There are products that have gone down in the world when they suffer from poor public relations: crembo, Ashkenazi food and action movies of all time.
The latter are commonly seen as having no real caloric value, as gums for the eyes measured in their ability to aid in the sale of popcorn at the cinema buffet.
However, well-wishers (and crembo lovers) are well aware that a good action movie is much more than just another chain of chases and explosions.
In its dynamic way such a film resonates with eternal debates about the changing nature of evil and the ability of the forces of good to defeat it.
Really good movies will also flood social and moral questions and wonder about the heavy price of violence, a critical component in action movies, of all those who take it, whether they belong to the sons of light or those of the sons of darkness.
The extraordinary success of the film series dedicated to Bond's exploits, James Bond, must also depend on its ability to provide the audience with answers to value questions.
In the second half of the last century, the series' films intensely marketed the confidence in Britain's ability to be a major player on the international stage and the naive belief that male power has the power to overcome any international malice.
Free of any realistic pretense, the films provided their audience with a far-fetched indulgence in a world where all men are gnarled, all women submissive and any criticism of sexism is immediately sent to the shredder.
A contemporary look at many of the series' films is embarrassing today.
Bond of yesteryear feels less like a role model and more like an awkward uncle who has a hard time absorbing the exchanges.
So it is understandable why in recent years the character of 007 has undergone a series of far-reaching changes.
James of "No Time to Die" is very different from his ancestors.
The problem is that on the way to the long awaited repair some new problems have arisen.
Most of all, the new film is a kind of travel form of political correctness. It was important for the filmmakers to differentiate themselves from the cultural traditions that preceded them, and they made sure to take one sub-character out of the closet, equip the rest with diverse ethnic identities, and portray all the representatives of the old-fashioned white establishment as suffering from moral atherosclerosis. The demand for change is called for, but the mechanical way in which it is carried out raises the suspicion that it is not the desire to create an egalitarian and just worldview that has guided producers, but the desire to atone for the sins of extreme conservatism once in a sharp pendulum.
It would have been easy to identify with the belief that social and gender correction would lead to the creation of a healthier cinematic culture, had it not been for the extensive use the film makes of violence as a means of eradicating archaic worldviews.
Violence directed at children, the oldest manipulative trick in the film, reappears in it again and again.
Villains who turn patriotism into their refuge are led to the stigma, and in a particularly problematic scene, one of the characters suspected of racism snatches a ball in a pony, to the applause of the audience.
The proposed connection in the film between blatant and realistic violence and the effort to create a more decent society tarnishes the latter and reveals a violent subconscious that also drives some of the progressive movements of our time.
On its crooked path, Bond provides the 2021 Model with its members a kind of license to kill.