Mysterywatches in Thunderball

0073 · May 2016

Hi,

Watched Thunderball again after awhile, and I noticed a couple of new watches, and one of them on James "Connery" Bond, no less!!! Yes I know, this is getting a little old this "discovery" of new Bond watches, but my Gugl-Fu proved powerless on this matter, so I ask You.

Watch no.1: In the scene where Largo kills Mr. Angelo in the plane under water, Mr. Angelo has a white faced watch with a steel bracelet. We all remember the watch Mr. Angelo should have in this scene, Breitling Navitimer of the late Mr. Derval. Black face with a black leather strap.

Watch no.2: Now this is going to feel a little repetitive, but: white face and steel bracelet. In the scene where Bond is watching Palmyra through binoculars from a helo, he has a "not Submariner" on his wrist, time stamp for the scene is about 1h.07min.

Now, there you go you watch sleuths and other collectors, go on and ID!

Please?

0073 · May 2016

So, 191 views and no replies, does this mean that no one knows?

thespyboys11 · May 2016

Oh no, all 191 of us know...we're just not telling..............

)
Seriously, I ,personally, never noticed. Good eye on your part.
Hopefully, the watch "gurus" will chime in and let us know.
-Ed

0073 · May 2016

DOH!!! I knew it!!!!!

)

Donald Grant · May 2016

While I can't ID the watch, I can tell you that in the underwater death scene the watch on the wrist of Mr. Angelo is the stunt doubles watch. If memory serves, it is Big John McLaughlin who doubled Mr. Angelo in at least part of that scene. He was also the underwater double for Adolfo Celi (Largo) and a whole host of other underwater SPECTRE baddies. To me the watch has no real significance because it was simply a continuity error. Same goes for the other watch in the other scene you mentioned.

I know certain so called watch experts think these continuity errors are a big deal, but I don't. To each his own I guess.

DG

0073 · May 2016

Donald Grant wrote:

I know certain so called watch experts think these continuity errors are a big deal, but I don't. To each his own I guess.

DG

Dear Sir!

While I did not mean to rip open any old wounds, your answer is still appreciated. Yes I know it is a continuity error, same way as the FN1910 is a continuity error in the scene where Professor Dent buys it in DrNo, it does not make it any less interesting. Big deal - no, interesting - yes! The same as that FN1910.

So anybody else wanting to chime in?

Higgins · May 2016

I'll check the next time that I am seeing TB.

But as DG said, it's a continuitiy error and it's not important to me just to research it right away - am pretty busy.

0073, in your opinion, which was can be seen in the Heli scene on Connery's wrist?

Higgins · May 2016

Edit: Just checked the Heli scene.

The watch is difficult to be seen.
At the beginning, I have the impression that he's wearing a watch on a black strap, at the end you can see a glimse of a metal bracelet.

It could be an Oyster bracelet, so, I'd not cross a Rolex out. But you can see only the reflection of the bracelet in a glimpse, I can't see a particular watch there.

0073 · May 2016

Higgins wrote:

0073, in your opinion, which was can be seen in the Heli scene on Connery's wrist?

"A nod is as good as a wink to a blind bat", which is to say I have no idea, that's why I'm asking. My knowledge in watches is purely from a user viewpoint and my modest collection is more of a vintage- than Bond collection.

I do however have an interest in watches in general, and as I noticed this C/E in TB, my curiosity was piqued!

Donald Grant · May 2016

0073 wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

I know certain so called watch experts think these continuity errors are a big deal, but I don't. To each his own I guess.

DG

Dear Sir!

While I did not mean to rip open any old wounds, your answer is still appreciated. Yes I know it is a continuity error, same way as the FN1910 is a continuity error in the scene where Professor Dent buys it in DrNo, it does not make it any less interesting. Big deal - no, interesting - yes! The same as that FN1910.

So anybody else wanting to chime in?

Not quite the same thing. Apples and oranges really. Bond's gun in that scene with Dent is focused on. Bond actually looks at the gun and rolls his wrist sizing up the weapon. In the scenes you mentioned, the alternate watch is not the focus of the scene.

The fact that the AJB membership did not respond to your question in any meaningful way also suggests that it is of very little interest or import to most people here.

I have given you, however, a place to begin your search for the answers you seek. What did Big John McGlaughlin and other doubles wear during that time frame?

Other than that, you'll probably get more traction with that cold and lonely fellow who has a "Bond watch axe to grind".

DG

Gadget Meister · May 2016

DG - You must mean Dell Deaton's best mate, Higgy Babe

)

Matt S · May 2016

0073 wrote:

Higgins wrote:

0073, in your opinion, which was can be seen in the Heli scene on Connery's wrist?

"A nod is as good as a wink to a blind bat", which is to say I have no idea, that's why I'm asking. My knowledge in watches is purely from a user viewpoint and my modest collection is more of a vintage- than Bond collection.

I do however have an interest in watches in general, and as I noticed this C/E in TB, my curiosity was piqued!

You'll have to find another forum if you want to discuss Connery's watches other than the Rolex Submariners or the Breitling. I learned the hard way that they are not allowed to be mentioned here.

Higgins · May 2016

Matt S wrote:

You'll have to find another forum if you want to discuss Connery's watches other than the Rolex Submariners or the Breitling. I learned the hard way that they are not allowed to be mentioned here.

Sorry Matt, that's absolutely nonsense and you should be better than that.

Nohing is correct in that statement above.

Matt S · May 2016

Higgins wrote:

Matt S wrote:

You'll have to find another forum if you want to discuss Connery's watches other than the Rolex Submariners or the Breitling. I learned the hard way that they are not allowed to be mentioned here.

Sorry Matt, that's absolutely nonsense and you should be better than that.

Nohing is correct in that statement above.

I once mentioned Connery's dress watch here and got a very rude reception that I was not at all expecting. I was accused of conspiring with someone supposedly more evil than Blofeld. It was like there was an unwritten rule to never bring that up here. DG's response above is implying that this watch discussion has no place here (which I politely disagree with).

Miles Messervy · May 2016

Whoever Dell Deaton is/was (before my time here), he certainly got the last laugh in whatever feud he was involved. I only know this because hardly a week goes by when his name Is not invoked.

Higgins · May 2016

Matt,

I think that you are a bit oversensitive.
I remotely remember that incident. The problem was, that you where referring to Dell Deaton who is not very welcome to many people here and Dell is the one who blew this Connery dresswatch story out of proportion because he thought that he "discovered it" and rode the horse for years - just for his own good - he thought. In reality he just made more of a fool out of himself than he was before.

Imo this watch is similarly insignificant like the TB watches that we are speaking about now but noone will forbid any discussion about them here.

But you may be faced with some strong opinions regarding Dell, who went as low as creating a webpage ( Which I've gotten closed) with the sole purpose to throw mud on DG, Asp9mm and myself.

To make things worse, people got problems in their real lifes and jobs just because he was following them and reported them whenever he could.

So you may understand a bit better, why he's not very popular with certain members here.

But this does not have anything to do with watches or the discussion of it.

{[] {[]

Matt S · May 2016

Higgins wrote:

Matt,

I think that you are a bit oversensitive.
I remotely remember that incident. The problem was, that you where referring to Dell Deaton who is not very welcome to many people here and Dell is the one who blew this Connery dresswatch story out of proportion because he thought that he "discovered it" and rode the horse for years - just for his own good - he thought. In reality he just made more of a fool out of himself than he was before.

Imo this watch is similarly insignificant like the TB watches that we are speaking about now but noone will forbid any discussion about them here.

But you may be faced with some strong opinions regarding Dell, who went as low as creating a webpage ( Which I've gotten closed) with the sole purpose to throw mud on DG, Asp9mm and myself.

To make things worse, people got problems in their real lifes and jobs just because he was following them and reported them whenever he could.

So you may understand a bit better, why he's not very popular with certain members here.

But this does not have anything to do with watches or the discussion of it.

{[] {[]

Thank you for explaining more about him, and now I can understand people's feelings toward him. But it's a shame that he must always be mentioned here when people bring up the watches he didn't even discover. He's clearly getting too much credit by being mentioned again and it doesn't need to be about him anymore. And it's not fair to 0073 to get the kind of response that nobody cares about the watch he mentioned.

Donald Grant · May 2016

Matt S wrote:

Higgins wrote:

Matt,

I think that you are a bit oversensitive.
I remotely remember that incident. The problem was, that you where referring to Dell Deaton who is not very welcome to many people here and Dell is the one who blew this Connery dresswatch story out of proportion because he thought that he "discovered it" and rode the horse for years - just for his own good - he thought. In reality he just made more of a fool out of himself than he was before.

Imo this watch is similarly insignificant like the TB watches that we are speaking about now but noone will forbid any discussion about them here.

But you may be faced with some strong opinions regarding Dell, who went as low as creating a webpage ( Which I've gotten closed) with the sole purpose to throw mud on DG, Asp9mm and myself.

To make things worse, people got problems in their real lifes and jobs just because he was following them and reported them whenever he could.

So you may understand a bit better, why he's not very popular with certain members here.

But this does not have anything to do with watches or the discussion of it.

{[] {[]

Thank you for explaining more about him, and now I can understand people's feelings toward him. But it's a shame that he must always be mentioned here when people bring up the watches he didn't even discover. He's clearly getting too much credit by being mentioned again and it doesn't need to be about him anymore. And it's not fair to 0073 to get the kind of response that nobody cares about the watch he mentioned.

It is fair. Nobody does care because nobody responded. If I remember correctly Matt you kept saying over and over that Connery wore a Gruen besides the Submariner and I called you on it. Your source was the very same guy who called it a gold Rolex Precision for years. Now it's a Gruen with no proof whatsoever. It sucks that you got roped in by that guy, but I had to call you on it. I don't think you're a bad guy because of it. I happen to think you're a great asset to AJB. But the whole Connery alternate gold watch thing is a load of bollox.

The whole reason the gold watch became a Rolex Precision was so that the so called Bond watch expert could have an alternate story as to the Rolex that Cubby gave the production of Dr. No. In that scenario it was a gold Rolex dress watch that Cubby gave the production and he "discovered" it. Since that didn't get much traction, now it's a Gruen. Prove it!

DG

Miles Messervy · May 2016

I just watched the scene. Nice catch. As Higgins has noted, It could definitely be an oyster bracelet. I am not intimately familiar with Rolex's mid-60s pieces, but I feel like it's a possibility. Sadly, I doubt we will ever know for certain. Like the much-maligned "gold watch," this one is probably lost to history.

Matt S · May 2016

Donald Grant wrote:

Matt S wrote:

Higgins wrote:

Matt,

I think that you are a bit oversensitive.
I remotely remember that incident. The problem was, that you where referring to Dell Deaton who is not very welcome to many people here and Dell is the one who blew this Connery dresswatch story out of proportion because he thought that he "discovered it" and rode the horse for years - just for his own good - he thought. In reality he just made more of a fool out of himself than he was before.

Imo this watch is similarly insignificant like the TB watches that we are speaking about now but noone will forbid any discussion about them here.

But you may be faced with some strong opinions regarding Dell, who went as low as creating a webpage ( Which I've gotten closed) with the sole purpose to throw mud on DG, Asp9mm and myself.

To make things worse, people got problems in their real lifes and jobs just because he was following them and reported them whenever he could.

So you may understand a bit better, why he's not very popular with certain members here.

But this does not have anything to do with watches or the discussion of it.

{[] {[]

Thank you for explaining more about him, and now I can understand people's feelings toward him. But it's a shame that he must always be mentioned here when people bring up the watches he didn't even discover. He's clearly getting too much credit by being mentioned again and it doesn't need to be about him anymore. And it's not fair to 0073 to get the kind of response that nobody cares about the watch he mentioned.

It is fair. Nobody does care because nobody responded. If I remember correctly Matt you kept saying over and over that Connery wore a Gruen besides the Submariner and I called you on it. Your source was the very same guy who called it a gold Rolex Precision for years. Now it's a Gruen with no proof whatsoever. It sucks that you got roped in by that guy, but I had to call you on it. I don't think you're a bad guy because of it. I happen to think you're a great asset to AJB. But the whole Connery alternate gold watch thing is a load of bollox.

The whole reason the gold watch became a Rolex Precision was so that the so called Bond watch expert could have an alternate story as to the Rolex that Cubby gave the production of Dr. No. In that scenario it was a gold Rolex dress watch that Cubby gave the production and he "discovered" it. Since that didn't get much traction, now it's a Gruen. Prove it!

DG

I didn't respond at first because I had nothing to contribute. And most people probably had nothing to contribute. But it doesn't mean nobody cares. 0073 cares, and he counts for something.

I appreciate that you pointed out to me that the dress watch I long wondered about was never positively identified. Most people don't notice it just like they don't notice that Connery's three-piece suit in Goldfinger is a glen check and not sharkskin. It's not something that stands out. I was only calling it a "Gruen" because that was the only thing I could find about it, and now I know it is simply just a guess by someone. That watch means nothing to you, and I understand your reasons for that. But the recurrence of a dress watch throughout most of Connery's films has significance to me, and that significance is where our opinions differ. I hope you can accept that. I can not prove what kind of watch it is and it's unlikely that anyone ever will. And what brand of watch it is will never have any significance. But I will always acknowledge that Connery often wore a dress watch, and I hope you're okay with that.

Donald Grant · May 2016

Matt S wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

Matt S wrote:

Thank you for explaining more about him, and now I can understand people's feelings toward him. But it's a shame that he must always be mentioned here when people bring up the watches he didn't even discover. He's clearly getting too much credit by being mentioned again and it doesn't need to be about him anymore. And it's not fair to 0073 to get the kind of response that nobody cares about the watch he mentioned.

It is fair. Nobody does care because nobody responded. If I remember correctly Matt you kept saying over and over that Connery wore a Gruen besides the Submariner and I called you on it. Your source was the very same guy who called it a gold Rolex Precision for years. Now it's a Gruen with no proof whatsoever. It sucks that you got roped in by that guy, but I had to call you on it. I don't think you're a bad guy because of it. I happen to think you're a great asset to AJB. But the whole Connery alternate gold watch thing is a load of bollox.

The whole reason the gold watch became a Rolex Precision was so that the so called Bond watch expert could have an alternate story as to the Rolex that Cubby gave the production of Dr. No. In that scenario it was a gold Rolex dress watch that Cubby gave the production and he "discovered" it. Since that didn't get much traction, now it's a Gruen. Prove it!

DG

I didn't respond at first because I had nothing to contribute. And most people probably had nothing to contribute. But it doesn't mean nobody cares. 0073 cares, and he counts for something.

I appreciate that you pointed out to me that the dress watch I long wondered about was never positively identified. Most people don't notice it just like they don't notice that Connery's three-piece suit in Goldfinger is a glen check and not sharkskin. It's not something that stands out. I was only calling it a "Gruen" because that was the only thing I could find about it, and now I know it is simply just a guess by someone. That watch means nothing to you, and I understand your reasons for that. But the recurrence of a dress watch throughout most of Connery's films has significance to me, and that significance is where our opinions differ. I hope you can accept that. I can not prove what kind of watch it is and it's unlikely that anyone ever will. And what brand of watch it is will never have any significance. But I will always acknowledge that Connery often wore a dress watch, and I hope you're okay with that.

Sure Matt, no problem. You can acknowledge the fact that Connery wore a dress watch as James Bond. Hell, we all can after watching it thousands of times!

The problem, or rather the question is why did he wear it? For you it is because you believe it was for sartorial reasons. To me that is a load of crap and the real reason the gold watch is worn is because it was most likely Connery's personal watch. The Submariner only being used when it was meant to be shown in close up or as a point of focus to identify Bond with a certain brand. If I'm wrong, why don't they ever show the gold watch in close-up? Why can't it be identified? See what I'm saying here? We know Connery wore a big crown Rolex Submariner, we know Connery wore a Breitling Top Time and we know after thousands of viewings that Connery wore a ????? gold colored watch.

DG

Matt S · May 2016

Donald Grant wrote:

Sure Matt, no problem. You can acknowledge the fact that Connery wore a dress watch as James Bond. Hell, we all can after watching it thousands of times!

The problem, or rather the question is why did he wear it? For you it is because you believe it was for sartorial reasons. To me that is a load of crap and the real reason the gold watch is worn is because it was most likely Connery's personal watch. The Submariner only being used when it was meant to be shown in close up or as a point of focus to identify Bond with a certain brand. If I'm wrong, why don't they ever show the gold watch in close-up? Why can't it be identified? See what I'm saying here? We know Connery wore a big crown Rolex Submariner, we know Connery wore a Breitling Top Time and we know after thousands of viewings that Connery wore a ????? gold colored watch.

DG

Are there photos of Connery wearing the dress watch in his personal life? That would give some weight to your theory. I don't think Connery would wear this watch so often as Bond if Bond wasn't meant to wear it. We've been through all this before and we will have to agree to disagree. I don't feel that we need to be calling each others' ideas loads of crap. Neither one of us has proven the intentions of this watch either way.

Donald Grant · May 2016

Matt S wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

Sure Matt, no problem. You can acknowledge the fact that Connery wore a dress watch as James Bond. Hell, we all can after watching it thousands of times!

The problem, or rather the question is why did he wear it? For you it is because you believe it was for sartorial reasons. To me that is a load of crap and the real reason the gold watch is worn is because it was most likely Connery's personal watch. The Submariner only being used when it was meant to be shown in close up or as a point of focus to identify Bond with a certain brand. If I'm wrong, why don't they ever show the gold watch in close-up? Why can't it be identified? See what I'm saying here? We know Connery wore a big crown Rolex Submariner, we know Connery wore a Breitling Top Time and we know after thousands of viewings that Connery wore a ????? gold colored watch.

DG

Are there photos of Connery wearing the dress watch in his personal life? That would give some weight to your theory. I don't think Connery would wear this watch so often as Bond if Bond wasn't meant to wear it. We've been through all this before and we will have to agree to disagree. I don't feel that we need to be calling each others' ideas loads of crap. Neither one of us has proven the intentions of this watch either way.

Yes, we have been through this before. I won't mince words with you either. Your theory is a load of crap! Which is the same theory that the so called watch expert proffered before you. Show me what brand the gold watch is, which would lend weight to your theory. I'm not trying to prove it is Connery's watch. I really don't care. You are, on the other hand, trying to prove why Connery wore the gold watch. Prove why!

DG

Matt S · May 2016

Donald Grant wrote:

Matt S wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

Sure Matt, no problem. You can acknowledge the fact that Connery wore a dress watch as James Bond. Hell, we all can after watching it thousands of times!

The problem, or rather the question is why did he wear it? For you it is because you believe it was for sartorial reasons. To me that is a load of crap and the real reason the gold watch is worn is because it was most likely Connery's personal watch. The Submariner only being used when it was meant to be shown in close up or as a point of focus to identify Bond with a certain brand. If I'm wrong, why don't they ever show the gold watch in close-up? Why can't it be identified? See what I'm saying here? We know Connery wore a big crown Rolex Submariner, we know Connery wore a Breitling Top Time and we know after thousands of viewings that Connery wore a ????? gold colored watch.

DG

Are there photos of Connery wearing the dress watch in his personal life? That would give some weight to your theory. I don't think Connery would wear this watch so often as Bond if Bond wasn't meant to wear it. We've been through all this before and we will have to agree to disagree. I don't feel that we need to be calling each others' ideas loads of crap. Neither one of us has proven the intentions of this watch either way.

Yes, we have been through this before. I won't mince words with you either. Your theory is a load of crap! Which is the same theory that the so called watch expert proffered before you. Show me what brand the gold watch is, which would lend weight to your theory. I'm not trying to prove it is Connery's watch. I really don't care. You are, on the other hand, trying to prove why Connery wore the gold watch. Prove why!

DG

I've said all I'm going to say on this. I don't understand why you have such an attitude towards this. I have never attempted to discredit you.

0073 · May 2016

Matt S wrote:

You'll have to find another forum if you want to discuss Connery's watches other than the Rolex Submariners or the Breitling. I learned the hard way that they are not allowed to be mentioned here.

Yes, it very much appears to be the case. Oh well, see no evils, hear no evil.... Sad really, I did not realise that there were no-go areas in the discussion, not based on the rules of the forum, but based on some peoples private heart aches.

Anyways, I now stand corrected and see the error of my ways.

|) This thread should be closed for creating animosity amongst contributing membership.

Donald Grant · May 2016

0073 wrote:

Matt S wrote:

You'll have to find another forum if you want to discuss Connery's watches other than the Rolex Submariners or the Breitling. I learned the hard way that they are not allowed to be mentioned here.

Yes, it very much appears to be the case. Oh well, see no evils, hear no evil.... Sad really, I did not realise that there were no-go areas in the discussion, not based on the rules of the forum, but based on some peoples private heart aches.

Anyways, I now stand corrected and see the error of my ways. |) This thread should be closed for creating animosity amongst contributing membership.

Nonsense! No one was interested in this thread. When I weighed in, Matt saw it as an opportunity to dredge up an old argument where he perceived he was slighted. You want to talk about the other watches in Thunderball, have at it.

DG

Thunderpussy · May 2016

I'm not a collector but have always found the watch section to be very Interesting.
Very informative -{

Miles Messervy · May 2016

Donald Grant wrote:

0073 wrote:

Matt S wrote:

You'll have to find another forum if you want to discuss Connery's watches other than the Rolex Submariners or the Breitling. I learned the hard way that they are not allowed to be mentioned here.

Yes, it very much appears to be the case. Oh well, see no evils, hear no evil.... Sad really, I did not realise that there were no-go areas in the discussion, not based on the rules of the forum, but based on some peoples private heart aches.

Anyways, I now stand corrected and see the error of my ways. |) This thread should be closed for creating animosity amongst contributing membership.

Nonsense! No one was interested in this thread.

DG

I was/am interested, and I'm sure others are as well. And you've posted quite a few times for someone who professes to have no interest in the topic.

Donald Grant · May 2016

Miles Messervy wrote:

Donald Grant wrote:

0073 wrote:

Yes, it very much appears to be the case. Oh well, see no evils, hear no evil.... Sad really, I did not realise that there were no-go areas in the discussion, not based on the rules of the forum, but based on some peoples private heart aches.

Anyways, I now stand corrected and see the error of my ways. |) This thread should be closed for creating animosity amongst contributing membership.

Nonsense! No one was interested in this thread.

DG

I was/am interested, and I'm sure others are as well. And you've posted quite a few times for someone who professes to have no interest in the topic.

A swing and a miss! Why don't you talk about the "Mysterywatches" in Thunderball? After all you are supposedly interested in that original topic, right?

DG

superado · May 2016

0073 wrote:

So, 191 views and no replies, does this mean that no one knows?

Vox populi. After the stirring of the pot with the 2nd post above demanding response, 1225 views and 28 responses later the people have spoken...you got your response!

) 8-) {[]

minigeff · May 2016

now pipe down everyone, ya'll tearing a strip off each other over the supposion of what watch you think you might or might not have seen connery wear.

there's no definitive way of finding out for sure, you've got too little info to go on.

Mysterywatches in Thunderball

Comments