The Dark Knight Rises The Dark Knight Rises as Two Films

[DoomsdayApex]

Considering the end has arrived and the trilogy pack is to hit stores next year, I'm hoping Nolan adds alot of behind-the-scenes and deleted/extended footage to Begins, Knight and Rises. It's not Nolan's style, but I'm praying to the film gods that Chris makes an exception.

 

[DACrowe]

I hate when they split singular stories in half. Sometimes it works (The Three Musketeers/Four Musketeers, Superman/Superman II), but often it leads to two unsatisfying, overstuffed and bloated films where not enough happens in either and they're chores to watch like Pirates 2/Pirates 3, Matrix 2/Matrix 3, Harry Potter 7/8 and I suspect Twilight is as well.

Yes, I would have liked to have seen what happened to Holly, more of Gotham's suffering at the hands of Bane for five months, more develop for Miranda Tate and, most of all, more of a build up of Bruce and Selina's relationship. Even so, I would rather have this film be a little longer by 20-30 minutes than another whole film. I also did not need to see more of Bruce in the Pit. It was enough as is.

Just my opinion.

 

[the amazing fro]

It was 400 pages. A lot was deleted. I think the Riddler may have been part of what was deleted. But, I don't think it negatively impacted the film. And there might be one or two deleted scenes with Talia, but I don't see much being deleted beyond that since that's the only area that really seemed rushed. The shooting script was NOT 400 pages, the rough draft was. Betting the final script of this was more 170/180 pages.

Could you elaborate on this? I find it hard to see where Riddler could have fit within the narrative.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/840/35iiy9.jpg/

 

[BlueLantern]

I wholeheartedly agree on the sentiment expressed. Two films would've definitely helped flesh out the story more. Things did feel plenty rushed.

 

[uniqueweasel]

But on the other hand, don't some complain about BB having some scenes that are too drawn out etc?

I would agree to put scenes in that help the story, etc but not just for the sake of them, which is what I fear would happen if they made it into two movies.

 

[VM1138]

This movie instantly became my favorite movie all-time, but I agree that there has to be at least 15 minutes of more footage out there. Nolan denies he ever filmed 4 hours of footage, and I believe him, but there are some points that feel like there should have been a couple of extra scenes. It's not like Nolan to leave some things unexplored.

I'm thinking of Tate for one. There may not be a lot of deleted scenes, but even just a small handful of short scenes could have fleshed out some parts more. I need to see the movie again, but there could have been more leading up to Bruce being broken by Bane.

 

[Jedm1991]

The scene's we know were cut makes my mouth water thinking about the scenes we didn't know even existed and we will never see...

 

[Havok83]

My biggest complaint was that there wasnt enough Batman and too much Bruce. Splitting it up into 2 films would have made for two boring movies with even less Batman to go around

 

[Kizzo02]

I have to agree. I like the movie and I thought it was a great way to end the trilogy, but looking at the plot holes, editing, and the pace. It seems as if they crammed two movies into one.

It would have been much better to film the final film as two movies and released Part 1 in 2012 and Part 2 in 2013. Maybe Bruce escaping the Pit and returning to Gotham should have been the ending to Part 1.

Of course if they were insistent on one movie. An additional 20 minutes would have made a huge difference in plot holes and pacing.

 

[The Guard]

I disagree. The execution was there but the character development and pacing suffered from the cut. There was just too much material for one film handle -- similar to Watchmen.

The character development suffered from not being there in favor of convoluted story points. It wasn't executed well. The film needed 15-30 minutes, tops, for these concepts to work. I have no idea why people think this needed to be two films. The issues with this film could be cleared up in far less time, with a few minor adjustments.

 

[Darkmania]

My biggest complaint was that there wasnt enough Batman and too much Bruce. Splitting it up into 2 films would have made for two boring movies with even less Batman to go around

I think more Batman would be added then. If had made to movies out of TDKR instead of one, I would have opened the first film with Batman stopping some criminals and being chased relentlessly by the police. I would have showed him get tired, frustrated, toying with giving up. I would have also included some scenes of him "retiring" and how he would struggle with it.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I find it humerous I came out of TDK thinking it was too long and out of Rises thinking it was too short.

Same here.

 

[maverick1127]

Listen. I know there is more footage that we didn't get to see and probably never will. Unfortunatly we have to move on. Maybe its just our inner fanboy selves that just find it hard that there is no more. No more Nolan and Bale. It sucks. So talk about footage we do have. It is a masterpiece. I'm going to my 5th showing tomorrow. It gets better and better everytime.

 

[kvz5]

This movie could've been unanimously the best in the trilogy if they cut out or shortened some of the dragging story lines and added an extra 30 mins or so to flesh out the underdeveloped arcs and added an extra Batman sequence. I think that would address all the complains about the pacing, dragging middle act, lack of Batman, and underdeveloped characters/stories.

As much as I loved and enjoyed the IMAX, I feel bitter that it could've been the reason why we got so many scenes cut out.

Splitting it to two could've worked as well specially if they wanted to use as much IMAX as possible and as long as they don't use it as an excuse to just further expand the storylines that already took much time in TDKR and dragged it down.

More of these would've worked in a 2 part movie IMO:
- additional Batman sequences
- Developed Tate arc where they show her actually work her way to Bruce's heart to make her betrayal actually mean something to the audience
- Catwoman's origins and definitely more interaction with her and Bruce/Batman to build her relationship with him more
- some flashbacks on what happened to Bruce in those 8 years
- Flesh out Gordon's story arc
- Additional Alfred scenes
- Bruce working on the Wayne legacy/philantrophy
- Longer time in prison to make the long time spent in rehabilitation and retraining actually translate well onscreen
- Show how Bruce got back into Gotham and him working on rallying the troops against Bane
- More Bane
- Explore the class warfare
- Longer 2nd fight between Batman and Bane, maybe even have a 3rd fight
- More, more, more Batman!

A good cut off would be the prison scenes. Either end with Bruce being thrown in prison in the first movie or end it with him making the triumphant climb (depends on whether they want the 1st to end on a low or high note).

I do wonder if the idea of splitting it to two was brought up. I'm sure WB would've been more than fine with that....

 

[batbax]

Listen. I know there is more footage that we didn't get to see and probably never will. Unfortunatly we have to move on. Maybe its just our inner fanboy selves that just find it hard that there is no more. No more Nolan and Bale. It sucks. So talk about footage we do have. It is a masterpiece. I'm going to my 5th showing tomorrow. It gets better and better everytime.

Agreed Im loving this more everytime I see it. Even some things I thought were plot holes before..really arent. DO I think it was cut down? Yes. And it could probably be even better. All Ill say is my Dad, who Ive seen it twice with now, had tears the second time and asked me if we could go again next week. The movie is working for the majority of people. I think we here on these boards had built up in our minds a movie waaay beforehand based on set pics spoilers, and endless speculation. When it didnt turn out exactly like that, some were dissapointed.

 

[Frontier]

I could easily tell from the rapid cuts of both dialogue and scenes that Nolan's true director's cut likely clocked in at well over 4.5 to 5 hours -- and thus he had to chisel things down to the bone to get it to fit under 3, something I'm sure no matter how much he's made the Studio monetarily, TPTB would have insisted upon.

I'm hopeful we'll one day get extended cuts of all three films, which will balloon run times up considerably. I'd say an extra 15-20 for Begins, 30-40 for TDK and hour-fifteen for TDKR.

 

[Notrip]

Yeah I agree the movie should have been longer. NO to the 2 movie part as I personally think I hate movies being split into 2 parts. I think the official first cut was long, remember that woman who works with speech(marion) on TDKR - on twitter (her husband said "over 3+ hours long") My guess was they had a three hour + long movie and IT had to be cut down to the Imax limit of 2 hrs. 45 minutes(my imax theater said that was the longest they could play) Which almost makes me wish Imax wasnt featured if this was the case. or hope we can actually get a directors cut(NO CHANCE) or at least the deleted scenes(STILL NO CHANCE)
this is one of the only things I kind of dislike about Nolan, that he doesnt really show deleted scenes or anything like that. BB extras were AWESOME while TDK lacked IMO.

 

[solidsnake86]

I'm actually surprised WB didnt decide to put it in two parts. You have to hand it to them, they let Nolan get away with not putting it in 3d for the extra profits, regardless of what people feel about 3d.

I don't think it needed to be split up, but I do find it curious the film clocked in exactly at what the capacity for imax was.

 

[KILLING JOKER]

I think the splitting the movie in 2 would make matters worse. They just needed to cut a-lot of stuff from the exsisting running time because much of it does not go anywhere. Matthew Modine and JGL scenes could probably add an extra 20 minutes of film to strenghten the weaker parts of the film.

 

[bullets]

What would be the cutoff point for the first film. Bruce traveling back to Gotham?

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I don't think the movie needed to be longer. If anything it is too long as is. The first half drags quite a bit in spots, and in general the film gets a lot better once Bane takes over Gotham.

 

[KILLING JOKER]

I don't think the movie needed to be longer. If anything it is too long as is. The first half drags quite a bit in spots, and in general the film gets a lot better once Bane takes over Gotham.

Agreed. It's how they handle the running time that's the problem.