I’ve proudly seen every James Bond movie ever made, even the George Lazenby, Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan doozies, plus Woody Allen’s 1967 “Casino Royale” spoof. As a kid, I even inhaled Duco Cement fumes assembling a plastic model 1964 Aston Martin DB5—with a working ejector seat!

Bond films delivered a feeling of sophistication and fun. The original James Bond was suave and sassy while he resolved sinister plots. He exemplified cool: He drank vodka martinis but never to excess, was impeccably dressed and, though flirty,...

Three of the actors who played James Bond, Timothy Dalton, Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan, appear together at a cinema in London, Nov. 17, 1996.

Photo: Alastair Grant/Associated Press

I’ve proudly seen every James Bond movie ever made, even the George Lazenby, Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan doozies, plus Woody Allen’s 1967 “Casino Royale” spoof. As a kid, I even inhaled Duco Cement fumes assembling a plastic model 1964 Aston Martin DB5—with a working ejector seat!

Bond films delivered a feeling of sophistication and fun. The original James Bond was suave and sassy while he resolved sinister plots. He exemplified cool: He drank vodka martinis but never to excess, was impeccably dressed and, though flirty, was a gentleman. The early films were filled with innuendo and scenes that were simultaneously exotic and a touch campy. Sean Connery’s Bond had a joie de vivre. Roger Moore’s was less serious and a little over the top, but the audience was in on the joke.

WSJ Opinion: A Talk With Eric Schmidt on AI and the Human Future

Join WSJ Opinion’s Paul Gigot and the former executive chairman of Google for a discussion on the technology’s effect on society
Online on Tuesday, December 14 at 7:00 PM ET
Register Now

Scholars love to analyze Bond creator and author Ian Fleming’s work as an allegory: Bond is the new Churchill, saving the British Empire from its inevitable postwar decline. Bond’s motivation in Her Majesty’s Secret Service is always God and country, epitomized in the opening scene of “The Spy Who Loved Me” when he skis off a cliff and unfurls a parachute emblazoned with the Union Jack.

But since Daniel Craig took over in 2006, things have turned strange, especially with his final Bond film, “No Time to Die,” which I recently watched. It was dark and gloomy like 2012’s “Skyfall.” Billie Eilish practically whispers the theme song, seemingly from a shrink’s couch. Bond was brooding, with a constant scowl on his face. What was he so depressed about, Brexit? No wonder Mr. Craig reportedly couldn’t wait to finish his run as 007.

What the heck is going on? After paying for $15 movie tickets plus overpriced and overbuttered popcorn, I expect to escape the drudgery of real life for a couple of hours. I want to come out of a dark theater with a huge smile on my face, not feeling as if I got hit by a sad sack of potatoes.

Why does Hollywood sulk so much these days? Is it simply reflecting society? This moody movement certainly ruined “Star Wars” and Batman—“Dark Knight” indeed—and even enjoyable Marvel characters like Iron Man’s Tony Stark, who started out snarky and ended up despondent. Gloomy dreck like “Parasite” and “Nomadland” now win the Oscar for Best Picture. Anything good, like Joaquin Phoenix’s performance in “The Joker,” gets shouted down as insensitive.

Man, I miss the days when you knew who the enemy was. Auric Goldfinger and his behatted crony Oddjob, Ernest Stavro Blofeld stroking his white cat, Jaws, Emilio Largo and his eyepatch and of course the Soviets. Bond girls, though enticing and with racy names, were usually sophisticated, worldly and wicked smart. They have been of diverse race and nationality since the 1960s. Equity! Yes, James Bond was a womanizer—maybe that’s part of the British ideal—but he was unmarried, and he was never a misogynist.

Plus, you could count on Bond films to have otherworldly plots—rob Fort Knox, steal atomic bombs, wipe out the human race from a hidden space station, and, my favorite, blow up Silicon Valley to corner the market on chips (the Japanese later tried this unsuccessfully). But in the Craig era, the plots turned inward. “Skyfall” delves into Bond’s childhood, and he destroys his ancestral home by blowing up propane tanks. Paging Dr. Freud. “Quantum of Solace” from 2008 involves a Bolivian water shortage. C’mon, these are fantasy films, not therapy or ecological case studies.

I especially look forward to seeing the advanced high-tech gadgets and weapons that Q provides 007. Talk about a letdown. In “No Time to Die,” Bond uses a Nokia

phone and goes off-roading in a Toyota. Ho-hum.

Early Bond films were made before computer graphics. They required clever filming, amazing sets, huge casts and daring stunts. These days, with hundreds of movies using special effects, most major cities have been blown up, and every car chase imaginable has been done. Special effects in movies are great, but they have become soulless, which perhaps leads to the inevitable gloom and doom.

This is the new-millennium malaise. Hollywood doesn’t want us to be happy. Sad audiences are easier to manipulate. Sure, the James Bond of the 1960s and ’70s needed to be modernized. But can modern Hollywood still balance fun and sophistication? I doubt it. Amazon is set to buy Bond franchise owner MGM, and I fear that a new 10-part Prime series on 007 fighting climate change and methane-belching cattle may be coming.

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed “No Time to Die,” but left disappointed. The only thing that Bond’s film producers seem to have a license to kill is fun. Actually, fun may already have died. I’m shaken, not stirred, by this.

Write to kessler@wsj.com.