How good of a James Bond would have a 35 year old Cary Grant have made?

I honestly think Connery is one of the main reasons why the early Bond films were so successful. In the early 1950's, there was a made-for-tv adaptation of Casino Royale which starred some no-name slob as James Bond. The producers completely "Americanized" the character and totally butchered Fleming's novel, the result wasn't successful at all.

Cary Grant might have been good in his time, but the character of James Bond is much better portrayed by someone who was a bit younger than 58. Just look at the 80's Bond films when Roger Moore was almost 60, they weren't nearly as popular than the older films because few people want to see a 60 year old man sleep with hundreds of women while being shot at. It's just not believable considering that a character like James Bond needs to be in top physical shape.

Yes, I think Cary Grant could have done well as James Bond. He could've played the part a few times without looking too old for it. That picture of Sean Connery holding a Walther pellet pistol is funny.

A lot of people don't know it's just a pellet pistol that can barely chase away pesky chickens. If 007 used it, he's have a very short career. BQ: Cary was before my time, so I haven't seen his movies.

2: "You Only Live Twice" 3: "The Avengers" 4: "Licence To Kill" 5: "Diamonds Are Forever.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.