The Dark Knight Rises The 86th TDKR General Discussion & Speculation Thread

[Doc Holliday]

Ok, maybe "guarantee" was too strong a word but think about it: To begin the film in media res with Bruce's death and then recap the events leading to it would be a very ballsy move for a film. Nolan loves pushing the envelope, and something in TDKR is going to do that.

It would have been ballsy, had it not been done countless times since Quentin Tarantino hit it big with Reservoir Dogs. Having films begin in medias res isn't exactly "pushing the envelope" anymore.

 

[kvz5]

As long as the time is justified and there are no fillers that will drag it down then I'm all good.

 

[RedSkull]

 

[redfirebird2008]

It would have been ballsy, had it not been done countless times since Quentin Tarantino hit it big with Reservoir Dogs. Having films begin in medias res isn't exactly "pushing the envelope" anymore.

In the superhero genre? With Bruce Wayne dying right at the beginning? Very ballsy IMHO. I don't expect it to happen, mind you.

 

[Mysteryman]

This film already has a rating. The cut is locked so what was presented to that woman is what we will get aside from minor ADR touchups. If they cut anything else it must be resubmitted which I don't see them doing. If the tweet was correct and not hyperbole then we will see a 3 hour film come July 20.

And Nolan does no do directors cuts so Watchmen would be a poor example to use.

I used Watchmen as an example because somebody previously used it as an example of a 3 hour Superhero release .
I was saying that Watchmen was not neccessarily proof that WB would be willing to release a 3 Hour Superhero Movie .
We shall see .

 

[Anno_Domini]

I used Watchmen as an example because somebody previously used it as an example of a 3 hour Superhero release .
I was saying that Watchmen was not neccessarily proof that WB would be willing to release a 3 Hour Superhero Movie .
We shall see .

WB is willing to do it if Christopher Nolan is behind said project though. I mean, he's the "governor" or something within Warner Brothers, right? Why wouldn't they be willing to push a three hour CBM after the success Nolan has given WB with The Dark Knight and Inception?

 

[craigdbfan]

There's a lot going on in this movie. 3 hours+ definitely sounds ideal.

 

[Doc Holliday]

In the superhero genre? With Bruce Wayne dying right at the beginning? Very ballsy IMHO. I don't expect it to happen, mind you.

Not in the superhero genre, but in general. Nolan's Bat-films have a way of transcending the comic book genre to a degree, and that's where it gets into territory that's less-than-uncharted. Hell, Nolan's done in medias res multiple times: Memento, The Prestige, and Inception off the top of my head.

 

[NateHevens]

Brought over from the Bane thread:

I love what you're saying and I'm right there with you, especially about Azkaban, but I can't agree with the bolded statement.



This series is entirely about Batman.

Look at those lines again, and consider them in context. This trilogy is all about what happens when a man decides to fight crime by becoming a vigilante. It's done using Batman, but the focus is very definitely on Bruce Wayne. It's all about the psychology of Bruce Wayne, what he goes through to maintain the secrecy, and how he slowly gets "lost in that monster of" his.

Yes, Batman is prominently featured, because Bruce Wayne is Batman. But make no mistake; these films are absolutely about Bruce Wayne and his journey as Batman. They're not directly about Batman as a character. So like I said before... these films are about Bruce Wayne and his alter-ego Batman, not about Batman and his alter-ego Bruce Wayne.

This is why neither Joseph-Gordon Levitt nor anybody else will be "taking up the mantle" at all. These films are about Bruce Wayne, who is Batman. They are not specifically/directly about Batman.

 

[shauner111]

This trilogy is all about what happens when a man decides to fight crime by becoming a vigilante. It's done using Batman, but the focus is very definitely on Bruce Wayne. It's all about the psychology of Bruce Wayne, what he goes through to maintain the secrecy, and how he slowly gets "lost in that monster of" his.

Yes, Batman is prominently featured, because Bruce Wayne is Batman. But make no mistake; these films are absolutely about Bruce Wayne and his journey as Batman. They not directly about Batman as a character. So like I said before... these films are about Bruce Wayne and his alter-ego Batman, not about batman and his alter-ego Bruce Wayne.

This is why neither Joseph-Gordon Levitt nor anybody else will be "taking up the mantle" at all. These films are about Bruce Wayne, who is Batman. They are not specifically/directly about Batman.

 

[Blue Sugar]

3 hours? Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay! And self-indulgent my ass, some of my favorite movies of all time are over 3 hours. I don't get how a long movie is automatically "too long".

I trust Nolan in his storytelling and pacing. This is awesome news.

 

[KalMart]

3 hours? Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay! And self-indulgent my ass, some of my favorite movies of all time are over 3 hours. I don't get how a long movie is automatically "too long".

I trust Nolan in his storytelling and pacing. This is awesome news.

Watch "Wyatt Earp"...and you will.


Thankfully, this probably won't be like that.

 

[Char]

Right but the question still stands are they actually still doing ADR (as was mentioned before) this late in the game?

My old teacher had an ADR production house in L.A., and he said that they will even ADR a week before the release...so yeah this late in the game is still a possibility

 

[Doc Holliday]

Watch "Wyatt Earp"...and you will.


Thankfully, this probably won't be like that.

Tombstone was so much better.

 

[KalMart]

My old teacher had an ADR production house in L.A., and he said that they will even ADR a week before the release...so yeah this late in the game is still a possibility

In Pittsburgh?


And it's always possible (as I know from experience)...but not exactly likely for something like this unless there's been some major screw-up or the like, which is what last-second things like this usually come down to when/if.

 

[KalMart]

Tombstone was so much better.

It was so much 'shallower' and packaged...but it was much more fun. t:

 

[Char]

It'd be ballsy as hell, no?

That was basically my idea of doing a Dark Knight Returns type of 'death' of batman, starting with Gordon making a speech in front of a memorial statue of Bats, then unfolding the story back to that point. Only to find out at the end that.....

Ballsy isn't even the right word to describe that.

 

[Doc Holliday]

It was so much 'shallower' and packaged...but it was much more fun. t:

Well, it wasn't as lofty. And I use that word in a negative connotation.

Tombstone is also much more quotable.

Spoiler

I may be a little biased though...vis a vis the avatar...

 

[KalMart]

Well, it wasn't as lofty. And I use that word in a negative connotation.

Tombstone is also much more quotable.

Spoiler

I may be a little biased though...vis a vis the avatar...

You're still being way to generous.

 

[Char]

As long as the time is justified and there are no fillers that will drag it down then I'm all good.

Batman: "That won't happen...I need 3 hours + alone!

 

[Blue Sugar]

Watch "Wyatt Earp"...and you will.


Thankfully, this probably won't be like that.

Well of course I've seen movies that are too long for it's own good. But way more often have I seen complaints about movies being "too long" just because they are, well, long!

A 3 hours plus movie that is done well is often a fantastic experience.

And when people complained TDK was great but too long it just left me speechless. If it's great, give me as much as possible of it!

 

[BatLobster]

In Pittsburgh?


And it's always possible (as I know from experience)...but not exactly likely for something like this unless there's been some major screw-up or the like, which is what last-second things like this usually come down to when/if.

That Pittsburgh tweet was from last August. She had to have watched it in LA.

 

[Doc Holliday]

You're still being way to generous.

It's one of those movies that knows what it is and doesn't purport to be anything other than an entertaining film. And I appreciate that. It's the same reason I enjoyed Thor. It was basically a vehicle to make The Avengers happen, but it didn't try to be a whole lot more.

Spoiler

The director/star combo was ripe with potential, but don't get me started there.

 

[KalMart]

That Pittsburgh tweet was from last August. She had to have watched it in LA.

Which is more sensible for the screening. But again, a movie of this size, with everything it has to go through in post and the magnitude of its release, almost always makes it a point to take care of this stuff early. It doesn't mean that she couldn't still attend a screening with certain cast and crew...which generally does happen much more often at this point in time than remaining ADR work.

 

[BatLobster]

Which is more sensible for the screening. But again, a movie of this size, with everything it has to go through in post, almost always makes it a point to take care of this stuff early. It doesn't mean that she couldn't still attend a screening with certain cast and crew...which generally does happen much more often at this point in time than remaining ADR work.

Yeah, that's true. Though Neil's tweet made it seem like she was literally going to the edit room to watch it, rather than a theater-type setting.

Maybe it was just a screening for her to give the thumbs up on all the dialogue/give a few notes. Really not sure, she's got a very specific job that I wasn't too familiar with previously. Either way I'm assuming what she watched was very close to final.