Comments:
I remember it well. I was 10 when I first watched a James Bond movie. It was in 1984 and Roger Moore was the current Bond. But the first Bond I watched was an early Bond with a man called Sean Connery. It was Thunderball. I still think today it is the best Bond movie that was ever made. By far. After that I asked my friend which other movies Mr. Connery played in. I was only interested in watching those. Dr No. From Russia with Love. Goldfinger. Those four* movies would move me in a way that no other future film would do. Well what does a DB4 have to do with JB? And what is the link with the 6536-1? Yes it is a so called 'James Bond' Rolex. No crown guard. But it is not a big crown most often associated with Bond (the 6538 & 5510). This a teaser. The full post I am still working on and it will be posted shortly.
*Connery also played many years later in another Bond called Diamonds are Forever.
6536-1 & DB4: A Bond Link?
I remember it well. I was 10 when I first watched a James Bond movie. It was in 1984 and Roger Moore was the current Bond. But the first Bond I watched was an early Bond with a man called Sean Connery. It was Thunderball. I still think today it is the best Bond movie that was ever made. By far. After that I asked my friend which other movies Mr. Connery played in. I was only interested in watching those. Dr No. From Russia with Love. Goldfinger. Those four* movies would move me in a way that no other future film would do. Well what does a DB4 have to do with JB? And what is the link with the 6536-1? Yes it is a so called 'James Bond' Rolex. No crown guard. But it is not a big crown most often associated with Bond (the 6538 & 5510). This a teaser. The full post I am still working on and it will be posted shortly.
Have a great weekend. And enjoy the upcoming auctions in Geneva. Should be interesting.
Best Edmond
*Connery also played many years later in another Bond called Diamonds are Forever.
There is only one James Bond no crownguard Sub: The 6538.
But there are many superb no crownguard Subs, small or big crown, being in the Rolex or the Tudor Collection.
Best,
Nicolas
Not sure about that
No one can really 100% confirm that Nicolas. There is much debate wether it was the 6538 or the 5510.
No one is 100% sure about this, we can only speculate that it might have been a 6538.
Provide us with the evidence and I will let this issue rest
Best Edmond
lume plot @ 6 oclock?
People say the 5510 lume plot at six oclock would have been lighter. This is NOT the case with the 6538.
Is this the evidence you are referring to?
Is this the evidence you are referring to?
Don't believe what everybody is saying.
Have a lok at several 5510s, with a correct dial...
You will see.
Best,
Nicolas
My view…..
JB is a BC….period.
Its a bit like the 911 vas Boxter argument really. You only get a Boxter for one reason. Don't get me wrong….the 6536 and 5508 are wonderful watches, but giving them extra mystique via 007 doesn't work for me.
BC
And... There are few chances that James had a 5510.
Which was in production for what? Only one year?
Another hint in favor of the 6538, the insert... Which is too early, AFAIK, for a 5510.
Best,
Nicolas This message has been edited by amanico on 2013-11-09 01:37:49
no this insert ...
with no intermediate minute markers is too old even for 6538 ( maybe besides the very first ones from 1954-5), while on the contrary it's the pristine one for 6200-6204-6205.
That was something I was not sure of, Marcello.
Thanks for bringing this precision in the discussion.
so, how do you explain this mystery?
Best,
Nicolas
not easy ...
in my opinion the watch could be a 5510 due to the lenght of minute markers lines ( that in 5510 are longer than those in 6538 ).
fonts in the upper part of both models are the very same : in the 2 lower lines there are so much different combos , either in spacing and in the printings ( all gold , all silver , mixed ... ) that from such a pic it's impossible to spot anything.
so the only thing is to check the lenght of minute markers lines.
fonts in the upper part of both models are the very same : in the 2 lower lines there are so much different combos , either in spacing and in the printings ( all gold , all silver , mixed ... ) that from such a pic it's impossible to spot anything.
so the only thing is to check the lenght of minute markers lines.
Interesting
I learn everyday from this Forum. I think we will never truly find out what reference it was.
I would have loved to ask 'Cubby' Broccoli who according to good sources lent his watch
to Connery for the first film. But sadly Mr Broccoli is no longer here.
Possibility
I actually have met one of this relatives a few months ago.
It was the son of Michael Wilson the current producer (along with Barbara Broccoli)
of the James Bond Film series. I will write him an Email next week.
Our chances are very slim that they know but - as my mother would say- 'you have nothing to lose
by asking'.
Best Edmond
Nice play on words
I enjoyed that Marcello.
By the way- and just for your information (remember I am a real Bond fanatic)
'Never say never' was not a real James Bond Film. Eon productions did not give their official ok to the film
and Sean Connery made the film agains the wishes of the official James Bond producers.
I also personally do not regard this as a James Bond Film even though the film was not that bad.
Mr Brandauer played brilliantly but Sean Connery has aged by the time he played that Bond film.
In some parts he looked like a grandfather Bond.
Best Edmond
Strong views
You are starting to think like me. And have strong views on things. That is good. You might understand
now why we disagree on the SD vs submariner issue.
I also associated JB with only BC. But the literature- well the literature is forcing to rethink my position.
I have a very good Rolex library at home. And in most books, they categorise SC as also JB watches.
The same goes to the Forums and blogs. They seem to term any non-crown guard sub a JB watch.
Now I understand why some experts terms a SC a JB watch. It is not only convenient terminology
but also a good strategic marketing move. Auctions houses, sellers, authors of watch books, they all
benefit from this....
Best Edmond
…..
"You are starting to think like me. And have strong views on things. That is good. You might understand
now why we disagree on the SD vs submariner issue."
Edmond…i am not sure who you meant this for. If it was me, then i think you are under a misapprehension. I don't have a debate with you on the SD vrs Sub issue. There is no discussion really. For 10 years, right from the first issue, the SD carried the Submariner on its dial. I am not trying to argue with you because there is no point in a discussion on this. This is how SD started….if i was you i would check out the Mondani Submariner Story book which will help you here.
Also, when you say that I am starting to think like you and that is good…….well, I am left wondering what to respond to that. Quite a spectacular perspective…….
....?
'Also, when you say that I am starting to think like you and that is good…….well, I am left wondering what to respond to that. Quite a spectacular perspective…….'
This message has been edited by Le Monde Edmond on 2013-11-09 08:36:41
Baron please read my text carefully. I never said the above statement. I said only its good you have strong views on things. Not that it is a good thing to think like me. Those are quite two different statements. Re-read my post and you will see that you took my text out of context. As to the Sub vs SD debate. The facts and history are on your side. That is clear. I was being provocative. So your right no need to have a discussion with me. But I stand by my personal view. I treat the two (SD & Submariners) as completely different.
Best Edmond
me loves valves so much ....
LLOOLLLL ....
please forgive this terrific joke .. after all I'm not native English ...
altough some UK friends say that I'm Brit at heart !
please forgive this terrific joke .. after all I'm not native English ...
altough some UK friends say that I'm Brit at heart !
Lost
Marcello - you lost me on this joke (which I am bad at understanding to begin with).
Must be your Italien / British humour which a German /American / Lebanese has difficulty understanding
"I was 10 when I first watched a James Bond movie"
Just started to look (the old ones) with my son (9) and so far we saw the first three ... 
Best,
Oliver
Best,
Oliver
Enjoy
The next one is Thunderball. Perhaps the best Bond ever made. These four are the best Bonds ever.
After Thunderball Sean Connery got annoyed at playing Bond. It was never to be the same anymore.
Enjoy time with your son watching those movies. I am looking forward to do that too one day
very cool
Thank you for that picture. It will make even more confusing our theories of what Mr Connery really wore on
the various James Bond films. I recently saw Ursula Andress and I asked her how Sean Connery was to act with.
She only smiled at me and said nothing. That told me everything.
James Bond
I'm looking forward to reading your post.
The non crown guards Subs are indeed referred to as "James Bond", probably from the time people had not really identified the 6538 in the movies. That was before full HD ;-)
They are all very desirable watches, in both Rolex & Tudor variations
Tudor
I have yet to appreciate and understand the Tudor line.
Something I will have to do soon to fully understand the whole picture.
Everytime I see Nicolas' big crown Tudor-makes me realise there is more out there than just
'Rolex'....
Edmond
James Bong GTG...
Hi there,
here is a picture of a little James Bond Rolex GTG we had some time ago in Paris,
6536/6538/5510/5508
Matt
here is a picture of a little James Bond Rolex GTG we had some time ago in Paris,
6536/6538/5510/5508
Matt