That&#x27;s not a lot of analysis.  Why not ask:<p>Which Bond actor was the most profitable per film (i.e. the average box office rating of an actor)?<p>Which actor was the most efficient (i.e. the average actor salary subtracted from the average box office rating)[0]?<p>Which actor turned the best ratings?  Can we predict whether the next Bond film will be good or bad, based on data first from the Craig era films and then all the films?<p>The article doesn&#x27;t even mention what is the <i>best</i> Bond film, i.e. the film that performs best when <i>both</i> rating and box office is taking into account.  I find the problem interesting of how you add a box office amount together with a rating percentage to get a &#x27;film score&#x27;.<p>This article seems to be more about the technical aspect and not such more about the results.<p>[0] Yes, I know there are five Roger Moore films where the actor salary is unknown, but then we could just skip Roger Moore or only calculate on the films we <i>do</i> know the salary.