CommanderBond.net

After ruminating on a recent Rolex vs. Omega thread here, a trend related to watches popped into my head. There is more and more talk I see (on the news and such), that wristwatches are fading from the younger generation's desires. Digital timekeeping has rendered watches a commodity item, and with cellphones ubiquitous, younger people are shunning watches altogether.

In my reality, most people I see under twenty-five don't wear watches, they just pull their cellphones out of their pockets to tell the time.

How this relates back to Bond is this: as Bond moves further into the future, and the young ones are expected to pack theaters to line the pockets of the studios and production houses, how do they relate to the "consumer" as far as watches go? You can appeal to them with cars, girls, food and drink, even locations. These are things they can still aspire to and envy about Bond.

But when he walks around with a $2k wristwatch that they care nothing about, what then? Does Bond become quaint, outdated? Like a person who today pulls out a checkbook, Is he considered an anachronism?

Agree? Disagree? Will Bond ditch the Omega for his snazzy new Sony Ericsson?

The research to which you refer doesn't extrapolate to the watches in the James Bond films, nor the demographic at which they are aimed (think "van der Waals force").

True, watches at mere devices of convenience to tell the time are declining in sales. That said, of course, there will always be a place for them, that place being where cell phones cannot or should not go (eg, swimming, court rooms).

Arguably, Bond hasn't been in the watch-accuracy corner since GoldenEye, the last time he wore a quartz. Every time piece since then has been only a fraction as precise. Therefore he, as other Omega owners, must be wearing it for another reason.

There are many. The one most cited is that a watch is "permission jewelry" for a man (gold chains and ID bracelets having, thankfully, gone out of fashion). It's also a sign of success, which is certainly a "prop" we'd expect of a man working high stakes games of chance, in and out of the casino. Beyond this, its an easy housing for Q gadgets, not where one would first think to look. I've also argued that it can serve as something readily convertable to cash in the field, in emergencies.

The style of watches may "date" the films we are watching today (as does, say, the Hamilton from Live and Let Die). But not the fact that he's wearing a watch at all.

I hope they don't ditch the watches. I've never really cared about Bond's watches (other than the occasional gadget-factor), because he doesn't wear the styles I like, but I like the fact that he wears one. I never did understand checking the time on your cell phone. You can A: fumble in your pocket or unsnap a case to get to your phone, or B: look down at your wrist. Granted, looking at your phone is not a complicated operation, but wrist watches are so easy you can't do it any better. There's a reason they're more popular than pocket watches.

Yup.

Now the thing is, a cell phone isn't exactly a pocket watch; rather, it is a device that provides other value that also happens to tell the time. So not as likely to be de-preferred as those great devices that kept the railroads running on time.

But following your leader, I'd like to suggest some other "why nots" here.

1. A wristwatch is far superior to a cell phone on longer away-from-home trips: The cell phone effectively dies after a couple of days if not charged.

2. A wristwatch provides more social grace: You can check the time w/out calling attention to yourself, sending a message (intended or not) to another person that they are boring you and you wanna get outta here!

3. Still waiting for someone to have the guts to allow James Bond to use his watch as a knuckle-duster, as Ian Fleming described in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. (Maybe one of the Omega watches on a bracelet in Quantum of Solace could deliver on that for us, please?)

I don't think that Bond will ditch his wristwatch. Afterall, a man wears a watch not only for practical reasons(telling the time), but also for his appearance. I support the opinion that a nice watch gives you status. A man who wants to be dressed smartly has to own the appropriate watch. You can't wear a tux and search your cell phone to tell the time if needed. Imagine Bond gambling in a casino without a Rolex or an Omega. It's like England without queen Elizabeth!!!

Ironically, it's actually not appropriate to wear a wristwatch w/ a tuxedo.

However, I'll take my horological cues from James Bond!

PS: Notice that I just made "Lieutenant" rank on CBn w/ this Post.

This post has been edited by Dell Deaton: 29 April 2008 - 17:49

I congratulate you on your promotion, Lieutenant. I've got a bit of slogging ahead of me before I reach the vaunted number.

I knew I could count on you Dell, for a well-informed response. I suppose it's true that the Omega on Bond's wrist will appeal to a different demographic. As you say, luxury watches are increasingly becoming more so as the years go on. As digital, mass-market watches drop in sales, and more people go without, the only viewers who would value what Bond wears are the people who want the status a luxury watch affords - not necessarily a watch to just tell the time.

And Bond is exactly the kind of person who would value that image of success and wealth. Actually, in his circles, it is a necessity, isn't it?

Perhaps, when a mobile (a.k.a. "cellphone") is as robust as a diver's watch, as waterproof as a diver's watch, and can be used as an improvised weapon, whilst still be elegant and masculine all at the same time, then it might possibly supplant Bond's watch; however, as I see that as an impossibly tall order, I think never is about the right time frame.

That being said, I still hope for something along the lines of the Suunto Mosquito (dive computer) in a nice dressy titanium chassis... not quite the same thing; but I think closer to what EON flirted with back in Goldeneye (quartz) than a mobile.

I am certain that most of
the 20something crowd that uses a. Cell for a watch will be wearing a wristwatch by the time they reach 35-40.

I certainly do hope so. I love watches and hate the fact that they seem to be more like jewelery now than a functional item required for day to day use.

As soon as I started reading this thread, I remembered a small article that appeared in Esquire that made (essentially) the same argument, which I couldn't agree more with. The point being made was that at the end of the day, whether you have a vintage Patek Philipe or a Timex on your wrist, it's simply a gentlemanly (Christ, is that a word?) thing to confidently answer someone's inquiry about the time without looking around for a nearby clock or fishing around for your mobile.


Yeah, me too. I've been wearing a wristwatch since I was 9, and it was always simply because of the fact that if I wanted to know the time, I could. It's indeed a bit of a shame that the kids today are more interested in how much bling can be crammed onto an already huge watch, as opposed to functionality. I sort of feel bad that I'm a part of that generation, who also rely on their mobile phones for everything, including the time (although I am the sort of person who insists on physically speaking with someone as opposed to texting them, and checking my watch for the time instead of rummaging around for my phone; that argument is for another time, though).

Regardless, I don't think the watches will ever be phased out of the Bond films, or in the real world. while his cars or methods may evolve over time, his watch is one of those things in a Bond film that will remain, well, timeless (ugh, forgive me for that).

Perhaps a way to look at this is to characterize James Bond watches as "classy" as opposed to "dandy." For the most part, dating back to the Ian Fleming novels, 007 has worn watches that indeed did stand out as more elegant than every day. Think about Live and Let Die, and he wore a watch that told the time, but was additionally solid enough for diving. And through On Her Majesty's Secret Service, a heavy piece, doubling as a weapon (along w/ his shaving razor).

I can see the occasional chronograph, and even something in gold (as, indeed, we have). And I'm sure we'll all forgive the mis-step or two we've seen in the films a'la fad and short-lived trend.

But taken as a whole, the descriptions and selections have been timeless. That's why they'll surely endure. Indeed, they are an indispensible part of who he is, defining the James Bond character.