lol.....you know, i heard years ago that rowan atkinson actually has a degree in engineering from i think cambridge. if not cambridge it was oxford. anyway, my first reaction was a resounding no because i just couldn't see him ever being serious. however, then i thought about jim carrey and the amazing performance he gave in "eternal sunshine of the spotless mind" in which his face never once contorted into any silly expressions at all. i couldn't believe it. he was amazing. i actually had to look up online to see if it really was jim carrey! maybe rowan atkinson could pull off a similar feat. however, 007 is always supposed to be a suave one with the ladies, and that is more difficult to swallow.....
2006-08-30 00:20:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by debbie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it would be really difficult to take him seriously, which is the problem with typecast actors like Atkinson.
2006-08-30 00:17:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by jennybeanses 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i don`t think so! i hated his movie, "Johnny English". ( a mickey take of 007 where Rowan plays a bumbling, useless spy) i don`t think i could watch Rowan as a serious Bond character after watching that movie!
2006-08-30 00:12:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by kat 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes, because i love those tv shows called Mr Bean, hes so funny lol, Susie
2006-08-30 00:13:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Forever Friends 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Teedee. Ask Asterix and Obelix.
2006-08-30 00:12:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by mug 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sounds too much like an Austin Powers remake. Too bad, though, he would have been funny.
2006-08-30 00:14:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by Helga J 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oooooooooooohh yeeeaah, definatly
2006-08-30 00:11:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think bruce willis would be a very good 007
2006-08-30 00:16:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Noooooooooo ........... ur putting a comedian to a general action movie.........thats like common sense
2006-08-30 02:22:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by nathaniel b 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Can't be any worse than George Lazenby.
2006-08-30 00:12:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋