THE DARK KNIGHT RISES FILM REVIEWS (SPOILERS. PERIOD.)

webhead2006 wrote:Another TDKR director's cut dvd/bluray rumor:
http://nukethefridge.com/2012/09/09/ntf-exclusive-the-dark-knight-rises-directors-cut-blu-ray-to-hit-just-before-man-of-steel-debuts-in-theaters/

NTF Exclusive: “The Dark Knight Rises” Director’s Cut Blu-ray to Hit Just Before “Man of Steel” Debuts in Theaters
September 9, 2012 by admin

Recently we reported that Christipher Nolan is working on the “Directors Cut” for the “The Dark Knight Rises.” The question is, when will it be released? We know that the theatrical cut of the film will be available on Blu-ray sometime before the end of the year, but will the extended version be released at the same time?

Today, we got word from the same source that gave us the heads up about the “Directors Cut” about the potential release date for that Blu-ray. So according to that person a new version of “The Dark Knight Rises” will be out on Blu-ray sometime right before Zack Snyder’s, “Man of Steel,” opens in theater.

Although “Man of Steel” is directed by Zack Snyder and produced by Christipher Nolan, it will open theatrically on June 14th, 2013. While Blu-rays are almost always released on Tuesdays, we should expect the Director’s Cut on June 10th (the Tuesday before “Man of Steel” hits.)

Can’t wait!

Until an official announcement it make we are treating this as a rumor.

Maybe I'll end up being wrong but I just don't buy this. Any of this. With his track record, I'd be shocked if Nolan didn't have final cut for the theatrical release. Does ANYBODY think WB wouldn't give Nolan final cut for TDKRises? Fuck's sake, they probably would've given him a female Filipino soccer team if that's what he wanted. Final cut? I'd have thought it went without saying.

Totally with what was on other dvd/bluray sets from first two. Can't really see director cut. Maybe some of those talked about cut bane scenes. But I doubt anything beyond the standard behind the scenes/making of stuff.

thecolorsblend wrote:

webhead2006 wrote:Another TDKR director's cut dvd/bluray rumor:
http://nukethefridge.com/2012/09/09/ntf-exclusive-the-dark-knight-rises-directors-cut-blu-ray-to-hit-just-before-man-of-steel-debuts-in-theaters/

NTF Exclusive: “The Dark Knight Rises” Director’s Cut Blu-ray to Hit Just Before “Man of Steel” Debuts in Theaters
September 9, 2012 by admin

Recently we reported that Christipher Nolan is working on the “Directors Cut” for the “The Dark Knight Rises.” The question is, when will it be released? We know that the theatrical cut of the film will be available on Blu-ray sometime before the end of the year, but will the extended version be released at the same time?

Today, we got word from the same source that gave us the heads up about the “Directors Cut” about the potential release date for that Blu-ray. So according to that person a new version of “The Dark Knight Rises” will be out on Blu-ray sometime right before Zack Snyder’s, “Man of Steel,” opens in theater.

Although “Man of Steel” is directed by Zack Snyder and produced by Christipher Nolan, it will open theatrically on June 14th, 2013. While Blu-rays are almost always released on Tuesdays, we should expect the Director’s Cut on June 10th (the Tuesday before “Man of Steel” hits.)

Can’t wait!

Until an official announcement it make we are treating this as a rumor.

Maybe I'll end up being wrong but I just don't buy this. Any of this. With his track record, I'd be shocked if Nolan didn't have final cut for the theatrical release. Does ANYBODY think WB wouldn't give Nolan final cut for TDKRises? Fuck's sake, they probably would've given him a female Filipino soccer team if that's what he wanted. Final cut? I'd have thought it went without saying.

Given that IMAX was in the equation, it's possible he had to cut a lot of stuff out in order to have the film fit in that format. That does explain why there were no previews in the IMAX screenings, there was literally no room left. Seems plausible. It's ironic though that Nolan champions IMAX but then it turns against him when in the editing process.

James Stocks wrote:Given that IMAX was in the equation, it's possible he had to cut a lot of stuff out in order to have the film fit in that format. That does explain why there were no previews in the IMAX screenings, there was literally no room left. Seems plausible. It's ironic though that Nolan champions IMAX but then it turns against him when in the editing process.

Fair point, except I thought the newer IMAX systems didn't have a run time limit and could handle basically whatever you throw at them. But even if there is a run time limit, why not split the movie across two prints?

No director's cut for TDKR:
http://superherohype.com/news/articles/172639-there-is-no-directors-cut-of-the-dark-knight-rises

There is No Director's Cut of The Dark Knight Rises by Spencer Perry September 12, 2012 Share this story

"No such plans exist"

In case you didn't know, there has been a much exploited rumor in the past week about an alleged director's cut for The Dark Knight Rises that would include 30 additional minutes of footage that was cut from the film. Today it has been confirmed that not only are there no plans for a director's cut release of the film, a director's cut doesn't even exist.

The Playlist got word from Christopher Nolan's reps about the situation, saying, "insiders close to the director confirmed to us yesterday that no such plans exist, and reports of an extended cut of the film are completely false."

There you have it, it's done. Stay tuned here for details about the actual home video release.

thecolorsblend wrote:

James Stocks wrote:Given that IMAX was in the equation, it's possible he had to cut a lot of stuff out in order to have the film fit in that format. That does explain why there were no previews in the IMAX screenings, there was literally no room left. Seems plausible. It's ironic though that Nolan champions IMAX but then it turns against him when in the editing process.

Fair point, except I thought the newer IMAX systems didn't have a run time limit and could handle basically whatever you throw at them. But even if there is a run time limit, why not split the movie across two prints?

I think that's true for the digital IMAX cinemas, as they were the only screenings that actually featured trailers before TDKR such as Skyfall. I don't know all the technical specs of real IMAX, I'm just making an assumption based on the lack of trailers and that it's from my memory the longest film ever screened for IMAX along with AVATAR coming a close second. It's also possible that this limitation might have had a part in THE HOBBIT being split into three films, but again I'm just making an assumption. We'll see how it all plays out. Nolan doesn't seem to be the guy to go for alternate cuts, but it would be cool if he could throw a bone and show some deleted footage for the video release.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6849597/batman-cant-stop-thinking-about-sex

Heh...

I'm still pissed off about Anne Hathaway only playing "Selina". She wears the fucking suit, she commits robberies, all that, but God forbid we call her Catwoman. And of course the Nolanite assholes all love it.

Idiots...

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00055833.html

Summary- The latest unsubstantiated gossip suggests that JGL might or might not reprise his role as John Blake/Batman in the JLA movie.

Now, there's an argument that this belongs in the JLA section. But I'm putting it here because the greater relevance is toward Batman. I liked TDKRises. I didn't love it and I outright resented parts of it. But it wasn't horrible. I'll give it that.

That said, I have absolutely zero interest in John Blake beyond TDKRises. Bruce Wayne is Batman. Period. The Nolan movies are/were popular, I get that, but I just don't care. I don't need to see any continuation of that bullshit. Part of me would enjoy the Nolanites shitting themselves that they're perfectly immaculate universe and bullshit realism would be irrevocably desecrated by Blake getting thrown into JLA but the satisfaction I'd get from that would not outweigh the benefits of putting the Nolanverse out to pasture.

The Nolan moves are far from masterpieces but they should be left the hell alone. Let's do something new now.

I don't usually pay attention to the Nolanites, but man they amused me a lot lately particularly because TDKR got ZERO nominations from the Oscars. They're so bent over it. I'll admit, even I was surprised it didn't get anything in the tech categories.

You don't say. To me, the high church of Nolanism will always be Bill Ramey's Batman On Film. I guess he knows what a scum-sucking bottom-feeder a lot of people think he is because you can't lurk on his forum. You must have an active account if you want to take a look around. It's not worth it to me to bother registering with that police state forum just to see what a miserable bunch of crybabies they've become. I've got a good imagination, after all.

Ah, I went on IMDB instead, which is filled with them.

What's really funny to me is that TDKR has been very successful, but apparently to Nolanites grossing over a billion dollars is not enough, it needs some Oscar cred too. SKYFALL just got five noms, the first time a Bond film has ever gotten any nom in 30 years. I just consider that icing on the cake, if it didn't get it, oh well.

It didn't deserve nominations over ANY of the films that WERE nominated.

Is this beating a dead horse?

http://www.peterdavid.net/2012/07/29/the-dark-knight-rises-like-a-souffle-but-then-a-loud-bang-makes-it-fall-my-spoiler-filled-comments

David makes a lot of good points. True, he takes a generally more favorable view of the movie than I can claim but he's not a gusher. He sees flaws and he calls them what they are. I can at least muster respect for that. Far more than I could for, say, the Jett/batmanonfilm.com review.

Ironic considering the above but I am done -- fucking DONE -- bagging on Nolan's films. Are they "my Batman"? Not always. In fact, most of the time, no. But they're fun to watch once in a while and if they're not perfect, hey, they're still freakin BATMAN.

We now have a lot to choose from- Adam West, BTAS, The Batman, Burton, Schumacher, Nolan, TBATB, animated BY1, animated TDKR and tons of other shit. And this is not to speak of who knows how many comic books and trades to choose from. If you ask me, it all fits into a portrait of what makes this character great. It may not all be "good" but it is all "great", if that makes sense.

The main reason I've been so militantly opposed to Nolan's films lo these past eight years is their fans zealots. I'm sick of being told that such-and-such in one of Nolan's films is "definitive" and therefore such-and-such from some other adaptation (or comic) is hackjob nonsense because "only Nolan could've made this credible".

The Nolan movies? Hey, there's plenty of room for them in the larger Batman mosaic. Their zealot fans? They can all piss off as far as I'm concerned.

Honestly, I've just chosen to forget about 'Rises', and sadly the entire Nolan "Bat-Trilogy". And after being such a huge fan of 'Begins' and 'DK', it really does suck.

Interesting note, I took 'Rises' to my brothers place, because he and his boys never saw it. Put my nephew to sleep within 15 mins, and was putting my brother to sleep at almost the same time. Took out the Blu and watched 'Hot Fuzz' instead.

No one caught any Zzzz's watching that....

Been going through some old comics lately. Specifically Batman. At this point, I'm pretty sure that the dickhead attitude most Batman fans have these days is going to be a permanent blight on this character for me. It's kind of like Van Halen. Time was I loved the Roth stuff. But the band members being absolute cocks on a personal level combined with their fans not being much better pretty much sullied that band for me. Same thing goes for Batman in some ways.

But as I flipped through some old Batman comics, I remembered what I loved about the character to begin with. To me, one of Batman's defining characteristics isn't whether he wins or loses. There are stories where even Batman's victories are hollow. Hell, Jeph Loeb's made a cottage industry of those types of stories. But what works isn't Batman's batting average so much as his commitment to his principles. Sure, I find some of those principles to be total horseshit. But he does have principles. And sink or swim, he abides by them.

The other thing that happened was I reread Superman- Secret Identity. It's an Elseworld's miniseries where a real life human dude named Clark Kent who lives in a place where Superman is every bit the iconic fictional character there that he is here... but this guy somehow acquires Superman's powers. He then meets and falls in love with a chick called Lois. Etc. It's a kinda sorta not really Superman in the real world. It's not really about Kal-El but at the same time it's TOTALLY a Superman story and it's one of my all time favorites.

To me, that's the niche into which I'm prepared to place Nolan's trilogy. It's not really Batman Batman. Make sense? Like Secret Identity, it's a story about a guy called Bruce Wayne in the real world who experiences some of what Batman goes through, adopts a secret identity and calls himself Batman. The Nolan trilogy is for Batman what Secret Identity is for Superman: a kind of interesting "what if" concept about real life people becoming fictional icons. But neither is truly that fictional icon, similar names, situations and trappings notwithstanding.

On that basis, Nolan's trilogy is a bit more enjoyable now. No, it'll never be definitive. Not for me. Shit, I'm starting to think my definitive version of Batman wouldn't appeal to anybody because MY take on Batman is something less (or at least something other) than the noble, virtuous superhero that other people seem to prefer. But having said that, when you watch, say, The Dark Knight in the context of an Elseworld's story along the lines of Secret Identity that never existed in the first place adapted into live action, it's imminently more enjoyable.

No, I'm not changing my mind about this. Insofar as Batman's concerned, I don't enjoy most of Nolan's work. But when I think of it as an imitation of Batman, an Elseworlds thought experiment about What Might Be... not bad. Not great but not bad.

Yeah, I sorta, kinda liked duh Nolan trilogy, especially Begins, but I never liked any of them as good as BATMAN (1989) I love that film to this day! Seemingly never get tired of it! Duh Nolan films on the other hand might be interesting in ways but just don't spark that same kind of enthusiasm in me. Heath ledger obviously did an awesome acting job but as what? The Joker? Not the Joker I knew! Instead of a chemical accident we got an anarchist who self-mutilated & put on 'war paint', you know, 'to scare people'. But this can't really be blamed on Ledger but rather Nolan and Goyer. An Elseworlds type story might be OK, like what if this really happened? But in their case, I think it was more so simply being ashamed of 'comic booky' which is why we got the ultra-realism that we did but in my opinion they butchered the mythos.

I can still watch and enjoy 'Begins' and 'TDK' juts fine. They are good "Batman-ish" films, but nowhere near the Batman films we SHOULD have. Especially now as it is 2014.

'Rises' though. Jeez, what a steaming pile THAT was. And is. It's switching between HBO and Cinemax, and I avoid it like the PLAGUE. It really soured the whole trilogy for me, but not in the way Singer did for his films. It was bad, but not offensive like Singerman was.

I can take 'Begins' and 'TDK' as they are, and just assume Bruce Wayne went on to be the Batman we know and love, and just leave it at that.

It's funny how real life can sometimes give fiction better context.

The example I usually point to is Star By Star, a hardcover Star Wars novel from the New Jedi Order series. The Yuuzhan Vong, invaders from another galaxy, have declared war on the Galaxy Far Far Away. Star By Star is their big push into the core systems. Coruscant is invaded, evacuated and all but destroyed. In the middle of all that, there's more than enough heroism to spare as Anakin Solo sacrifices his life for the greater good.

Keep in mind, this book came out in October 2001. Remember what happened in September 2001? Obviously the connection there was totally intentional... but you can't argue the emotional impact of 9/11 while reading a story about Coruscant skyscrapers tumbling, heroes sacrificing their lives so that others may live and Leia giving a "rally the troops" speech that made me cry like a baby.

What's my point? I truly believe if Occupy Retardation had never happened, TDKRises would've been the moment where Nolan lost everybody. If I saw TDKRises back in 2010 or earlyearlyearly 2011, I would've thought that (let's call it what it is) Occupy Gotham thing was contrived and incoherent. But who would've ever thought Occupy Stupidity was going to happen right when TDKRises went into post-production?

People, usually those with their heads on the chopping block, want to dismiss the political aspects of Nolan's Batman films but, intentionally timely or not, that stuff resonates a little too much with partisan politics for me to think Nolan wasn't commenting on something.