Rough Cut for The Dark Knight Rises completed

Some info on rough cut of the film:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=56703

"The Dark Knight Rises is real and finished, presumably in the form of a four-hour rough cut. There's no official word on the reaction to the screening, as of yet."

Would be neat to see what the 4hr cut would be. That just sounds a bit long even for batman. Heck you could probably make it two films like last harry potter was. More so according to the article on nolan's other bat flicks with there rough cut vs final cut. How long do you guys think the final cut will be widdled down.

I couldn't handle 4 hours of "Baney-Me". The 2 hours, 30 mins or so it ends up being will be too much as it is.

Apologist Puncher wrote:I couldn't handle 4 hours of "Baney-Me". The 2 hours, 30 mins or so it ends up being will be too much as it is.

Amen! Preach it brother!

webhead2006 wrote:Some info on rough cut of the film:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/nailbiter111/news/?a=56703

"The Dark Knight Rises is real and finished, presumably in the form of a four-hour rough cut. There's no official word on the reaction to the screening, as of yet."

Would be neat to see what the 4hr cut would be. That just sounds a bit long even for batman. Heck you could probably make it two films like last harry potter was. More so according to the article on nolan's other bat flicks with there rough cut vs final cut. How long do you guys think the final cut will be widdled down.

"Presumably in the form of a four-hour rough cut"? This is news?

And it's not like I'm omniscient or anything but a "four hour rough cut"? Not saying such a thing has never existed but if it's that long, my suspicion would be that it's an assembly. It's basically everything the director has all put together. Whole takes, all scenes, the whole burrito. There's not even much editing done for timing. The idea is to give the director an idea of where he needs to take the film before he really starts editing it.

Meanwhile, a rough cut (the next step) is his first draft, as it were, of trying to put the film together into some kind of shape. And then it gets refined further on down the line.

As I say, maybe this sum bitch really is a four hour rough cut... which instantly tells me all I need to know about where Nolan is likely to take this movie (as if it wasn't already apparent). But I just have a hard time picturing that.

thecolorsblend wrote:

As I say, maybe this sum bitch really is a four hour rough cut... which instantly tells me all I need to know about where Nolan is likely to take this movie (as if it wasn't already apparent). But I just have a hard time picturing that.

I assume you're talking about duh hulking 190-lb. 1/6 scale Hardly Bane either crippling Batman or even worse, outright killing him? At least that's the feeling I get from your post. But certainly 'the brothers Warner' wouldn't allow that? I mean, Batman is once again a major box office draw for them. I don't care how respected a director Nolan is. Batman=$$$$$. That is, unless they allow it with full intent on rebooting again. Don't really know what to think about this at the moment but I can say, I don't think THE AVENGERS have anything to worry about.

non_amos wrote:thecolorsblend wrote:

As I say, maybe this sum bitch really is a four hour rough cut... which instantly tells me all I need to know about where Nolan is likely to take this movie (as if it wasn't already apparent). But I just have a hard time picturing that.

I assume you're talking about duh hulking 190-lb. 1/6 scale Hardly Bane either crippling Batman or even worse, outright killing him? At least that's the feeling I get from your post. But certainly 'the brothers Warner' wouldn't allow that? I mean, Batman is once again a major box office draw for them. I don't care how respected a director Nolan is. Batman=$$$$$. That is, unless they allow it with full intent on rebooting again. Don't really know what to think about this at the moment but I can say, I don't think THE AVENGERS have anything to worry about.

Well, there is that. But I meant more that if the rough cut really is four hours... how much of that is really going to be action sequences? With a running time like that, my guess is the movie will have an action ratio not unlike what we saw with Singerman.

But as for killing Batman... yeah, I can't see that happening and for all the reasons you describe. Plus, Nolan's is a popular franchise. You could argue that a reboot simply makes no sense from a business point of view.

I see what you mean now, the point about Singerman. I guess Nolan is gonna give us an overly long film with a lot of 'dialogue & character development' ad nauseum. Christian Bale masturbating over whether to become Batman again.....or not. Stuff like that. Or people bragging on how awesome 'Bany-Me' is. Batman in disguise with Gordon having a circle jerk or something. You get the point. But you know duh apologists are gotten eat this stuff up & be crying 'Oscar' for this film anyway.

Well it looks like the 4hr thing was incorrect:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/GraphicCity/news/?a=56735

Just to clear some confusion: I have no idea how long "The Dark Knight Rises" rough cut is. "4 hours" was a joke taken too literally.

— Kevin P. Sullivan (@KPSull) March 21, 2012

This is me doing a victory lap. I maintain the assembly could feasibly be four hours. Or hell, even more for all I know. But a rough cut? That sounded pretty unorthodox from the start.

thecolorsblend wrote:This is me doing a victory lap. I maintain the assembly could feasibly be four hours. Or hell, even more for all I know. But a rough cut? That sounded pretty unorthodox from the start.

Unless they were going to go all 'Twilight' on it, 4 hours was NEVER a realistic thing.

thecolorsblend wrote:This is me doing a victory lap. I maintain the assembly could feasibly be four hours. Or hell, even more for all I know. But a rough cut? That sounded pretty unorthodox from the start.

Apologist Puncher wrote:Unless they were going to go all 'Twilight' on it, 4 hours was NEVER a realistic thing.

Tell that to the douchenozzles trying to spike up their website hits.

thecolorsblend wrote:

thecolorsblend wrote:This is me doing a victory lap. I maintain the assembly could feasibly be four hours. Or hell, even more for all I know. But a rough cut? That sounded pretty unorthodox from the start.

Apologist Puncher wrote:Unless they were going to go all 'Twilight' on it, 4 hours was NEVER a realistic thing.

Tell that to the douchenozzles trying to spike up their website hits.

And the retarded Nolanites who WANTED to believe it.

Just saw this bit of news related to the rumor last week of a possible screening for TDKR at comic con:
http://twitter.com/#!/DrewAtHitFix/status/183245189450702848

Drew McWeeny
‏ @DrewAtHitFix Follow Following Unfollow Blocked Unblock Pending Cancel
I can state with absolute authority that "The Dark Knight Rises" will not be at ComicCon. Don't believe the rumors, kids.