WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

James Bond Watch

  • Rolex

    Votes: 43 31.2%
  • Seiko

    Votes: 9 6.5%
  • Omega

    Votes: 86 62.3%
1 - 20 of 88 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
After Brimstones' excellent "Actors" poll.
What about a watch poll.
Which brand really represents the Secret Agent best.
The original Fleming Rolex, the 80's Digital era Seiko or the understated
hard wearing Omega Seamaster.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,154 Posts
I did very much like that Digital Seiko G757 i think it was :-!

After Brimstones' excellent "Actors" poll.
What about a watch poll.
Which brand really represents the Secret Agent best.
The original Fleming Rolex, the 80's Digital era Seiko or the understated
hard wearing Omega Seamaster.
 
P

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Rolex Submariner 5513, followed by the Bond Seamaster. PO <| and Seiko a definite :-x
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,693 Posts
Fleming said Rollie, Cubby said Rollie, huge quantity of money said Omega. Don't get me wrong, SeMP is the dog's. However the Oyster is without doubt the Bond watch.

If only someone, say a respected forum mod, had one spare...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,693 Posts
The Po doesn't do it for me either, never really understood it, on paper it should be my grail, in reality it's just ho-hum. I infinitely prefer the AT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
The Po doesn't do it for me either, never really understood it, on paper it should be my grail, in reality it's just ho-hum. I infinitely prefer the AT.
Hi Matt
I just can't get the AT and love the PO. I guess, like football, it's all a matter of opinion ;-);-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Funny thing is, the Rolex was a watch that Bond, on his modest salary of 2000 pounds annually could afford back then (he bought his own, and also had one supplied through Q branch).
Today the average salary is about 45k, and a Rolex costs about 6k? So the watch would be, by today's standards, 10% of his earnings.

What did a Rolex cost in 1963?

On the basis of Bond's true character, as defined by Flemming, he used things that were extremely well crafted, built to last and of great value, but not necessarily "luxury". The Rolex fit that description then, but does it now with it's current price and compared with what Bond might make in today's economy?

The Omega, based on price, would seem to be more in-line with Flemming's choice, and even a Seiko Marine Master as well. More affordable, and just as tough as the Rolex (Bond used the Rolex as pseudo brass knuckles on someone's face in one of the novels).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,693 Posts
If you go by the books it's a Rolex Oyster perpetual, by the films:

Dr. No Rolex Submariner
From Russia With Love Rolex Submariner
Goldfinger Rolex Submariner
You Only Live Twice Rolex Submariner
Thunderball Rolex Submariner
On Her Majesty's Secret Service Rolex Submariner
Diamonds Are Forever Rolex Submariner
The Man With the Golden Gun Rolex Submariner
Live & Let Die Rolex Submariner
The Spy Who Loved Me Seiko
For Your Eyes Only Seiko
Octopussy Seiko
A View to a Kill Seiko
The Living Daylights Rolex Submariner
Licence to Kill Rolex Submariner
Goldeneye Omega Seamaster Professional
Tomorrow Never Dies Omega Seamaster Professional
The World is Not Enough Omega Seamaster Professional
Die Another Day Omega Seamaster Professional
Casino Royal Omega Planet Ocean
Quantum of Solace Omega Planet Ocean
So, assuming I can count: that's eleven to Rolex, six to Omega and four to Seiko.


However, as the quote goes:

"A Rolex? Probably. They were on the heavy side, but they work. And at least you could see the time in the dark with those big phosphorous numerals".
More information and photos are here.


http://www.hmss.com/qbranch/0202.htm

http://members.optusnet.com.au/heliosz/jamesbond.html

Oh, and don't forget - He's an imaginary character
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,418 Posts
i like that reasoning:-! .

i think the PO is a great current choice for bond. relatively understated, but strong and stylish. also, in terms of luxury brand cachet, it's certainly more under the radar (when compared to rolex) in keeping with bond's character in the novels.

Funny thing is, the Rolex was a watch that Bond, on his modest salary of 2000 pounds annually could afford back then (he bought his own, and also had one supplied through Q branch).
Today the average salary is about 45k, and a Rolex costs about 6k? So the watch would be, by today's standards, 10% of his earnings.

What did a Rolex cost in 1963?

On the basis of Bond's true character, as defined by Flemming, he used things that were extremely well crafted, built to last and of great value, but not necessarily "luxury". The Rolex fit that description then, but does it now with it's current price and compared with what Bond might make in today's economy?

The Omega, based on price, would seem to be more in-line with Flemming's choice, and even a Seiko Marine Master as well. More affordable, and just as tough as the Rolex (Bond used the Rolex as pseudo brass knuckles on someone's face in one of the novels).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,559 Posts
If you go by the books it's a Rolex Oyster perpetual, by the films:

Dr. No Rolex Submariner
From Russia With Love Rolex Submariner
Goldfinger Rolex Submariner
You Only Live Twice Rolex Submariner
Thunderball Rolex Submariner
On Her Majesty's Secret Service Rolex Submariner
Diamonds Are Forever Rolex Submariner
The Man With the Golden Gun Rolex Submariner
Live & Let Die Rolex Submariner
The Spy Who Loved Me Seiko
For Your Eyes Only Seiko
Octopussy Seiko
A View to a Kill Seiko
The Living Daylights Rolex Submariner
Licence to Kill Rolex Submariner
Goldeneye Omega Seamaster Professional
Tomorrow Never Dies Omega Seamaster Professional
The World is Not Enough Omega Seamaster Professional
Die Another Day Omega Seamaster Professional
Casino Royal Omega Planet Ocean
Quantum of Solace Omega Planet Ocean

So, assuming I can count: that's eleven to Rolex, six to Omega and four to Seiko.


However, as the quote goes:

More information and photos are here.


http://www.hmss.com/qbranch/0202.htm

http://members.optusnet.com.au/heliosz/jamesbond.html

Oh, and don't forget - He's an imaginary character

I don't remember seeing any wrist shots in Diamonds, so not sure about that one if there was a Rolex in it, Thunderball also had a Breitling, Live And Let Die, also had the Pulsar, OHMSS also had the Rolex Chronograph in the cable car as well as the Sub, and of course Casino had the SMP as well as the PO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,218 Posts
i like that reasoning:-! .

i think the PO is a great current choice for bond. relatively understated, but strong and stylish. also, in terms of luxury brand cachet, it's certainly more under the radar (when compared to rolex) in keeping with bond's character in the novels.
+1 on that reasoning as well.

I feel Omega is (or was maybe before their "prestige ascent" :-d) what Rolex was in Fleming's days - If Fleming were writing the Bond novels now he'd be wearing a Seamaster I think.

That said, the watch of Fleming's Bond is a Rolex. And I love early Subs (much much better than the current ones) so I felt they were a good fit for the first films, but the Seamaster is more relevant to now.

I'm not sure which Seamaster Fleming would actually have him wearing though... :think:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
From an Omega Bond Website...

What about Bond's Rolex?

In the Ian Fleming novels, Bond is referred to a few times as wearing a Rolex watch. It is briefly described as a "Rolex Oyster Perpetual on an expanding metal bracelet" and as having "big phosphorus numerals." While most of the Bond movies in the 1960's through 1980's featured 007 wearing a Rolex Submariner, there really is nothing in the original novels that indicates that the Submariner was the watch the author had in mind. The big phosphorus numerals actually indicates the watch was likely a military-style Rolex that predated the Submariner.

While Fleming could get away with not specifying a particular Rolex model in the novels, one did need to be chosen when filming began on the first Bond film. The choice of the Submariner for the movies appears to have been more a matter of expediency than anything else. When filming began on Dr. No in 1961, Rolex was unwilling to donate a watch for Sean Connery to wear. To avoid delaying the filming, producer Albert Broccoli handed over his personal Rolex, a Submariner, to fill the role. You can see in both Dr. No and Goldfinger that Sean Connery sometimes wears the watch on a black and gray striped NATO-style cloth strap that is clearly narrower than the wider-than-common lugs on the Submariner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
More from an Omega Bond Website...

So why the change to an OMEGA?

The change from Bond wearing a Rolex appears to have been for two reasons--one stylistic, the other financial.
Foremost, for introducing Pierce Brosnan as the "new" James Bond in the 1995 film GoldenEye, the producers wanted to update the image of Bond to a more distinctly sophisticated "Euro" look. Lindy Hemming, the costume designer for the first three of the Pierce Brosnan appearances as Bond was quoted in The European Magazine ["The Names Bond, Euro Bond", July 7-13 1995] as explaining: "Sean Connery wore a Rolex, but we thought they'd become a bit ordinary now. OMEGA are more minimal--even though this one does shoot off a bomb."

She is not alone in thinking this. Rolex as a brand has changed a lot since the late 1950's when Fleming chose one for Bond to wear. At that time, Rolex was known as a uniquely well made, durable and "waterproof" watch that cost somewhat more than other watches. Now, decades later, many inexpensive watches meet the functional needs of durability, accuracy, and water-resistance that people used to turn to Rolex for. In this time, Rolex has shifted from being a technically superior, but only modestly well known watch make to being the publicly perceived "leader of the pack" in the luxury watch market.

Because of this, many Bond afficionados believe that the OMEGA Seamaster is closer in spirit to what Fleming would choose for Bond today. The literary Bond would not have chosen a watch based on luxury and flashy name recognition, but on performance. To him, any watch, car, or other implement's primary function is as a tool. Any tool is expendable. The Seamaster offers the comparable performance, style, and weight Bond would have wanted, but without attracting extra attention or making the statement a Rolex does today. With OMEGA's much heavier bracelet on the Seamaster, it would probably make an even better "knuckle duster" as the literary Bond once used his Rolex in a fight.

The other reason is that with all the product marketing deals that surrounded such modern high-profile films, the filmmakers wanted to work with a company that was interested in high-profile co-promotions--something that Rolex conservatively avoids. Reports are that the film producers chose OMEGA as their leading candidate as a replacement for the classic Bond watch, then contacted OMEGA to ask their participation in providing products and being involved in co-marketing arrangements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,635 Posts
IMO, Bond would just wear whatever works. No pretense, no brands, no loyalty. If I were Bond, I'd go for something with tritium vials. Maybe a Ball or Marathon watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,559 Posts
Re: More from an Omega Bond Website...

So why the change to an OMEGA?

The change from Bond wearing a Rolex appears to have been for two reasons--one stylistic, the other financial.
Foremost, for introducing Pierce Brosnan as the "new" James Bond in the 1995 film GoldenEye, the producers wanted to update the image of Bond to a more distinctly sophisticated "Euro" look. Lindy Hemming, the costume designer for the first three of the Pierce Brosnan appearances as Bond was quoted in The European Magazine ["The Names Bond, Euro Bond", July 7-13 1995] as explaining: "Sean Connery wore a Rolex, but we thought they'd become a bit ordinary now. OMEGA are more minimal--even though this one does shoot off a bomb."

She is not alone in thinking this. Rolex as a brand has changed a lot since the late 1950's when Fleming chose one for Bond to wear. At that time, Rolex was known as a uniquely well made, durable and "waterproof" watch that cost somewhat more than other watches. Now, decades later, many inexpensive watches meet the functional needs of durability, accuracy, and water-resistance that people used to turn to Rolex for. In this time, Rolex has shifted from being a technically superior, but only modestly well known watch make to being the publicly perceived "leader of the pack" in the luxury watch market.

Because of this, many Bond afficionados believe that the OMEGA Seamaster is closer in spirit to what Fleming would choose for Bond today. The literary Bond would not have chosen a watch based on luxury and flashy name recognition, but on performance. To him, any watch, car, or other implement's primary function is as a tool. Any tool is expendable. The Seamaster offers the comparable performance, style, and weight Bond would have wanted, but without attracting extra attention or making the statement a Rolex does today. With OMEGA's much heavier bracelet on the Seamaster, it would probably make an even better "knuckle duster" as the literary Bond once used his Rolex in a fight.

The other reason is that with all the product marketing deals that surrounded such modern high-profile films, the filmmakers wanted to work with a company that was interested in high-profile co-promotions--something that Rolex conservatively avoids. Reports are that the film producers chose OMEGA as their leading candidate as a replacement for the classic Bond watch, then contacted OMEGA to ask their participation in providing products and being involved in co-marketing arrangements.
We're forgetting the REAL reason. Rolex refused to pay to have their watch in the films, Omega paid millions. Guess who won?:roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
It's all about "product placement"...

IMO, if Rolex refused to let them use one of their watches for Dr. No, why would they even bother to even show the Rolex on screen? That's FREE advertisement for the cheap-ass Rolex Corp. If TIMEX would've said: "We'll give you $100.00 AND an unlimited supply of watches for your movies.", we'd all be wearing Timexes and there would be a Timex forum.​
 
1 - 20 of 88 Posts
Top