/fa/ - Fashion

The Casio AE1200 is not a “Bond Watch”. It has not appeared in any of the films.
Furthermore the nickname “Royale” is misleading. It hasn't been referenced in the Casino Royale novel, nor shown in the two Casino Royale films.
Now let's talk about the Seiko G757.
Bond wore a digital watch in Octopussy. Octopussy was released in 1983, which is 29 years before the AE1200 seems to have been released, so it is impossible for the AE1200 to have been in Octopussy.
The digital watch worn by Bond in Octopussy was made by Seiko. The Seiko Group and Casio Computer Co., Ltd. are different companies, and Casio does not own Seiko. In other words, the digital watch worn by Bond in Octopussy was not a Casio, and therefore could not possibly have been the Casio AE1200.
I have heard arguments that the Casio AE1200 (not worn by Bond in any movie) and Seiko G757 (worn by Bond in Octopussy) are so similar that the Casio AE1200 should be considered a Bond watch. This is a weak argument that does not stand up to minimal scrutiny. For the sake of argument, let's accept that watches not worn by Bond can be considered to be Bond watches if they match real Bond watches in specific areas. Let's compare the Casio AE1200 and the Seiko G757 to establish those areas:
Display Type (digital)
Hands (hour, minute, second)
Number of buttons (4)
Dial shape (octagonal)
Country of Origin (Japan)
Now if you believe that the Casio AE1200 is a “Bond watch” because it matches a real bond watch in the above categories, then you would also believe that any watch matching other real Bond watches (let's use an Omega Seamaster 300 for example) in those categories would also be a “Bond Watch”
* Display Type (analog)
* Hands (hour, minute, second)
* Number of buttons (0)
* Dial shape (circle)
* Country of Origin (Switzerland)
This would include so many watches so as to render the concept of a “Bond watch” meaningless.