Nolan Fans

Re-watching this the other night, I noticed there are a ton of strange edits and quick cuts that made the movie feel very disjointed and jarring...unlike any previous Nolan film. The biggest one and most noticeable being when Selina steals Bruce's car. it cuts in and out of her driving so quick that it's almost laughable.

Then obviously there are the ones everyone has talked about with the changes from day to night/Bruce arriving back in Gotham..but whats up with that? Now that all the hype and excitement has died down I've had the chance to watch it closer and without the "awesome goggles" and I think it ultimately hurt the film.

anyone else notice it/bothered by it?

My original reaction regarding screen time was like but now I understand it hurts film...

Obviously.

No.

I think at times it hurts the film, but just a little.

It's a different style / different movie. It doesn't make it better or worse. Unless the scene explicitly needed more time, then what's wrong with the cut? Take that scene with Selina stealing the car- why did it need to be longer? We got the point / joke of the scene. I think people were just used to the smoother cuts and transitions from TDK and Nolan's previous films. For me personally, it's something that I completely adapted to on my second viewing.

There are some moments, or rather plot elements that could have used more time to develop, but that's different.

For the most part, with the amount of story and stuff going on in the film, I think it was brilliantly edited.

How is this a new criticism? It's been one of the most vocalized issues with the film by just about everyone. I'm not sure the editing itself is that strange necessarily, I think it may be closer to cutting things down literally as much as possible, excluding pretty necessary transition shots or shots that contrast better than what we're given. Lee Smith's talked about how the job was basically making it the shortest version of the movie possible to fit the IMAX running time, and the movie certainly suffered for it.

-Vader

Yes it hurt. Obviously. The final lines and the death delivered by Talia especially was horrible.

Vader182 wrote:How is this a new criticism? It's been one of the most vocalized issues with the film by just about everyone. I'm not sure the editing itself is that strange necessarily, I think it may be closer to cutting things down literally as much as possible, excluding pretty necessary transition shots or shots that contrast better than what we're given. Lee Smith's talked about how the job was basically making it the shortest version of the movie possible to fit the IMAX running time, and the movie certainly suffered for it.

-Vader

Can someone fill me in on this? I always thought the quibble with Imax was that it has shorter takes, but why would it affect the length of the movie, or how much they decide to cut?

stanley wrote:

Vader182 wrote:How is this a new criticism? It's been one of the most vocalized issues with the film by just about everyone. I'm not sure the editing itself is that strange necessarily, I think it may be closer to cutting things down literally as much as possible, excluding pretty necessary transition shots or shots that contrast better than what we're given. Lee Smith's talked about how the job was basically making it the shortest version of the movie possible to fit the IMAX running time, and the movie certainly suffered for it.

-Vader

Can someone fill me in on this? I always thought the quibble with Imax was that it has shorter takes, but why would it affect the length of the movie, or how much they decide to cut?

It has to do with the length/size of the amount of film that can be run through the projector. 165 minutes is the max for IMAX film (remember that IMAX film is extremely large), and people who saw the movie in true 15/70 IMAX would understand this as there were no previews shown before the movie - there simply wasn't any extra room on the IMAX film reel.