Shortly after unveiling my “James Bond watches: ‘The List’ of EON Productions movie wristwatches” on the jamesbondwatches.com website, I posted a Thread to the TimeZone “Rolex – Vintage” Forum. James Dowling, a/k/a “MrRolex” is the moderator.

Some of what follows here includes feedback from Forum participants, including Mr. Dowling.

However, the main purpose for presenting the content here is for the further information I provide on development of “The List” and questions that were valuable to answer.

delldeaton, Jan 01, 2009 – 11:42 AM, “Definitive list of James Bond film watches (EON Productions)”

Wanted to make TZ one of my first stops in sharing what I believe is the most comprehensive lists of James Bond film watches available. Although it’s been several years in the making, I still consider it a work-in-progress.

But the thing I think it offers of most importance at this point is an organized way of capturing each variation of watch by film, model, story line, and gadget. I don’t see this so much as a debate about “which watch came first?” or “which watch is best?” or “what’s the real James Bond watch?” so much as it is a way of trying to cover everything for those who are interested in the topic.

As always, I thank you all for your interest. And I’m looking forward to your feedback….

delldeaton, Jan 01, 2009 – 02:46 PM, “There are really two things I’m fundamentally hoping to achieve here”

The first is to provide a truly complete list of all watch variations that have appeared in the James Bond films from EON Productions. A clear shortcoming in efforts (well-meaning as they may be) based on film-title associations falls short; for example, A View to a Kill shows as many as four different watches in my list so far.

Now we look where perhaps we have not looked before. And we can discuss watches based on common labels, moving closer to “final answers,” as opposed to potentially confusing variations.

Second, I wanted to really question assumptions here. That doesn’t make all assumptions “wrong,” per se. Rather, the idea is to highlight the reasons why folks lean toward one interpretation or another in identifying a particular watch and model, as opposed to what someone else might do.

Take what I call the “Miss Taro Rolex.” Would one ID that model based on what they see on-screen in Dr. No? Or based on a publicity still from the film (there’s a dial-shot of the watch where Bond is in bed w/ her and a that appears in a lot of references: But in the still, Bond is wearing a shirt, and in the movie he is not). Maybe someone else bases his/her ID on an assumption that the “Miss Taro Rolex” is the same as the “Russian Embassy Rolex.” The latter being much more readily ID’ed, based on the close-up 1 hour, 4 minutes into From Russia with Love.

I’ll be adding larger reference images for each watch labeled; these will link through the current thumbnails. It was quite a balancing act to put together this main page, as you might imagine. What to include? What to leave out? How to organize it so that it could expand as information is confirmed. And, of course, how to provide reference images w/o having a Page that took forever to load on some systems….

delldeaton, Jan 01, 2009 – 05:52 PM, “Some sooner than others.”

As you might imagine, I am getting closer to some villain watches as a result of this research. I’ve catalogued things such as screen captures and side-by-sides (the one that always seems to come to mind being when Trevelyan held Bond’s watch up next to his own and knew how to use it to disarm its remote detonator for explosives).

But no immediate plans….

That said, let me add that one of my approaches to research is to note similarities in watch selections w/in films. It doesn’t always work, but it’s often a great starting point. By this I mean that when looking for a 007 watch where it seems like there’s not a context clue in the world, checking out other watches in the film can often point the way. I mean, if you were a producer, wouldn’t it just make sense to acquire a lot of watches from the same supplier?

And, if that supplier were a watchmaker, well, you get the picture.

James Dowling (MrRolex), Jan 02, 2009 – 04:25 AM, “Thanks”

Hi DD;

Excellent work.

My only suggestion (based on my own researches into other fields) is never to call anything ‘definitive’, or at least to qualify it with the words ‘The Current’; as, by definition, any work in progress can never also be definitive. And, as you know, work like yours is always in progress.

Sublover, Jan 02, 2009 – 05:52 AM

Really great work by you!

Wowwwww…..

To me the watch pictures in “From Russia with Love” it should be either a 6538 or a 5510. Definitely a big crown but nearly impossible to see if a 2- liner of 4-liner and also the bezel insert seems to have no minute tracks….

To me there are just these 2 opps.

Take care and I will always support if I can
Sublover

fbobberts, Jan 03, 2009 – 01:56 AM, “There’s the OHMSS ‘Playboy’ Rolex”

Lazenby sets his watch (clearly a 5513) on the copier when he is thumbing through the Playboy in the layer’s office. I think it should be a 5513 and the same for the Partner Rolex- this watch was Lazenby’s own 5513. I don’t think he wore more than one.

He also wore that 6238 -Dang I love that watch.

Nice work on the Seikos.

delldeaton, Jan 03, 2009 – 06:23 PM, “Believe me, I wanted to have ‘Playboy’ magazine there”

Ironically, it’s the sequence where James Bond removes his watch to keep track of time in the safe-cracker sequence that kept me from referencing “Playboy” (for now) on my list. As many times as I’ve looked at that sequence, I can’t reconcile the watch shown there w/ what I’m seeing elsewhere in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service.

As always, I’m of course open to further discussion on this.

re “Lazenby’s own 5513,” I’ve got a stack of references to that story, and recent confirmation from a reliable source who just interviewed Mr. Lazenby and says he heard the claim again with his own ears. (Please PM me w/ your own references, as I suspect some day I may devote a Page on my site to them.)

But I’m skeptical. That’s not to say I “doubt” anyone, per se. It’s just that we’re talking in this Forum as WIS-types about a different degree of specificity than is common elsewhere. Remember that story that’s been cited as Gospel from James Bond: The Legacy, referencing the Albert R. Broccoli Rolex? “It must have been a Sub,” based on this, goes the shout.

John Cork disputes this, and he authored the book (I think his response is on my Blog).

In order to get from George Lazenby’s personal purchase to the film, it seems to me that we’ve got to make a lot of assumptions. Are they all confirmed? If so, how? And are they confirmed by folks who understand the nuances?

The parallel I draw is to the 1966 TV series Batmobile. It’s a fantastic vehicle, and a focus I may take on some day (after I truly have completed the “definitive” work on James Bond watches!). But, my goodness: You can look at interviews over time and see how the same person tells the same story in completely different ways. Heck, for that matter, in the same time period. Why? Not for malice or lack of wanting to be right, I don’t think. But, more simply, because they’re not answering the question from the same point of reference as the person asking (eg, the auto buff, film historian, et cetera).