The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion & Speculation Thread (NOT A LOUNGE)

[Greens]

But it's only possible if it has the same number of sessions available to it that TDK had. Between 2hrs 30min and 2hr 45min you can still fit in at least 5 sessions per day, once you start creeping up to 3 hours though cuts you down to about 4. If Rises was of a similar length to TDK then yes I would agree it has a shot at taking back the opening records although it would still be difficult because of big the HP box office was. But at 3 hours? No chance.

Can't you just do two sessions at the same time? They did that here with Titanic 3D.

 

[The_Raganork]

1 session less at about double (+) the theaters and I say it still has a chance. An uphill battle yes but I don't think it's impossible.

I also don't think it matters much either.

 

[Travesty]

Exacly, very few actually participate in critical reading. They read that guys article and repeat what he said as if its fact. Because you see it on this forum repeated as if that scene was shot incompetently.

Actually, this guys blog is wrong on so many accounts. He doesn't seem to know the architecture of Lower Wacker, and thinks that it's some kind of bridge with water on both sides of it, when in fact, Lower Wacker runs along side the river, not over it. Sure, there are bridges that connect to Wacker Drive, but the road itself isn't one, nor was the scene shot as a bridge. It kinda sounds like you're doing exactly what you said you hate: you're not participating in critical reading, and presenting something as fact, without looking into it yourself. 2-3 of this guys rebuttals rely solely on the fact that Lower Wacker is a bridge, when it isn't.

Water is on both sides, as bridges over rivers are apt to do. This is just trolling.

Why call someone a troll, if they themselves have no idea what they're talking about? This just proves that he has no basis for commenting on the perspective of the shots. This is exactly what Emerson was commenting on. Things like vehicles magically appearing on the opposite side of the road, the river on the left, then magically on the right, cars popping in and out with no explanation, etc. And instead of actually putting two-and-two together, this guy just makes up his own logic by calling it a bridge. Even Nolan didn't depict Lower Wacker as some bridge in Gotham. Maybe that's why the scene wasn't confusing to him, because he thought water was on both sides of the road?

And while I don't agree with everything Emerson said in his video, some of it is right, especially the continuity errors. And all this guys does in response to that, is just say, "eh, he may be right, but editing is a hard job".

 

[Greens]

And while I don't agree with everything Emerson said in his video, some of it is right, especially the continuity errors. And all this guys does in response to that, is just say, "eh, he may be right, but editing is a hard job".

Emerson did kind of manipulate his points by showing screencaps of the scene, as the blogger said. The part where there are two cop cars, and then a second later there are three, isn't noticeable at all. The third cop car is covered up by the other two in front of it. The screencap makes it look like a huge noticeable mistake. Another example is the one of Dent supposedly reacting towards the wrong side of the van, which is a stupid point anyway.

 

[Travesty]

Emerson did kind of manipulate his points by showing screencaps of the scene, as the blogger said. The part where there are two cop cars, and then a second later there are three, isn't noticeable at all. The third cop car is covered up by the other two in front of it. The screencap makes it look like a huge noticeable mistake. Another example is the one of Dent supposedly reacting towards the wrong side of the van, which is a stupid point anyway.

I really didn't notice the perspective of Dent in the van or some of the other perspectives he mentioned(which are some of he points I didn't really care or agree with Emerson), but you can notice the cop cars while watching the movie, how cars will magically flip on the opposite side of the concrete medium, the river on the left side of the truck, and then it's on the right, the SWAT car being hit on the wrong side, etc.

Like I said, I don't agree with everything Emerson said, but he has a point with the continuity errors.

 

[vanson]

normal editing rules like the 180degree rule dont apply in an action sequence.. editing is very much a feel thing.
the guy in that video is nitpicking too much imo. i never felt lost in the entire sequence..

 

[Marvolo]

But it's only possible if it has the same number of sessions available to it that TDK had. Between 2hrs 30min and 2hr 45min you can still fit in at least 5 sessions per day, once you start creeping up to 3 hours though cuts you down to about 4. If Rises was of a similar length to TDK then yes I would agree it has a shot at taking back the opening records although it would still be difficult because of big the HP box office was. But at 3 hours? No chance.

With Deathly Hallows Part 2 my local theater did 14 sessions for its midnight opening. After that it committed nearly half its screens to the film with back to back sessions for the rest of July. Runtime discrepancy aside, TDKR will get the same treatment. My theater has even dropped previews to maximize the amount of times a film can be shown. They will cram as many viewings as possible in for as long as it is possible. TDKR can easily make a great profit if its over 3 hours. Return of the King was 3 hours and 20 minutes and did quite well.

 

[jmc]

Can't you just do two sessions at the same time? They did that here with Titanic 3D.

Well it depends on the theatre chain of course, down here I know some big films get split between two theatres at the one cinema complex with alternating sessions every hour or so, but you're still making less revenue with 3 hour film.

 

[jmc]

With Deathly Hallows Part 2 my local theater did 14 sessions for its midnight opening. After that it committed nearly half its screens to the film with back to back sessions for the rest of July. TDKR can easily make a great profit if its over 3 hours. Return of the King was 3 hours and 20 minutes and did quite well.

Talking about the opening weekend record not the overall box office.

 

[Marvolo]

Talking about the opening weekend record not the overall box office.

Well, like I said DH Part 2 got 14 midnight showings at my local theater. Then it got back to back showings in over half of my theaters screens. It was jam packed back to back all opening weekend. If they do this with TDKR and more theaters do this then this film will dominate the opening weekend regardless of length.

 

[jmc]

Yeah, but that film was just over 2 hours long. It may dominate the weekend regardless of length but it won't break the opening weekend record at 3 hours in length. That's what I'm trying to get across here.

 

[Travesty]

I'm sure TDKR will do great on opening weekend, I just don't think it'll be a 3hr movie.

My bet is on it being around the same length as TDK.

 

[Nevincer]

Done this quickly, they may as well give us the movie early damn it! No, that never happens. They'll push it back, but never forward

 

[Marvolo]

Yeah, but that film was just over 2 hours long. It may dominate the weekend regardless of length but it won't break the opening weekend record at 3 hours in length. That's what I'm trying to get across here.

I'm using DH as an example to show you that theaters will give this film a lot of screenings regardless of length. There will be no space where they won't cram it in.

I get what you are saying, but I think it will break the record regardless. This film is opening in 600 IMAX screens. Thats over 400 as many as TDK. It is opening in more regular screens than TDK, also. A runtime that is 30 minutes longer than TDK will not be a big deal when you factor in higher ticket prices, and the larger number of screens it is opening on. I think it will break records opening weekend regardless of length.

 

[Nevincer]

My bet is it won't hit the 3hr mark, but it'll be close.

 

[Naite22]

I'm sure TDKR will do great on opening weekend, I just don't think it'll be a 3hr movie.

My bet is on it being around the same length as TDK.

I hope your bet is wrong... I really want a 3 hour bat flick!

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

I hope your bet is wrong... I really want a 3 hour bat flick!

What... just for the sake of length?

If Nolan can tell this story in the same run time as Begins, whats the problem?

 

[Travesty]

I would prefer a BB runtime. I thought it was the perfect length.

 

[weezerspider]

I love plenty of long ass films( LOTR, Ben Hur, The Godfather, Watchmen DC) but I prefer films around 2-2:30 hours because I just don't have the time to watch three hour films on a regular basis for repeated viewings. I love LOTR to death, but i've only seen each extended version like twice simply because I don't often have the time to rewatch them. And I'm not one of those people who can watch part of a film, put it on pause and come back later. Its all or nothin for me.

 

[Naite22]

http://www.nolanfans.com/forums/view...359082#p359082

Wooow. There's a surprise! Rises is rated PG-13! W_T_F!? No way! What else? Of course it won't be rated R! I still think this movie will be the darkest of them all...

I'm actually surprised that Nolan and team got off with the visuals in The Dark Knight, with a PG-13 rating! I mean, it got pretty_damn_dark with the face of Harvey's Two-Face! I still remember the chills, the first time he turns his face. Extremely dark and pretty nasty looking! The Way Nolan mixed CG (the eye) with practical make-up was amazingly well done, and seamless!

What kind of dark visuals could be seen in Rises???

 

[Naite22]

What... just for the sake of length?

If Nolan can tell this story in the same run time as Begins, whats the problem?

No no, not just for the sake of length! But because I HOPE his final and concluding story IS the biggest and requires the most screen time... Just a wish.

 

[Travesty]

http://www.nolanfans.com/forums/view...359082#p359082

Wooow. There's a surprise! Rises is rated PG-13! W_T_F!? No way! What else? Of course it won't be rated R! I still think this movie will be the darkest of them all...

I'm actually surprised that Nolan and team got off with the visuals in The Dark Knight, with a PG-13 rating! I mean, it got pretty_damn_dark with the face of Harvey's Two-Face! I still remember the chills, the first time he turns his face. Extremely dark and pretty nasty looking! The Way Nolan mixed CG (the eye) with practical make-up was amazingly well done, and seamless!

What kind of dark visuals could be seen in Rises???

Yeah, Two Face looked extremely badass. By far my favorite thing about TDK.

As for the visuals of TDKR: I'm not sure, exactly. We really don't know that much about the film. We already know a ton of people are going to die in the football stadium, so that's a given.

 

[Steyin]

You have to realize that even if it is a longer film, theaters will probably show it in say 3/4 auditoriums instead of 2/3, thus leveling out the number of viewings. Considering the rise in IMAX ticket prices and number of IMAX venues across the country/world, this film has every chance to smash the opening weekend record.

 

[Blue Sugar]

Yeah, Two Face looked extremely badass. By far my favorite thing about TDK.

 

[Travesty]

So now saying something positive about TDK gets dry emoticons?