The Dark Knight Rises OFFICIAL: Batman in the Burgh - Part 10

[TheBatman072]

Apparently it's not something that was known BEFORE hand. This idea came up during production, so it's not keeping it a secret as much as it is; WB hasn't said a word about this film yet.


I recall Wally saying that there would be a trouble getting the film done in the time allotted.

I don't know either way but, I'm keeping the option open.

The fact that it was heard by others only makes me consider it more.

Yyyyyep.

 

[ChrisB]

What do you call what we're getting now?

What do you mean?

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I cant believe we are talking about the bs rumors of splitting the movie in 2 parts but why has anyone not talked about Aaron Eckhart being spotted in Pittsburgh! They showed him at the Steelers vs Eagles game tonight!!

Maybe he's a fan of the Eagles or Steelers?

 

[The_Raganork]

I am very confused by this word logic or I'm just over thinking it. Wasn't MOS always planned for Dec of 2012 but now its moved to June 2013? So if it was initially suppose to be a combo in the summer wouldn't they have just put MOS in summer of 2013 in the first place.

When you later say "Then Superman got pushed back a year" which it did to 2013, that makes it sound like that destroyed the plan but then that would be perfect if they had a Part 2 in 2013 for TDKR.

I'm just confused on which dates your referring to the respective movie dates.

I mean they want to market the two films together. Use TDKR to push MoS. Connect it with the Nolan involvement and really push MoS that way.

When MoS went to 2013; the idea became to use that year between TDKR1 to promote both films (TDKR2 wouldn't need it as the first one would do the work) and destroy the summer with the two films.

 

[jazzmatik]

Instead of splitting them up into 2 films, they should just make 1 relatively long film OR 2 separate films with different titles.

 

[Figs]

What do you mean?

That what we're hearing is an unofficial source at the moment.

 

[jabroni2kz]

"I recall Wally saying that there would be a trouble getting the film done in the time allotted."

..unless I am missing something that clearly means Wally thinks they cannot finish making the film by Nov/Dec (the time alloted for filming), or that they cannot edit/adjust/score a finished film by July 2012...that would imply a pushed back release date...it does not really imply that they have so much material for just 1 movie

 

[bosef982]

So you're saying the decision was not based upon the content of TDKR, but rather them needing to ratchet up interest for MOS.

So they didn't stop and say "Wow, TDKR needs to be 2 movies." They came out and said, "Well, let's just split this already long movie into 100 minute parts and pair one of them and own the summer 2013."

 

[Anita18]

WOOOO!!

OMG is TheBatman072 finally...HAPPY with something TDKR-related????

 

[Liam_H]

I mean they want to market the two films together. Use TDKR to push MoS. Connect it with the Nolan involvement and really push MoS that way.

When MoS went to 2013; the idea became to use that year between TDKR1 to promote both films (TDKR2 wouldn't need it as the first one would do the work) and destroy the summer with the two films.

Lol, I see push a World's Finest movie but not really. They're together for summer of 2013...but separately.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Split into two parts? Kinda tacky. It is not needed, and just how much story would they need to cover that they need two f____ing films to do it? TDK was already pushing 2.5 hours and worked like aces. Granted, it worked for HP, but that already had an actual "strict" storyline they wanted to put onscreen. Surely Nolan hasn't written some king of Bat-Bible?

 

[bosef982]

This could be a disaster if this decision was based SOLEY on the motivation of providing MOS with a crutch, and also just a means to get the hordes of people who want to see Nolan's conclusion to pay TWICE to see it all. It's the cinematic equivalent of price gouging really...

 

[subaruwrxfan]

Just got some insight from someone that's in the business, they said:
"Just to let you know, I'm in the business and how it works is to not confuse the TAKE number and the SCENE number they will usually start the SCENE number at 101 which is actually scene 1.

So SCENE 180 is actually scene 80. SCENE 290 is in fact scene 190.

In a typical 90 min film you can have 100-130+ scenes. Realize a scene can simply be a 3 second shot down the street. When you are within a scene and simply change camera angles you add a letter to the scene. IE: Scene 175E would be the 6th angle. (first angle doesnt get a letter)

Absolutely a 2.5 hour film can have 190 scenes. If i had to completely guess I would say 190 would be 15 mins or so till the end."

P.S. They went on to say that the numbering is different for european versions, so this might not be true, but chances are it is.

So there you have it. I'm not sold yet on 2 movies.

 

[Hide the Rum]

All I've been thinking is thank god TDKR comes out before the end of the world I can't die on a Batman cliffhanger!

 

[TheBatman072]

The most conclusive evidence right here.

http://razzi.me/p/102796

 

[kvz5]

Didn't Gill say that the script was bloated? But I recall him saying too that it's good now and has been trimmed.

 

[Anita18]

So you're saying the decision was not based upon the content of TDKR, but rather them needing to ratchet up interest for MOS.

So they didn't stop and say "Wow, TDKR needs to be 2 movies." They came out and said, "Well, let's just split this already long movie into 100 minute parts and pair one of them and own the summer 2013."

No, I see Rag's assertion as explaining to us WB's strategy for these two films.

The clapboard I think the real clincher. "Scene 290" written out in a script means that Nolan wrote it intending to be that long.

Even with 1 scene=1 page=1 minute in a screenplay...that's almost 5 hours.

 

[Liam_H]

"I recall Wally saying that there would be a trouble getting the film done in the time allotted."

..unless I am missing something that clearly means Wally thinks they cannot finish making the film by Nov/Dec (the time alloted for filming)..it does not really imply that they have so much material for just 1 movie

It can also mean fitting all the content of the film into one reasonable length but it usually means filming wise not movie runtime. Because Nolan wants to present this in IMAX he has a max time limit set.

 

[TheBatman072]

If this turns out to be true, it could be amazing. Absolutely amazing.

 

[The_Raganork]

"I recall Wally saying that there would be a trouble getting the film done in the time allotted."

..unless I am missing something that clearly means Wally thinks they cannot finish making the film by Nov/Dec (the time alloted for filming)..it does not really imply that they have so much material for just 1 movie

Correct.

But it could mean there's a lot of material in the film and fitting it into the schedule is a problem. Perhaps enough for two films.

I think everyone thinks when shooting: "It'll come down in editing" but once you get to shooting you know what's going to stick for sure and what's not. At this point it may be:

We have too much and cutting it down will compromise our story.

COULD, MAYBE, PERHAPS.

This isn't fact or definition.

So you're saying the decision was not based upon the content of TDKR, but rather them needing to ratchet up interest for MOS.

So they didn't stop and say "Wow, TDKR needs to be 2 movies." They came out and said, "Well, let's just split this already long movie into 100 minute parts and pair one of them and own the summer 2013."

I'm saying that factor is one part of it. Please stop making my post absolutes.

 

[Bim]

Apparently it's not something that was known BEFORE hand. This idea came up during production, so it's not keeping it a secret as much as it is; WB hasn't said a word about this film yet.

I recall Wally saying that there would be a trouble getting the film done in the time allotted.

I don't know either way but, I'm keeping the option open.

The fact that it was heard by others only makes me consider it more.

My attitude exactly towards this info and all other unconfirmed stuff... thanks for sharing though, could make things interesting for sure if true. I would **** a a cliffhanger though, but not like i'd have much of a choice hahaha

 

[Brother Jack]

Didn't Gill say that the script was bloated? But I recall him saying too that it's good now and has been trimmed.

He's been very quiet as of late. It would nice to hear back from him, considering everything that's been going on.

 

[bosef982]

Correct.

But it could mean there's a lot of material in the film and fitting it into the schedule is a problem. Perhaps enough for two films.

I think everyone thinks when shooting: "It'll come down in editing" but once you get to shooting you know what's going to stick for sure and what's not. At this point it may be:

We have too much and cutting it down will compromise our story.

COULD, MAYBE, PERHAPS.

This isn't fact or definition.



I'm saying that factor is one part of it. Please stop making my post absolutes.

Um...I didn't, thanks though.

 

[Goku Goes Crazy]

Just got some insight from someone that's in the business, they said:
"Just to let you know, I'm in the business and how it works is to not confuse the TAKE number and the SCENE number they will usually start the SCENE number at 101 which is actually scene 1.

So SCENE 180 is actually scene 80. SCENE 290 is in fact scene 190.

In a typical 90 min film you can have 100-130+ scenes. Realize a scene can simply be a 3 second shot down the street. When you are within a scene and simply change camera angles you add a letter to the scene. IE: Scene 175E would be the 6th angle. (first angle doesnt get a letter)

Absolutely a 2.5 hour film can have 190 scenes. If i had to completely guess I would say 190 would be 15 mins or so till the end."

So there you have it. I'm not sold yet on 2 movies.

Well, there you go.

 

[Anita18]

Just got some insight from someone that's in the business, they said:
"Just to let you know, I'm in the business and how it works is to not confuse the TAKE number and the SCENE number they will usually start the SCENE number at 101 which is actually scene 1.

So SCENE 180 is actually scene 80. SCENE 290 is in fact scene 190.

In a typical 90 min film you can have 100-130+ scenes. Realize a scene can simply be a 3 second shot down the street. When you are within a scene and simply change camera angles you add a letter to the scene. IE: Scene 175E would be the 6th angle. (first angle doesnt get a letter)

Absolutely a 2.5 hour film can have 190 scenes. If i had to completely guess I would say 190 would be 15 mins or so till the end."

So there you have it. I'm not sold yet on 2 movies.

Hmmm...quick someone find some spy shots for TDK and see how they did the clapboard.