Has Progress killed Bond?

Following the release of Daniel Craig's second film as James Bond, many critics, and even Rodger Moore himself, find themselves questioning whether what has happened to Bond is good. Throughout the forty years of Bond bonanza, the gadgets and pushing of the proverbial envelope have been changing to fit the modern world. However, with this country's unquenchable thirst for violence in entertainment, these critics feel that Bond has become too violent to appropriately fit the 007 model left by Craig's predecessors. With the progression in the media being made tin the past few decades, Americans have found themselves being able to view content with more violence, sex, and drug use than in the past. Obviously, the filmmakers of the Bond films had to adjust to the changing times and in turn have lost the charm and far out espionage sequence and replaced it with more death and more destruction.

Will Columbia Pictures head the warnings of critics and try to make a more classic Bond film in the future? Or will they listen to the outstanding box office preformance that ushered in over $70 million dollars for the studio? My friends, I regret to say, they will probably give into the power of green, and the American public will be force fed more putrid garbage through films that once warmed our imagination and inspired many to believe that futurism is ideal. Should we take this as a warning that progress may not be the key to our society? Perhaps the general balance we have now (save for a few exceptions) is where we should draw the line.