Now that Spectre is out in theaters now, this has left people with mixed reviews about James Bond. Normally, I talk about movies over the weekend, but these are speculative fiction films. I will have to say that I like James Bond, sometimes, and James Bond can be pretty speculative sometimes.

I think the question we have to ask ourselves is why James Bond has last over 50 years, and that is just the movies. It is very obvious that James Bond was born out of cold war fears, like From Russia with Love. After a while, the James Bond formula was about fighting some mastermind like Goldfinger, and politics started not to matter but were still in the background.

In 1989, the last Timothy Dalton film License to Kill left doubts on whether or not James Bond would ever return. Perhaps it was because the cold war ended that Bond just didn’t seem relevant anymore. Fortunately, a post cold-war Bond appeared with Pearce Brosnan as someone who was certainly suave enough for the part, even though it got a little dumb for Die Another Day.

Even though Die Another Day was released in 2002, it was obvious that new Bond for a post 9/11 age was needed. This was a reboot with Daniel Craig’s Casino Royale in 2006, a film that had actually been made a few times, but was never considered part of Bond canon. However, it was considered a success as this more realistic Bond dealt with things that are relevant now.

The issue that whenever a new Bond for a new age shows up, it just gets sillier until it has to be rebooted for the times or just given a different actor. It is amazing how it is still relevant, even with an age of Jason Bourne and other spy franchises.

I think that the real proof of James Bond’s sticking power is whether or not we will have James Bond in 2062. That would be 100 years of Bond, and I’m not certain what kinds of problems that the world will have then that Bond would fight against.