DO YOU HAVE TROUBLE COMMITTING TO A SHOW WHEN YOUR FAVORITE ACTOR IS REPLACED BY MANAGEMENT?

It's been 45 years since TV executives replaced the actor (Dick York) who played Samantha's husband on the show "Bewitched" with another actor (Dick Sargent) and hoped that nobody would notice. Did they really think we'd be fooled because both actors had similar first names? I've never recovered from the treachery. I have trust issues because of it, and I don't sleep well. While it's true that back problems led to York leaving the show, my problem is with the lack of an explanation.

As a result, I have trouble fully committing to any movie or TV character because I live in fear that one day, some executive will make an arbitrary decision based on ratings, money or whimsy, and hire a new actor to replace the one I like.

Do you think it was easy for me to accept Roger Moore, even though it probably was Sean Connery's decision not to do any more James Bond movies? They should have ended the film series right then, admitting that Sean Connery was the perfect Bond, and that perfection is its own reward. Don't even get me started on George Lazenby, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig.

I am nothing if not flexible, and I have made allowances for certain changes in actors, including Batman and The Joker. George Clooney pretty much killed Batman for all intents and purposes, and the universe demanded a new Batman. As long as you're changing Batman, you might as well change his nemesis.

But the exceptions that I allow are few. More often, the changes are egregious, such as the casting of Russell Brand in the title role of "Arthur." My rule of thumb is that if a certain actor created the perfect character, as Dudley Moore did in the 1981 movie, it should be a crime against art to remake the movie.