The Dark Knight Rises The 80th TDKR General Discussion & Speculation Thread - - - - - Part 85

[Hurm...]

I just hope he wasn't exaggerating and it didn't just feel like 3 hours (2 hrs 40 min if its not 3 hrs, most likely).

 

[KalMart]

Could you give me a specific example of exactly what you would streamline?

For beginners, I'd actually take out the last sonar-vision part or not make it as heavy. Actually, the more I think about it, that whole part could maybe go including the hostages and police being roped, etc (in writing), leaving the ferries and finding Joker in the building. Again, it's not an editing thing, and probably wasn't as evident until it was all put together.

I'd also look for more variation in the score or take some of it out...it was all a bit too heavy and repetitive during a lot of that. The overall issues is feeling a bit numb or 'punch drunk' even though you fully acknowledge it as intense and important. And not intentionally as if to mirror the mental state of the characters. But as I said, obviously not everyone was going to feel this way, but there is a common consensus amongst many to this, and I believe that had it been made with avoiding that, it still would have sat just as well with everyone including those who didn't feel it was too much.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I just hope he was exaggerating and it just felt like 3 hours (2 hrs 40 min if its not 3 hrs, most likely).

Why would anyone hope for that?

Does everyone have an appointment to get to after these movies end? Is there a reason a story can't come to its natural conclusion?

 

[Sharkboy]

How is it bloated? People keep saying this without giving a proper example.

With Begins, I think a lot of the problems come simply from how it was written, not the time given. Scarecrow's exit is kind of funny, but I agree that it should of been handled better. I also wished they had played up the visions of the fear toxin.

Yeah obviously begins had problems in writing, which Nolan should have (or been allowed to) amend or cut out. A lot happens in TDK, especially during the first hour, like i said, it's not too much of a problem but there are quite a bit of smaller scenes go over peoples heads during the first viewing.

 

[Hurm...]

Why would anyone hope for that?

Does everyone have an appointment to get to after these movies end? Is there a reason a story can't come to its natural conclusion?

LMFAO. MAJOR TYPO! Hahaha I hope he wasn't exaggerating

 

[KalMart]

Sorry, was quoting someone's assertion that it would be cut at this late in the game if it was over 3 hours.

IF something was screened yesterday, it was final cut. Not saying it's definitely 3 hours, but Nolan would NOT be cutting now. No way.

Agreed, highly doubtful he, or anyone, would still be cutting with a mere two months before opening unless something severe happened. They'd also probably have to up the post budget for triple-overtime in sound/effects/color/processing to still make it. And as you pointed out, Nolan is also known to be an efficient filmmaker as well when it comes to budget and schedule.

 

[Brother Jack]

With Begins, I think a lot of the problems come simply from how it was written, not the time given. Scarecrow's exit is kind of funny, but I agree that it should of been handled better. I also wished they had played up the visions of the fear toxin.

I do think there are some moments that should have been elongated, not least of which the shot of Batman falling down the staircase with the bats all around him. That image was a major focal point in the marketing of the movie at it lasts for less than a second in the film. I'm not saying it needed to be gratuitous, just long enough to give the audience enough time to absorb it. I remember reading that WB had a mandate that Begins had to be a certain length, so that might have something to do with the rapid editing.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Nolan said he told the studio before the film was ever made that Batman Begins would be 2 hours and 20 minutes and so he said "compression" was used to fit it all in (Box Office Mojo interview in October 2005). I like the pacing of Batman Begins, it starts out slow and ramps up to a crazy level as it goes along. Gets me pumped.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Yeah obviously begins had problems in writing, which Nolan should have (or been allowed to) amend or cut out. A lot happens in TDK, especially during the first hour, like i said, it's not too much of a problem but there are quite a bit of smaller scenes go over peoples heads during the first viewing.

Maybe I just pay attention, but I can't think of any such scenes.

With Begins, I am in favor of amending, not necessarily cutting. I think what is there works, it just needs to be played with a little. On street level, it should of been a true horror show and I would have got rid of the forerunners to the annoying cop.

 

[Nevincer]

The more the better, I mean if these really are the last minutes we're ever going to see of this universe on screen the fanboy in me can't help but hope we get as much as possible before it all goes away

 

[Nevincer]

LMFAO. MAJOR TYPO! Hahaha I hope he wasn't exaggerating

I thought that was weird... earlier you seemed ecstatic at the news "I love me an epic.." QFT.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Nolan said he told the studio before the film was ever made that Batman Begins would be 2 hours and 20 minutes and so he said "compression" was used to fit it all in (Box Office Mojo interview in October 2005). I like the pacing of Batman Begins, it starts out slow and ramps up to a crazy level as it goes along. Gets me pumped.

I now really wonder what was compressed. I remember seeing images of Bruce out near where him and Rachel were playing as kids.

 

[KalMart]

Nolan said he told the studio before the film was ever made that Batman Begins would be 2 hours and 20 minutes and so he said "compression" was used to fit it all in (Box Office Mojo interview in October 2005). I like the pacing of Batman Begins, it starts out slow and ramps up to a crazy level as it goes along. Gets me pumped.

A la something technical? I mean, higher-ups can often tell you to shorten your running length no matter what...causing you to quicken all cuts and take out fractions of a seconds here and there. But it's not like you can do something to the overall thing with a setting/adjustment to fit it into a shorter length without it feeling actually sped up. Can you paste the actual interview so that we can clarify?

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

A la something technical? I mean, higher-ups can often tell you to shorten your running length no matter what...causing you to quicken all cuts and take out fractions of a seconds here and there. But it's not like you can do something to the overall thing with a setting/adjustment to fit it into a shorter length without it feeling actually sped up. Can you paste the actual interview so that we can clarify?

Sure

Nolan: It's 2:20. 2:17 has been printed, but 2:20 is accurate. Three years ago, I went to the studio, and I told them roughly what the film was going to be, and I told them it would be two hours and 20 minutes long. The reason is that to me the epic scope of the story we were aiming for, combined with the fact that, in dealing with the origins of the story, you have to spend a lot of time before you even get to Batman. And you want a number of action scenes—you basically want a two-hour blockbuster movie plus an extra movement to the piece at the end with credits—which comes out at two hours and 20 minutes as opposed to two hours and five minutes. We had to start at the very beginning of the story, treating [Bruce Wayne] as a child—and spend time doing that, not just a montage, but really embrace the story—you need that extra room. When you look at the highest grossing movies, they're really long films, whether it's Titanic or The Sound of Music or Gone with the Wind. I always want a film I work on to be as short as it possibly can, and it took a while because there's a lot of story here to cram in. There aren't any deleted scenes on the DVD, because we never removed story; we just compressed it. So it's a furiously paced film, and we're very fortunate that musicians helped us achieve a unity with the right tempo.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/features/?id=1921&pagenum=all&p=.htm

 

[KalMart]

Sure



http://www.boxofficemojo.com/features/?id=1921&pagenum=all&p=.htm

Thanks!

It looks as if he's referring to creatively streamlining things even in writing, not actually doing something to it. Or sometimes, you take key points of a scene that's originally longer, then piece them through something else. From what he's saying, it look as though he had to shave 10-15 minutes to make that 2:20. Sometimes you can still find more 'fat' to trim after you feel you're done...when you feel you have to.

It also looks (not surprisingly) that being 2:20 had to really be sold to the studio for a new reintroduction/reboot film....and understandably so. They had to know they could win over a new audience before going for the deluxe lengths.

 

[Sharkboy]

Maybe I just pay attention, but I can't think of any such scenes.

With Begins, I am in favor of amending, not necessarily cutting. I think what is there works, it just needs to be played with a little. On street level, it should of been a true horror show and I would have got rid of the forerunners to the annoying cop.

It has nothing to do with paying attention, Scenes tend to lose their effect and meaning when they are sandwiched with tons of other scenes and you are constantly bombarded with scene, scene, plot development etc etc, you lose some of these great character moments. The biggest casualty in TDK would be the character of Bruce Wayne, sure enough he's more of an ensemble than a main character that time 'round, but there are plenty of opportunities in that film to really linger on Bruce and let bale do his work (more than just a brief shot of bruce brooding) you've got to let the audience feel it as well, and its hard to feel Bruce's pain when you are immediately given more joker/harvey/gordon/maroni etc etc scenes.

Anyway, hopefully TDKR gives Bale more room to play around with his characterization this time, I want to really feel the right moments in Bruce's plight for redemption.

 

[bosef982]

A la something technical? I mean, higher-ups can often tell you to shorten your running length no matter what...causing you to quicken all cuts and take out fractions of a seconds here and there. But it's not like you can do something to the overall thing with a setting/adjustment to fit it into a shorter length without it feeling actually sped up. Can you paste the actual interview so that we can clarify?

Nolan has final cut in his contracts

 

[KalMart]

Nolan has final cut in his contracts

Sorry, what does that have to do with what we're discussing?

And sure, a director can have final cut in their contract, etc...but it doesn't mean that a studio can't pressure you to make your final cut shorter.

 

[J.Howlett]

Thanks!

It looks as if he's referring to creatively streamlining things even in writing, not actually doing something to it. Or sometimes, you take key points of a scene that's originally longer, then piece them through something else. From what he's saying, it look as though he had to shave 10-15 minutes to make that 2:20. Sometimes you can still find more 'fat' to trim after you feel you're done...when you feel you have to.

It also looks (not surprisingly) that being 2:20 had to really be sold to the studio for a new reintroduction/reboot film....and understandably so. They had to know they could win over a new audience before going for the deluxe lengths.

That's exactly what he's talking about. Nolan does the majority of his editing at the script stage.

If you go back and read the final script to Begins, it's what we got, minus a line or two of dialogue here and there and maybe a beat or two missing. But, every scene in the script is in the film....

 

[KalMart]

That's exactly what he's talking about. Nolan does the majority of his editing at the script stage.

If you go back and read the final script to Begins, it's what we got, minus a line or two of dialogue here and there and maybe a beat or two missing. But, every scene in the script is in the film....

Well, to be fair, there's always some trimming that can be done during editing without actually losing a scene. Whether or not it covers the script completely, it's only in editing when you really know whether things are just taking or feeling too long, or if you can live without it even if it did work great on paper. But one of the good things about collaborating on scripts that can help this is that different people can wear different hats...i.e. one writer could primarily stay in 'the moment' whereas another looks at it more objectively and judges how pacing should improve and so on. Whereas it can be much harder for one writer to do that and why so many scripts or stories start out with a surplus of stuff that can go later on.

 

[bosef982]

Sorry, what does that have to do with what we're discussing?

And sure, a director can have final cut in their contract, etc...but it doesn't mean that a studio can't pressure you to make your final cut shorter.

Sorry, your words: "I mean, higher-ups can often tell you to shorten your running length no matter what...causing you to quicken all cuts and take out fractions of a seconds here and there."

Can often "tell you" means telling like a parent tells their child to go clean up their room and they do so.

Yes, a studio can tell -- or rather ask -- Nolan to make changes, but at the end of the day -- nope. It's his call. And WB is far more interested in maintaining their relationship with Nolan than they are about shaving 20 minutes of TDKR.

Final cut is a literal term. Very few directors have it in Hollywood. It's basically studios can give notes, but if Nolan disagrees -- that's that.

 

[A.Stabelli]

Is the movie 3 hours or not? That's all I wanna know.

 

[Nevincer]

We won't know officially until the runtime is on that exec site.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

We won't know officially until the runtime is on that exec site.

Anybody been checking on that? I guess no news then.

 

[KalMart]

Sorry, your words: "I mean, higher-ups can often tell you to shorten your running length no matter what...causing you to quicken all cuts and take out fractions of a seconds here and there."

Which again, can still apply to someone having 'final cut' on their contract. A la, the studio allows the director to have say over the time removal they request instead of hiring someone else to do it. But I was mainly referring to when a studio does step in for other projects not necessarily his. Depends on the situation and where the director is in his career...but it doesn't universally make one 'untouchable', so to speak. No one disagreed that Nolan actually has final cut and say on his films now.

Can often "tell you" means telling like a parent tells their child to go clean up their room and they do so.

Yes, a studio can tell -- or rather ask -- Nolan to make changes, but at the end of the day -- nope. It's his call. And WB is far more interested in maintaining their relationship with Nolan than they are about shaving 20 minutes of TDKR.

Final cut is a literal term. Very few directors have it in Hollywood. It's basically studios can give notes, but if Nolan disagrees -- that's that.

Again we're primarily talking about BB here, when he was a relative newcomer..and why he had to acknowledge with them that it could be 2:20. When you're a newer director handed a franchise like this, and you convince them to give you 2:20, then you better get it in at 2:20 or less or you're stepping over a line of faith at the start of the relationship. I.e.: if his earlier BB cut was 160 minutes, he wouldn't need a studio telling him to cut it down in running length. Obviously, once the success has come in, more power is under Nolan's hand and he can push that three-hour mark upon more open arms...that's not in question. Trust me, I personally deal with how much 'final cut' certain directors have.