A 30-million-baht James Bond film-location museum at Surakul Pier in Phang Nga has been left closed and deteriorating, with much of its external air-conditioning system stripped for parts.

Local residents in Krasom, Takua Thung district, are now asking authorities to remove the building, saying it is unused, obstructs views at the pier and no longer serves the tourism purpose for which it was built.

The 007 Thailand Film Location Exhibition, was developed by the Department of Tourism under the Ministry of Tourism and Sports. It was intended to showcase Thailand's connection to the James Bond film The Man with the Golden Gun, which had key scenes filmed in Phang Nga Bay.

Museum opened briefly before closing again

The Department of Tourism received permission in 2018 to use land at Surakul Pier from Krasom Municipality for the project, according to Wasant Wisarn, deputy mayor of Krasom Municipality.

Built with more than 30 million baht in state funding, the museum was designed as both a learning centre and visitor attraction. It displayed filming scenes, memorabilia, equipment and background material connected with James Bond 007.

However, it initially opened for just one day before closing. It reopened for about 10 months after the Covid-19 situation, taking slightly more than 9,000 baht in revenue, before shutting again and remaining closed to this day.

A site inspection found the exhibition building has been abandoned for a long period. Its exterior has deteriorated over time, while many items inside that were once part of the displays have decayed or been damaged.

Mr Wasant said people with bad intentions had dismantled the air-conditioning system outside the building and removed components, leaving little of the original system.

Pier remains a key point for bay visitors

The pier remains an important connection point for visitors travelling to attractions in Phang Nga Bay, but residents say the unused structure now detracts from its appearance. They want the site returned to a use that better supports tourism and the local community.

Mr Wasant said Krasom Municipality does not have sufficient funds to repair or manage the building. Responsibility for the project currently lies with the Phang Nga Provincial Treasury Office, meaning any decision on future use, renovation or demolition will require coordination between relevant agencies.

Residents have questioned the value of the more than 30-million-baht public investment after an attraction expected to draw visitors following a world-famous film was closed and allowed to decline for several years. They are urging officials to find a solution so that the site and money already spent are not wasted.

Pictures courtesy of SiamRath

Join the discussion?

8 September 2026

View full article

However, it initially opened for just one day before closing. It reopened for about 10 months after the Covid-19 situation, taking slightly more than 9,000 baht in revenue, before shutting again and remaining closed to this day.

Not the best plan Moneypenny but I'm sure some kerching!

It's time to let go of the old days. The movie is a classic, but too classic for the current generation. Figure out something new how to promote a rock.

At least some people benefited from the construction ... I guess 😉

3 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

Local residents in Krasom, Takua Thung district, are now asking authorities to remove the building, saying it is unused, obstructs views at the pier and no longer serves the tourism purpose for which it was built.

Not so sure about that.. I'm sure some pockets got filled

A classic example of the dangers of investing in a tourist-based economy - times change, tastes change, big investments rot away ...

However, it initially opened for just one day before closing.

See?

Not a White Elephant 🐘

When it first opened, I thought why...and why would tourists come...personally, I think the money was made, but by those in charge, including officials.

Excellent ROI. Who authorised it?

I have lived in this district and agree that it should be removed as it is a total eyesore and an embarrassment to the community. Many people assume corruption or cronyism is behind this fiasco, but in fact it is a textbook example of systemic bureaucratic incompetence and waste. What happened was there was a rush to find something to spend 30 million on before the end of a financial year but nobody made any budget provision for operating it, training staff, maintenance, etc. and the local authority had no expertise in marketing such a facility. These days it is nothing more than a monument to administrative ineptitude.

5 minutes ago, banyanman said:

I have lived in this district and agree that it should be removed as it is a total eyesore and an embarrassment to the community. Many people assume corruption or cronyism is behind this fiasco, but in fact it is a textbook example of systemic bureaucratic incompetence and waste. What happened was there was a rush to find something to spend 30 million on before the end of a financial year but nobody made any budget provision for operating it, training staff, maintenance, etc. and the local authority had no expertise in marketing such a facility. These days it is nothing more than a monument to administrative ineptitude.

This is a classic example of a Thai project...Build it, and then don't spend so much as one baht on maintenance....While making sure the construction money ends up in the right pockets.....

You've got to love that 9000 baht return on the 30 million....Which is a 0.03% return on investment...

No doubt it was a big tourist attraction in its early days making plenty

of money 🤑🥳

But as normal here it's let's make the money now forget the long term gains 😱

Surakul Pier: shaken, stirred… and unmistakably Phuyuck!

4 hours ago, redwood1 said:

This is a classic example of a Thai project...Build it, and then don't spend so much as one baht on maintenance....While making sure the construction money ends up in the right pockets.....

You've got to love that 9000 baht return on the 30 million....Which is a 0.03% return on investment...

And how much return per annum?

That 9k baht was the income generated over a multi year period.

Fortunately, running and maintenance costs were very low. Doesn’t sound like a single baht was spent on it.

On the bright side, some local residents scavenged some parts from air conditioning units, so there was a ripple effect throughout the local economy./s

3 hours ago, shackleton said:

No doubt it was a big tourist attraction in its early days making plenty

of money 🤑🥳

But as normal here it's let's make the money now forget the long term gains 😱

Big attraction in its early days making plenty of money? Where did you read that?

I read this:

“However, it initially opened for just one day before closing. It reopened for about 10 months after the Covid-19 situation, taking slightly more than 9,000 baht in revenue, before shutting again and remaining closed to this day.”