The Dark Knight Nolan: "Running time comparable to the first film's 140 minutes"

Dumbass thinks Pacino has a cameo, I keep trying to tell him, but no.
 
I've just made note a few times that Nolan's take on this movie is almost Godfather-like in terms of scope. He has chosen to really play up the organized crime element and has described it almost as a tragedy.
 
.


The film would have been fine at the length they edited it to, but IMO they chose to keep the wrong scenes. The pacing was terrible at places.

Have you seen the ADM fan edit, it's a huge improvement and only about 5 minutes shorter.
 
I've just made note a few times that Nolan's take on this movie is almost Godfather-like in terms of scope. Mainly though it's because Pacino has a cameo. It's sooo Godfather-ish. My source says that Nolan is linking the films together.

Dude, It's not going to happen.
 
i cant see them making this movie 3hrs long athough i wouldnt mind.
 
2007's Zodiac had a runtime of 158 min. Nearly 3 hours. I have no problem either with TDK being that long. :)
 
The only worry i have is that it might effect box office after opening weekend...

It's hard to tell sometimes if the public are comfortable with these kind of lenghty movies or not.
 
Christ, at almost 3 hours, and the (lack) footage we've seen.....that leaves SO MUCH room to give us a little more than the same 5 scenes in all the marketing. :o
 
I even want it longer. I dont understand some folks complaining how long Superman Returns was when it was just fine with me.
 
I don't mind if a movie is long as long as it is interesting. When it is too long and either bad or just boring, it becomes more of a task to watch. SR to me and a couple people I know that it was just really boring.
 
I think BB was the perfect length, as this will be.
 
Oh my god.... a three hour (or close to) cut of TDK??! I would die of happiness...:wow::woot::hehe:
 
I wouldn't be surprised if The Dark Knight turns out to be 3 hours long. I was hoping all along that it would push the 3 hour mark because I think it may become rushed if they try to cram all the plot lines into a smaller running time.
 
I'm fine with 165 minutes... if the rumor's true. Chris Nolan's not Peter Jackson (I hope) - I don't think we'll have a slideshow of 'alternativeendings' at the end of the movie. But I hope such a runtime won't influence (in a negative way) the films' success at the box office.
 
OMG 3 HOURS!

MY DREAMS HAVE COME TRUE!

When I think about the first time I saw batman begins, and then thinking about how it would have been if there was another 25 minutes at the end, I can't help but cream myself.
 
It will probably end up being a 165 or so, like most people think - but then again, Nolan could make it longer due to him wanting to put every piece of Heath's performance on the print, so we'll see.
 
I hope they cut some heath scenes and just move it to the third one if they want to have him in it instead of cramming it in.
 
If it is close to 3 hours, they better not leave out any of Heath's scenes.

:up: but i dont think we are going to have to worry about that....im both excited about it being 3 hours and apprehensive
 
3 hours worked well for the first two lord of the rings films
but the end of ROTK had me very impatient.
it was just like "oh here's the ending now.......no wait.....wait...waaaaiiit....."

2 - 2 & 1/2 hours for this film would do i think

and what happened to stotch??
 
3 hours? wow. i don't think it'll affect the movie negatively...i mean it's batman for crying out loud. i'm sure people wouldnt worry about the length of the film, i'm sure people are craving for some batman action right about now. hahaha...no that's just me.

but seeing that it was heath's last performance, i'm sure many people will go watch it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"