Ed New Years 2002!

Hi all,

Paolo Malaguti sent me a photo of Ed Bishop
celebrating the new year:

http://ufoseries.com/edNewYear2002.jpg

Enjoy, and thanks Paolo!

--
Marc Martin, [hidden email]

--- Marc wrote:
>
> Paolo Malaguti sent me a photo of Ed Bishop
> celebrating the new year:
>
> http://ufoseries.com/edNewYear2002.jpg
>
> Enjoy, and thanks Paolo!

Errr... Marc,

haven't you forgot something?
I mean for our Ladies on this group?
I know I forget it sometimes too {:-]
...the KERPLOP warning!

Christian :-)

>"memorymetropolis" <[hidden email]>
wrote:
> Errr... Marc,
>
>haven't you forgot something?
>I mean for our Ladies on this group?
>I know I forget it sometimes too {:-]
>...the KERPLOP warning!

Christian,
I enjoy seeing my favorite stars over the years, but there are very few of
them past 65 that can still make me swoon. Actually, the list is quite
small, in fact, and includes only two. Ed Bishop is not on that list.
Somehow, I don't think many of the other girls in the group find him as
glamorous as he was when he was in his 40's either. (Although I'm well
aware that there are some diehards among us!) I'm not sure what it is about
him that has lost its glamour, because he's still an excellent actor and
lights up the screen when you see him. I think it may be something about
his eyes. They seem so placid in all the photos. Not intense, like they
used to be in the series. Is he more intense in person, do you think, and
the loss merely a trick of the light? Or has he lost over time that certain
something that made him such a sexy commander?
Denise
(wishing I lived in the UK so I could just settle the question one way or
the other)

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

"Denise Felt" wrote:
> Is he more intense in person, do you think, and the loss merely a
> trick of the light? Or has he lost over time that certain
> something that made him such a sexy commander?


Well, his eyes are a little less bright and clear these days as
is only to be expected, but he still does have a lot of charisma
in person. He definitely has 'presence'. I'm not sure about
'intense'. Straker was definitely 'intense', not sure Ed Bishop
is.

Cheers
James

>James Gibbon <[hidden email]>
wrote:
>Well, his eyes are a little less bright and clear these days as
>is only to be expected, but he still does have a lot of charisma
>in person. He definitely has 'presence'. I'm not sure about
>'intense'. Straker was definitely 'intense', not sure Ed Bishop
>is.

Thanks, James. As one who doesn't photograph well myself, I am always a
little leery of how others look in pictures, since I know that the camera
does indeed lie. I'm glad he still has that "presence" (good choice of
words, btw) in person. I had hoped to see him at the Fanderson Con in May,
but my husband has been out of work lately and it doesn't seem as though
it's going to work out for us this year after all. *sigh* Maybe someday...
Denise

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx