21 replies to this topic

[Dell Deaton]

Although Daniel Craig has worn three different Omega watches now in just his first two films as James Bond, a case can be made for Bond 23 to feature "fairly cheap, expendable wrist watches on expanding metal bracelets which can be slipped forward over the thumb and used in the form of a knuckle-duster, either on the outside or the inside of the hand."

These words were written by Ian Fleming in 1958. Doctor No was in first edition release, and his Goldfinger novel was largely written. So, in describing Bond's "practice" as it related to wristwatch choices, Mr. Fleming was describing approximately half of the series.

In my circles of interest, the question seems to be coming up a lot lately. There's certainly an argument I can see from the fan base for a more financial accessible James Bond watch choice (particularly in this economy). More fascinating to me, however, is what this might portend for the next on-screen characterization of 007.

Let's face it: His choice in rental cars certainly changed from Tomorrow Never Dies and Casino Royale.

What do you all think? Further thoughts are on my James Bond Watches website and Blog. LINK

[trs007]

I disagree--Bond should always be out of the reach of the ordinary man. Even Omegas are too accessable.

As for the rental car comment---TND's BMW was a Q branch provided piece of equipment, whereas in CR, he was "off sticking his head in the sand" and got a regular rental car (granted product placement).

So, no more Seikos or other cheap watches for Bond.

[jaguar007]

I disagree--Bond should always be out of the reach of the ordinary man. Even Omegas are too accessable.

As for the rental car comment---TND's BMW was a Q branch provided piece of equipment, whereas in CR, he was "off sticking his head in the sand" and got a regular rental car (granted product placement).

So, no more Seikos or other cheap watches for Bond.

Even the Q branch TND BMW was product placement.

As for Bond wearing a cheaper watch, I don't think it would fit with the modern perception of Bond. Too many people would say it is another way of making Bond more like Bourne. I also don't see many watchmakers using the expandable bands these days, but Dell would know much more about that than I would.

[trs007]

Sorry, I meant BOTH cars were "product placement" but in the context of the film--Bond's BMW was supplied equipment, whereas in CR, he was on his own, so to speak.

[AgentBentley]

I agree with trs: nothing about Bond should be cheap. That's part of the fantasy, the Bond 'mystique' - expensive locations, expensive cars, expensive women. Escapism. During an economic crisis, movie goers might even want more of that.

[MkB]

Honestly?
If Bond wears an expensive watch, I'd like it to be a Q-Branch provided equipment.

It's true, exotic locations and expensive cars are part of the fantasy (about the "expensive women" [sic]... well, if that's your kind of fantasy!). But to me the beauty of it is that Bond has access to that thanks to his job, not thanks to a family fortune or something in the like.

I'd actually really like if he even joked about being equipped with a watch that's worth a full month of salary or something like that. Acting less style-conscious and more detached, like he's a natural, you know? But I don't think this is going to happen, in few the next films anyway.

[Turn]

Considering I read somewhere recently that a lot men don't even wear watches anymore, wouldn't it be more of a reflection of the times if Bond didn't either?

I'll be the first to admit he looks cool with an Omega, but if they aren't adding anything, is it necessary other than to provide a gadget or for a marketing product placement?

[MajorB]

Although I like some of the more real-world touches of the Craig films--sometimes a rental vehicle, sometimes dressing down--ultimately I still want certain fantasy elements left intact. Plausible or not, the Omegas and Rolexes have helped keep Bond the wish-fulfillment figure I got hooked on. I'm happy for it to stay that way.

[scottish peasant]

Well, it would need to be up to the spec of a navy diver. Could be a Doxa Sharkhunter, like Dirk Pitt...still expensive.

Could be a CWC - not sure what the price on that is.

My issue with the current Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean, though I love it, is the size. The original Seamaster 300M, like the Rolex, is not so oversized that you couldn't wear it out for the evening.

Something less of a diving watch, along the lines of a traditional Oyster Perpetual, but with ~300M rating would work as well and probably be more appropriate.

[double o ego]

Considering I read somewhere recently that a lot men don't even wear watches anymore, wouldn't it be more of a reflection of the times if Bond didn't either?

I'll be the first to admit he looks cool with an Omega, but if they aren't adding anything, is it necessary other than to provide a gadget or for a marketing product placement?

Eh? A lot of men don't wear watches but simultaneously a lot of men do. Bond is the sort of man that would wear a watch. Remember, Bond is a man of class, sophistication and style. Sure, there are numerous devices that tell the time and getting hold of the time is easier now than it's ever been BUT, a watch for decades now, hasn't just been about telling and keeping time. It's a cultural fashion statement, a (excuse the pun) timeless accessory.
Bond needs a watch, Bond without a watch just looks uncivilised. The watch doesn't need to serve any sort of fantastical practical purpose, he just needs to have a high class, reputable time piece that completes and is a staple of his image.
That being said, I wouldn't want Bond wearing some cheap watch. Bond is a resourceful guy. Most of what he has is equipped to him by his employers so, I'm assuming, if he wanted to use his planet ocean as a knuckle duster in a fight, he wouldn't hesitate. Lord knows he's ruined and lost equipment out in the field, he'd just have it replaced.
I own a PO, beautiful watch and I don't really care for it's underwater practical functions. I have it because 1) Bond wears it and 2) I love the way it looks.

[HellIsHere]

Bond look should look expensive and not affordable.

[codywan24]

As for Bond wearing a cheaper watch, I don't think it would fit with the modern perception of Bond. Too many people would say it is another way of making Bond more like Bourne.

Bourne wears a Tag Heuer, which is a comparable watch to the Omega (in price at least).

I think Bond should stick with either Rolex or Omega as his watch of choice (or Q-branch issue, whatever the case may be). Bond may be rugged and brutal and cold, especially as incarnated by Daniel Craig, but he's still a man of class and sophistication. If he were to wear a "cheaper" watch, it should have been in Casino Royale.

[plankattack]

In a word, no. A LCD-face Seiko turning into a ribbon printer doesn't have the same allure as a submariner turning into a buzzsaw. And the old push-to-display numerals is great if your gig is to turn invisible, but another thing entirely for a sopisticated secret agent!

At the same time, I don't have a problem with Bond sporting a different watch - a speedmaster or a rolex daytona, but I still feel the brand should be one to aspire to (IWC, Fortis) etc, rather than something off-the-shelf.

[Dr.Mirakle32]

I disagree--Bond should always be out of the reach of the ordinary man. Even Omegas are too accessable.

Yeah, because a high-end watch that costs around three grand is sooooo accessable, especially in today's economy...

Plus, while I'm all for a stylish Bond, isn't he essentially a government worker?
Do spies really get all that expensive crap in real life, especially if they want to be low-key?

Edited by Dr.Mirakle32, 11 March 2009 - 10:17 PM.

[double o ego]

No of course they don't. But James Bond at least the cinematic concept for the sake of argument is ridiculous by default. Secret agent? Yeah right. In fact, I'm almost inclined to say that everything about Bond, particularly given the nature of his job is fundimentally ironic. Bond may have an afinity for the finer things in life but lets be real here, he clearly has penchant for milking the company expense account.

[trs007]

I disagree--Bond should always be out of the reach of the ordinary man. Even Omegas are too accessable.

Yeah, because a high-end watch that costs around three grand is sooooo accessable, especially in today's economy...

Plus, while I'm all for a stylish Bond, isn't he essentially a government worker?
Do spies really get all that expensive crap in real life, especially if they want to be low-key?

I am not saying everyone can acquire an Omega, but Omegas are much more prominent in the circles that post here, elsewhere and in my circle of friends than the Rolex Submariner.

I felt the same way of the BMW Z3, at $35,000, not everyone was buying one, but still infinitely more accessable than the Z8, Lotuses or the Astons.

[double o ego]

Personally, I think it's dumb that Bond should be accessorizing with the most expensive stuff just for the sake of it. Sure, there are many things that we the audience should look at in awe but to be 100% completely out of reach from Bond is just ludicrous. It also nullifies the point of product placement, which, the films are overindulgent in. As long as the goods are of a high class, reputable quality and boasts high end sophistication, that's all that essentially matters.

[trs007]

I can see that---but that's Bond and when you tie-in the real world aspects that the films are a product to make money--and the big companies are making money--well, there ya have it.

Bond has always had "above the average man", but nowadays, the product placement seems more blatant. Even when not "in your face", Bond is attired with expensive clothing, a few examples:

*The sweater he wears during the DAD Scene when we discover Frost is a traitor was, in 2002, around $500.

*The cardigan he wears in QOS to visit Mathis, is, I have been told, around $1800.

*$200-$500 sunglasses in QOS and CR.

*Brioni suits, which although I haven't priced, I have been told are in the thousands.

*The overcoat during the Q-scene in TND--$4000 in 1997 $.

And many others. Yes, it is nice when we get items that allow us to "emulate the lifestyle" but I still stand behind my opinion--if it was too common--it wouldn't be special.

[007Bond007]

I personaly believe that Bond should equipe himself with the most sophisticated watches and clothes mainly because of the fact that, thats the way they always did it, even in the novels Bond would make some money and the brainstorm what to spend it on, if your life is indanger than whats the point of saving money? (This was done in moonraker incase you forgot).

[Tuxedo]

I am an Omega Seamaster geek. But to be honest I think the way Daniel Craig plays the James Bond character it doesn't matter what kind of watch he wears. The last two movies showed clearly that it is all about the character and not the gadgets. Craig's Bond looks like he can deal with whatever is available. The suits, shades and drinks (and the Aston Martin) he preferes seem to be well chosen but not necessary. For that - yes, he could sport a cheap watch. But on the other hand this doesn't fit the character beside the movies - the merchandise figure James Bond. Craig puts Bond to a new level in the movies so why not in merchandising?

[double o ego]

What Craig's doing is what Connery did and much better I might add. Connery had the style and sophistication but his watch didn't need to be some sort of gadget gizmo. The fact is, any watch that costs over a grand is easily considered a luxury and high end watch. Jmaes Bond doesn't do cheap watches. Bond wears suits in the desert, he wears a tux under a swim suit. Bond is outrageous but he's luxuriously outrageous.

[MkB]

*The cardigan he wears in QOS to visit Mathis, is, I have been told, around $1800.

$1800 for that thing? Some really need kicking!
I hate wearing any piece of clothing that will make me fear to damage it because it's expensive. My clothes are supposed to protect me, I'm not supposed to protect them!

I stand by my opinion: Bond is a civil servant, with the income of a civil servant, and I like it far better when the reason for his indulging into snobbery is the Service and his duty. Remember the first lines of Live and Let Die, especially the very first ones:

There are moments of great luxury in the life of a secret agent. There are assignments on which he is required to act the part of a very rich man; occasions when he takes refuge in good living to efface the memory of danger and the shadow of death; and times when, as was now the case, he is a guest in the territory of an allied secret service.

Then, luxury makes sense.