I'm glad you loved it. I am really hoping a second viewing this Tuesday in IMAX can help me fix some of my issues with it or make certain things more clear. Maybe by expecting the often awkward pacing this time I will see things more clearly.m4st4 wrote:I like how I really don't have any major problems with TDKR, the more I think about it the more I need to see it again, but to fully enjoy it - not overanalyse it, not yet. Now, take Prometheus, where my mind was busy only with those tiny details that bothered me.
NF Reviews/Reactions Only
I agree with much of what you said. I caught about the last 15 minutes of TDK on TNT last night and noticed the pace of the film and the editing for just those few minutes and that in and of itself reminded me of why TDK's editing is far above TDKR. It doesn't rush, it takes it time, it builds tension, it makes the scene feel like it has weight. There is none of that in TDKR. I watched it for a 2nd time before drawing these conclusions.Big Bad Harv wrote:Skyab23, it's apparent that you didn't walk away from this film a happy camper, and I definitely understand that there are some minor plot issues and editing qualms that can be endlessly discussed (and to a degree, rightfully so); however, TDK suffers from many of the same nearly-paralyzing structural problems ... and yet we've been able to, over time, forgive the narrative mistakes, editing qualms, and overall obvious plot issues enough to hail the film a "masterpiece" time and time again. We seem to want to compare TDKR to TDK -- and yet, how can you, really? All three films are entirely different in tone, scope, vision, etc. than each other. I don't even compare TDK to BB because what's not important to me is how TDK "surpassed" BB but how different of a film it was than its predecessor. The exact same can -- and should -- be applied to TDKR. One thing should be made clear: I love, love, love TDK; It truly is a phenomenal film, and certainly one of my all-time favorite films. But I also came to love it despite its flaws. I've seen TDKR once and I think it's a phenomenal film as well in its own right, again, despite its flaws. I never, ever wanted TDKR to be TDK 2.0, as many have said; that simply would've been the worst way to end this trilogy.Skyab23 wrote:
If TDK were edited in the rushed way that TDKR is, no way it would be considered the masterpiece that it is today. It would simply be that film with the good performance by Ledger and nothing more. No film is perfectly edited. But I'm merely comparing this film's editing to Nolan's filmography, not just TDK. And it is subpar and really disappointing...I blame WB because I have too much respect for Nolan to even consider this was his doing.
If anything, I agree with this wholeheartedly. The rough cut may not have been the four-hour long behemoth first fed to us by the rumor mill, but something tells me Nolan had in mind at least a three-hour long ending to his saga. This may be one of the rare times in which WB pressured Nolan into a slightly different direction than he initially planned, so it could very well be -- but can probably never be verified -- that the plot and editing and pacing issues that this film suffers from did not directly come from Nolan's own hand. But even if I accept this as the final product, like we all must, I can't help but be completely blown away by what he and Pfister and Jonah and Goyer and Zimmer and the cast were able to deliver. The great in this film absolutely outweighs the bad, and I certainly don't mind if I end up in the minority with that opinion because I'm sticking to it.Skyab23 wrote:I blame WB because I have too much respect for Nolan to even consider this was his doing.
The only morality in a cruel world is chance. Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair.
IMAX cemented this as my favorite movie experience. But has IMAX also affected the film's editing given runtime limitations?
Posts: 55632
Joined:
May 2010
I didn't know there were any to be frank, until I started to read about them here on NF. About Talia - it's all there, that's who she is, backstabbing bitch with one purpose only, and I loved it. It's not like Ducard had a backstory of a lifetime.Skyab23 wrote:m4st4 wrote:I like how I really don't have any major problems with TDKR, the more I think about it the more I need to see it again, but to fully enjoy it - not overanalyse it, not yet. Now, take Prometheus, where my mind was busy only with those tiny details that bothered me.
I thought Gordon, Lucius and all these police officers were citizens of Gotham too? Whatever happened inside Gotham City, happened to Gotham citizens, and we saw plenty of that.
Of course it would have.JONATHAN3D wrote:IMAX cemented this as my favorite movie experience. But has IMAX also affected the film's editing given runtime limitations?
Nolan has often said that he edits the script heavily beforehand as well. He doesn't have deleted scenes. I think he'd figured out the runtime on paper and then got himself to around about that point anyway. The film is Nolan's - if you have any issues, level them at him. He's the producer, writer, and director, and has his own logo at the start of the film.
Ah, böwakawa! Poussé, poussé...
Ah, böwakawa! Poussé, poussé...
Ah, böwakawa! Poussé, poussé...
Ah, böwakawa! Poussé, poussé...
Ah, böwakawa! Poussé, poussé...
When people talk about "ballsy" films, THIS is a "ballsy" film.
I'm not blaming this on IMAX Corp. They did all they could by pushing the runtime an extra five minutes. Just found it worth noting that Christopher Nolan chose IMAX to offer us the best experience possible but in the end, he found himself constrained by it. It's like that whole poetic thing: "what I loved, killed me". Except, it's not tragic because this film is still insanely awesome.ArmandFancypants wrote:Of course it would have.JONATHAN3D wrote:IMAX cemented this as my favorite movie experience. But has IMAX also affected the film's editing given runtime limitations?
Nolan has often said that he edits the script heavily beforehand as well. He doesn't have deleted scenes. I think he'd figured out the runtime on paper and then got himself to around about that point anyway. The film is Nolan's - if you have any issues, level them at him. He's the producer, writer, and director, and has his own logo at the start of the film.
Posts: 3
Joined:
January 2012
One questions for those who have seen the movie - Are you sad the dark knight ends and this one was the last one?
Thank you
Thank you
I've seen everything I wanted to (and more). And frankly, the overwhelming scope of this film is exhausting. It's sad to say "good bye" to characters you've grown with, but I'm glad it ended to the point where I could actually say "good bye" formally.Shellshock wrote:One questions for those who have seen the movie - Are you sad the dark knight ends and this one was the last one?
Thank you
Posts: 151
Joined:
June 2012
I think saying that I don't understand or care about the technical aspects of a film is even more of a preemptive generalisation than what I said. Of course, it's not a perfect film. I know much more than you think I know, but frankly it's 3am here and I can't be bothered to get into the tech side of it all. Rather talk about the beauty of the story and acting. Yes, the editing was a little off at times. But some people have mentioned that there was too much time concentrating on Bruce Wayne rather than batman, but yet I think the balance in the film was actually perfect considering that this was about the ending of the legend. Personally, I think people's opinions on which film is better will come down to people's general preference of films. The DKR is really not as bad and disappointing as some people on here make out, and they are all three of them pretty evenly matched. Like the Toy Story trilogy, everyone will have a favourite and no one can really argue with anyone's preferences.Skyab23 wrote:robboadam31 wrote:Jus watched it today for a second time, and boy, do I recommend everyone to see it again. I like others was a bit disappointed the first time I watched it, but that was because going in I was expecting to watch a completely different movie than what was presented to me. After watching it again, and knowing what to expect from it, I realise now what a fantastic work of art this movie is. Anyone that's whining like a baby and complaining was obviously just expecting DK 2.0, but the DKR is just so much more than that. It really can stand on its own, and I really think its my favourite of the three now. Before people thnk I'm wildly defending it, I had the same reaction as many in here coming out the first time. To those people I say........WATCH IT AGAIN. Go into the movie with a different mindset. Actually, I would hate it to have been a rerun of the DK again. Anyway, essay over.
I watched it twice before giving my review, and while I agree that the second viewing helps to enhance the experience (and I did like it more the second time), one thing had not changed: the editing. For you to say that those of us who were disappointed in it are only whining because "we expected TDK 2.0," that's just a simple preemptive generalization. The editing was not up to par for a Christopher Nolan film. I think some great examples have already been given thus far on the problems the movie has on the editing front so I won't reiterate that, but it's disingenuous to claim that there aren't real concerns and technical problems with the film just because you disagree or don't understand or care about the technical aspects of a film.
