• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

Casino Royale - Straight Flush Edition

Well I started watching this the other day but was only able to watch about 15 minutes of it. What I did notice is that you were able to use the original version of the movie and not the edited version that we have to deal with in the US. Lucky bastard!

As for the edit, I'll have to continue it at a latter time but it worked well so far.
 
The UK version is cut too: it is just cut less. The French Deluxe Edition BD is uncut.
 
This edit got a solid 9/10 from me, now this can be seen as the standard for truly good spy movies. Congrats kerr!

Perhaps you can also try your hand on QoS? I know that Gaith´s coda included as special feature pretty much sums up Bond´s personal aspect, yet I think there is an entertaining adventure buried in there somewhere...
 
Thanks, havok! :)

I have been thinking about QoS, but I just don't think it's possible to fix it - it's too brutally edited to begin with, and I don't think trimming it even more would help. I suppose one could make some minor cuts - removing the opening car chase, for example - but I'm not really interested in doing something like that. What I'm really hoping for, though, is that they release a 3-disc set with deleted scenes like the one we got for CR, as I think QoS could really benefit from some scene extensions. If we're really lucky, it could even be possible to recut some of the action sequences using behind-the-scenes footage... But tht's probably just a pipe dream. For now, I'm quite happy with Gaith's "Fury and Solace".
 
Just watched it.
Technically, the edit is perfect. I could detect absolutely no cuts or audio miscues. Outstanding. 10/10
I have mixed feelings when it comes to the actual film. In many ways your cuts strengthen the film -cutting out Matthis commentary, the shortened sinking house fight, the long chase at the beginning (just eye candy), and the shorter Skyfleet sequence.
But other cuts like "one bombmaker" and "you've got your armour on" I thought weakened the movie. One bombmaker is the rationale why they don't just kill Le Chiffre, and why Bond is not yet Bond when he goes to kill him with the knife. The armour is important because it is the making of Bond. She stripped his armour, yet betrayed him - which is why his armour is forever on thereafter. He becomes cool, dispassionate, Bond. I'm not quite sure why, but I felt slightly unsure of Bond's development into Bond after Straight Flush edition. So the original will be the one that remains on my shelf, but as I think it was almost perfectly crafted, that's no disrespect to you Kerr!
Thanks for an entertaining 2 hours!

As for Fury and Solace... I watched QoS again the other night, and the more I watch it, the more I enjoy it. It is an enjoyable movie with some outstanding scenes (like in the hotel corridor with M, and the opening sequence with the "we have people everywhere") - and extends the emotional journey of Bond very well.
 
This edit doesn't show up in the James Bond franchise category on fe.org . :)
 
Gaith said:
This edit doesn't show up in the James Bond franchise category on fe.org . :)

Some of those categories links lead to pages from the old site and are not up to date, you're right.
 
I downloaded this some time back, and I enjoyed it overall except for the parkour chase scene being shortened. While it didn't further the plot, it was still one of the highlights of the film. The airport sequence worked better at your shortened length though.
 
I'm in agreement with you there. I'd recently watched this while working on my Quantum of Solace edit and though much of it was for the better I missed the parkour stuff. Is it a little bloated perhaps? Yeah, maybe, but it was quite fun and I never felt like it was one of the things that bogged down the movie in the least.
 
Waslah said:
I'm in agreement with you there. I'd recently watched this while working on my Quantum of Solace edit and though much of it was for the better I missed the parkour stuff. Is it a little bloated perhaps? Yeah, maybe, but it was quite fun and I never felt like it was one of the things that bogged down the movie in the least.
It depends of what your idea of James Bond is. If you favor the Moore/Brosnan school of big loud spectacular shows, the parkour sequence is fine. But if you like it more down to Earth, kind of early Connery, it is there just for the "hey look! this is COOL and BIG! go wow NOW!" factor.
 
DwightFry78 said:
It depends of what your idea of James Bond is. If you favor the Moore/Brosnan school of big loud spectacular shows, the parkour sequence is fine. But if you like it more down to Earth, kind of early Connery, it is there just for the "hey look! this is COOL and BIG! go wow NOW!" factor.

See and I am actually more a fan of the Connery films, From Russia With Love is my favorite film in the series, but even so I thought the parkour chase was exciting, well shot, and felt appropriate for the film they wanted to make. James Bond has always been escapist cinema and even the Connery films had action sequences in them just to have big, exciting moments that otherwise have little to no reason to be there. From Russia with Love has a helicopter chase that's only there to be big and exciting to look at - well that and to rip off North By Northwest haha - in Goldfinger the precedent of a pre-titles sequence having nothing to do with the movie as a whole but existing simply to be rousing and entertaining is established, Thunderball features Bond in a fist fight and escaping on a jet pack, the list of these things goes on. I think the Parkour chase fits that mold fine and modernizes it for today's cinema, and it doesn't detract from the movie in my opinion. For me what does detract from the movie is the grinding halt at the start of what feels like a 4th act.

That all said I understand what the intent with this edit was and it accomplished that terrifically, in re-inserting the parkour chase this would become my favorite cut of the film I think.
 
I agree with Waslah. I despised the Moore and Brosnan Bonds. Connery and Dalton were my favorites (the Dalton films not being great, but Dalton himself was how I always always pictured Bond looking and acting based on the Fleming novels.)

The early Connery films and the Fleming books all had somewhat over-the-top action sequences just like the parkour scene in CR. They were nowhere near the level of the shenanigans that plagued the later Bond films and I don't consider the pursuit in Casino Royale any different than those early action sequences.

I respect the OPs reasoning in deleting the sequence, but I disagree that it was silly or big/dumb/loud like the Moore/Brosnan era. One could argue that it did little to advance the plot, but if we were to trim all of the superfluous action sequences from the entire Bond series, we'd have about thirty minutes of footage left over.
 
theregencyelf said:
(the Dalton films not being great, but Dalton himself was how I always always pictured Bond looking and acting based on the Fleming novels.)
Now, on that we can agree! Such a spot-on yet underrated portrayal, which deserved to be in better movies (The Living Daylights played like a Moore reject and License to Kill looked in parts like a Schwarzenegger movie). I'm surprised no one has tackled either one. Maybe I will, one of these centuries. Don't worry, I won't cut out all of the action. :)
 
I've considered tackling The Living Daylights once or twice, which I think is the best of the two Dalton installments though I enjoy both of them tremendously in spite of their flaws, but I wouldn't try Licence to Kill. That film was too low budget, too cheap looking to really feel like a Bond film. It looked and felt like any number of low budget action movies coming out in that time period, but unlike some of those films Licence to Kill had to overcome John Glen's fairly bland direction style so it never really had a chance to rise above those budget limitations. Though to be fair the truck chase at the end of that movie is phenomenal. One of my favorite action pieces in the franchise. But yeah, I just don't know that there's enough there to work with when it comes to LTK in order to fix it.

Living Daylights on the other hand had budget enough to overcome Glen's directorial shortcomings and a much better story to tell but suffered from the fact that they didn't know who the next Bond was going to be and thus wrote a script that played like a half-committed Roger Moore picture as you suggested. The fact that they wanted to do, and filmed, a magic carpet ride sequence of sorts points pretty blatantly in my opinion to them assuming they'd have Moore back. And unfortunately it suffers from indulgence as I think all the Bond films post Goldfinger do. It's just too long, and it drags like crazy just prior to the climax. But I think if somebody went in to that film with a clear idea of what they wanted to do in order to fix those problems there's a great movie in there. Would be more of a trim the fat project than anything else I think.

There's a lot of things I want to do with the Bond franchise. I'm working on a Quantum of Solace fix right now, which I started sometime last month, to try and fix some of the incomprehensible editing and trim or remove as much of the meaningless, unnecessary, and in one case plainly dumb action scenes and just generally slow the film down and let it breath. It wants so desperately to be a quieter character piece but keeps getting rudely interrupted by loud, obnoxious action sequences as if audiences are unable to pay attention for longer than 4 minutes if something doesn't go boom. So I got that going, but it won't be done for quite sometime.

I also want to tackle Dr. No soon. I love that movie to death, but I've always wanted to make it feel just a LITTLE closer to the rest of the franchise. Give it a pre-titles sequence, a proper gun barrel opening that doesn't get interrupted by a credit for Albert R. Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, improve the pacing, and pair down the INCESSANT use of the Bond theme. I actually just recently completed a test for Dr. No recently that I was mostly happy with.
 
Waslah said:
I've considered tackling The Living Daylights once or twice... I think if somebody went in to that film with a clear idea of what they wanted to do in order to fix those problems there's a great movie in there. Would be more of a trim the fat project than anything else I think.
I've only seen (most of it) once, and had to stop roughly 3/4 through, but I loved what I did see, perhaps more than any other 007. I'd definitely be interested in seeing a trim of it, far more than any other Bond edit; just my $.02. :)
 
Hmmm...well then, I'll have to take a look at that today and see what I think. :)
 
License to Kill would indeed be a tough nut to crack. But, I'm willing to bet that just cutting the parts with Q and cutting as much footage with the two female leads as possible would benefit it tremendously.

I love Q, but his appearance in LTK seemed almost like an afterthought. It was like "Let's make this movie look like every other low-budget action thriller from the last few years. As long as we put Desmond Llwellyn in a couple of parts, people will know it's a Bond flick."

The two female actresses are to me the fatal flaw of the movie. Talk about not being able to act your way out of a paper bag!
 
I like the stuff with Q in LTK if only because I always thought Desmond Llewellyn was hilarious as Q and was criminally underused much of the time. Seeing him in the field was nice, in my opinion, because he was finally getting something to do other than a 2 minute scene inserted somewhere in the middle of the movie that seems completely unnecessary. At least here he's given more time on screen. Plus, I liked the way he interacted with Dalton's Bond far more than with Roger Moore's, Though that might be because I didn't like Roger Moore's Bond at all. I think there's maybe 2 films out of his 7 film run that I enjoyed to any degree, the rest are awul.

While I'm working on QoS I'll take a look at the 2 Dalton films and see what can be done. I think your thought on pairing down the two women in Licence To Kill would be a great place to start on that one.
 
casinoroyalebanner.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom