James Bond enjoyed a healthy career in literature, content with his cult following debonair dreaming fan base. But 1962 launched a new era of stardom when Dr. No brought 007 to the big screen. Sean Connery perfected the arrogant, womanizing secret agent with suave good looks and manly chest hair. Best of all was the accent - the perfect voice still imitated when anyone says those immortal words: “Bond, James Bond.”

So here’s a question. If a movie makes $300 million, but none of the actors care, will there be a sequel? The answer is an very obvious yes.

Resident Evil 3 ending with a painful cliffhanger. Sony Pictures announced three more Spider-Man movies. And while there’s no X-Men 4 announced, let’s be certain it’s happening. Yet should these sequels be made? When do these franchises run out of stories? Or are the replacement actors an embarrassment to the originals you love and adore (Roger Moore’s James Bond still gives me nightmares)? But I think wanting these franchises to end too early might deprive us of something amazing: the endless debate.

For about a week, my friends and I debated what should happen to Spider-Man after the disappointing Spider-Man 3. The crowded and overly dramatic film might have represented a franchise lost and without a future. Batman and Robin, Superman 3 and 4, and Rocky 2-5 all show franchises that have been left on life support far too long. But you know what, bad story telling does not mean there are no stories.

Look at Casino Royale. After about 15 mediocre to bad James Bond movies, Casino Royale showed what new blood can do. And Daniel Craig won’t replace Sean Connery, but he can stand on his own.

So who’s to say someone can’t replace Toby Maguire as Spider-Man? The guy where’s a full-faced masked for half the movie…or, well, he should.

So, to settle the debate once and for all. My first point is to remember, there is no limit to the stories that can be told. Marvel Comics has been telling Spider-Man and X-Men stories for more than 40 years. There are more than 60 years of Superman and Batman stories. So I don’t think no more movies can be made for these characters.

The problem is more that movies are a poor medium for serialized stories since it takes two to three years to make a movie. As a result, actors and directors have to devote years to these franchises with little time for variety. This is why actors for franchises are more and more likely to sign contracts to appear in several movies, in order to maintain some consistency.

But I think most franchises can survive just fine without the original creative team. The best success is for franchises based on pre-defined characters. James Bond and Batman can change actors with relative ease because we as fans want to see a new James Bond or Batman movie, not because we’re desperate to see Pierce Brosnan or Michael Keaton. And the same will apply to Toby Maguire as Spider-Man. I don’t go to see Spider-Man to see Toby Maguire. I go to see Spider-Man. I go to see web-slinging super-hero goodness. So if all of a sudden Jake Gyllenhaal tool over as Spider-Man, it might be a little jarring, but I’d survive.

Sometimes a franchise is, however, built on the skills of one actor rather than the character. Take Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean. I would agree Depp would be near impossible to replace. When I think of Captain Sparrow, I only think of Depp. Spider-Man, James Bond, and Batman all existed in my mind before any actor on the screen. If an actor tries to replace Depp, they will spend more time imitating Depp than being Sparrow. It is not impossible to replace the original actor, but it takes time. Steve Martin has been an acceptable Inspector Clouseau in the recent (and soon-to-be-sequel) Pink Panther movie, taking the reigns of the character almost 40 years after Peter Sellers created the character. Sellers died in 1980 after making six Pink Panther films (include one released after his death made using deleted scenes). I do not mean to say death is the only way to replace to a character, but that this example shows even a character created and perfected by one actor can be evolved to fit a new actor.

I think the main thing to remember is franchises are meant to continue on and on. While it might get annoying to see an 11 after a movie title, fans of that series have kept it going and should get to enjoy more and more stories as long as they’re willing to watch them. No franchise ever runs out of stories to tell. A run of bad films should not ruin a franchise. It just needs to be fixed and renewed. As long as the characters interest people, there are good stories to tell. And I hope these stories get told…whatever they may be.

Bond girls have a special place in geek’s hearts.  These women are often the epitome of unattainable, but they swoon at the croon of the British secret agent.  In terms of memorable, no Bond girl matches Honey Ryder emerging from the Caribbean sea.  Ursula Andress plays the first official Bond girl in 1962’s Dr. No.  Bond and Ryder meet halfway through the film on Dr. No’s private island with bond trying to stop the super villain and Ryder searching for shells (yes, shells).  Andress’ water-based entrance has become a Bond staple, repeated in Die Another Day by Halle "Jinx" Berry and in the most recent Casino Royale by James Bond himself.