, has a sexy British accent, formidible athletic skills and can turn up the heat in a love scene. Incidentally, another reader suggested that the original 007 --Sean Connery, 73 take over as M from Dame Judi Dench."

sheryl318@aol.com

[Seannery]

[quote name='Loomis' date='27 June 2004 - 23:29'] [quote name='Agent76' date='27 June 2004 - 22:19'] [quote name='Loomis' date='27 June 2004 - 20:49']
[/QUOTE]
Leave it to the professionals. [/QUOTE]
which are you talking about? Eon? cough..cough... or perhaps P & W? [/QUOTE]


END OF AGENT 76, NOW TO LOOMIS:


Well, Eon. Yes. They've picked five Bonds so far, and they've always chosen well (even the much-maligned Lazenby is now getting his due recognition as a decent choice, albeit one who could never win since Connery cast such a long shadow at the time).

As for these surveys, well, they're ten a penny. In the UK, Robbie Williams ends up winning most of 'em. Or some "EastEnders" star. They're worthless. As for the idea that this may be a PR stunt to warm people up to the already-cast (in secret) Adrian Paul, I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. No way will Paul ever be Bond. [/QUOTE]


END OF LOOMIS QUOTE, BEGINNING OF RESPONSE:


Loomis I like your passion though we rarely agree . Your end statement that Paul will never be Bond may very well be famous last words . I have seen much of the major "serious" polls across the pond and Robbie Williams and other non-entities have not been winning "those" polls--usually it has been Jackman, Owen, Bloom and even Firth. Parade Magazine is a well established national publication, not one of those rinky dink limited publications that occasionally throw out a non-serious Bond poll. This polled all through the USA.

I agree Eon has generally done a good job picking Bonds though not perfect. Lazenby couldn't carry the box office and a bunch of people still say he couldn't act. Dalton was solid but not perfectly cast and his box office was inconsistent. The other three worked out fine of course. And Eon would be wise to take into account general audience support as at least one factor in their Bond decision. They did that with Pierce as he was winning many polls in 1994. So Adrian Paul winning that nation-wide poll is significant and shows a lot of people disagree with your negative view of him as I also do. They need to find who fits Bond best and also who the audience buys as Bond. And i'm sure that is what they are going to do and that bodes well for Adrian Paul.

This post has been edited by Seannery: 28 June 2004 - 01:13 AM

[SPECTRE ASSASSIN]

Adrian Paul, 45, is too old to be Bond.

Sorry, leave it to professionals like Loomis said.

[Qwerty]

sheryl318, on 27 June 2004 - 20:34, said:

PAUL WON HANDS DOWN!!

Not as conclusive and final an answer though. There's always these ideas for who should be the next Bond.

[Seannery]

SPECTRE ASSASSIN, on 28 June 2004 - 03:24, said:

Adrian Paul, 45, is too old to be Bond.

Sorry, leave it to professionals like Loomis said.

Everyone has differing opinions on who could play James Bond and I think a number of actors could do fine including Adrian Paul. Everyone has their distractors and supporters--Paul certainly does, just look at the survey. Everyone has their reasons for supporting or knocking a candidate, but the age point is very weak in my opinion. As I mentioned elsewhere Roger was going strong into Octopussy in his mid 50's. Pierce looks-wise is going strong in his early 50's and producers willing could also go to mid 50's. His conflict with producers is over money and creative direction of series. Not age. Paul has the youthful look at his age that Roger did and Pierce does--he can easily do 3, 4 films. That is plenty if you can find someone who fits the role like many think Paul does. That being said I would be fine with Jackman getting the role if he wants it.

This post has been edited by Seannery: 28 June 2004 - 03:17 AM

[Willie Garvin]

SPECTRE ASSASSIN, on 28 June 2004 - 02:24, said:

Adrian Paul, 45, is too old to be Bond.

Sorry, leave it to professionals like Loomis said.

Not to sound argumentative but if 45 is considered too old for an actor to play 007 then neither Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan could have been cast.Each man was 44 when he began playing James Bond.

I'm not overly familiar with Adrian Paul's performances(only seen a few of his movies) but at least he looks like a good contender for the role--if only physically.

I think the next actor to play Bond should be in his midthirties.Everyone ages while playing the part(Brosnan aged well but now looks every one of his 52 years),so a younger man might be able to last longer in the part.

Look at Lazenby aged 29 and offered a 7 year contract by Eon.Had he been mature enough to understand his good fortune he might've been 007 for over 10 years--maybe 20.

[SPECTRE ASSASSIN]

Willie Garvin, on 27 June 2004 - 22:02, said:

SPECTRE ASSASSIN, on 28 June 2004 - 02:24, said:

Adrian Paul, 45, is too old to be Bond.

Sorry, leave it to professionals like Loomis said.

Not to sound argumentative but if 45 is considered too old for an actor to play 007 then neither Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan could have been cast.Each man was 44 when he began playing James Bond.

Exactly Brosnan was betwen 41 and 42 when when he did Goldeneye, and Roger Moore was between 45 and 46 when he did Live and Let Die.

[Qwerty]

I think the 40's are quite an ideal age for a new actor to take over the James Bons role. Early to mid, preferably.

[Danger Man]

I would age 39 the ideal age for an actor to play Bond.

[Qwerty]

Yes, late 30's to mid 40's, any of those work when starting off.

[Danger Man]

I like Roger Moore alot. But I think he started off late playing Bond and ended Bond at a very old age at 58. But if he did Bond near his "late 30's to mid 40's" like you said Qwerty, there wouldn't hardly any critisism of Moore's age if he did that amount of Bond films at an early age.

I remember some newspaper made an unflattering cartoon of Moore in a turbo-charged wheelchair. I found it very rude to me and to Moore.

[Qwerty]

Well perhaps, I suppose it all depended on if he ended with his seventh film at starting at a younger age, or if he would have stayed on even longer as Bond, if starting even younger than he did.

[Jim]

Not wishing to be awkward, but who is this person? Could someone put up a picture or something?

[SPECTRE ASSASSIN]

adrian paul

Here you go mate.

[Jim]

Thank you.

[SPECTRE ASSASSIN]

Your welcome.