Xixax Film Forum

Who Is Batman's Next Foe?

As the Internet rumor mill heats up about a possible foe for the next Batman film, writer David S. Goyer (who got a story credit for The Dark Knight) told SCI FI Wire that it's possible the villain may not even be one you've ever heard of.

"There's no reason why we necessarily have to use the same three or four that are still around," Goyer said in an interview at Comic-Con International in San Diego last month. "I mean, Batman's got a wide variety, [a] rogues' gallery. Certainly we used two in the first movie that hadn't been in the films before."

Goyer, who wrote the script for Batman Begins with director Christopher Nolan, was referring to Ra's al Ghul (Ken Watanabe and Liam Neeson) and Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy).

The Dark Knight, written by Nolan and his brother, Jonathan Nolan, features Batman's most famous enemy, the Joker (played memorably by the late Heath Ledger), and a second well-known nemesis, Harvey Two-Face (Aaron Eckhart).

And Goyer's comments come as Web sites speculate on which well-known villain (The Riddler? The Penguin? Catwoman?) and which actor (Johnny Depp? Philip Seymour Hoffman? Angelina Jolie?) would play him/her in an inevitable third film in the most recent incarnation of the Batman saga.

But there are plenty of others: Villains that Batman has faced in the DC Comics alone include such familiar and obscure names as Anarky, Bane, Batzarro, Black Mask, Blockbuster, Calendar Man, Catman, Clayface, Cluemaster, Deadshot, Firefly, Hush, Killer Croc, Killer Moth, the Mad Hatter, Man-Bat, Maxie Zeus, Mr. Freeze, Mr. Zsasz, Poison Ivy, Hugo Strange, Tweedledum and Tweedledee, Ventriloquist and Scarface, according to Wikipedia.

No decision has been made yet on whether to move forward with a third Batman movie, though it's likely one will come together eventually. "It's really up to Chris to decide, and he has not decided whether or not he wants to go back to the well again," Goyer said. "And if he does, I, you know, would be honored to work with him."

Going with a villain not well known (or even unknown) is a better idea.  Those villains listed are more in the supernatural realm, which I think would be counterproductive to the other two films' "realness". 

Dark Knight was pretty good, but I would rather see Nolan move on to another movie for now.  He made an excellent one ("The Prestige") in between the Batman movies. 

Quote from: MacGuffin on August 07, 2008, 12:16:56 AM
Catman

There's a catman? I wasn't aware of this. Catman?!

How bout dogwoman.

Batman vs. Man-Bat.

I'd pay.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.getthebigpicture.net%2Fstorage%2Fposters%2Friddlerposter.jpg&hash=3df75c36594a0483c980bdbfc8fd0ed68f5a7905)















(fake)

Yeah probably fake. But looks pretty good!

Depp & Hoffman In For Next "Batman"?
By Garth Franklin
Monday, September 8th 2008 11:11am


While Chris Nolan is still on break and hasn't begun considering a third "Batman" flick, Warner Bros. Pictures execs may have already got the next film's villains and who they want to play them in mind it would seem.

Talking with MTV News, Michael Caine revealed that he not only heard the rumors of the various villain casting choices for the next film floating throughout the media, but that he brought up the topic with a Warner executive who seems to have confirmed that some of them were right.

Caine says "When Christopher [Nolan] said we were going to do 'The Dark Knight' next, I didn't what that meant in Batman terms. I said, 'What's the story?' and he said The Joker. I said, 'Oh, s–t! How are you going to top Jack [Nicholson]?' He said, 'Well, I've cast Heath Ledger. And I went 'Ha! I couldn't top Jack, but if anyone could, maybe Heath could.' And he did."

He then added "I was with [a Warner Bros.] executive and I said, 'Are we going to make another one?' They said yeah. I said, 'How the hell are we going to top Heath? And he says 'I'll tell you how you top Heath — Johnny Depp as The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as The Penguin.' I said, 'S–t, they've done it again!."

Hoffman's name as a British or Russian arms dealer version of 'The Penguin' first floated around in 2006, right after "Batman Begins" but before the villains of "The Dark Knight" were set. Depp's link to 'The Riddler' is more recent but the most talked about of the rumors and Depp himself recently said he'd be open to considering the opportunity.

Of course all of this remains up in the air and depends upon the whim of Christopher Nolan who'll decide whether he wants to do the project and which villains and actors will be involved.

That Hoffman shit is inspired.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on September 08, 2008, 06:07:13 PM
'Oh, s–t! How are you going to top Jack [Nicholson]?'

knowing that Michael Caine says 'Oh Shit!' pleases me.

Quote from: Alexandro on September 08, 2008, 06:35:51 PM
That Hoffman shit is inspired.

Is it really? Not that he wouldn't play it great but to me it seems like the obvious choice, well Dustin would be too, Heath's was inspired because nobody saw it coming.

I guess inspired for me would be to choose an actor that doesn't seem obvious or a not so known villian like harley quinn and cast Jena Malone, Evan Rachel Wood or somebody like that.


BTW, I saw it for the third time this weekend in a non imax screen and damn, it's like day and night, guess I really saw it only two times.

Yup. I think Hoffman and Depp are both predictable as fuck. I want someone you didn't see coming with casting I hate until a year later when I see where their actually going with the role. Then I love them.

Depp is somewhat predictable, but I still think Hoffmann is inspired casting. It was considered as such when the idea was first proposed in 2006. At the time Hoffmann hadn't yet even ventured into action films so it was a completely new idea of how to picture him. I just think we had a few years to digest that idea as the recommendable choice so it doesn't seem so new, but it's still the best and most inspired choice.

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on September 10, 2008, 11:30:32 AM
It was considered as such when the idea was first proposed in 2006. At the time Hoffmann hadn't yet even ventured into action films so it was a completely new idea of how to picture him.

Was the idea proposed before or after he starred in the action movie, 'Mission Impossible 3'?

Quote from: SiliasRuby on September 10, 2008, 11:34:47 AM

Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on September 10, 2008, 11:30:32 AM
It was considered as such when the idea was first proposed in 2006. At the time Hoffmann hadn't yet even ventured into action films so it was a completely new idea of how to picture him.

Was the idea proposed before or after he starred in the action movie, 'Mission Impossible 3'?

I believe before. He had already been cast in MI3 but it hadn't been released yet.

Hoffman denied any conversations about this and said he is a big fan of Batman movies but has no interest in playing a character... its all rumors.

Hoffman: 'I'd Love To Play The Penguin'

9 September 2008 3:11 PM, PDT

Philip Seymour Hoffman is thrilled he's among the names in contention for Batman villain The Penguin, because he has always wanted to play the comic book bad guy.

Despite The Dark Knight star Michael Caine's confirmation that the Capote star has already landed the role, Hoffman insists he's yet to be officially offered the part - but he can't wait for the phone call.

He tells TheStoneReport.com, "I grew up a comic book fan, so I love that stuff. I love going to that stuff. I think what they're doing with that whole Batman story is really true to what that whole Batman thing has always been.

"It's one of the darkest origins of a superhero, to get all nerdy and geeky on you. That character sees his parents gunned down as a young child. I remember when I was a kid reading that story, so seeing it now come to life as the dark tale that it really is intense, really dark, very visceral."

If he lands the role, he'll follow Danny DeVito, who played The Penguin on the big screen in 1992's Batman Returns.

I'd like to see Dustin Diamond as The Riddler and Danny DeVito again as The Penguin.

Yeah, I think it's inspired. I don't see it as being in relation to Hoffman in an action film or anything like that. I just think that the kind of operatic and big level in which these films work it's something new for him, at least on this scale. MI3 was boring, really, and he was a forgettable villain there. I don't even remember what was the point of him doing whatever he was doing. The Penguin is a role in which he could really go wild.

Depp is just too Burtonish.

my turn:

sacha baron cohen as riddler.

richard dreyfuss as penguin.

naomi watts as catwoman.

samantha morton as poison ivy.

bonus: (anyone but) ellen paige as harley quinn.

Quote from: kal on September 10, 2008, 05:33:27 PM
Hoffman denied any conversations about this and said he is a big fan of Batman movies but has no interest in playing a character... its all rumors.

Quote from: picolas on September 10, 2008, 05:59:23 PM
Hoffman: 'I'd Love To Play The Penguin'

take that, pal.  i mean kal.

Quote from: Pozer on September 10, 2008, 10:47:06 PM

Quote from: kal on September 10, 2008, 05:33:27 PM
Hoffman denied any conversations about this and said he is a big fan of Batman movies but has no interest in playing a character... its all rumors.

Quote from: picolas on September 10, 2008, 05:59:23 PM
Hoffman: 'I'd Love To Play The Penguin'

take that, pal.  i mean kal.

See what I meant saying that the press distorts everything? Here is the complete article and you'll see what I was talking about.



Yesterday, we reported that "Dark Knight" castmember Michael Caine claimed that as far as he knew, the villains for the next "Batman" film had been cast with Johnny Depp landing the role of The Riddler, and Philip Seymour Hoffman playing The Penguin. Today at the Toronto Film Festival, we went right to the source and asked Hoffman directly if he indeed had been cast as The Penguin.

"No one has talked to me about it ever — never," replied Hoffman. "It happened, like, five years ago, too. It was a rumor back then and it's still a rumor. [laughs] It's just in the press. It's funny."

To further cement this issue, Hoffman added that he'd never met Nolan ("Maybe I did or met him in passing?"), and that his interest in comic book movies is purely on a fan level, and he intended to keep it that way.

"I'm such a fan of those movies," related Hoffman. "Comic book movies in general I look forward to — I am a real cheerleader for them. I want them to do well because those are terrific stories. As a kid I was a big comic book collector. What [Nolan]'s doing is taking it in a whole other exciting great place. I'm more a fan, so the interest of being in it isn't that great. It's more the interest in wanting to see the next one. It's probably better that way."

When further pressed for his level of interest if Warner Bros. approached him about the role, Hoffman said, "I don't know. I think I'm more interested in seeing someone else do it. I don't know if I'd be a good Penguin to be quite honest. [laughs]"

Riddle me this: Will Johnny Depp star in the new 'Batman'?
Source: Los Angeles Times

It's the question fanboys have been agonizing over for weeks: Will Johnny Depp portray arch villain the Riddler in director Christopher Nolan's third film installment of "Batman"?

Holy casting coup! Michael Caine, who plays Bruce Wayne's butler consigliere Alfred in Nolan's "Batman Begins" (2005) and "The Dark Knight," claims the rumors are true and that Depp has been locked in for a role.

Sources at the movie franchise's studio home Warner Bros., however, say that as of now, there is no truth to Caine's claims.

Intrigue bubbled up Tuesday when Caine was interviewed by MTV at the Toronto Film Festival. Asked which actor he'd like to see face off against the Caped Crusader, Caine said: "They've already got them in mind. It's Johnny Depp as the Riddler. And the Penguin is Philip Seymour Hoffman. I read it in the paper."

Pressed on the issue of where he got his information, Caine said he heard the news through someone at the studio.

"I was with [a Warner Bros.] executive, and I said, 'Are we going to make another one?' They said yeah. I said, 'How the hell are we going to top Heath?' " –- referring to Heath Ledger's critically acclaimed performance as the Joker in "The Dark Knight" –- "And he says, 'I'll tell you how you top Heath –- Johnny Depp as the Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as the Penguin.' I said, '. . . they've done it again!' "

Casting doubt on Caine's credibility, Hoffman has denied accepting the role and claims never to have met Nolan.

And in a similar swirl of inuendo last month, pop diva Cher shot down rumors that she will star as Catwoman in the upcoming "Batman" sequel.

russel crowe as the penguin, or pacino, that would be creepy...giamatti?

riddler: paul bettany, paul dano.

If Caine is taking a piss about Depp and Hoffman, he's probably doing the same about Riddler and Penguine, why is everyone assuming one is true if we know the other isn't?

I say  :yabbse-thumbdown: to Hoffman and Depp. Also, I don't think the Penguin or Catwoman should be a part of the next film. Riddler I think would be interesting, depending on who is cast. All this speculation is irrelevant when considered alongside the ongoing story that Nolan is wanting to tell with his series of films. The Joker was not just a badass, he served a clear function within the thematic aspect of the series too. How is Penguin or Riddler or whoever going to allow he to expand on that in the next film? That needs to be the focus here. And Caine is just stirring to try and keep TDK in the public's consciousness.

Lol, and hopefully they won't call it 'The Caped Crusader,' kind of a lame follow-up to 'The Dark Knight.'

My pick for the next film would be to follow the Joker dynamics, but have someone who truly is Batman's negative - Man-Bat!!!

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2F5%2F59%2FManBatCv3.jpg%2F250px-ManBatCv3.jpg&hash=94000be491629c054e4d190122d7716a0c6239ae)

And what about Jason Bateman? Talk about inspired casting!

how about lets fucking talk about some real movies, eh?  Everybody?  Goddammit, just because I've stopped watching movies doesn't mean everybody else has to too.

'The Dark Knight' Screenwriter David Goyer On 'Batman 3' Rumors: 'It's All B.S.'

It's the second most successful movie of all-time, a cultural tour de force that's reverberated with critics and fans alike, redefining what a summer blockbuster and a comic movie can be capable of.

To paraphrase the Joker himself: It's changed things. There's no going back.

But there is, of course, going forward. Three months removed from "The Dark Knight," and it seems all anybody wants to talk about is "Batman 3" – a new "scoop" coming our way every couple of days.

Yet whether it's that Chris Nolan has signed on, and will start pre-production early next year, or that Johnny Depp and Philip Seymour Hoffman will play the villains, or that Cher (Cher!) is lining up to wear Catwoman's claws, there's one thing that each and every supposed scoop has in common, "Batman Begins" and "Dark Knight" storyman David Goyer told MTV News:

"It's all B.S.," he said. "ALL of it."

That means, no, Nolan has not signed on (yet). No, there is no casting, let alone TALK, of villains, and, no, nobody is certain to return.

"Chris and I haven't even talked about it. He quite understandably is taking a long, long vacation and wants to purge himself," Goyer said.

Goyer means they haven't talked about it "officially," although, of course, he does admit – as he did when we chatted in July – that they've loosely bandied about themes and more.

"We have mused here and there [but] I mean Chris is pretty much a one movie at a time kind of guy," Goyer said. "I wish I could tell you more. There really isn't anything to tell."

So continue to have fun with the speculation, the talk, the great debate fans have argued about back and forth in posts like the above on theme, and others. Goyer himself called the fan speculation "amusing."

Just know there isn't anything official. And when there is?

"If and when [Chris is] ready to talk - we'll talk," he promised.

For now, Nolan and Batman will rest in 'Dark' glory
By Scott Bowles, USA TODAY

LOS ANGELES — Since he took over the Batman franchise in 2005, Christopher Nolan has produced two No. 1 movies, generated $1.4 billion in worldwide ticket sales and created the second-highest-grossing film of all time in The Dark Knight.

So what's stopping him from making a third installment?

For starters, most third acts in Hollywood stink. Look at the disappointing threequels for The Godfather, Superman and the original Batman. The conclusions weren't much better for the more recent Shrek, Spider-Man and Pirates of the Caribbean.

"I don't know why they're hard to do," Nolan says. "Maybe there's so much expectation to them. But I wouldn't want to do one if it weren't going to be as good as the first or second. That's not respectful to the fans."

Nolan says that reverence informed the making of The Dark Knight DVD and Blu-ray, out Tuesday. Then on Jan. 23, fans get another chance to see the film on the big screen as it's re-released the day after Academy Award nominations arrive.

Many consider Heath Ledger, who died of a prescription overdose on Jan. 22, a shoo-in for a supporting-actor nomination. But fans won't find much more of Ledger's Joker in DVD extras. There are features on the staging of the film's elaborate stunts, alternate angles and a segment on the technology behind Batman's gadgets, but not a single deleted scene or outtake from Ledger's performance.

Nolan says he wasn't keeping deleted scenes from fans. "For my past three films, I really haven't had scenes that didn't make it in the movie," he says. "If it's in the final script, I tend put it on screen."

Any outtakes, however, were intentionally left off the DVD. "I don't like outtakes or gag reels," Nolan says. "I don't think it's respectful to the actors, who signed on to have their performance on screen, not the takes that didn't work out. It discourages actors from going all-out if they think every mistake is going on the disc."

Nolan says he is jotting notes and doing some rough outlines for a third story, but he hasn't yet found anything he's willing to commit to film, despite Warner Bros.' eagerness to get a new film underway.

"It was obvious when the box office was so big ($530 million domestically) that we had underestimated how ready fans were to reboot the franchise," he says. "The worst thing you could do now that you've gotten the plane back in the air is mess up the landing."

Is Batman 3 a Go?
Source: Ted Casablanca; E! Online

The next Batman installment is alive and kicking—definitely. We already mentioned today certain Warners sources are leaking to us that Rachel Weisz is being considered for the Catwoman role, too fab. But Warners officially isn't saying bubkes. But other insiders working on the next installment, to follow up where The Dark Knight left off, say it's all so a go:

Despite some recent interviews in which he down-played the possibility of returning as director again, Christopher Nolan (who helmed Knight) will for sure be back directing the third flick, we're assured by a production mole. Christian Bale will obviously rejoin his director pal, and we're very pleased to report that he'll be playing a "sexier" Bruce Wayne. This is heaven-sent news, as, let's face it, Bale couldn't have looked any more constipated in that last flick.

Never mind. And as for Catwoman casting, look, when we chatted with Aaron Eckhart not long ago, he blabbed that he would love to see Angelina Jolie play the role. Well, sorry babes, as we spilled earlier today, Weisz is the one more likely, at this point, to be signed on to play the sexy puss. After all, Angie has her claws out enough in real life, right?

By the by, even though Warners did not comment on any of the above movie talk, additional studio sources did confirm it's certainly "expected" Bale and Nolan will be back, pending a script which is being written as we gossip. However, let's not forget the most important Batman buzz of all, right?

Who dare fill Heath's shoes? A Batman movie is only as good as the villain, right? Don't believe me? Just watch the Oscars next February, and let's discuss after Heath nabs one of those babies posthumously.

Quote from: MacGuffin on December 15, 2008, 03:36:02 PM
Is Batman 3 a Go?
Source: Ted Casablanca; E! Online

The next Batman installment is alive and kicking—definitely. We already mentioned today certain Warners sources are leaking to us that Rachel Weisz is being considered for the Catwoman role, too fab. But Warners officially isn't saying bubkes. But other insiders working on the next installment, to follow up where The Dark Knight left off, say it's all so a go:

Despite some recent interviews in which he down-played the possibility of returning as director again, Christopher Nolan (who helmed Knight) will for sure be back directing the third flick, we're assured by a production mole. Christian Bale will obviously rejoin his director pal, and we're very pleased to report that he'll be playing a "sexier" Bruce Wayne. This is heaven-sent news, as, let's face it, Bale couldn't have looked any more constipated in that last flick.

Never mind. And as for Catwoman casting, look, when we chatted with Aaron Eckhart not long ago, he blabbed that he would love to see Angelina Jolie play the role. Well, sorry babes, as we spilled earlier today, Weisz is the one more likely, at this point, to be signed on to play the sexy puss. After all, Angie has her claws out enough in real life, right?

By the by, even though Warners did not comment on any of the above movie talk, additional studio sources did confirm it's certainly "expected" Bale and Nolan will be back, pending a script which is being written as we gossip. However, let's not forget the most important Batman buzz of all, right?

Who dare fill Heath's shoes? A Batman movie is only as good as the villain, right? Don't believe me? Just watch the Oscars next February, and let's discuss after Heath nabs one of those babies posthumously.

haha. wtf?

Have you ever watched E!?  That is E! to a T.

E!T. phone home.

The tabloid report of the day. If this is true then it will be so bad that the Dark Knight will look pretty good in my eyes, but I got this from Imdb.com:



Murphy And Labeouf For Batman
17 December 2008 5:29 PM, PST


Eddie Murphy and Shia Labeouf have been lined up to star in the next Batman movie, according to reports.

The Beverly Hills Cop actor will star as The Riddler and Labeouf will play the caped crusader's sidekick Robin in the next instalment, tentatively titled Gotham.

Actress Rachel Weisz is reportedly in the frame to play Catwoman. Christian Bale will return as Bruce Wayne and Michael Caine will again play his assistant Alfred, according to British newspaper The Sun.

The movie, which is slated for a 2010 release, will be directed by Christopher Nolan, who made The Dark Knight such a huge success when it was released this year.

A source says, .Chris wasn.t sure if he wanted to do another movie but as soon as he decided to, he got the wheels in motion. Eddie.s a fantastic addition. Everyone.s excited to see what he does as the Riddler..

this is like that time that robin williams would play the joker, right? RIGHT?

those two shits would invalidate everything that's good about the new franchise.

It's false; SuperheroHype says so. I can't remember where I heard it, but it was said that Nolan doesn't want to do a Robin storyline.

So I met Christian Bale last night at the Admirals Club in LAX. He said he is not even discussing anything about the film for now, they have not started working on a script, much less casting or dates.

The minute my wife told me about this, I knew it wasn't true. This shit wasn't even a rumor first and then she read about it CNN? Like this would come up out of nowhere. What a dumb rumor.

never ever ever happen.  everybody knows marlon wayans is robin.

'Batman 3' Rumor Report: 'Eddie Murphy As Riddler' Reporter Stands By His 'Gotham' Casting Story
Source: MTV

Sure, we all had a good laugh at the expense of the U.K.-based tabloid The Sun after they announced that Eddie Murphy and Shia LaBeouf would portray The Riddler and Robin, respectively, in "Gotham" (what The Sun claimed to be the title of the follow-up to this summer's "The Dark Knight"). After all — as we've made perfectly clear — Warner Bros., director Christopher Nolan and various high-level execs attached to the franchise have all gone on record saying that there's been absolutely no movement on the film, let alone a script or preliminary casting.

However, the source of the speculation — Sun reporter Gordon Smart — has come forward in the face of the fanboy firing squad to defend his reporting, saying that he stands by his story based on "a reliable contact" close to the film. And while it's still safe to shrug and smirk this rumor off, it might be worth noting that Smart claims that the same anonymous source who kick-started the recent "Batman 3" casting rumors was responsible for another rumor back in 2005 that proved true in a big way: the casting of Daniel Craig as the new (at the time) James Bond.

In a recent post on The Guardian's Film Blog — in reference to the "Craig as Bond" rumor that came true — Smart is quoted as saying, "Everyone had a crack at us when we published that one. I was almost laughed out of conference that day, but it turned out to be spot on. I wish I had had a bet on it."

The Guardian follows that up with a report that, off the record, Smart revealed his unnamed source, and points out that — if credible — it appears to be very reliable.

So while we here at Splash Page still have our doubts about this rumor, it appears as though this story isn't going away anytime soon.

There's no way. I'd love to put money on it but .... Shia Le BUFF.

'Dark Knight' Producer Talks 'Batman 3' Casting, Status
'Chris [Nolan] and David Goyer are talking and thinking,' Chuck Roven tells MTV News.

While "The Dark Knight" amasses a Batcave full of award nominations — and fans of the flick anxiously wait to see if it will get the attention of a fella named Oscar — we here at MTV News continue to look toward the future of the franchise: "Batman 3."

So, naturally, when we caught up with "Dark Knight" producer Chuck Roven on the People's Choice Awards red carpet, we simply had to ask for an update on the film. The good news is, it looks like director Christopher Nolan could be officially on the project (after months of online speculation that he was still on the fence). But no one — not even the producers — know what's in store for the third, ridiculously anticipated film.

"I know that Chris [Nolan] and [writer] David Goyer are talking and thinking," Roven said. "We're hoping, of course, that they find and rest on something that they'll find is worthy to do, but we don't know anything more than you do right now."

Meanwhile, fans are also dying to know what villain — or villains — the Caped Crusader will possibly face off against in the follow-up to 2008's box-office titan and, also, what actors will be playing the parts. Again, the Internet has been ablaze with rumors regarding possible rogues and casting — some good, some bad and some downright laughable — so we checked to see if Roven had any ideas.

"All I can say — because I really don't know more than you do — is that I see no reason why, tonally, Chris would do anything different than he's done in the first two films," the producer said.

As Hollywood buzzes with speculation regarding a possible posthumous Academy Award nomination for Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker, it's nearly impossible to talk "The Dark Knight" and not bring him up. And while Ledger has managed to become synonymous with the role — and considering that viewers were left with the impression that the Joker may indeed show up in future Batman films — we wondered, considering the tragedy of Ledger's untimely death, if the producers would've done anything differently regarding that character.

"We have to separate the actors from the role," Roven said. "On a personal level, Heath was a friend of mine. We had worked together before 'The Dark Knight,' but I still think that 'The Dark Knight' is its own thing, and we have to separate them. So I guess the answer is, I think we still would've done the same thing."

Batman 3! Flash! Season of the Witch! We got updates
Source: SciFi Wire

Speaking at a news conference in Beverly Hills, Calif., Thursday to promote The International, Roven added that a sequel to Get Smart is also in the works for 2010. The following Q&A features edited excerpts of the news conference.

Christopher Nolan says he'll only make a third Batman if he has a worthy idea. Do you think he'll get there?

Roven: We know that he's thinking about what another one would be like, if he can think all the way through [development]. We'll know if he's gotten to the end of that process when he tells us he's gotten to the end of that process.

Is there anything you can do to make him feel comfortable developing it?

Roven: You know, Chris is his own guy. That's all I can say, so when he's come through the process that he's going to come through, he'll tell us what he wants to do.

Casting rumors have already started. Have you started approaching actors for the new villains?

Roven: Nothing's been done. There's no story, so we wouldn't be casting anybody without a story.

Nolan did The Prestige in between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Do you think he'll do something else before a third Batman?

Roven: My guess is if he decides he wants to do another Batman that he would put a movie in between.

Get Smart was another hit for you this summer. Are you thinking about a Get Smart 2?

Roven: We're definitely developing a Get Smart sequel, definitely. So I'm hopeful that we'll make that movie in 2010.

Would it still be with Steve Carell and Anne Hathaway?

Roven: That's our intention, certainly.

The Flash has floated around for a while, too. Any progress on that?

Roven: Nope, it's all shrouded in mystery.

Well, shrouded in mystery is better than dead.

Roven: No, no, it's definitely not dead. Definitely not dead, but it's shrouded in mystery.

Is Season of the Witch a supernatural witch?

Roven: Yeah, it's supernatural. I'm in the middle of shooting in Hungary right now. Dominic Sena is directing, a guy by the name of Bragi Schut wrote. It stars Nick Cage and Ron Perlman. It takes place during the plague in the 14th century. They have to transport a woman that's accused of being a witch who started the plague to an abbey where her innocence or guilt will be determined.

Sounds intense. Would it be R-rated?

Roven: No, PG-13.

there wasn't an ounce of batman info there... why do they feel the need on reporting all of the Qs & As and not just say "We talked to him and there's no news on batman... on to bullshit"

Nolan and BATMAN 3: FAR From a Done Deal?
Source: Batman On Film

When I got the chance to visit with David Goyer and Jonathan Nolan a year ago, one of the things I heard them tell us media folk was that they had to lobby and "convince" Chris Nolan to do THE DARK KNIGHT and they'd probably have to do the same thing for there to be a Nolan-helmed BATMAN 3.

Maybe the sale-job on Chris for a third BATMAN is going to be a really tough one this time.

Despite the fact that BOF has had some unofficial assurances that Chris would indeed return and direct a third BATMAN, industry scuttlebutt says – and has been saying – differently.

I've been told that while they desperately want another Chris Nolan BATMAN, Warner Bros. does have a shortlist of directors (Zack Snyder's reps told BOF that he wasn't interested) they'd consider and ultimately turn to if (and when) Nolan's done with The Caped Crusader. And frankly, it certainly wouldn't be prudent of them not to have such a list.

Several (and unrelated) industry friends of BOF have been telling me over the last year that it's far from a given that Chris will do another one. And alarmingly, this one's starting to pick up steam.

Case it point, a report I received from an old friend of the site overnight via email. This cat works in the business behind the camera and has proved to me long ago to be legit. With that said, this again is what I term "Industry Scuttlebutt," so keep that in mind. Also, if any of my friends at Warner Bros. or reps of Mr. Nolan want to refute the following, you've got an open forum here. Anyway, according to our source...

* The death of Heath Ledger in January of 2008 rocked Mr. Nolan hard. So hard that Chris was convinced that TDK was going to be it for him and Batman on film.

* The Joker was going to return in BATMAN 3.

* "You are correct in reporting that he is developing story ideas with [Jonathan Nolan] and David Goyer, but it will be until AT LEAST 2012 before we see the Caped Crusader back [in theaters]. And that is only an EARLY ESTIMATE at best right now. They are even saying it might not be until 2013."

* Basically, the BATMAN film franchise is back to square one. As far as a story or a BATMAN 3, "Right now, there is none," says our guy.

Now, there was some other stuff that was off the record (mainly to protect our guy's identity), but really, it doesn't affect the jest of this story. The bottom line here is that we may be a ways away from a BATMAN 3 -- with or without Chris Nolan.

Look, I want Mr. Nolan to return as much as anyone else and have TONS of respect for him, Emma Thomas, Charles Roven, David Goyer, Jonathan Nolan, and the rest of the folks who've given us the BEST two BATMAN films ever. But if Chris is done, then he's done and I'm sure as hell not going to begrudge the guy. Despite the fact that I am a "Batman Fan" first and foremost, I've also grown to be a big Chris Nolan fan as well. BUT...

As a Batman fan, I certainly hope that Warner Bros. has a contingent plan in place – and one much better than the one they had back in the early 90s.

Despite the bummer vibe that permeates this report, let me remind you of the positives. One, Warner Bros. has not officially announced that Chris is done and the search is underway for a new Bat-director. Secondly, Nolan himself has admitted to "musing" with David Goyer about the storyline of a third film. Third, back in February, IGN reported that Chris is the only screenwriter attached to B3 per the WGA. And finally, the same industry scuttlebutt that produced today's story also says that Chris' deal with WB for INCEPTION included at least a handshake agreement for BATMAN 3.

Keep those fingers crossed Bat-Fans!

fock.

yeah, thanks for nothing, heath ledger.

i did not approve that message.

i dunno how reliable this site is but...

Christian Bale Won't Do Another Batman Movie

Christian Bale doesn't necessarily strike me as the easiest person to work with. :) So I can't say I'm totally surprised by this decision. After finding out that 'Dark Knight' director, Chris Nolan, wouldn't be back on board for another movie in the Batman franchise, Christian says he's out too.

"Chris is in the mindset that he is unlikely to be able to top what was achieved with Dark Knight," reveals a Hollywood insider. "He has a number of new projects he's working on and Batman is not a priority for him right now. Christian is unlikely to want to do another one without Chris. He feels only he understands the dynamic of the character and so it could well be that there will have to be a new Batman and director if there is to be a third movie."

Hmmm...would you want the trilogy to go on without Christian in the role???

http://www.imnotobsessed.com/2009/06/23/christian-bale-wont-do-another-batman-movie

he's signed on for a 3rd, so it doesn't really matter what he wants.  but yeah it will be impossible for nolan/anyone to top TDK.  but we all knew that last summer.

He could still get out of the role, but it would cost him a lot. I believe if Nolan isn't involved, he should get out anyways. Him being in a non-Nolan version of Batman could destroy his credibility as Batman. Nolan is the reason why the franchise is what it is now, but if the producers just depend on Bale then the results will be similar to Terminator: Salvation. Considering the hype for a third Batman will be enormous, I don't think Bale wants that kind of blowback in his face.

In that case, I hope Bale does come back without Nolan. He's a bitchass motherfucker who deserves the blowback of a shitty third Batman film.

SDCC 09: Oldman Confirms Batman
Book of Eli star confirms sequel.

At the panel for Warner Bros. release Book of Eli today, star Gary Oldman confirmed that a sequel to The Dark Knight is currently in the works and set to start filming next year. While he offered no specific information on the plot, he did mention that they're aiming for release in two years.

"But you didn't hear that from he," Oldman assured the roaring crowd.

No "Dark Knight" Follow-Up Just Yet
By Garth Franklin
Saturday July 25th 2009 03:38PM


During "The Book of Eli" panel yesterday at the San Diego Comic Con, a fan asked Gary Oldman about the status of a potential third "Batman" film with Christopher Nolan at the helm.

A nervous Oldman gave the surprising response that it'll begin filming next year prompting a wave of articles from the geek community that the news was set and locked.

It ain't that clear though as in press interviews with iF Magazine a few hours later, Oldman was asked about what he said and he responded "Someone asked me [about the third BATMAN film] and I said, 'I don't know, next year? Two years away? It could be three years away.'"

Next Batman Movie to be Fully Shot in IMAX?
Source: ComingSoon

Ain't It Cool News has posted an interesting rumor saying that Christopher Nolan and Warner Bros. Pictures could be planning to shoot the follow-up to The Dark Knight completely in IMAX format:

The THIRD chapter of Christopher Nolan's Caped Crusader's saga could very well be FULLY shot in IMAX, not IMAX Digital - but the beautiful, stunning IMAX that we saw pieces of THE DARK KNIGHT in.

Now this is something that I'm sure a lot of you will feel is a no-brainer. Nolan blew us away with the IMAX sequences in that film - but it was a very tough process to work in. Mainly due to the limitations of how many available real IMAX rigs there are. Not only that, but lenses had to be created, adapted and god forbid one broke down. Part of the reason that Nolan went forward with INCEPTION first - besides taking a creative break from the cape and cowl adventures... was possibly to create a few new IMAX cameras made to his specs. Once again - the cost of shooting an entire feature film on IMAX... the stock, the time it takes to reset, to load, to move the cameras... Well... it is daunting, but as Nolan proved with DARK KNIGHT - the difference is stunning.

We'll have to wait and see if this does indeed happen.

That is going to be so time-consuming and expensive.

and awesome.  if it happens.

I have never seen a movie in imax. We don't have any within 300 miles of town. Are they really that different?

i can't remember the last time i saw an entire movie in real IMAX, but the Dark Knight scenes in IMAX were STUNNING.  F-- 3D, this was completely immersive.

i was actually afraid of any aerial shot. especially the one where batman jumps off the building. my body felt like it was going to plunge to its death.

It would be fantastic if true, but didn't Nolan specifically rule out this possibility a while back?

I think by this point Nolan is just fucking with Christian Bale. What a jerk.

Quote from: Stefen on August 26, 2009, 03:02:11 PM
I have never seen a movie in imax. We don't have any within 300 miles of town. Are they really that different?

yes they are.  :therethere:

TDK on a normal screen felt like watching an old betamax, on imax it was pure bliss. havent seen yet a film so pristine.

Batman 3 Decision Due in January?
Nolan and Co. rumoured to give offical update on sequel.
by Orlando Parfitt, IGN UK

Some news that we missed last week about a little-known comic book movie franchise called Batman.

Batman On Film reports that director Christopher Nolan and studio Warner Bros. will officially announce their plans for Batman 3 in January.

Their scooper told the site: "The longer we don't hear a Nolan/B3 announcement in 2010, the less likely it is that the director will return."

We've heard so many rumours and counter-rumours about Batman 3 over the past year, so here's hoping BOF's source is true, and that 2010 brings some kind of official news about the project.

the idea of announcing a potential announcement scares me. it's not like they'll know in advance that they'll have a good enough idea to want to make the third one... i smell an official "no" which i have mixed feelings about.

Probability is that Nolan returns. He dropped out of a major project recently and all hearsay is that he did that because he needed the time to commit to a third Batman film. This pre-annoucement of an annoucement could be to get scheduling and logistics down on when filming and such will take place. Since Nolan's Batman has become an event, maybe the studios want to keep the public informed of every step forward. They also may want to do that for the simple reason that development of a third film has been slow and audiences are anxious.

Of course this is all speculation in the lowest confidence. 

Quote from: Gold Trumpet on November 18, 2009, 02:03:12 AM
Of course this is all speculation in the lowest confidence. 

marquee that.


do y'all think we'll see a warner brothers batman without Nolan any time soon?

Cinematographer Wally Pfister Talks About Shooting 'Batman 3' in 3-D
by Todd Gilchrist; Cinematical

On Friday, April 16, the Dallas Film Society presented their coveted Star Award to Wally Pfister for his accomplishments in the world of cinematography, which includes a longtime partnership with Christopher Nolan on such films as Memento, The Prestige, and The Dark Knight. Earlier in the day, Cinematical sat down with Pfister to discuss his career, during which time he offered a few insights about the future of the Batman movie franchise, including whether the film might succumb to being shot in 3-D.

Pfister is of a like mind with Nolan about the merits of 3-D (check back for a full interview soon, in which he details their mutual disinterest), which the duo declined to use for their upcoming film Inception. But the acclaimed, award-winning director of photography said that neither he nor Nolan has ruled out the possibility of shooting it using the format. "What Chris and I have talked about is doing something cool and something interesting," Pfister said. "[Director] Brad Bird was [saying] 'you've got to shoot the whole thing in IMAX!' I was like, yeah, I've talked to Chris about that."

Pfister acknowledged that the technology required to shoot Batman 3 in IMAX would likely be cumbersome, since he and Nolan used it for several sequences in The Dark Knight, but isn't sure that 3-D photography will even be an issue by the time they start shooting. "I did it for one shot of The Dark Knight because he said, you have to say you did it, and literally I had this strapped to my shoulder and I was carrying it. But I think Chris is game for doing something interesting like that, Lord knows that the 3-D fad might pass by the time that summer comes around."

Pfister also said that regardless in how many dimensions they end up shooting the Caped Crusader's exploits, he knows that some decisions have already been made about the film's photography. "But I know one thing about the film that Chris is adamant about is that he wants to shoot on film," Pfister said. "He doesn't want to shoot on video, and I'm the same way."

How did this thread get the title of Caped crusader?

'Batman 3' Nabs a Release Date
Source: Cinematical

Congrats, you Bat nuts finally have an actual day to obsess over for months and months. Warner Bros. has officially announced the release date of Christopher Nolan's third Batman film: July 20th, 2012. All signs have been pointing toward the third Bat installment arriving in 2012, and you didn't have to be a rocket scientist to guess Warners would stick the flick on the same weekend as its closest sibling (especially since it shattered records), but it's still nice to know for sure that we'll be getting a new Batman movie from Nolan on a specific date in the future. It's all set in stone -- we can change the pencil to pen, make the invitations and start looking for a florist and photographer. This deal is done.

Now comes the fun part: 1. Who are the villains? 2. Which actors and actresses are playing those villains? Who else will Nolan add to his delightful, ever-growing ensemble cast? Which actress will replace Maggie Gyllenhaal as the girl Bruce Wayne wants to sleep with? Will Christian Bale lessen the growl a little bit so we don't immediately make fun of him after the credits roll? Can anyone top Ledger? Will this new film forever live in the shadow of its predecessor no matter what they do? How do you make a follow up to one of greatest superhero films of all time?

Those questions -- and many more, I imagine -- will be answered one by one over the next several months.

Christopher Nolan on Batman and Superman
Source: ComingSoon

Empire magazine talked to Christopher Nolan, whose new film Inception opens July 16, and got some great quotes from the helmer on the next Batman movie, coming July 20, 2012, and next Superman movie, targeted for a holiday 2012 release.

It was recently revealed that he would take on a mentor (or "godfather") role for the Superman movie, but he's not that comfortable with that title. "It's much more specific than that," he explained, "What it is, while David Goyer and myself were putting together the story for another Batman film a few years ago - you know, thrashing out where we might move on from 'The Dark Knight' - we got stuck. We were just sitting there idly chatting and he said, ' By the way, I think I know how you approach Superman,' and he told me his take on it. I thought it was really tremendous. It was the first time I had been able to conceive of how you would address Superman in a modern context. I thought it was a very exciting idea."

Nolan said he took that idea and pitched it to Warner Bros., and the studio got excited, too. "But it's not something for me to direct," he added. "It's something we were just trying to put together a vision for, and then find the right person to take it forward."

What's important to Nolan is finding the core of what makes the character so indelible; he favors the back-to-basics approach. "What you have to remember with both Batman and Superman," he told the magazine, "is that what makes those the best superhero characters there are, the most beloved after all this time, is the essence of who those characters were when they were created and when they were first developed. And you can't ever move too far from that."

He still hasn't officially signed on to direct new Batman movie. "No I haven't. There is a point where you're just being precious about it and people get annoyed, but the God's honest truth is I work on one movie at a time. I'm only capable of doing that, so my head will continue to be firmly in ['Inception'] for another few months."

There are some things, though, that Nolan can confirm. "My brother is working on the screenplay. We came up with a story that we are very excited about. We particularly like where we are taking the characters and what the ending is... There are things for me to be very excited about in addressing the characters again. But ultimately it always comes down to the script, and can we make a great film from this? That's something I will firmly be turning my attention to figuring out fairly soon." It will be, he said, "the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story."

Empire asked whether the villain could be a returning (and recast) Joker. "No," said Nolan resisting to elaborate, "I just don't feel comfortable about it."

Nolan reiterated that you won't be seeing a Batman/Superman crossover in his movies. "Marvel are doing what they do and people will respond to that really well, or they won't," said Nolan. "It's not something I ever really applied a blanket rule to, but Marvel characters are very different to DC characters, and the key DC characters are very different to the minor DC characters. You've got to go back to that element of, 'What do I see when I close my eyes and think of Batman? What do I see when I close my eyes and think of Superman?' And for me a big part of that is their individuality. They are extraordinary beings in an ordinary world. And the reason I think the two are fascinating is because Superman is very specifically superpowered and obviously otherworldly; Batman is very human and flawed. They're two very different characters, but there's an elemental feeling of power in the iconography of those characters. To me that's originally because they stood alone. I need to hang on to that in my imagining of them."

Caine: 'Batman 3' to shoot in April
'Batman' star talks about start date
Source: Variety

Christopher Nolan plans to start shooting "Batman 3" for Warner Bros. in April, according to thesp Michael Caine.

The studio hasn't yet officially greenlighted the pic and wasn't immediately available for comment. Caine made the disclosure at Thursday night's London premiere of Nolan's "Inception" in response to a question about "Batman 3."

"I think they're going to do it in April, but that's about as much as I know," said Caine said, who portrays a professor in "Inception."

Caine portrayed Batman's butler, Alfred Pennyworth, in the last two Batpics. He also starred in Nolan's "The Prestige."

Warner Bros. announced in late April that "Batman 3" would open on July 20, 2012. The studio and Imax had jointly disclosed a few days earlier that week that the project -- the third "Batman" pic to be directed by Nolan -- was one of 20 Warner projects that would be released in an Imax format before the end of 2013.

David Goyer is working with Christopher Nolan's brother, Jonathan Nolan, on a script for the next Batman installment, based on an idea from Christopher Nolan.

Christopher Nolan and Goyer helped breathe new life into the Batman franchise in 2005 co-writing "Batman Begins," which went on to earn $352 million worldwide. The 2008 follow-up "The Dark Knight" was co-written by the Nolans with Goyer helping develop the story, earned $1 billion.

New here. So thought i'd start with a little update.

Christopher Nolan Confirms Batman 3
Exclusive: Nolan says he's set to direct
Source: Exclusive
   

You may have guessed, you may have assumed it, but until now we hadn't had confirmation from the studio or the man himself that Christopher Nolan would be back to direct Batman 3 / The Dark Knight 2 (or whatever we're calling it). But our Dan Jolin talked to the man himself earlier today, and got it straight from Nolan himself.

"It's becoming inevitable, I'll put it that way," says Nolan. "I feel myself falling into it, I guess. And getting it all figured out and I'm pretty excited about what we're doing so... If I haven't announced it, I think that people probably all know at this point that I'm doing it."

Hang on, that's not 100% clear: so we can safely assume you're directing?

"I think you can at this point, yes."

So as of right now, Nolan will return. You may also have spotted the "getting it all figured out" there: when we asked Nolan what he was busy with as we called, the answer was that he's working on Jonathan Nolan's script for the film. In other words, there is a script! Things are slowly taking shape!

Express your excitement below, and permit yourself a moment's indulgence in wildly speculating about villains and themes this time around. Just a moment, though: we don't want to get carried away.

Helen O' Hara

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=29062

Morgan Freeman on Batman 3 villains: There may be more than one
Source: SfyFy

How can Batman 3 possibly top The Dark Knight? One of the deciding factors will surely be the choice of villain ... or should that be villains? Because as we all debate which bad guy director Christopher Nolan should choose, Morgan Freeman just hinted that Nolan may end up choosing more than one.

Freeman, who played Bruce Wayne's armorer and technical genius Lucius Fox in the previous films, has been talking up bringing back Catwoman, and when asked recently if Nolan was on board with that idea, he said:

"Well, yes and no. But I don't know if that's going to be his choice. There's been talk of the Riddler, talk of the Joker—I don't mean the Joker—the Penguin. Philip Seymour Hoffman as the Penguin, and that sounds interesting to me. So we'll wait and see. And there just may be more than one."

There has been more than 1 in both films, so that wouldn't be changing anything. 

Tom Hardy Reunited With 'Inception' Helmer Chris Nolan On 'Batman'
Source: DeadlineNY

EXCLUSIVE: While Tom Hardy's plan to play Mad Max in the George Miller-directed Mad Max: Fury Road has hit another delay, the fast-rising Hardy's in the mix for another big film at Warner Bros. I'm told that Hardy has been set by his Inception director Chris Nolan for a lead role in the next Batman film at Warner Bros. Insiders are keeping the role secret and won't even say if he's up for a villain role, but that seems a reasonable assumption. Hardy has followed up Inception with lead roles in the Tomas Alfredson-directed  adaptation of the John Le Carre novel Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, and he's currently starring with Chris Pine and Reese Witherspoon in the McG-directed Fox comedy This Means War. CAA reps Hardy, who's expected to return to Fury Road when it goes.

'Batman 3' Reportedly Looking For Female Lead
Source: The Playlist

We're tempted to file this one under, "no shit, sherlock," but a) we're back on our don't-be-outraged medication this week and b) we'll admit, this is, we suppose an interesting, if very foreseeable, development.

According to Australian site, MovieHole, Christopher Nolan's third, untitled "Batman" film (aka "Batman 3" for now), is on the hunt for a new female lead. Katie Holmes, then Maggie Gyllenhaal; there's already been two female leads in Nolan's previous Batman films, "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight" (both played the romantic interest Rachel Dawes). With Dawes out of the picture (spoiler, she dies in 'TDK,' where have you been?) it seems only natural that Christian Bale's Playboy-ish Bruce Wayne character would have some sort female interest in his life.

So without providing many details, Moviehole says, that a "revolving door will be in operation for the better part of this week as director Christopher Nolan and producers meet with their prospective female lead." These are all apparently tentative meetings and while Moviehole claims to know names, they're not naming any.

Really a non-story (wait, why did we start this piece?), but Moviehole does say that insiders "suspect" this could be the often-rumored Catwoman role. Frankly, we think that Catwoman is a pretty ridiculous character in the Nolan-directed Batman world as much as geek sites would like to think otherwise. We're betting it's another Dawes-like character.

So far, no word has been made on new casting news in "Batman 3" other than actor-of-the-moment Tom Hardy ("Inception") who now has room on his schedule in 2011 thanks to "Mad Max: Fury Road" being pushed to a 2012 production start date. Christian Bale will be back and so too presumably will be actors like Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman , among others. "Batman 3" is eying an April, 2011 start date. No villains have been made, but that won't stop the Internet from claiming any faint trace of "evidence" means XYZ character is in the movie. If any familiar villains do show up (Riddler, Penguin, Catwoman), we expect them to appear in some stripped-down, far less cartoony than the comic books much like the way Nolan made The Joker and Two-Face seem like very plausible, psychotic antagonists.

Christopher Nolan reveals title of third Batman film and that 'it wont be the Riddler'
Source: LATimes

Christopher Nolan's third Batman film will be called "The Dark Knight Rises" and though the Gotham City auteur isn't ready to reveal the villain of his 2012 film, he did eliminate one of the big contenders: "It won't be the Riddler," Nolan said in an exclusive interview with the Hero Complex.

Riddler rumors were off target.

Nolan was most eager to talk about the fact that Warner Bros. had  agreed with his argument that the film should resist the current 3-D craze and instead use high-definition approaches and IMAX cameras to strike out on a different cinematic path than the stereoscopic technology that, for better or worse, has become the dominant conversation in the blockbuster sector.

Check back here later in the morning for a more in-depth look at that decision and the Nolan ambitions and reasons behind it.

As for the title, it shows the writer-director's intention to keep his Bruce Wayne trilogy tightly stitched together. "We'll use many of the same characters as we have all along, and we'll be introducing some new ones," Nolan said cryptically.  I had an odd thought: What if Nolan somehow brings back Harvey Dent? The only reason I even mention it is because, back during post-production on the second film, Nolan told me that the title "The Dark Knight" was just as much about Dent and his fall from the status of shining-knight civic crusader. Dent was plainly dead at the end of the last film, though, and Nolan has been intent on keeping his Gotham City film firmly rooted in a gritty gangland realism– this isn't a franchise that has veered off into the supernatural or even much super-science.

Nolan plays things close to the vest — he's one of the few filmmakers of his generation who actually does wear a vest — and he chuckled when I tried to get a few more details out of him. "Oh, you know me, I don't talk." He began our conversation by comparing it with a visit to the dentist's office. Well, if so, he's a patient who never opens wide. I asked if he could imagine a time when Warner Bros. would let a filmmaker shoot a Batman script where the villain isn't one of the signature creations from the comic books. "Ah, Geoff Boucher, master of the leading question," he said with a chuckle.

That's when he did agree, however, to eliminate a villain candidate, namely Edward Nigma, the green-suited Riddler, who many people (myself included) assumed was the next natural choice. That character could be taken in a lot of directions — think of Kevin Spacey's character in "Seven" as a compass point for one of those dark paths — but Nolan and his team are going a different way. As with "Dark Knight," the new film has a script written by Nolan and his brother, Jonah, and it's based on a story by the director and David Goyer. Earlier, I got Nolan to take Mr. Freeze off the list and, yes, this is like pulling teeth but don't think for a minute that I mind. Nolan makes sublime films, and any secrets he wants to keep in place are done so to protect the final product. As for me, I'm hoping now for Hugo Strange who, come to think of it, looks a bit like a dentist...

I'm just going to keep calling it Three Dark Knight.

Nolan still sucks with titles. However, I am happy there is no Riddler. I can't see how he could fit into a continuation of the story. With Catwoman, you can tweek supernatural aspects of her character, and make it fit for Wayne under the guise he wants to find a real love but somehow stay away from donning the cape in full hero mood again? A relationship with Selena Kyle could draw out that character in him again.

Quote from: Gold Trumpet on October 27, 2010, 02:31:08 PM
Nolan still sucks with titles. However, I am happy there is no Riddler.

Explain.  Batman Begins isn't great, The Dark Knight is.  His other films are all fine.

I like his titles, but I don't like the dark knight rises. sounds like a porno.

Three Dark Knight it is.

I was thinking about the Batman trilogy so far and yes, the Dark Knight is fine. I guess I said it because Batman Begins may be one of the worst titles ever for me. The Dark Knight Rises falls into line with Batman Begins title-wise.

Quote from: polkablues on October 27, 2010, 02:28:31 PM
I'm just going to keep calling it Three Dark Knight.

The Dark Kni3ht.

No no, Three Dark Knight is perfect.

This is polky's CMBB moment.

3DK 4eva!

Batman III: 3 Dark Kni3ht in 3D

3DarKnight

HEATH L3DKER

3DK421

3DARK 1Knight

3OH!DK

3==D K

Quote from: P on October 28, 2010, 02:19:39 AM3==D K

HAHA.

Quote from: P on October 27, 2010, 06:16:15 PM
No no, Three Dark Knight is perfect.

This is polky's CMBB moment.

3DK 4eva!

Like Chere Mill, it's doomed to be unappreciated in its own time.

EXCLUSIVE: (http://www.deadline.com/2010/11/chris-nolan-lines-up-actresses-for-batfilm/) Chris Nolan is lining up actresses he'll meet for two female lead roles in The Dark Knight Rises, the third installment of the Batfranchise which Warner Bros has dated release on July 20, 2012. I'm told one of the roles is a love interest for Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne, and the other is a villain. The actresses are: Rachel Weisz, Naomi Watts, Blake Lively, Natalie Portman, Anne Hathaway and Keira Knightley. Nolan is keeping the roles under wraps, just the way that he did when he drafted his Inception star Tom Hardy to come aboard to likely play a villain. Deadline broke that story October 13. I'm still not sure what the role is and I believe Hardy took the job without knowing or reading a script that's still being tweaked.

Talia Al Ghul would be cool and make sense.

Quote from: RegularKarate on November 11, 2010, 04:23:42 PM
Talia Al Ghul would be cool and make sense.

It would be if she was introduced in Batman Begins. Could have been in a small and trivial way, but they made the Al Ghul character a revolving door for a title someone holds in the organization. It would be a big door swing to revisit that storyline and have to explain the why's of how a daughter scenario is rational.

But if she is just a member of the organization and is seeking revenge, that would be great.

This title isn't growing on me. Seems so lazy. I would have liked something like The Caped Crusader Returns. Something to cap off a classic trilogy.

I don't love the title, but I also don't give a shit.  Batman Begins is a bad title too.  The Dark Knight was only "alright" for a title, but it doesn't matter.

The only problem I have with the title is that it doesn't feel final.  It feels like a chapter that people wouldn't care about.

The Dark Knight fit the film because Batman went dark. The people were against him and he didn't really seem to give a crap anymore. He went DARK. I liked the idea of The Caped Crusader because it would mean Batman the peoples champ is back and he's probably kicking bad-guy ass and taking names.

But Nolan hasn't done wrong yet so I'll trust him. There's a reason why he's titling and making movies and I'm complaining about them on the internet.

The Dark Knight Rises Won't be Shot Entirely in IMAX
Wally Pfister talks about the anticipated film
by SuperHeroHype

Earlier this week, a rumor made the rounds that Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises will be shot entirely in IMAX. That's not the case, director of photography Wally Pfister told TheWrap at an Inception screening last night.

Pfister said he and Nolan hope to shoot much of the new Batman film, "The Dark Knight Rises," for IMAX -- as they did for sporadic parts in "The Dark Knight." But they won't shoot the entire film for IMAX, he said, citing cost and the inability to capture sound as just two of the impediments.

In addition to stressing again that he and Nolan are not big fans of 3D, he brushed off speculation that the film would shoot in New Orleans, though we're pretty sure scenes will be shot in the city and other locations starting in April. He added that he doesn't expect to see the script until early next year.

The Dark Knight Rises is scheduled to hit theaters on July 20, 2012.

The dialogue scenes would be wasted in IMAX.  But I'm glad they're shooting some action sequences again in the format.  For impressive visuals, IMAX > 3D.

The Dark Knight Rises will be Christian Bale's last Batman film
Source: SyFy

After shooting the third Caped Crusader flick for Christopher Nolan next year, Christian Bale will hang up the cape and cowl for good.

While out doing press for The Fighter—which also gave us the "Mark Walhberg hates The Happening" nugget from yesterday—Bale let slip that The Dark Knight Rises will be his final go-round as the protector of Gotham City: "I believe, unless Chris (Nolan) says different, this will be the last time I'm playing Batman."

Which also leads us to believe that The Dark Knight Rises will be Nolan's final film in the Batman franchise as well, as we can't imagine the director continuing without his frequent collaborator. Not that Bale knows much of anything Bat-related:

"Chris will let me know what I need to know when I need to know it. I probably know a little bit more than some other people out there, but I think most people would be surprised at how little I do know."

OFF TOPIC

Quote from: MacGuffin on November 25, 2010, 02:42:09 AM
"Mark Walhberg hates The Happening"

What did he express about the movie exactly? It's funny because if there's anything I hate about The Happening- something that held it back from being great, it has to be his performance.

Quote from: Reelist on November 25, 2010, 10:14:38 AM

Quote from: MacGuffin on November 25, 2010, 02:42:09 AM
"Mark Walhberg hates The Happening"

What did he express about the movie exactly?

http://www.collider.com/2010/11/21/mark-wahlberg-the-happening-bad-movie/ (http://www.collider.com/2010/11/21/mark-wahlberg-the-happening-bad-movie/)

In discussing meeting with his Fighter co-star Amy Adams previously, Wahlberg said:

We had actually had the luxury of having lunch before to talk about another movie and it was a bad movie that I did. She dodged the bullet. And then I was still able to ... I don't want to tell you what movie ... alright "The Happening." Fuck it. It is what it is. Fucking trees, man. The plants. Fuck it. You can't blame me for not wanting to try to play a science teacher. At least I wasn't playing a cop or a crook.

Quote from: Reelist on November 25, 2010, 10:14:38 AM
It's funny because if there's anything I hate about The Happening- something that held it back from being great, it has to be his performance.

you are wrong. aside from his performance there was plenty of other terrible stuff . . . happening.

Quote from: Pozer on November 25, 2010, 10:59:13 AM

Quote from: Reelist on November 25, 2010, 10:14:38 AM

Quote from: MacGuffin on November 25, 2010, 02:42:09 AM
"Mark Walhberg hates The Happening"

What did he express about the movie exactly?

http://www.collider.com/2010/11/21/mark-wahlberg-the-happening-bad-movie/ (http://www.collider.com/2010/11/21/mark-wahlberg-the-happening-bad-movie/)

In discussing meeting with his Fighter co-star Amy Adams previously, Wahlberg said:

We had actually had the luxury of having lunch before to talk about another movie and it was a bad movie that I did. She dodged the bullet. And then I was still able to ... I don't want to tell you what movie ... alright The Happening." Fuck it. It is what it is. Fucking trees, man. The plants. Fuck it. You can't blame me for not wanting to try to play a science teacher. At least I wasn't playing a cop or a crook.

Quote from: Reelist on November 25, 2010, 10:14:38 AM
It's funny because if there's anything I hate about The Happening- something that held it back from being great, it has to be his performance.

you are wrong. aside from his performance there was plenty of other terrible stuff . . . happening.

strangely enough i didn't hate the happening. my friend and i both kinda enjoyed it separately and laughed when we both admitted this to each other. It's a bad movie in that it's a bad script, everything else in it i kinda enjoyed. the happening requires the same suspension of disbelief that Pontypool requires and as long as you make that leap, it's an average movie. do i ever want to see it again? nope, but it got shit on way too much.  there are some great shots/scenes in it, i especially liked that one long shot with the gun being passed around to all the people on the street.

i guess i went in with super low expectations.

Fucking trees, man...

my favorite of his was I heart Huckabee's, but he's pretty much sucked balls since The Departed. Maybe he can take over for Christian Bale and play the next shitty Batman.


BACK ON TOPIC

lol. Bale will be done with Batman when Chris Nolan says he's done with Batman.

What is it with you and new pages anyway? :yabbse-grin:

Rumor of the day: Heath Ledger's Joker to cameo in Batman 3
Source: SyFy

Heath Ledger's Joker to return in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises? That's the rumor going around today, and while we're skeptical about it, we're also definitely intrigued.

According to ShowbizSpy, "sources" have confirmed that Christopher Nolan plans to use unseen footage from Ledger's incredible Oscar-winning performance as the deranged Joker from The Dark Knight in his upcoming third Batman film. Ledger's appearance in the movie would simply be a cameo, since the actor passed away from an accidental overdose in 2008 at the age of 28.

A "movie insider" apparently said:

"The idea is to use these fragments of cut scenes and use CGI to have The Joker appear one last time.
"Chris wants some continuity between movies and for the franchise to pay tribute to Heath and his portrayal of the Joker.

"It would only be a fleeting moment in the movie and would only be included with the full consent of Heath's family."


Is there any truth to this story? Possibly, but please take it with a grain (or mountain) of salt until we hear it from Nolan himself.

The Dark Knight Rises is currently in preproduction and is set to be released in theaters on July 20, 2012.

Nolan and his wife/producing partner Emma Thomas both swatted down the rumor to Heat Vision in a chat last night.

"I heard the rumor," said Thomas. "We're not doing that."

Christopher Nolan responds to those Heath Ledger/Batman 3 rumors
Source: SyFy

The rumors of Heath Ledger's death were not exaggerated, but the rumors of his upcoming appearance in the next Batman movie are. Writer and director Christopher Nolan has denied the late actor will have a cameo.

IndieWire reports that Nolan spoke to them to:

shoot down reports that he'll resurrect The Joker by including unused footage of Heath Ledger's performance in the previous chapter. "That's all wrong," said the writer-director, who's also producing the next Superman movie, for Zack Snyder to direct.

Nolan did mention that Tom Hardy—one of the supporting characters in his previous venture, Inception—will have an important role in The Dark Knight Rises, but he would not confirm whether Hardy's character was a hero or a villain. He plans to finish the script by January.

Fans of Ledger can take comfort in knowing that his performance of the Joker was too strong to settle for a mere cameo.

---------------------------------------------------------

Christopher Nolan confirms 3rd Batman will be his last
Source: SyFy

With Christopher Nolan having just confirmed that The Dark Knight Rises would be his last Batman film—calling it "the last chapter of our Batman saga"—and with Christian Bale recently saying that it would also be his last outing as the caped hero, we're left to wonder: Could it truly be the end of the big-screen Batman franchise?

In an interview with EW, Nolan all but confirmed that the intrepid duo's collaboration on one of the most successful comic-book franchises of all time will end with the third Batman film. However, in the wake of the success of Inception, the director is still very much happy to be working on his last Batman outing:

"I feel very glad that I'm doing another Batman film. I think it would have been daunting to sit down and write an original script after Inception. I love working within the realm and rules of our Batman world. It's kind of nice to have someplace to go that I'm super-excited about.

"I must say that I'm glad—I'm very, very glad—to be embarking on the last chapter of our Batman saga without any sense of obligation or duty to the studio. They did very well with Inception. So I'm able to go into finishing our story in a very enthusiastic way."

With a worldwide box office of almost $372 million for Batman Begins and over $1 billion for The Dark Knight, surely Warner Brothers won't want to let the franchise end with The Dark Knight Rises, so we've got to assume they'll likely go the reboot or sequel road with an all-new cast and crew.

But with Nolan and Bale out of the equation, the studio will have hard shoes to fill. Unless, of course, they make both men offers they can't possibly refuse for them to return for a fourth film.

Eckhart Confirms No Two-Face in The Dark Knight Rises
Source: MTV

Aaron Eckhart confirmed once and for all to MTV that Harvey Dent/Two-Face will not be appearing in The Dark Knight Rises, which he says "is going to blow everybody away."

"Chris and I had a meeting, on the beach, just the two of us," Eckhart said. "I said, 'Chris, a lot of people are asking me if I'm in the next 'Batman.' And Chris said, 'Yes?' I said, 'Am I?' He looked at me and he said, 'No.'" He added that he wasn't joking about the beach part and said that they "found ourselves alone on the beach together on a stormy day and he delivered the news to me. I was heartbroken. But Chris has his reasons and my life must go on... Honestly, it was Heath's movie to go on. We had a great movie. I'm so honored to be a part of that movie."

That sounds like the most hilarious meeting ever.

What that article fails to mention is that Eckhart was wearing a Catwoman costume at the time.

I'm starting to go through Batman withdrawal -- I'm getting the shakes.  I need this movie (preferably with a decent female character). 

However, surprisingly, I am not overly familiar with the Hugo Strange character and stroyline in Prey.  I am, however, still familiar with shark-repellent-bat-spray.  But I don't think Nolan will include that.

'Dark Knight Rises': Anne Hathaway will be Catwoman, Tom Hardy is Bane
Source: LA Times

This just in, a press release from Warner Bros..

Warner Bros. Pictures announced today that Anne Hathaway has been cast as Selina Kyle in Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight Rises." She will be starring alongside Christian Bale, who returns in the title role of Bruce Wayne/Batman. Christopher Nolan stated, "I am thrilled to have the opportunity to work with Anne Hathaway, who will be a fantastic addition to our ensemble as we complete our story."

In addition, Tom Hardy has been set to play Bane. Nolan said, "I am delighted to be working with Tom again and excited to watch him bring to life our new interpretation of one of Batman's most formidable enemies." Nolan will direct the film from a screenplay he wrote with Jonathan Nolan, from a story by Christopher Nolan and David S. Goyer. Nolan will also produce the film with his longtime producing partner, Emma Thomas, and Charles Roven. "The Dark Knight Rises" is slated for release on July 20, 2012. The film will be distributed worldwide by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Warner Bros. Entertainment Company.

I like Hathaway, but that's a major miscast.

I like her a lot too so I'm just hoping Nolan knows what he's doing.  I was a big doubter for Ledger and that turned out amazing so I'm just trying to picture Rachel Getting Married instead of Bride Wars.  I think she can do it....

I'm more shocked by Tom Hardy playing Bane.  Didn't even consider that weird character would be making a 2nd appearance onscreen.  But again, I'm sure whatever Nolan's interpretation is will be interesting.

Bane and Catwoman is crazy to me.

I don't trust Nolan very much with female characters and Bane is a batshit choice unless they're planning on breaking Batman's back to avoid further sequels in this universe.

reallyreally wanted the hoff-man to be involved. this is just boring. 

Hathaway is an alright actress, but total butterface (just like Gyllenhall). She has the same droopy eye syndrome as Katie and Maggie. Thought Catwoman was supposed to be sexy.

Meh. But I trust Nolan.

And go to hell, Derek! Anne Hathaway is hotter than a thermometer in the suns ass!

Quote from: Stefen on January 19, 2011, 05:25:05 PM
Meh. But I trust Nolan.

And go to hell, Derek! Anne Hathaway is hotter than a thermometer in the suns ass!

She's super pretty, but it's a theater-nerd brand of pretty.  She's about as sexy as a puppy.

Quote from: RegularKarate on January 19, 2011, 12:34:13 PM
I don't trust Nolan very much with female characters and Bane is a batshit choice unless they're planning on breaking Batman's back to avoid further sequels in this universe.

Knightfall would be fun to do -- but that would be one mighty long movie!


I don't think Anne Hathaway is a bad choice.  I was skeptical about Heath Ledger as Joker way back when he was cast, so I don't have a great track record with predicting casting.  I just hope he doesn't short-change my favorite Batman character.  After the atrocious "movie" that Halle Berry starred in, this character needs serious redemption!

Quote from: RegularKarate on January 19, 2011, 12:34:13 PM
Bane and Catwoman is crazy to me.

I don't trust Nolan very much with female characters and Bane is a batshit choice unless they're planning on breaking Batman's back to avoid further sequels in this universe.

Who knows where Nolan will go with it. It could be kind of cool to see Bane be Batmans sidekick or something. Nolan may not necessarily make him a villain. Same with Catwoman. That's what's so much fun about these movies. They're surprising.

I don't really care very much about these Batman movies, but I do think that Anne Hathaway can be sexy.

Never gonna top Batman Returns, though.

Quote from: matt35mm on January 19, 2011, 09:31:40 PM
Never gonna top Batman Returns, though.

Don't count Nolan out.  Whether he tops it or not it will at least be a completely different and interesting interpretation.  Like Nicholson vs. Ledger.  I can't pick a favorite.  89 or 08?  I love both for totally different things.

the dark nip rises.

hathaway is very catlike in that she makes you work for her rewards. she is not blatantly attractive and when she tries to be, ie. when she smiles, a normal person's reaction is to shriek back in terror. she is like a cat.. if they smiled and acted like mouth breathing dogs all the time you woudln't like them.

so she's s a villain in the sense that most people are DOG people (because they're insecure and constantly need to be loved.. because their daddy and mommy/mummy didn't pay enough attention to them when they were a child..) but Batman has the whole city drooling after him, which is what he wanted as a natural dog person like the rest of the world --- that's why he's one of US.. that is one of the millions of people that made the movie a hit, definitely not just xixax freaks --- he didn't get enough love from his parents cos they DIEDED,, but now that he's maturing in the final installment of the series it makes sense he'd be after something that doesn't constantly need his love to live.

Tom Hardy will break batman's back in the sense that he will expose his other vulnerability, that is his ultra masculinity. hardy's character will crack batty-boy's back in the sense that he will make bale lose the deep voice and suddenly talk like the prissy brit he is.. they will find some kind of camaraderie and share their deep held love for  instant cofee.

called it.

 :yabbse-thumbup: to this ^

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F_T_JachDW9ag%2FTTxQyaq-tXI%2FAAAAAAAALYg%2FL6qvs5aIMdY%2Fs1600%2F1295795868677.jpg&hash=3fa23868d354b8f79c892fde93c69bf6326a33a0)

Love that poster. Still haven't warmed up to the title. It seemed so perfect to cap off the trilogy with The Caped Crusader. I'm sure once it gets closer I'll get used to it.

It's gonna be a long year and a half of anticipation.

that poster is a pretty good fake

so this poster is speculating that catwoman is gonna be batman's sidekick? that attire looks way too Wayne Enterpisey.

Fake. But pretty good.

Quote from: squints on January 26, 2011, 02:08:02 AM
that poster is a pretty good fake

Quote from: modage on January 26, 2011, 05:50:58 AM
Fake. But pretty good.

Its pretty good. But Fake.

It's good. Pretty fake.

it's pretty. good fake?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F_c6ImA-vA_8U%2FSYIWziifiBI%2FAAAAAAAAAB4%2FyDOaIRy4f-s%2Fs320%2FIts-Still-Real-to-Me-Dammit.jpg&hash=25a56bd7abe4b85ec0619ff6f172bf26d6434d84)"It's still real to me, dammit!"

for reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvTNyKIGXiI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvTNyKIGXiI)

cause i had to look it up. HAHA.

Sometimes I forget that not everyone spends as much time screwing around on the internet as I do.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt To Play The Holiday Killer In 'The Dark Knight Rises'
Source: The Playlist

It looks like Christopher Nolan is going totally new-school in his approach for the villains in "The Dark Knight Rises." With Tom Hardy set to play Bane, word has surfaced about the recently confirmed Joseph Gordon-Levitt's role in the upcoming film. Variety reports that Gordon-Levitt is set to play Alberto Falcone aka The Holiday Killer, an intriguing choice given that the character only appears in the graphic novels "The Long Halloween" and "Batman: Dark Victory." That said, he does fit into the world of Gotham established by Christopher Nolan. The son of mobster Carmine Falcone (played by Tom Wilkinson in "Batman Begins"), Alberto murders a number of prominent Gotham mobsters on holiday dates across a year (hence his name). His weapon of choice is a .22 with taped handle, serial number filed off and a baby bottle nipple silencer. Storywise, the move makes sense since with Batman now on the run and Harvey Dent dead, we could only presume that Captain Gordon will have his hands full as the criminal enterprises begin to reassert their power in Gotham. Alberto is sort of the runt of the crime family—not unlike Fredo Corleone—who wants to help in the business but is refused by his father who wants him to live a normal life. So much for that. However, nothing is 100% just yet. Recently, Gary Oldman revealed that one of the villains would be "from one of the old, old, from way back from the old comics"—neither of which Bane or The Holiday Killer are. Of course, he might be talking about Anne Hathaway as Catwoman (though recent reports suggest she'll be an ally/love interest instead of a baddie). So either Oldman was wrong or was spinning some disinformation. And of course, there's Two-Face who is a classic villain and Aaron Eckhart continues to be coy about his involvement—he recently told us "Harvey Dent is dead" leading some to rejoinder that it means Two-Face is alive—although last year it was reported that Christopher Nolan told him directly he would not be in the film. So still lots of unknowns about the picture that will be gearing up to shoot soon, such as Juno Temple's role as a "street-smart Gotham girl." "The Dark Knight Rises" opens on July 20, 2012.

I would still like to have seen JGL as the Riddler, but oh well. It seems that there is only one image of the Holiday Killer in existence, at least according to Google:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fzangtheblog.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F02%2F369px-alberto_falcone_001.jpg&hash=3054c251186909b31d4cf35152788b5bee6a041c)

Quote from: Sleepless on March 20, 2011, 06:53:46 PM
I would still like to have seen JGL as the Riddler, but oh well.

chance regenerated

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/03/21/joseph-gordon-levitt-dark-knight-rises/ (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/03/21/joseph-gordon-levitt-dark-knight-rises/)

Warner Bros, Legendary Start Shooting 'The Dark Knight Rises,' Final Chapter Of Christopher Nolan's Trilogy
BY MIKE FLEMING | Deadline

BURBANK, CA, May 19, 2011 –Principal photography has begun on Warner Bros. Pictures' and Legendary Pictures' "The Dark Knight Rises," the epic conclusion to filmmaker Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. Leading an all-star international cast, Oscar® winner Christian Bale ("The Fighter") again plays the dual role of Bruce Wayne/Batman. The film also stars Anne Hathaway, as Selina Kyle; Tom Hardy, as Bane; Oscar® winner Marion Cotillard ("La Vie en Rose"), as Miranda Tate; and Joseph Gordon-Levitt, as John Blake. Returning to the main cast, Oscar® winner Michael Caine ("The Cider House Rules") plays Alfred; Gary Oldman is Commissioner Gordon; and Oscar® winner Morgan Freeman ("Million Dollar Baby") reprises the role of Lucius Fox. In helming "The Dark Knight Rises," Christopher Nolan is utilizing IMAX® cameras even more extensively than he did on "The Dark Knight," which had marked the first time ever that a major feature film was partially shot with IMAX® cameras. The results were so spectacular that the director wanted to expand the use of the large-format cameras for this film.

The screenplay for "The Dark Knight Rises" is written by Christopher Nolan and Jonathan Nolan, story by Christopher Nolan & David S. Goyer. The film is being produced by Emma Thomas, Christopher Nolan and Charles Roven, who previously teamed on "Batman Begins" and the record-breaking blockbuster "The Dark Knight." The executive producers are Benjamin Melniker, Michael E. Uslan, Kevin De La Noy and Thomas Tull, with Jordan Goldberg serving as co-producer. "The Dark Knight" is based upon characters appearing in comic books published by DC Comics. Batman was created by Bob Kane. Behind the scenes, "The Dark Knight Rises" reunites the director with several of his longtime collaborators, all of whom worked together on the "The Dark Knight." The creative team includes director of photography Wally Pfister, who recently won an Oscar® for his work on Nolan's "Inception"; production designer Nathan Crowley; editor Lee Smith; and Oscar®-winning costume designer Lindy Hemming ("Topsy-Turvy"). In addition, Paul Franklin and Chris Corbould, who both won Oscars® for the effects in "Inception," will supervise the visual and special effects, respectively. The music will be composed by Oscar® winner Hans Zimmer ("The Lion King"). The locations for "The Dark Knight Rises" span three continents and include the American cities of Pittsburgh, New York and Los Angeles, as well as sites in India, England and Scotland. "The Dark Knight Rises" is a presentation of Warner Bros. Pictures, in association with Legendary Pictures. Slated for release on July 20, 2012, the film will be distributed worldwide by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Warner Bros. Entertainment Company.

Official Website is up. Cool viral stuff is happening:
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/what-the-hell-is-going-on-at-the-dark-knight-rises-web-site

Tom Hardy as Bane:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.deadline.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F05%2FHARDY-BAN_20110521081420.jpg&hash=be372d3cd18bbb0042d0b6e55df67d7b37ce4c30)

Is Matthew Modine Playing A "Key Villain" In 'The Dark Knight Rises'?
Source: The Playlist

So it's Monday of Memorial Day weekend which means you've spent the quality time with family, had way too many hot dogs at your Uncle's BBQ, perhaps laid in the sun a bit too long and before you back to the daily grind at the office tomorrow, you're using Monday afternoon to catch up on some websites or Twitter feeds you've been neglecting. Which may explain why this latest bit is only picking up steam now, nearly a week after it first kissed the internet. Anyway, Roger Friedman's Showbiz 411 (which currently appears to be offline) reported last week that Matthew Modine was set to play Nixon "a politician and a key villain." The report came five days after Modine was first announced to playing a character named Nixon and his report was seemingly missed by most outlets (including us). Friedman speculates that the name is an homage to the other Nixon we all know and hate but how true this is or not remains to be seen. Friedman's intel tends to be iffy at times —remember last year when he dubiously reported that James Franco was in the running for "The Bourne Legacy" after Tony Gilroy went to see "127 Hours"? But then again, he definitely has a fat Rolodex and lots of Hollywood connections so this could have some basis in truth and he has been on the money many times before. Our guess? Modine is a politician looking to bring Batman to "justice" for his vigilante brand of crime-fighting, but perhaps calling him a "key villain" might be a stretch. We already had a politician/villain in Two-Face and we doubt Christopher Nolan would want to go down a similar road. Modine will shoot all of his scenes in a London studio if that helps in deciphering things out any more clearly. Anyway, "The Dark Knight Rises" is currently shooting and we'll get all of our answers on July 20, 2012.

The Dark Knight Returns' Spoiler: Guess Who's (Reportedly) Back?
Source: Playlist

Keeping with the wishes of Drew McWeeny over at HitFix, we didn't put the name in the headline or the picture in the image above, but obviously, this story has spoilers so if you don't want to know stop reading now and don't cry to us about it later.



Anyway, according to sources that have reached out to HitFix, a major character from "Batman Begins" has quietly hit the set of Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight Rises" which if true, will certainly be another strong thread in tying up the trilogy as a whole. Liam Neeson, who just a few months ago said he had not been asked to come back for the third installment, has apparently been spotted shooting scenes for "The Dark Knight Rises" in London. As you might remember, Josh Pence signed on to play a young Ra's Al-Ghul in flashback scenes though right now, it's not Neeson will fit into the story, details of which are being kept close to the chest. Is Neeson showing up in a different flashback with scenes circa "Batman Begins"? Has Ra's Al Ghul been resurrected? Has he started a new career in craft services? Who knows. But it's another interesting morsel from a film that will work hard to keep the surprises—-well, surprising. Warner Bros. had no comment when asked by the site about what they heard and McWeeny tends to have good intel, so we're inclined to believe this has some truth sauce behind it. All this also makes us wonder if Cillian Murphy's Scarecrow will also pop up. We hope so if only to get him in all three films. His character adds an interesting texture as sort of a B-level villain, plus he's pretty damn great in the part and his moments in "The Dark Knight" were fun. Shooting continues and the film hits on July 20, 2012.

Leaked Teaser Trailer here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXFsQRW5VKg)

Quote from: MacGuffin on June 17, 2011, 02:17:17 PM
Leaked Teaser Trailer here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXFsQRW5VKg)

Fake... and boring

Mod said on Twitter that he had this ruined for him. How can I too have it ruined for me?  :ponder:

I just he was just talking about

Spoiler alert!
Liam Neeson being in it.

Also, that's not necessarily a spoiler.  Since we know that Talia Al Ghul is in this, it would make sense to have flashbacks.  We don't know that Ras is still alive and even if he is, we don't know if it's because he didn't die (which I have assumed since the very first time I saw the movie) or because of the Lazarus pit.

What is a Lazarus Pit and will it ruin the movie?

Info here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_Pit). I would suspect that they won't feature in the movie as it doesn't seem to fit the universe Nolan has created. But that's pure speculation. Flashbacks seems more likely.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.blogs.indiewire.com%2Fimages%2Fblogs%2Ftheplaylist%2Farchives%2FTheDarkKnightRises_TeaserPo.jpg&hash=e5f48bad9171ae135b652d4fc80ab4ac3904079e)

Batception.

I watched The Dark Knight the other night and it got me really excited for this new one. It's so good until the Two Face stuff, then I don't like it as much.

Right when it ended I went and researched everything I could about this movie. I trust Nolan. I just hope that silly sonar crap doesn't come back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i6uU-gjRts&feature=youtu.be

This link will be null and void very soon, but man, if that pit whoever is climbing out of is the Lazerus Pit, they have made it more epic and dark than I could have imagined before. Very little to teaser besides a few good moments with Bane but very adorkable for Batman nerds. Can't help but be excited.

that crowd didn't seem very impressed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO3LL5kvJkw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO3LL5kvJkw)


Robin Williams huh?


EDIT:

HERP DERP its fake. Watching it again, i'm embarrassed that i was fooled.  :oops:

Real Teaser here. (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/watch_teaser_trailer_for_the_dark_knight_rises_does_exactly_that/#.TiRc-BJyg34.twitter)

It's a good teaser. Certainly better than some of the fanboy nerds are suggesting. Yeah, there isn't much new footage, but at least there is footage. Remember The Dark Knight teaser? There wasn't any footage at all. New or old. The end of this one with Bane coming at Batman like a man possessed and Batman backing away like a chump was pretty bad ass.

Since we don't know much about it, I think we should all try and guess what the plot will be. Since Bane is a character in the films, and in the comics he breaks Batmans back, and it also features the Lazarus pit, I'm going to say that at some point Batman gets his back broken by Bane, or gets severely injured/crippled and then it eventually gets fixed by the Lazarus pit. Rhas Al Ghul was a big part of the Lazarus pit storyline so with crap from him in the first movie being featured so prominently in the new trailer it's safe to assume he's back. At some point Gordon gets effed up. Possibly by Bane, maybe by someone else. Regardless, he's in bad shape, possibly dying. That could bring Batman out of retirement. Batman could be pissed and want revenge, but everyone hates him, so how does this work? Maybe this is where Catwoman comes in. She could have taken up the mantle while Batman was in retirement and protected Gotham City or at least protect it as much as Nolan would let a woman. The women in Nolan's films are always pretty weak whether it's Rachel Dawes in Batman who's always having to be saved or the girls in The Prestige who are always at the whim of the magicians (one of the wives drowns because she isn't saved), or Maude in Inception who's just a complete nutcase who can't even take care of herself and also needs to be saved, so maybe Batman saves Catwoman after she gets in too deep and that puts him back in the good graces of the people of Gotham.

Currently my most anticipated of 2012, and I hate comic book movies.

Since it was revealed he was a character, I've been pretty sure that Bane is going to break Batman's back, man.  I feel like it will probably come at the end though.  This is the end of the trilogy.  He wants to kill this series off an prevent others from making a fourth movie (they'll have to reboot again).

I don't think the Lazarus pit will actually bring people back to life or give them immortality since this series is more grounded in reality.  I get the feeling it's just something used to add to the legend of Ra's Al Ghul.  It makes sense to bring him back for this one since it would bookend it, but it's possible that he's just back in flashbacks.

I think Catwoman is going to be a less significant part of the storyline.

Also, I don't know how well Nolan could keep something like this covered up, but in the Batman storyline, Bane breaks the walls of Arkham Assylum and releases all the criminals.  Maybe that's what brings the Bat out of retirement.

The Dark Unicorn Rises (http://i.imgur.com/OX6Oe.jpg)

??? ohh, I see it now.

Tom Hardy as Bane.

http://justjared.buzznet.com/2011/07/30/tom-hardy-on-set-as-bane-for-the-dark-knight-rises/

He looks small.

Batman and little ass Bane throwing fists in a giant dust up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twPypRSpj-M&feature=player_embedded

http://www.avclub.com/articles/let-us-also-pass-judgment-on-this-photo-of-anne-ha,60004/

Let us also pass judgment on this photo of Anne Hathaway in The Dark Knight Rises
By Sean O'Neal
August 5, 2011

Our week of possibly contentious, context-free teases continues with this first glimpse of Selina Kyle in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises, a film that will be released one representative publicity still and/or set photo per day, every day, thereby unspooling its story like a modern hieroglyphic. Anyway, some people expressed concern when choir treasurer Anne Hathaway was selected to be our next Catwoman, but what do you think now, eh? Nothing, most likely, because there's nothing here to see—just a woman dressed in the sort of form-fitting leather that exists only in superhero films and perhaps a few Eastern European nightclubs, riding one of Bruce Wayne's Batcycles through what appears to be the lobby of a Hilton, and wearing wraparound virtual reality glasses for some reason. Obviously, there's no indication that this is actually Hathaway in her Catwoman garb (for what it's worth, the photo file is labeled "selina_kyle.jpg"), nor any other explanation for any of this. But let's not let that stop us from drawing premature conclusions about Hathaway's suitability for the role. We have a whole year to kill here.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.avclub.com%2Fimages%2Farticles%2Farticle%2F60%2F60004%2Fselina_kyle-dkr-1110-thumb-630x419-38428_jpg_627x1000_q85.jpg&hash=9e6f1c616cc71e5c8a221afb4911f57ed9894e0a)

haha oh no she looks ridiculous.

i have faith in Nola--hahaha

that's just silly.

yuck.

jesus, guys.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Foi54.tinypic.com%2Fic94qw.jpg&hash=3657bcbb20add404278ab620ac42a0caf9ac9b7c)


I'd hit that (If I was able to it)

EDIT: Oh shit, it's a fake.

Is the other one fake too?

we can only hope

I hope Nolan knows what he's doing...it's still early.  Judging by the picture alone, he might be using a later incarnation of the Catwoman costume from the Catwoman comic series -- that would explain the goggles.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.comicsreporter.com%2Fimages%2Fuploads%2Fbrubecatwoman.jpg&hash=7dc307b0e4877870a8cd451371f9b2f30e23e0e4)

Do you like it Gloria? I don't like it, but I trust Nolan. To me it just looks like every other comic book villain. Nothing sets it apart. The Batman villains have always been very genuine and real. This one doesn't seem like that.

Most super hero outfits look dumb to me in promotional picture stage. When in action on film, I think the suit will be passable enough. The simplicity of the outfit will help it.

Quote from: S.R. on August 06, 2011, 06:47:11 PM
Do you like it Gloria? I don't like it, but I trust Nolan. To me it just looks like every other comic book villain. Nothing sets it apart. The Batman villains have always been very genuine and real. This one doesn't seem like that.

It looks questionable right now -- I think, judging only from the set photo, her costume is too glossy and cheap.  It kind of worries me with the costume looking this way, because I was hoping Anne Hathaway wouldn't seem miscast like Katie Holmes was in Batman Begins -- both seem a little "goody-goody" without a lot of intensity.  With this costuming, she looks even more out of place compared to the Bane and Batman costumes. I'm a little worried - but it's early.

It's also possible that she's only wearing those dumb goggles (the only thing that looks bad to me) because she's riding a Batcycle.

Anne Hathaway Reacts to 'The Dark Knight Rises' Catwoman Criticisms
Source: THR

Anne Hathaway wasn't shy when asked about the criticisms of the first Catwoman photos that Warner Bros. released from The Dark Knight Rises, even revealing that she asked someone to send her some of the reactions so she could read them.

"I was not going to admit it: I asked someone to send me a few reactions [to the photo]," Hathaway told MTV News. "And I happen to know that MTV's reaction was 'meh.' " In fact, MTV's response to the photo used the words "cautiously optimistic" and "underwhelming" in their critique.

Last week, the first image of Hathaway as Selina Kyle in the upcoming The Dark Knight Rises was released on the web and many did not have a favorable impression. Holly Duffy said, "I'm sure it won't be as bad as I think, but still, Catwoman doesn't look like that, and Anne Hathaway is too cuddly to play her." But Shane Adams had a positive reaction, saying, "Anne Hathaway as Selena Kyle/Catwoman riding a Bat-pod. Sounds good to me." In the image, Hathaway was seen wearing skin-tight leather and riding a large motorcycle.

"What I am happy to say is, if you didn't like the photo, you only see about a 10th of what that suit can do," she said.

She added: "And if you did like the photo, you have excellent taste."

During filming, Hathaway's stunt double wrecked an expensive Imax camera during filming. She was riding a giant motorcycle down the steps of a Carnegie Mellon University building when she went flying into the camera.

The Dark Knight Rises is in theaters next summer and stars Christian Bale, Tom Hardy and Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

Quote from: MacGuffin on August 09, 2011, 05:46:11 PM
Anne Hathaway Reacts to 'The Dark Knight Rises' Catwoman Criticisms
Source: THR

During filming, Hathaway's stunt double wrecked an expensive Imax camera during filming. She was riding a giant motorcycle down the steps of a Carnegie Mellon University building when she went flying into the camera.

And here it is happening. Spoilers, I guess. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXbdotM9JxQ

I feel like I'm going to know the whole movie just based off of spy crap.

Ha she fucked it up good. This will just reinforce Nolan's well established habit to never give a female character any major active role. This time even her stunt double is miscast.

Also..

Quote from: MacGuffin on August 09, 2011, 05:46:11 PM
"What I am happy to say is, if you didn't like the photo, you only see about a 10th of what that suit can do," she said.

I don't think that's why no one liked the photo. The problem is her, she just looks dumb on that bike. I don't care what the suit can do.. what am I, a tiny child? Does she think she's in one of the Schumacher films?

Marquee:

What can the suit do?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frobotceleb.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2Fdark-knight-rises-catwoman-e1295462344297-265x400.jpg&hash=f9daf6ee4f44a2662665282818f64643725d5b36)

Ugly, three-year-old fake.

Paparazzi shot of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.empireonline.com%2Fimages%2Fuploaded%2Ffullcatwomancostume4.jpg&hash=0ac30778f8ca1a90666aed84b0768c7ea1e2ebda)

More here. (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=82506)

Quote from: Sleepless on September 26, 2011, 11:41:03 AM
Paparazzi shot of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman:

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.empireonline.com%2Fimages%2Fuploaded%2Ffullcatwomancostume4.jpg&hash=0ac30778f8ca1a90666aed84b0768c7ea1e2ebda)

More here. (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=82506)

As someone in the comments noted, it looks exactly like the released press photo except with the visor being work on her head to make it look like she has ears.

hmmmmm, she's floating.


is it necessary to post this in both threads?

Quote from: squints on September 26, 2011, 02:59:01 PM
hmmmmm, she's floating.


is it necessary to post this in both threads?

He didn't post it in both threads. I just quoted it in the dark knight rises thread since it was more about that movie than this one.

Yeah, my bad. I don't know how I picked the wrong thread. Sorry.

oooooooooh. herp derp.


still doesn't change the fact that she's floating.

'The Dark Knight Rises' 6 Minute Preview Confirmed, But Only On 70mm Capable IMAX Screens
Not In Those Tiny, Digital IMAX Theaters
Source: Playlist

Last week word spread like wildfire around the interwebs that a lengthy, six-minute prologue from "The Dark Knight Rises" would be unspooled in front of screenings for "Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol." While the news seemed legit, we had our doubts and wondered why Legendary Pictures and Warner Bros. were putting a massive teaser for easily the biggest film of next summer in front of a rival studio's film. But it turns out there is a big caveat for those who want to see it which may mean buying your tickets well in advance and scouring to find out which theater in particular near you will even be capable of showing it.

AMC Theaters has confirmed that yes, that six-minute "The Dark Knight Rises" teaser is confirmed, however, it will only be shown on 70mm IMAX screens. So what does that mean? You know those much tinier, digital fake IMAX screens Aziz Ansari was bitching about before which are kind of a total ripoff? Yeah, it will not be shown in those. Only on IMAX screens with 70mm projectors aka those constructed under the "Classic Design," because as you know, Christopher Nolan has not gone down that digital road.

Essentially, this preview is going to take some work to see as the list of 70mm capable screens is not very long. Here's an unofficial list of theaters/screens that can handle the format, but again, not all of these are IMAX and this is not a comprehensive guide.

So do your research folks and buy your tickets early if you want to see this thing. "Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol" begins its limited IMAX-only run on December 16th before going wide on December 21st.

http://www.redballoon.net/current70mmus.html

Wow, don't go by that list.  I know that Austin at least is WAY off.  None of the theaters listed there are IMAX and the IMAX we DO have (which is capable of 70MM) is no listed.
Seriously, Playlist, this should be MUCH easier to research.

For the Austin stuff, it does say "now closed" for each of those except for the Paramount, which does have a 70mm projector but won't be playing Mission: Impossible.

But you know for sure that Bob Bullock IMAX projects in 70mm? I was wondering about that.

Quote from: matt35mm on October 25, 2011, 11:54:02 AM
For the Austin stuff, it does say "now closed" for each of those except for the Paramount, which does have a 70mm projector but won't be playing Mission: Impossible.

But you know for sure that Bob Bullock IMAX projects in 70mm? I was wondering about that.

I know they used to.  They're a real IMAX, not a dumb fake one.  They used to only show educational IMAX films and has been there since before there were fake IMAXes.

I need to see this but don't have an IMAX within 500 miles of me.  :( #xixaxproblems

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shockya.com%2Fnews%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fempire-bane-dark-knight-rises-cover1.jpg&hash=0341e23d72c588efbd8fe125d56b6591378a15bb)

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shockya.com%2Fnews%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fempire-batman-dark-knight-rises-cover1.jpg&hash=a6360c642e06a754afa5fc19a3df4043b0117e78)

Don't tase me, bro.

'Dark Knight Rises' Director Christopher Nolan Reveals New Details About the Plot, Villain Bane
Source: THR

The movie picks up eight years after "The Dark Knight" with Bruce Wayne "not in a great state," says the helmer, who has been notoriously secretive about the final film in his Batman trilogy.

Christopher Nolan has gone overboard to guard the plot details of upcoming Batman threequel, The Dark Knight Rises, including at one point reportedly refusing to let the cast know the ending.

But now he's spilling a few secrets about the movie in a new interview with Empire magazine.

"It's really all about finishing Batman and Bruce Wayne's story," said Nolan, who previously directed 2005's Batman Begins and 2008's The Dark Knight. "We left him in a very precarious place. Perhaps surprisingly for some people, our story picks up quite a bit later, eight years after The Dark Knight. So he's an older Bruce Wayne; he's not in a great state."

Warner Bros.' summer 2012 tentpole finds Christian Bale reprising his role of Bruce Wayne/Batman and Gary Oldman back as Commissioner Gordon. But several newcomers also have joined the film, including Tom Hardy as the villain Bane, whom Nolan described as "brutal."

"He's a big dude who's incredibly clinical, in the fact that he has a result-based and oriented fighting style," he said. "It's not about fighting. It's about carnage. The style is heavy-handed, heavy-footed, it's nasty. Anything from small-joint manipulation to crushing skulls, crushing rib cages, stamping on shins and knees and necks and collarbones and snapping heads off and tearing his fists through chests, ripping out spinal columns. He is a terrorist in mentality as well as brutal action."

Nolan said the plan was to give Batman a villain unlike any he's previously encountered.

"With Bane, we're looking to give Batman a challenge he hasn't had before," Nolan said. "With our choice of villain and with our choice of story we're testing Batman both physically as well as mentally."

Meanwhile, costume designer Lindy Hemming revealed a few more details about the villain's backstory as it relates to his mask.

"He was injured early in his story," she told Empire. "He's suffering from pain and needs gas to survive. He can't survive the pain without the mask. The pipes from the mask go back along his jawline and feed into the thing at his back, where there are two cannisters."

Nolan has been notoriously secretive about the movie's plot. In September, Oldman said that he believed he was the only actor who knew details about the final scenes.

"Christopher doesn't want anyone to ruin it and I completely understand that," he told ContactMusic.com. "The newer people on the film go to his office to read the script. They sent mine out, but it had to be hand-delivered directly to me and nobody else. And the final few pages were missing. I went along and talked to Christopher and in person about the ending. Then I locked it away in my head."

The movie -- which also stars franchise newcomers Anne Hathaway as Catwoman along with Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Marion Cotillard and Josh Pence -- opens July 20. Nolan has said it will be his last Batman film.

Christopher Nolan Debuts 8-Minute 'Dark Knight Rises' Preview
Source: THR

UPDATED: The majority of the footage introduced audiences to Bane, the Batman movie's major villain played by a masked Tom Hardy, and a heist involving a plane.

Warner Bros. and Christopher Nolan showed off about eight minutes of footage from The Dark Knight Rises, a preview that will be seen later this month in select IMAX theatres before Mission: Impossible -- Ghost Protocol.
The majority of the preview introduced audiences to Bane, the Batman movie's major villain, played by a masked Tom Hardy. Without giving too much away, the footage revolved around a heist involving a plane.

The sequence was grand in scope, expanding the Batman world outside of Gotham City, and it was filled with a lot of tension and dread. The effect was not only from the images on screen but from the score, which was reminiscent of Nolan's The Dark Knight and Inception.

The crowd, made up mostly of the entertainment press and such executives as DC's Diane Nelson and Geoff Johns, left the screening definitely impressed. Some did point out one pickle, however: the sound. It may be early in the sound mixing process, but a lot of key dialogue, particularly that of Bane, who speaks via a mask, was unintelligible.

When Heat Vision asked Nolan at the post-preview reception about the perceived problem, the director admitted that because of Hardy's accent and because you can't see his lips, there may be problems in hearing the dialogue (though he did say additional sound work would clear some of it up). And he admitted that sometimes in his movies a viewer may not grasp all the lines. 

But he was and is striving for is an overall understanding by the audience and a deeper cinematic experience. To him, the visuals are as important to tell the story as any dialogue. "Otherwise, it's just a radio play," Nolan said.

Nolan introduced the movie praising the IMAX film format, saying it was created the year before he was born but is "the best imaging format ever created." The reason for the preview, which will only appear on about 42 IMAX screens, is to give the movie and Batfans a sense of what the experience of Rises will be in this format. Since only a handful of giant IMAX screens exist, the preview will "give (moviegoers) time to find (them)," Nolan said.

Nolan also said he wanted to bring back a sense of grandeur to movies, which he said was "being chipped away" by various forces. That grandeur was imprinted on him as a child and "I struggle to recapture that," he said.

Prior to the press preview, Nolan had a run-though for another a A-list crowd. Sources say Nolan showed off the footage to fillmakers including Michael Bay, Bryan Singer, Jon Favreau and Eli Roth among others.

Sounds good. Let me know when it's on YouTube.

Also: Bane is about to make a reappearance in the Dark Knight comic book - I think in January. Just in case you're interested.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fscreenrant.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FThe-Dark-Knight-Rises-Poster-Bane-Triumphant.jpg&hash=33ea5000b98dbbde5a115fea73eaff7cb0da02f0)

Beautiful

if the movie's about his spine getting nastied up, i really have to question the title they chose. i would of gone with something like "The Knight's End" but maybe that won't sell.

nor sound good.

Quote from: O on December 10, 2011, 06:09:24 PM
if the movie's about his spine getting nastied up, i really have to question the title they chose. i would of gone with something like "The Knight's End" but maybe that won't sell.

I think he obviously gets back up at some point. Walks again. RISES.

Has anyone seen the prologue?

Quote from: O on December 10, 2011, 06:09:24 PM
I would of gone with something like "The Knight's End" but maybe that won't sell.

I would've gone with something coherent like "would've gone" but maybe that won't smell of shit English.

FUCK

I'm digging Bane's voice.

Samsong mentioned this in the Mission Impossible thread, but the few minutes they showed at the Imax screening were pretty fucking great except that Bane's voice is completely unintelligible.  It sounds cool, but I can't tell what he's saying... I MAYBE understood a third of what he said.

I won't ruin the clip, but despite not fully understanding WHY everything was happening, it was incredible to watch. 

dude I saw the trailer, it was awesome...Christian Bale showed his dick.

Trailer! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ESy1-ew9tw)

Well that looked kinda bad to me. A football game with explosions? That's almost as silly and awful as that rave sequence in The Matrix 2. Or maybe even something out of the Schumacher Batman movies.

And what's the deal with referring to comic book stories as "legends"?

That bootleg trailer was better than the half dozen other ones that have come out this weekend, but I still wish we could get a non iPhone recorded trailer.

Quote from: RegularKarate on December 16, 2011, 12:53:14 PM
Samsong mentioned this in the Mission Impossible thread, but the few minutes they showed at the Imax screening were pretty fucking great except that Bane's voice is completely unintelligible.  It sounds cool, but I can't tell what he's saying... I MAYBE understood a third of what he said.

I won't ruin the clip, but despite not fully understanding WHY everything was happening, it was incredible to watch. 

I mostly agree with this, except to add that the editing felt weirdly choppy.  Is this how the sequence is actually going to play in the movie, or is it supposed to be some sort of abridged version of the scene?

Also, why am I the only person in the world who sees how unrepentantly shitty an actor Aiden Gillen is?  If more people would watch this movie (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=124.msg304922#msg304922), maybe they would understand where I'm coming from.  It's hyper-emphasized when he's trying to do an American accent, but in general, the guy can't deliver a line in a way that makes him believable as a human being, much less whatever character he's supposed to be playing.

Much better (http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thedarkknightrises/)

Maybe half the film will be people going, "What?"

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dark-knight-rises-christian-bale-batman-tom-hardy-bane-275489

'The Dark Knight Rises' Faces Big Problem: Audiences Can't Understand Villain
Sources say some at Warner Bros. want Christopher Nolan to change the sound mix in response to complaints that Bane's dialogue is hard to hear. But the filmmaker plans only to alter the sound slightly.
5:00 AM PST 12/20/2011 by Borys Kit

Audience interest in next summer's The Dark Knight Rises is ramping up thanks to Imax screenings of an extended prologue before Mission: Impossible -- Ghost Protocol and the debut online of the film's trailer  Monday.

But despite the warm reception to the footage, Warner Bros. is running into an unexpected problem, one which is causing some handwringing among executives and others who are working on the movie.

Some audience members are grumbling that they can't understand what Bane, the main villain in the final installment of the Christopher Nolan-helmed trilogy, is saying. Bane is a bad guy whose super-strength comes from a drug that he continuously inhales. In the prologue, the character, played by British actor Tom Hardy, is seen with a mask that covers his nose and mouth; his speech is garbled and muffled.
"A fantastic action sequence hurt by the fact that you cannot understand the villain at all," commented one fan on Twitter. Others poked fun at the seven-minute prologue. "The Dark Knight Rises prologue was really great, especially when Bane spoke the soon-to-be-classic line: 'Mmrbl ffrmrff hmrbblfmm,'" wrote one.

Fan websites, whose approval is seen in Hollywood as key to building buzz for big superhero tentpole movies, also have not been kind to the sound in the prologue. "We've seen the Dark Knight Rises prologue -- and yes, Bane really does sound that bad," wrote IO9. The male-oriented site What Would Tyler Durden Do published the prologue's purported script pages to help shed light on the dialogue. The site's comment on fan reaction to the footage: "Most people immediately said two things: 'damn that was bad ass!' and 'I have no idea what the f*** was going on!'"

Sources close to the movie say Warner Bros. is very aware of the sound issue. One source working on the film says he is "scared to death" about "the Bane problem." And with good reason. The last Batman film, 2008's The Dark Knight, grossed more than $1 billion worldwide, and the studio doesn't want anything to tamper with Rise's chances for success.

Sources also say some at Warners would like Nolan to change the sound mix, but the filmmaker, whose autonomy is well-earned (his Inception earned the studio more than $800 million and eight Oscar nominations), has informed executives that he plans only to alter the sound slightly, not to rework it completely.

"Chris wants the audience to catch up and participate rather than push everything at them. He doesn't dumb things down," says one high-level exec, declining to be named. "You've got to pedal faster to keep up."

Nolan said similar things to The Hollywood Reporter at the prologue's unveiling during a press event Dec. 8, explaining that it was OK for a moviegoer not to understand what was said at times, as long as the overall idea was conveyed. The filmmaker is currently editing the movie and won't have a cut to show the studio for at least a couple pf months.

While Warners has supported Nolan's wishes in the past, moviegoer complaints about the character could create pressure to make changes. Or the studio and Nolan can do nothing and hope that fan interest in The Dark Knight Rises outweighs any issues with understanding Bane's dialogue.

I hope he doesn't change anything. I thought Bane sounded pretty awesome. The tone of his voice and what not. He's wearing a mask. In the Nolanverse, someone who is wearing a mask would sometimes be difficult to understand.

I'm cool with tweaking the post-processing on the voice to make it a little less muffled, but I'm really glad they're not completely re-dubbing the whole performance, which I'm sure Warner Brothers was pushing for.

I have never been able to understand Kenny.

At least one show will be grateful for the perfect parody potential.

Also Nolan might have to insist the DVD gets released without subtitle options, if he's that keen about getting no one to understand what the dude is saying.

SPOILER:


It looks like the rumors are true. Liam Neeson will be in The Dark Knight Rises. "Production notes for Wrath Of The Titans, in which Neeson plays Zeus, reveal that he is returning, reading: "Neeson next appears in Peter Berg's actioner Battleship and he also will be seen in Christopher Nolan's much-anticipated action thriller The Dark Knight Rises." http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/major-character-returning-for-the-dark-knight-rise/264351 (http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/major-character-returning-for-the-dark-knight-rise/264351)

http://collider.com/dark-knight-rises-imax-hour/161138/

THE DARK KNIGHT RISES to Feature More than an Hour of IMAX Footage
by Matt Goldberg    Posted:April 22nd, 2012 at 8:07 pm

Back in November 2010, it was rumored that director Christopher Nolan might shoot all of The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX.  In May 2011, Warner Bros. sent out a press release saying that while not all of the movie would be shot in IMAX, the technology would be used "even more extensively" than it was in The Dark Knight, which contained about 40 minutes of IMAX.  Then in December, Steve spoke with producer Emma Thomas and learned that the movie could feature more than 40 – 50 minutes of IMAX footage.  Today, The Wall Street Journal reports that there will be "more than one hour's worth" of IMAX footage in The Dark Knight Rises.  Aw, yeah.

The Dark Knight Rises opens July 20th.

Speaking to The Wall Street Journal, Nolan explained that blockbuster movies can handle the technical requirements of the noisy, 90-pound cameras:

"There was a huge irony that we were told it would be too difficult to shoot a Hollywood movie on IMAX when we had this gigantic camera department, grips, electric, hundreds of people working for us," says the director, whose agreement to direct "The Dark Knight" was contingent on Warner Bros. allowing him to shoot the film in IMAX. "These were cameras that had been to the top of Mount Everest, to the bottom of the ocean and into outer space, but people thought we couldn't make a feature film. It was absurd."

There will be plenty of 3D and IMAX post-converted blockbusters this summer, but movies shot in IMAX, not 3D, is where those blockbusters should be trying to go.  An IMAX movie is absolutely worth the cost of a ticket because it gives the viewer something they'll never be able to get at home.  The Dark Knight Rises won't be entirely in IMAX, but I think we can all live with getting over an hour's worth of the spectacular format.

This is great news.  We have one of the best IMAX theaters in the world in Seattle, and the IMAX sequences in Dark Knight and Mission Impossible were some of the most jaw-dropping cinematic experiences I've had. 

Quote from: Ravi on April 22, 2012, 10:30:23 PM
There will be plenty of 3D and IMAX post-converted blockbusters this summer, but movies shot in IMAX, not 3D, is where those blockbusters should be trying to go.  An IMAX movie is absolutely worth the cost of a ticket because it gives the viewer something they'll never be able to get at home.

I agree with every letter of this.

New Trailer

The viral marketing begins (http://www.thedarkknightrises.com/)

Been awhile since a trailer elicited an emotional response from me, but this one did it. When Catwoman tells Batman, "You don't owe these people any more. You've given them everything." and he responds, "Not everything. Not yet." that was really something considering the events of the past films.

Nolan really did a 180 in the way he presented it. Thought he would play up the action aspects but he really went the opposite and played up the drama.

I'm sure The Avirginers will give the Starcraft II online servers a break for a weekend and do huge business, but it seems there's a new fat nerd movie every weekend and I've been sick and tired of them for years, but I'm glad there's this one still to come and after this I hope the fad dies quick and doesn't return for awhile.

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpixel.nymag.com%2Fimgs%2Fdaily%2Fvulture%2F2012%2F05%2F21%2F21_dark-knight-rises.o.jpg%2Fa_560x0.jpg&hash=07d02f0e72bbfe4f640b42a01779e592839bfb5f)

Look at dem fists.

He's so darn angry.

Maybe he nukes Gotham at the end.

'Dark Knight Rises' Director Christopher Nolan Isn't a Fan of Digital
At the Produced By conference the director says he still shoots his movies on film and will continue to do so until he finds digital images to be as high quality as what he can capture on celluloid.
Source: THR

Culver City, California - The movie business is rapidly switching from shooting movies on film to digital but Christopher Nolan, whose third Batman movie The Dark Knight Rises opens in July, thinks it is a mistake because its not being done for quality, but rather for cost.

"There's a huge danger in all of this," Nolan said Saturday while being interviewed at the annual Produced By Conference, presented by the Producer's Guild of America. "If you are looking strictly at production cost, then you would use digital. But for the best image, it is still film."

Nolan said he thinks film is still best because it provides the filmmaker the most range, captures the most depth of image and works best as a tool to tell a story. Nolan said that moving to digital creates a risk of "devaluing what we do as filmmakers."

"The problem with the push to digital is its has been given a consumer aspect," says Nolan," who suggests it confuses the camera with an Ipad. "It's not what is best for the film," he insists.

While digital has made great strides, Nolan believes it has a ways to go yet before it will offer the quality to capture images that film does. "I don't want to be the R and D department. I don't have any interest in the research into electronics. What interests me is to use the best technology and that is film."

Nolan says he does use digital technology in the editing process and for special effects and in other ways, but ultimately he wants his movies shot on film and shown on film. When the digital technology evolves to the point it has the same depth, image quality and look as film, he is open to shifting his view.

"When it is as good as film and it makes sense I'll be open to it," says Nolan. "But (at present) it's not good enough."

Nolan was interviewed along with his producing partner Emma Thomas in the first session on the first day of the Produced By Conference, held this year on the grounds of the Sony Pictures Studio. He was interviewed by Vance Van Petten, national executive director of the Producer's Guild of America, in front of a packed audience – mostly of producers – on the same sound stage where the TV show Wheel of Fortune is shot.

Van Petten spent much of the interview focused on how Nolan and Thomas got their start after meeting as university students in London. They made their first film together, Following, on a budget of $6,000, with a cast and crew he says could fit into one London taxi cab. When it was one Nolan and Thomas brought it to America to get exposure at film festivals. They entered it at Sundance, but did not get in. However, one of those on the Sundance selection committee who saw it was also involved with the San Francisco film festival and brought Nolan there to show his movie.

When it was well received, Nolan and Thomas were on a path that led them to get funding for their next film Memento, which became a critical and commercial hit. In the dozen years since they have made ever bigger movies, but both insisted that they never think about the budget, even when it soars into hundreds of millions of dollars.

Nolan says he always focuses on the story and what the audience expects, not the budget. "For me the different skills of doing certain films is much more important than the large scale," says Nolan, adding: "Doing large scale films is a matter of nerve. You get over it. 'OK, I'm not afraid of that any more."

That doesn't mean Nolan and Thomas don't have to deal with budgets and the reality of what things cost. The director says his approach is always to be clear and honest with the studio about what things are going to cost. "I look them in the eye and say 'this is what it is going to take. I wish it was less but this is what it takes.'"

Thomas added that the main thing with big studios is not to surprise them. The secret to keeping creative control, they both said, was to make the movies on time and on budget so that there is no reason for the studio executives to interfere.

On their movies, Nolan says they do very little story boarding – only for big action sequences – very few re-takes and use no second unit. Nolan prefers to direct it all himself and says he finds second units are a hidden expense that often produces very little material that is actually usable. "I think second units are a very expensive luxury," says Nolan.

One expense Nolan and Thomas insist on is seeing dailies every night after they finish the days shooting. Dailies are the scenes they most recently shot. "We project dailies so we know what we've got," says Nolan. "It used to be an absolute requirement for my job and now for some reason it is not."

"People see (eliminating dailies) as a way to cut costs," adds Thomas. "But what I think is that it's a massive help to everybody to see dailies every night. Frankly, you see what needs fixing."

Nolan recalled working with actor Al Pacino on his first really big budget movie, Insomnia, which cost about $40 million to make. "As a director it's very much about the creative relationship (with the actor)," says Nolan. "It's about finding trust with each actor. Working with Pacino was a huge thing for me. As we shot I was rewriting the script for him and putting my own spin on the script."

"People ask me 'did he take direction?'" says Nolan. "Well, he demanded it. You had to fill that role."

At first Nolan just wanted to write and direct but he says he soon found he had to be a producer as well to deal with all of the issues and problems that go with making a movie. For instance, when he assembles a cast he doesn't immediately schedule his actors; but rather waits until he has them all and knows what he wants. "You have to think like a producer," says Nolan, adding: "That is the only way you can make the puzzle all come together."

By design, very little of the discussion dealt with the upcoming Dark Knight Rises. Nolan did say it would be his last movie in what has become a Batman trilogy. He says he never thought about doing three movies, but did everything he could to do his best on each film, and then did it again. He says that is why it takes him several years between each of the movies to start that entire creative process over again.

Nolan who writes with his brother, and has worked with many of the same crew members on all of his movies, says he just trys to make each film as good as he can. "I said to my brother I don't want to save anything," Nolan says of the development of each of the Batman movies.

Nolan says he did not refer to the Batman comics, and never found the origin story of the characters all in one place in any case. He focused on just telling the best story he could. If he was influenced, it was by earlier Batman movies, some of which he found fanciful. He wanted his movies to be much more grounded in a kind of reality.

"The source material is irrelevant," says Nolan. "The challenge with Batman is to find what is a believable character. You put your stamp on it."

Still, he was always keenly aware that Batman is an iconic figure and a "classic brand."

New Trailer

I wish I hadn't watched that. It's pretty spoilery. I feel like I have a real feel for the plot, not many gaps left.

Still, the music was the best part. It's like a combination of Dark Knight and Inception (which makes total sense).

Nokia Trailer?

I stopped watching after a minute and a half in, but for anyone interested in checking out what looks like a pretty in-depth featurette before seeing the movie then look no further.


http://collider.com/dark-knight-rises-tv-special/177957/ (http://collider.com/dark-knight-rises-tv-special/177957/)

First Screening Of The Dark Knight Rises Receives A Standing Ovation (http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/screening-dark-knight-rises-receives-standing-ovation/)

Wow, the praise seems unanimous..

Quote from: malkovich on July 09, 2012, 05:12:08 PM
First Screening Of The Dark Knight Rises Receives A Standing Ovation (http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/screening-dark-knight-rises-receives-standing-ovation/)

Wow, the praise seems unanimous..

QuoteJust finished the screening of Dark Knight Rises...so much awesome...can't wait to see it again. And again. 9 out of 10 for me. I'd put Amazing Spider-Man at a 7.5 and Avengers at an 8.5.

So "film critic" means as little as "random blogger" nowadays?

I'll wait for non-fanboy reactions.

Quote from: Tortuga on July 10, 2012, 05:59:13 AM

QuoteJust finished the screening of Dark Knight Rises...so much awesome...can't wait to see it again. And again. 9 out of 10 for me. I'd put Amazing Spider-Man at a 7.5 and Avengers at an 8.5.

So "film critic" means as little as "random blogger" nowadays?

I'll wait for non-fanboy reactions.

Yeah, his grading scale is the worst. INVALIDATED.

For those interested in a different kind of spoiler, the soundtrack is online:

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=34498 (http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=34498)

^ came here to post that. Listening to it now.

Short of reading the entire script I can't think of anything more spoilerific than listening to the score! I know it'll be awesome though.

My hopes for this movie:

1. Batman isn't the least interesting character again.
2. It has a couple of good laughs.
3. It dials down the pretension at least a hair.
4. Nolan doesn't hand-hold every fight scene into an incomprehensible, uninspired mess.

5th trailer.

http://xfinitytv.comcast.net/movies/The-Dark-Knight-Rises/216393/2250462197/Preview%3A-The-Dark-Knight-Rises%3A-Journey/videos#

Quote from: ©brad on July 10, 2012, 01:36:04 PM
Short of reading the entire script I can't think of anything more spoilerific than listening to the score! I know it'll be awesome though.

Not really. Was listening to it at work in the background. It's just moody, atmospheric tunes. You will not be spoiled.

Quote from: Sleepless on July 10, 2012, 03:47:21 PM

Quote from: ©brad on July 10, 2012, 01:36:04 PM
Short of reading the entire script I can't think of anything more spoilerific than listening to the score! I know it'll be awesome though.

Not really. Was listening to it at work in the background. It's just moody, atmospheric tunes. You will not be spoiled.

Disagree!
I listened to the first two tracks and feel VERY spoiled. I stopped listening.

CAUTION: PSYCHIC SPOILERS


Is there a point in the music where it sounds like Batman is having his spine broken?  Or a point where the music indicates that Marion Cotillard's character is secretly Talia Al Ghul?

Well, there is a track called Qui-Gon's Funeral.

I saw this.

I love Christopher Nolan.

And I'm sad that it's over.

Don't worry, it will be rebooted in two years.

Mod said nothing about the film. + He didn't make a spoilatar for it. = He didn't like the film.

Told Mod this yesterday, I was more excited for him to see this and to read his (long-form) review than I am to see it myself. Glad you enjoyed it!

Rotten Tomatoes Shuts Down 'Dark Knight Rises' Comments
The movie reviews aggregator aims to protect its featured critics from venomous Batman fans.
Source: THR

Rotten Tomatoes, the popular movie review aggregator, has suspended negative comments from reviews of The Dark Knight Rises, The Associated Press reports.

The site's editor, Matt Atchity, said it was the first time user comments had been yanked from Rotten Tomatoes but that postings would be restored by week's end.

"The job of policing the comments became more than my staff could handle for that film, so we stopped the comments altogether," he explained. "It just got to be too much hate based on reactions to reviews of movies that people hadn't even seen."

Christopher Nolan's epic trilogy ends Friday with The Dark Knight Rises, inarguably the biggest film of the summer co-starring Christian Bale as Batman, Tom Hardy as villain Bane and Anne Hathaway as Catwoman.

Rotten Tomatoes is owned by Flixster.com, a community-based movie site owned by Warner Bros., the studio behind Dark Knight Rises.

Batman superfans are not only disputing the tone of critics' reviews -- they're complaining about spoilers, too. After film critic Marshall Fine posted his assessment of Dark Knight Rises, he received death threats as commenters spewed venom on Rotten Tomatoes and on Fine's website, Hollywood and Fine, causing it to crash amid the flood of traffic.

"I guess to me it crosses a line if someone shows up on my front step," Fine said in an interview with Indiewire. Otherwise everyone's entitled to their opinion. People have strong feelings about this stuff. Is it unfortunate that this is the way people express themselves? Well, yeah, I think it's a measure of how powerless people feel in this society in general. Here's their chance to get their rocks off at someone they don't know."

According to the AP, Rotten Tomatoes could switch to a commenting system like on Facebook, where anonymous posts are curtailed.

"We may do away with comments completely or get to a place where comments are only activated after a movie opens," he said.

Thus far, Dark Knight Rises has scored an 87 percent "fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes despite Fine's critique of the movie as "nonsensical" and other unflattering reviews.

Quote from: polkablues on January 19, 2011, 11:47:56 AM
I like Hathaway, but that's a major miscast.

Also: she's great.

fuckin P called it


:bravo:






and i thought it was ok.

im seeing it again tomorrow midnite








maybe ill say more later

SPOILERS

Thought it was great.

This quoted post (below) should be marked as a spoiler...Donno if people already knew who Marion Cotillard was but I didn't until I read that post. So...thanks.

Quote from: polkablues on July 10, 2012, 06:08:26 PM
Is there a point in the music where it sounds like Batman is having his spine broken?  Or a point where the music indicates that Marion Cotillard's character is secretly Talia Al Ghul?

Well at least I got to see it this morning before the massacre happened.

And to add insult to death and injury..

The movie sucks.

I knew P wouldn't like it.
I completely understand complaints about this movie.
I knew it wasn't going to live up to the second one. I think it earned being what it was though and I will watch it a bunch more times.

I thought it was pretty bad, which is a bummer since it's the flick I was most looking forward to. Even more than The Master. I really hate nerd movies but I liked the Nolan Batman films because they took their audience seriously, but this one does the same crap the nerd movies do with dumb quips after heightened scenes and plot holes galore. God, the plot holes were huge.

It had some cool parts, but overall I thought it was a mess and silly.

Agreed. It was uneven and clunky as hell. I like it less and less, the more I think about it.

I'm happy that I'm waiting a few weeks to see it, so I know where the backlash/back-backlash eventually settles.

MASSIVE SPOILERS





this would have been a lot better if they left out that shitty Miranda Tate character twist and Bane's sympathetic back story, right before his exit... really, were they serious? i had a lot of other problems with it throughout but if it knew how to end itself i would have been satisfied. the last minute forced Bruce/Selina love plot and Alfred's closure was also pretty horrible. this is the same woman who crossed Bruce twice and left him for dead at the hands of Bane. the cafe scene could be brushed off as Alfred's recurring fantasy but that would have only worked if we didn't see selina's face. hate to dwell on the negatives, but as is the flick left a bad taste in my mouth despite it's great moments. easily the weakest link of an overall pretty great trilogy. i'll see it again soon in hopes that it sits better with me after repeated viewings, but i doubt it.

Quote from: S.R. on July 20, 2012, 08:47:49 PM
it's the flick I was most looking forward to. Even more than The Master.

BANNED!

SPOILERS!!

Okay... So either Christopher Nolan lied to our eyes.... Or Alfred see's ghosts.... Or Bruce Wayne has an identical twin brother... Or atom bombs don't hurt?

CONT.  SPOILS

Quote from: pumba on July 21, 2012, 11:59:28 AM
SPOILERS!!

Okay... So either Christopher Nolan lied to our eyes.... Or Alfred see's ghosts.... Or Bruce Wayne has an identical twin brother... Or atom bombs don't hurt?

or their was brief instance where Fox and Wayne discussed the auto-pilot on his aircraft.  Then another conversation takes place later where they say, "yeah it says Bruce Wayne made a patch for it 6 months ago"

In conclusion, Bruce Wayne put his plane (thing) on auto pilot.  The end.

I think what we're seeing with Christopher Nolan and the Dark Knight Rises is his transition into businessman mode. He's no longer able to focus solely on making a great film like he was earlier in his career because due to the success of his earlier films, there's a lot more he has to be mindful of in his new ones. It happens to all the greats. Spielberg could never make Jaws or Close Encounters today. Scorcese could never make Taxi Driver or Raging Bull today. Peter Jackson could never make Heavenly Creatures or LOTR again. He tried with The Lovely Bones and failed miserably and he's trying with The Hobbit but it's completely obvious that whereas LOTR was a passion project for him, The Hobbit is nothing more than a cash grab. When you become as successful as they are, it's no longer a creative process, it's a financial one. You begin compromising your creative vision in order to appeal to the largest possible demographic. You include things in your films that you normally never would just because it will make sure a certain demographic won't be left out. It always happens when you start producing big films for other people. That's always the first sign that a filmmaker has entered businessman mode.

^good to read you, bud. put some words to the massah thread now that it's your most anticipated?

movie feels like he went with a rough draft, coulda been great had brother nolan ironed it out lots and lots more.

Spoiler...


Nearly a decade of batty moping around over snaggleface is when you the knew the script was far from polished.

also, the music bailed out its good scenes. srsly nonstop zimmer to rely on up in this piece.

I had such low expectations going in...and it met those. So much meh. It wasn't bad...just meh. I sometimes get depressed when so many people are in love with a film that I was so completely bored with.

Quote from: S.R. on July 21, 2012, 01:05:36 PM
I think what we're seeing with Christopher Nolan and the Dark Knight Rises is his transition into businessman mode. He's no longer able to focus solely on making a great film like he was earlier in his career because due to the success of his earlier films, there's a lot more he has to be mindful of in his new ones.

Nolan will get his groove back. It's good they've brought Batman to a close so he can move on to bigger and better things now. He made two pretty great films in between them, but he's gonna need to wipe the slate clean in order to make another 'Memento'

Man, this was shockingly bad! I loved The Dark Knight but wanted to walk out of this an hour into it.

I really enjoyed the sewer fight scene but thats about it.

Overall, I enjoyed it, but it is the weakest of the three films. It jam packs new characters and their storylines with resolving issues of established characters.


SPOILERS



My biggest disappointment is with the third act. I never felt these films were traditional action flicks, but Rises falls victim to this conventional storytelling: Ticking time bomb with huge readout for the countdown; the talking villain who lays out their plans giving the hero time to make their escape; the anti-hero who has a change of heart and returns to help the hero (think Han Solo at the end of Star Wars). These moments became less about the characters, which I think every action scene, including the previous films, that came before were the driving force. I felt less chills with this film. I liked Bane and his 'deconstruction' of Batman. So, after an unlifting moment of Batman using Bane's "permission to die," I felt cheated that Catwoman was the one to take down Bane, and so easily.


END SPOILERS




But I did shed a tear at the end of it all. I will miss these characters (I think Gary Oldman's Commissioner Gordon is underrated ) and this Gotham that Nolan created.

Yeah, it wasn't all bad and it had a lot of redeeming qualities and I too got mad emotional in a couple Alfred scenes, but overall, it was just so disappointing, maybe not because it was bad, but because so much more was expected of it. It's fun but ultimately forgettable just like any other nerd movie, but these ones were so unique because they were different and didn't do the same silly things the other nerd movies did.

Spoiler.

When Catwoman kills Bane then says something like, "Sorry, but that no using guns thing? Yeah, not for me." I cringed because it was so out of place in these films. It just showed how light this movie was. Sure, they have humor, but they did such a good job being serious when they needed to be, but this one didn't. I can't imagine Batman or Gordon ever saying something silly at the end of TDK because the tone was so somber and serious, and I guess that's what I was expecting out of this one. And then it did other things like just expecting you to believe certain things because you're not supposed to be taking the source material serious any ways. Something like Bruce learning how to fly the Bat or getting back to Gotham despite all bridges and entrances to the city being destroyed for the sole purpose of nobody getting in and out. How did he do that? Because he's Batman obviously. That's not the way the Nolan Batman films were supposed to work and that's why they were so great.

Hmm and the teasers were so good.

SPOILERS






What was with that ridiculously expositionary Clean Slate dialogue? "Clean Slate? You mean the thing that erases your identity yada yada yada?"

I loved the initial scenes of a haggard Bruce Wayne, the sewer fight, and the prison scenes. Ultimately we know that he will win, but the film puts him in such peril that, in the moment, the situation seems almost impossible for him to overcome.

The ending felt like Nolan just wanted to wrap everything up already, and like Mac I was disappointed that the ticking time bomb was a ticking time bomb. It certainly was not as inventive as the thing with the two ferries in TDK and the climax in skyscraper.

For all its flaws, it was still quite an experience. The scenes that were good were fantastic, and overall the film is better and more interesting than most superhero films. That this not-that-great film was a the worst in the trilogy shows how good the first two films were. If it was from another director and wasn't following two films that were so beloved, I think we'd be praising it more.

The weirdest thing was that Thomas Lennon was in this.

Thanks guys. Makes me feel good to see so many mixes opinions on this. SPOILERS

I'm sick of hearing everyone love this, say that it is the best film of the year, or even the best film ever. It's just not very good. Lots of problems with the script, with the characters, everything... Bane is just not a good villain at all. Compared to The Joker he was a joke. And his voice was annoying.

Catwoman is not really catwoman. She doesn't contribute anything. Neither does Joseph Gordon Levitt, who happens to be a cop, who happens to be everywhere at the right time, and also happens to know Batmans identity.

Also a bit of a Dr. Evil thing... why didn't he just kill Batman instead of putting him on that place? He is Batman. Of course he can escape. And everyones backstory is just not interesting. Not to mention the twist, which sucked, and nobody cares because that character did nothing in the movie. Bruce Wayne has sex with her once, but there is nothing that makes anyone care about her or trust her. 

And I don't know what happened with all the guns of the cops trapped in the sewers. Or what happened with everyone else in Gotham. People just chilling at home? Months went by and the place seemed pretty quiet. The streets were clean and empty. No traffic, no fires, nothing crazy...

I don't know... it's just a lazy film. It has some good things but far from being as great as people say, and nowhere as good as the last one.

Gary Oldman wears Daniel Plainview's sweater in one scene.

* SPOILERS *
* SPOILERS *
* SPOILERS *
(seriously, should anyone be reading this topic at this point if they haven't seen the film???)


I got just what I hoped for out of this movie.  It was about Batman and not how bad-ass his villains were.  It was a bit cartoony, as was Batman Begins and small moments in The Dark Knight, but it was far from a crappy film.

I felt as if Joseph Gordon Levitt was a surrogate for the audience, although the ONE SUPER CLEVER THING they could have done was
A) say that his character was the kid who Batman gave binoculars to in "Batman Begins" then
B) say the kid saw him in the orphanage as Bruce Wayne therefore
C) give the connection he made less about emotional sensitivity and pair it with a tangible experience. (he could have explained the lack of blonde hair away by saying "you wouldn't recognize me nowadays because I used to be a toehead" or somethin')
ANNNNYWAYS
I think JGL added to the movie by being a normal person who was just as pissed off about the dumb way things work in a bureaucracy as the rest of us.  And the fact that they gave him th depth before giving us a little twist at the end shows me that Nolan & co. respected the audience enough to not try and lure us in with the promise of this character showing up in the film.

So.
I'm not going to bitch as much about the film as a couple of my friends have. I left the theatre satisfied with the Nolan Batman Trilogy.
I look forward to a Nolan-esque take on Superman because according to the teaser ol' Supes has one of the manliest jobs around. Zack Snyder tends to suck, though.
Transmission complete.

* SPOILERS *
* SPOILERS *
* SPOILERS *

SPOILERS

I actually quite liked Bane as a villain in this, it was good to see Batman meet his match physically. There are stretches of this film that are great, most of them without Batman. I loved the morbid tone of Bane's post apocalyptic Gotham (that shot of the people hanging from the bridge was very effective).  As soon as Batman returns, things got too hokey for me.  I hated the giant Bat symbol torch (there's a ticking time bomb stupid, stop decorating!)  I didn't mind the Talia Al Ghul twist so much, but it led to the most anticlimactic villain showdown in the series. I even thought of The Incredibles' "You got me monologue-ing" scene as she blabbed away.  Then Catwoman just drives in, shoots Bane, and gives the corniest line in the film? It all just felt so hokey to me, which might have worked better if the tone of the film wasn't SUPER FUCKING SERIOUS.

i don't feel up for saying too much, but i will say that all the haters are overreacting, as are the people who think its the best thing,  or that christopher nolan is the best thing. its an above average entertainment movie, because it has a lot of positive qualities that other entertainment movies, even the "good ones," (avengers) don't have.. but, like, nolan's last movie, its extremely flawed, esp. re:  pace and structure. (thought the first act was messy, but i had a lot of fun once gotham went "bad." i think its ridiculous that the movie feels like it has to move so fast, when it could just have so fun with its heightened milieu. i thought wally pfister did a great job, but again, over-editing spoils it. the effects were above-average as well.) i just hate that we have to pretend this is a step below nolan's other movies, because all the problems this movie has inception has as well.

his movies are good.

one thing that certainly is horrible is bane's voice. it sounded non-diegetic. like, how did bane's voice actually sound if you were in the room? there's it had total disregard for any aural perspective, and it pulled me out of the film every time he talked. how does this happen?

SPOILER

I enjoyed it. I had huge excitement/expectations last summer when the first teaser was released but I guess I'm just getting old cause I couldn't keep both up for an entire year. I went in expecting a conclusion to the story and knowing the second film is usually the best of a trilogy. So my expectations were met.

I liked Bane as a villain but there was too much of him in the film. Heath Ledger was fantastic and stole every scene he was in so you want a lot of him(Imagine how great it would have been seeing the Scarecrow as the judge and the joker as the prosecutor in the courtroom) but Bane is only interesting when he is fighting. They don't need him giving speeches about harvey dent and so on.

The second film did a great job of setting up the chaos and unpredictability which the third didn't. It was anti-climatic. Finally, I was only a reader of this messageboard when the dark knight was released but I remember somebody praising Nolan for keeping a lot if not all of the third act out of any of the trailers.  He didn't do it for this film one.  There wasn't a lot of surprises in the final act like there was for the second.

Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on July 22, 2012, 07:52:02 PM
I felt as if Joseph Gordon Levitt was a surrogate for the audience, although the ONE SUPER CLEVER THING they could have done was
A) say that his character was the kid who Batman gave binoculars to in "Batman Begins"

then the part would have gone to this guy ...

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m6vefwbZ1D1qb1jz9o1_1280.jpg&hash=83584fb912f51e7f0e48605e0cbd43e6dcfc99b9)

ewww.

I feel like I saw Batman Begins, but I have no clear memory of it. Is this a common experience?

The thing is, everything that people are complaining about in this movie was just as present in the other two.  The reason people forget that is because when they think back on TDK, all they remember is the amazingness of the Joker, and as JB implies in the previous post, nobody particularly remembers Batman Begins whatsoever.  I felt like this, despite the rough edges that are present in every Nolan film, was the strongest overall of the three films. 

It's a weird thing to watch a Batman movie and like it best when Batman is nowhere to be seen, but here we are.  This was epic on a scale far grander than the other films.  Expanding the focus beyond Bruce Wayne/Batman allowed Nolan to make the point he's been trying to get at this whole trilogy, about the transformative power of ideas, how our myths allow us to control our reality.  Yeah, there was cheesy shit, but it was a big film about big ideas, and I'm willing to cut those some slack.  I'll take this over an empty popcorn kernel like The Avengers every single time.

Well said, polka.

Quote from: polkablues on July 24, 2012, 06:25:01 PM
I'll take this over an empty popcorn kernel like The Avengers every single time.

This especially.

*SPOILS*

- the biggest problem with this movie is batman doesn't die. the whole Point of nolan's take on batman is that there are consequences to being batman. (and that as a symbol, anyone can theoretically become batman as jgl shows.) that point is utterly negated by batman surviving. it's exactly what we expect of the character.. i don't think batman's ever been killed in a mainstream thing before. it's such a mistake for him to live after that scene. that amazing moment where he takes a deep breath as the bat rises, a private moment of fear, is just emotional manipulation if he doesn't die.
- the best part of this movie is when bane beats him. i realized how long batman has been around in my life and how disturbing it is on a deep, childhood psyche-level to see him lose. to see the mask crack. even he can't believe it. the lack of score is also really helpful there.
- there are so many pieces of dialogue that should have been cut or changed. biggest example (paraphrasing):
• "so.. you came back to watch your city burn."
"no... i came back to fight you."
we know, batman! you didn't need to clear that up. or at least say something interesting like "i know how to punch you in the face better now."
• also alfred didn't need to say a goddamn word to those tombstones. sobbing is enough. why is there so much explicit stating of facts??
• like after batman tells gordon his identity and gordon has the falshback and then goes "......BRUCE WAYNE.".. just watch him fly off gordon. we saw inside your brain. we know what you're thinking.
• when batman goes "then you have MY permission to die!" he's just crudely lowering himself to bane's level. he needed to do Something with that phrase..
- when batman says "so that's what that feels like" he really should've said it in the bruce wayne voice. there was no one around. i would've enjoyed that moment much more. though i did laugh, and i think this is probably the funniest of the three.
- WHY was batman better at punching bane's face the second time? this needed some kind of explanation for it to make sense and be dramatically interesting.
- why did talia need to initiate sex with bruce wayne? is that part of the knife twisting deeper?
- probably the second biggest problem is the ambiguity around how bane runs this new liberated gotham for MONTHS. why is fox free to walk around and talk to people and shit? talia kind of makes sense but that would raise a lot of suspicion for me if i were fox. what are the rules of this new gotham exactly? how has Nothing happened in MONTHS? it's a clear plot contrivance for the sake of having a nuclear device degrade to the point of detonation. i guess that takes months, so they have to drag out that idea for months, which is insane. MAYBE one month.. maybe.. but FIVE MONTHS? WITH NO INTERFERENCE?

i mostly enjoyed this movie but it's really soured by the ending and all the mistakes that could have been rectified with one more draft.

Well said, pico.

Quote from: picolas on July 28, 2012, 02:40:18 PM
*SPOILS*

- the biggest problem with this movie is batman doesn't die. the whole Point of nolan's take on batman is that there are consequences to being batman. (and that as a symbol, anyone can theoretically become batman as jgl shows.) that point is utterly negated by batman surviving. it's exactly what we expect of the character.. i don't think batman's ever been killed in a mainstream thing before. it's such a mistake for him to live after that scene. that amazing moment where he takes a deep breath as the bat rises, a private moment of fear, is just emotional manipulation if he doesn't die.
- the best part of this movie is when bane beats him. i realized how long batman has been around in my life and how disturbing it is on a deep, childhood psyche-level to see him lose. to see the mask crack. even he can't believe it. the lack of score is also really helpful there.
- there are so many pieces of dialogue that should have been cut or changed. biggest example (paraphrasing):
• "so.. you came back to watch your city burn."
"no... i came back to fight you."
we know, batman! you didn't need to clear that up. or at least say something interesting like "i know how to punch you in the face better now."
• also alfred didn't need to say a goddamn word to those tombstones. sobbing is enough. why is there so much explicit stating of facts??
• like after batman tells gordon his identity and gordon has the falshback and then goes "......BRUCE WAYNE.".. just watch him fly off gordon. we saw inside your brain. we know what you're thinking.
• when batman goes "then you have MY permission to die!" he's just crudely lowering himself to bane's level. he needed to do Something with that phrase..
- when batman says "so that's what that feels like" he really should've said it in the bruce wayne voice. there was no one around. i would've enjoyed that moment much more. though i did laugh, and i think this is probably the funniest of the three.
- WHY was batman better at punching bane's face the second time? this needed some kind of explanation for it to make sense and be dramatically interesting.
- why did talia need to initiate sex with bruce wayne? is that part of the knife twisting deeper?
- probably the second biggest problem is the ambiguity around how bane runs this new liberated gotham for MONTHS. why is fox free to walk around and talk to people and shit? talia kind of makes sense but that would raise a lot of suspicion for me if i were fox. what are the rules of this new gotham exactly? how has Nothing happened in MONTHS? it's a clear plot contrivance for the sake of having a nuclear device degrade to the point of detonation. i guess that takes months, so they have to drag out that idea for months, which is insane. MAYBE one month.. maybe.. but FIVE MONTHS? WITH NO INTERFERENCE?

This especially.

CONTRARIAN!

@ picolas regarding your last point.

Despite the fact that the theme wasn't developed nearly enough, I think Nolan was trying to show how docile people become when they're filled with a combination of uncertainty and fear.  At least that's what I thought was trying to be represented whenever Foley came to the door acting like coward. It does look like a ghost town, and to not even address what a huge city is doing during this time is just lazy, but i mean showing the police deputy/commissioner being scared is pretty representational of the rest of the Gotham's psyche, in my opinion.

With that being said, I understand that doesn't remove the issues you have with the film, but if the film(S) are intended to represent the idea that we are all responsible  for maintaining the just order of things (or as MLK jr. said, an injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere), then I'd say it's at least peppered in there.  I just have a hard time believing that such a huge plot point slipped Nolan and Co's mind.  I feel like it says a lot, but there probably should've been plenty more instances to showcase that point, but it's tough to find the middle ground as to not beat the audience over the head with critiques of human nature.

At any rate, I can't wait to accumulate some other thoughts and opinions about this spectacle of a film. 

Spoiler spoiler spoiler


I find the ending works a lot better when I assume that Alfred was imagining seeing Bruce and Selina.  It's closure for him psychologically, not to be literally taken as Bruce surviving.

Besides, the character of Selina Kyle had spent the whole movie being set up as being in what was almost certainly a lesbian relationship with Juno Temple, it wouldn't make sense for her to suddenly be romancing it up with Bruce Wayne in Italy, except in the addled imagination of an elderly British butler.

Quote from: polkablues on July 28, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
Spoiler spoiler spoiler


I find the ending works a lot better when I assume that Alfred was imagining seeing Bruce and Selina.  It's closure for him psychologically, not to be literally taken as Bruce surviving.

Yeah, when Alfred stared into the camera and smiled, I thought it was the perfect shot to end on.  Kinda disappointed when it continued on to show his POV.

Quote from: polkablues on July 28, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
Spoiler spoiler spoiler



Besides, the character of Selina Kyle had spent the whole movie being set up as being in what was almost certainly a lesbian relationship with Juno Temple, it wouldn't make sense for her to suddenly be romancing it up with Bruce Wayne in Italy, except in the addled imagination of an elderly British butler.

haha yeah, for a second I was mad stoked that Nolan was gonna go there. In an art snob way, not a frat boy way. She ended up just being another weak female character in a Nolan flick. For such a supposed strong woman she sure seemed to take Bruce and Miranda's relationship to heart when Batman is giving her his motorcycle and telling her to wait for the fighting to start and then blow open the entrances which sends her into pity party mode so she looks down at the ground and passively-aggressively whispers, "so you can save your stuck-up girlfriend." That's some immature see-through emotional shit that gets used by junior high kids, and apparently also Catwoman.

It reminded me of that scene in High-Fidelity where it flashbacks to one of Rob's girlfriends in college and he's walking her up to her apartment building and when she leans in to kiss him goodbye he gets all mopey, turns his face away and says, "what's the point? it never goes anywhere." then pulls the hood of his hoodie over his head and walks away as she starts to :cry:

At least Batman didn't start crying. Not yet.

Quote from: polkablues on July 28, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
Spoiler spoiler spoiler


I find the ending works a lot better when I assume that Alfred was imagining seeing Bruce and Selina.  It's closure for him psychologically, not to be literally taken as Bruce surviving.

Besides, the character of Selina Kyle had spent the whole movie being set up as being in what was almost certainly a lesbian relationship with Juno Temple, it wouldn't make sense for her to suddenly be romancing it up with Bruce Wayne in Italy, except in the addled imagination of an elderly British butler.

but then he would've also had to imagine lucius fox finding out about bruce patching the autopilot. which he didn't know anything about. and he only saw catwoman's face briefly on a computer screen. why would he imagine her being with bruce? nolan's intent is clearly to show bruce wayne survived.

even if they didn't show bruce and kept it ambiguous, that would still be stupid/hinting at ruining what made nolan's batman so interesting. the only correct ending after bruce makes his choice is death. totally unambiguous sacrifice. preferably show him vaporizing inside the bat so there's no debate afterwards.

oh and another obvious change that would've made this movie better: he really should've been in more pain from that knife. he should've been holding his body together just so he could die properly. limp-running towards the bat. so much better.

Chris is on The Treatment (http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/tt/tt120725christopher_nolan_th)

Quote from: S.R. on July 29, 2012, 03:46:17 AM

Quote from: polkablues on July 28, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
Spoiler spoiler spoiler



Besides, the character of Selina Kyle had spent the whole movie being set up as being in what was almost certainly a lesbian relationship with Juno Temple, it wouldn't make sense for her to suddenly be romancing it up with Bruce Wayne in Italy, except in the addled imagination of an elderly British butler.

haha yeah, for a second I was mad stoked that Nolan was gonna go there. In an art snob way, not a frat boy way. She ended up just being another weak female character in a Nolan flick. For such a supposed strong woman she sure seemed to take Bruce and Miranda's relationship to heart when Batman is giving her his motorcycle and telling her to wait for the fighting to start and then blow open the entrances which sends her into pity party mode so she looks down at the ground and passively-aggressively whispers, "so you can save your stuck-up girlfriend." That's some immature see-through emotional shit that gets used by junior high kids, and apparently also Catwoman.

It reminded me of that scene in High-Fidelity where it flashbacks to one of Rob's girlfriends in college and he's walking her up to her apartment building and when she leans in to kiss him goodbye he gets all mopey, turns his face away and says, "what's the point? it never goes anywhere." then pulls the hood of his hoodie over his head and walks away as she starts to :cry:

At least Batman didn't start crying. Not yet.

I didn't get the impression that Selina Kyle and the Juno Temple characters were in a lesbian relationship. She was trying to flee Gotham alone.  If she was in a relationship with her, wouldn't she try to get her to come with her after seeing what Bane did to Batman?  I don't know I don't really have much of a Gaydar. After hearing Catwoman was going to be in the third and who was playing the role, I was very skeptical but I have to say I really loved Anne Hathaway in the role. You can make a case about if she would return to save batman or runaway with Bruce but I didn't see her as weak.  Christopher Nolan's "women problem" wasn't with weak female characters but that he would kill them off. I wasn't bothered by the "save your stuck up girlfriend" comment and I don't think that one line can sum her up into a weak character. There was a ton of horrible lines in that movie. Bane "You came back to die with your city?"  Batman "No. I came back to stop you."

Quote from: picolas on July 29, 2012, 04:44:28 AM

Quote from: polkablues on July 28, 2012, 11:15:24 PM
Spoiler spoiler spoiler


oh and another obvious change that would've made this movie better: he really should've been in more pain from that knife. he should've been holding his body together just so he could die properly. limp-running towards the bat. so much better.

I noticed that too.  There were a lot of similar details that were missing throughout the film.  The bad guy would just give up a little too easy and let the crowd overrun him and so on.  Also, Nolan brilliantly did a great job of making the previous film seem more violent then it actually was by shooting those scenes in a way where the viewer thought they saw something more violent that what was actually shown. I think he tried to do the same here but wasn't successful. 


I'll admit I didn't see the Miranda Tate twist. I was aware of all the internet talk when she was cast and everyone was saying she was related to Ras Al Ghul.  I think the original rumor was that she was his wife. When the film began I forgot about it all cause I am very susceptible to the charms and loveliness that is Marion Cotillard.

SPOILERS

I saw this again in IMax (so much better in Imax) and boy, I loved it a lot more... mostly because I knew what to expect. I knew this didn't live up to what it could have been, but when you consider that Nolan essentially had to give up his original vision when Ledger died, but probably felt a great deal of pressure to finish the trilogy, it's kinda understanding that he went with "entertaining film for fans".

Not a defense of the movie because I know there's a shit load wrong with it, but here are some responses to the things that I have noticed being talked about:

Quote from: picolas on July 28, 2012, 02:40:18 PM
*SPOILS*
- WHY was batman better at punching bane's face the second time? this needed some kind of explanation for it to make sense and be dramatically interesting.

I feel like this is explained while Batman is in the pit. The thing that gives him the power to make the leap is the same that gives him the power to defeat Bane, a good dose of anger and the fear of death. This may be why they decided to let him survive at the end though I really think it was to give fans that hope (just enough to torture them with the possibility of another Nolan Batman)... still would have been better if he had died.

Speaking of which, he didn't die. It's been said, but the autopilot wouldn't have been mentioned if this was in Alfred's head, also, there's a line about the pearl necklace being missing from the inventory of Bruce Wayne's things. They were doing too much to prove he lived.

Quote from: picolas on July 28, 2012, 02:40:18 PM- why did talia need to initiate sex with bruce wayne? is that part of the knife twisting deeper?

Well, I think the reason she did this in the movie was to make Wayne trust her more, but this also comes off as one of the many things Nolan does to give little winks to the comic book readers... Talia and Batman have a history and he even gets R'ed by her and she has a baby Batman.

Speaking to the Juno Temple/ Catwoman love, there's something to that, but I think it's one-sided. Jen is essentially Holly Robinson and Holly Robinson is openly gay in the comics.

Some random thoughts and possible SPOILERS, i guess:

I was not a fan of neither The Dark Knight nor Inception, both movies to me suffering from Nolan's excessive ambition and obtuse seriousness about his material. The constant and intrusive music, the excessive editing, the exposition in the dialogues...

Here, those problems remain, but for some reason they didn't bother me as much. The music seemed more restrained, or at least not so repetitive. The editing gave a little more breathing room to the shots, and fight scenes at least looked like they were choreographed and not merely randomly shot and edited with as many cameras as possible. Still, with Nolan excesses in story lines, the rhythm feels rushed, the passage of narrative time incoherent and the focus on some of the characters very unbalanced. It's also very bizarre that people like to claim Nolan as the dude that makes intelligent blockbusters for the masses while his movies are so filled with expository dialog. I mean, like it was mentioned before, we get to see what a character is thinking, and immediately after, the character just says it out loud so there are no doubts left. And why not just end the scene with Alfred in Florence, with him just looking at the camera instead of cutting to his POV?

On a positive note, I liked the first hour or so very much, basically from the beginning until the whole sequence when Batman returns to action. Also, it's the funniest of Nolan's recent output, you can actually feel some sense of humor in it, mostly coming from Wayne/Selina. And to me the most amusing thing about the whole trilogy is how the writing team make these important characters in the Batman universe appear from where you least expect them.

Then Batman gets into a fight, goes to a pit, Gotham is under siege and the movie started to feel underwhelming, when it should be building up to an epic conclusion. At least there isn't the insulting sonar-thingy this time around, which to me was the final blow on the previous movie. Still, that race against time never felt very tense for some reason, probably because you know that no superhero movie will end with a whole town being blown to ashes.

Spoilers?

This late in the game?

Why are you reading about TDKR then?

You KNOW most of us have SEEN it.

Okay.

Perhaps because you just want our opinions on it before taking the plunge & spending $10-15 to see it on the big screen.

Anyways.

SPOILER

   The part when Alfred looks "at the camera", well, my friend and I BOTH thought that would have been a great way to end the movie.  Our guess is that even though this film was a guaranteed money-maker, they still had to put it through the test-audience ringer.  Maybe, because Americans are fucking stupid, they didn't "get" a version of the ending with Alfred's simple-yet-powerful glance.  Perhaps a larger percentage of test audiences didn't "understand" the reference to a part of the movie that took place less than two hours ago. So our guess is that as artful as that would ending have been, especially for a huge American cinematic juggernaut, the less tasteful (aka snobby..yeah I'm a snob) would have pissed and moaned that the ending didn't "make sense". 
   Just a theory.

END SPOILER

Makes sense to me.  Nolan's entire career has been an ode to ambiguity, it seems odd that he would suddenly abandon that ethos in such a blunt way unless there was studio interference involved.

Yeah, as I said before, I'm not that big a fan of Inception, but that movie still ended on a ??? note and did perfectly well at the box office.

Yeah this was one of those experiences like indy 4, when as I am watching the film before my eyes I can't believe how bad it actually is. I read some comments from here before going and I just didn't want to believe in them also. But it's painfully obvious right from the start that this films just sucks. It feels lazy in every aspect, and the dialogue, which was always expository in the other films, here becomes almost a joke. No, it actually becomes a joke.

I didn't understand the point of "Catwoman" in this film, and I hated seeing Hathaway so underused. Come to think of it, no one really had a point being in this movie. Batman and Gordon didn't seem to me like they paid their dues. It's all so rushed and crammed with scenes, story lines, situations. The action sequences seem endless, the ticking bomb is actually a ticking bomb. And worst, we went from a villain with a philosophy (the joker) that humiliated Batman (who only has an "ethic"), to a villain ultimately motivated by revenge, which I think makes it easier for Batman.

I don't know, this has to be the biggest movie letdown I've had in quite some time.

I'm putting this as worst movie of the year.

It's embarrassing.

If you liked transformers, you'd like this film.

Quote from: Pubrick on August 04, 2012, 11:34:14 AM
I'm putting this as worst movie of the year.

It's embarrassing.

If you liked transformers, you'd like this film.

Ouch.
Am I wrong to say this was at least better than "Daredevil"? and if so, does that make "Transformers" better than Affleck's opposite-of-a-tour-de-force?

Quote from: polkablues on August 02, 2012, 06:03:02 PM
Makes sense to me.  Nolan's entire career has been an ode to ambiguity, it seems odd that he would suddenly abandon that ethos in such a blunt way unless there was studio interference involved.

The Dark Knight was such a success I imagine the studios would have let him do whatever he wanted. I got the impression that Nolan and the others involved had gotten sentimental over the characters and legacy of the franchise. The first two they seemed determined to ignore all that and create a story that was real and dark and true to the characters and story. All of this is just my impression and seems more likely to me for the lack of ambiguity and other elements than studio involvement.  It seems like they approached it as this is our last Batman instead of lets finish what we've started. Approaching the film as a curtain call rather than an ending while also being sentimental probably lead to a lot of the issues. Also, after the success of the Dark Knight, they probably realized this will be considered the quintessential Batman franchise.  With that being so how they ended the franchise would be a huge part of the legacy of Batman. They might have had that in mind too but I think treating the characters and story sentimentally played more of a role.

Quote from: Brando on August 04, 2012, 04:38:30 PM
The Dark Knight was such a success I imagine the studios would have let him do whatever he wanted. I got the impression that Nolan and the others involved had gotten sentimental over the characters and legacy of the franchise.

Studios never let anyone do whatever he or she want with a Batbudget. They may be more lenient with somebody with a track record like Nolan, but there is no way he had absolute control. Look at what happened with Bane's voice. A few people complained, the studio got skittish, Nolan changed it. Now, he probably could've fought for it and maybe could've won or better compromised, but -- far from being sentimental -- I don't think he cared about the movie at all. Disinterested, businessman Nolan finally reared its ugly head. I don't think he wanted to make a third one. I don't think he cared about Batman anymore. People have praised him for ultimately making an audience-pleasing film. Which, first of all, is just a euphemism for "dumb film," and secondly, how the fuck are the first two not audience-pleasing? Combined, they made a BILLION AND A HALF DOLLARS at the box office! With Inception, his previous three blockbusters made well-over TWO BILLION DOLLARS! Displeased audiences don't spend like that. The movie is only "audience-pleasing" because it's easy and lazy.

Quote from: Pubrick on August 04, 2012, 11:34:14 AM
I'm putting this as worst movie of the year.

It's embarrassing.

If you liked transformers, you'd like this film.

Despite my tone above, I actually kinda liked it okay. I am in total agreement with you that it is reprehensibly bad and, yes, could very well prove to be the worst movie of the year (especially if its quality is weighed against its potential). But still, somehow, I had an okay time. About ten minutes in I felt a creeping "what the fuck is this," gave up any preconceived notion that I would enjoy the film, and came away with tepid enjoyment. Maybe I was determined to like it having disliked every other film I've seen theatrically this year. I don't know. There's no doubt in my mind that it's shit and I could never reasonably defend my enjoyment. But it is what it is.

I've watched The Dark Knight a few times and will probably continue to watch it every few years. I'll probably never watch this one again. Maybe once more. 

As you said his previous three films made well over two billion.  You put that with TDKR was going to be pretty much a sure thing at the box office, I believe Nolan made the movie he wanted to make with none or insignificant influence form the studio. Him and James Cameron are the two directors right now that I can think of can make these kind of huge budget blockbusters with little to no influence from the studios. Bane's voice controversy is insignificant.  The change didn't have any impact on the final product. It was just a character with too much dialogue being understood better. I was annoyed with all his dialogue so not being able to understand it would have made it worse so I thought i was a good change. I think he did compromise with the voice. I'm sure the studio would have liked the voice to be changed completely. It's still very close to the original only more intelligible. I mean there were still lines I missed. it wasn't changed drastically.



I just got the impression that Nolan was sentimental and I could be totally wrong. I don't think he was disinterested or did the film for a cash grab. Reading this doesn't come off as disinterested in Batmanhttp://collider.com/christopher-nolan-batman-letter/183108/ (http://collider.com/christopher-nolan-batman-letter/183108/)  There was probably no studio interference, he wasn't sentimental or disinterested but rather really wanted to do a third batman and create the best film he could and he failed.  He just made a bad film. He's made eight films in like fourteen years. That's a fast pace for the quality of his films. Anyone making that many films is due to make a bad one.

I watched it again this weekend and it's actually a lot of fun if you don't take it seriously and just view it as a campy comedy.

There were so many unintentionally hilarious moments in this movie but some of my favorites were...(spoilers of course.)

Banes voice in the prologue. Especially when he rips out of his handcuffs then yells, "NOOOOOOO SURVIVORS ARGHHH!!!" Sure, it wasn't very easy to pick up on every word he said in the original prologue but at least it wasn't so over the top it was bad.

When Batman is using his classic punch you in the face and interrogate routine on Bane. "WHERZ DA trigguh!!!!! *punch to the face* WHERE IZ ITTT!!! *punch* WHEREZ DA TRIGGUH!!!!!!! *2 punches* "YOU WOULDN'T GIVE IT TO AN ORDINARY CITIZEN!!!" *bunch of punches to the face* "WHERE IZ IT!!!!" *Batman gets tired. Only throws one punch to Bane's face* "TRIGGUH!!!!" *Batman's out of breath.* "where   is ....it"

Every scene with Talia after she's revealed. She gives like 5 monologues in the span on 10 minutes. She looks at Bane and says, "his only crime is that he loved me too much." then a tear starts coming down Bane's face. haha. Fuck outta here. And then her death scene may be the most hilarious moment of the last 10 years.

SPOI

her slumpping death reminded me that i have to watch the original french Taxi

Quote from: S.R. on August 06, 2012, 01:25:13 PM
it's actually a lot of fun if you don't take it seriously

Yeah, this was the only Nolan I didn't fall asleep to while seeing it in the theater ( Begins, Dark Knight, Inception )

I loved it, man. Just loved it. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I'm not entirely familiar with The Dark Knight and had a really awful experience watching it in a white trash dollar theater, haven't seen it since. So just getting re-introduced to Nolan's gotham was such a treat to me. I have to say it's my favorite of the 3, for now..

Also, I didn't pay for it. I bought a ticket to The Campaign and then watched Total Recall, then this. So, if anything, my thoughts on 'Campaign' are probably the most biased. It really does change your perception of a film when your not shelling out cash and expecting it to 'deliver.'

Filmspotting put up their The Dark Knight Rises  SPOILED (http://filmspotting.net/reviews/901-dark-knight-rises-spoiled.html) episode

Spoilers, I guess...

I've been avoiding this thread since the release and I've got to say I'm really disappointed by the general reaction to this film. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Did it have its faults? Of course, but it was more-or-less what I've come to expect from a Nolan Batman film: popcorn entertainment with characters and social-political philosophizing thrown in. I had fun. I was entertained. As someone else already pointed out, the problems that have been pointed out with this film were already present in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, so complaining about them here is kind of irrelevant. After all, when was the last time (really) that the third film in a trilogy equaled or bettered it's predecessors? I'd argue that Toy Story 3 is the exception rather than the rule. Certainly Return of the Jedi, Godfather Part III, Jurassic Park 3, Spiderman 3, and X-Men: Last Stand are all classic examples of substantially diminishing returns. But people calling this the worst film of the year are just as ridiculous as those claiming it's the best film of the year.

Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed it for what it was. Sure, it wasn't the tour-de-force that The Dark Knight (the film which will be most fondly remembered of this trilogy) was, but for my money it was more enjoyable than Batman Begins. It definitely felt like there was more studio interference in this film, or at least that the film was driven more by money-making rather than artistic aspirations, particularly with all the nods to the previous films (Scarecrow as the judge, etc.) but surely that's somewhat inevitable.

Overall, the good:

• Anne Hathaway - I hadn't anticipated Catwoman to be portrayed in this way, but she totally nailed it
• The action set pieces - I know plenty of people enjoy criticizing Nolan's style, but based on the competition he's still one of the best blockbuster directors of action working today
• The editing - it just really worked for me. I liked the way the sound dropped out during the action set pieces (as in previous films)
• JGL - it's almost impossible to dislike the guy, but considering we expected him to be a relatively minor character he actually really held the film together as a central figure
• The supporting cast - flashing out the world with character actors such as Aiden Gillen and Tom Conti really added some much-needed depth to the epic sprawl

The bad:

• The plot holes - I may have missed most in my only viewing (based on others' reviews) but the one which really stood out to me was how JGL's character figured out that Bruce Wayne was Batman
• Marion Cotillard - I don't know whether to argue that she was wasted in a thankless role, or that the revelation with her character was treated as an afterthought. Probably both.
• The third act development of the relationship between Bruce and Selina
• The ham-handed parallel of A Tale of Two Cities - it felt like Nolan was trying to get at some sort of social/political commentary but rather than putting things out there to let the audience reach their own conclusion, it just came across like he didn't really know where he wanted to go with it or what he wanted to say
• Batman being absent for a huge portion of the film - I get that it was necessary to take some time for Bruce to recover from his injuries and that his absence allowed the film to focus more on the bigger world in which he lives, but it did result in the film being somewhat uneven - actually, from the point that he fires Alfred

Bane wasn't a great villain, but given that he was filling the shoes of Heath Ledger's Joker he had a tough act to follow. I do think that Nolan took a wrong step by focusing so much on Bane's backstory when one of the most remarked aspects of TDK was that the Joker was never given a definitive backstory. Rather, they should have focused on Bane's political philosophy and agenda to avoid him becoming the average villain of the week that he actually was.

Oh, and what's with Michael Cane making me well up every time he was on screen?

Quote from: Sleepless on August 21, 2012, 02:39:59 PM
Oh, and what's with Michael Cane making me well up every time he was on screen?

Presumably something to do with not blinking.

this film just doesn't work. I rewatched dark knight a couple of years after it's release and it was just as great. yes, it is silly. but this is not only silly, is plain lazy.

Quote from: Sleepless on August 21, 2012, 02:39:59 PM

• The supporting cast - flashing out the world with character actors such as Aiden Gillen and Tom Conti really added some much-needed depth to the epic sprawl

Nolan actually has an uneven approach to casting small roles in these movies.  He gets great actors for main roles, but then sticks randomly terrible actors in all the nooks and crannies.  Burn Gorman, Ben Mendelsohn, Matthew Modine, Aiden Gillen (our worst living actor and no one can convince me otherwise).  And then he'll throw in John Hurt, one of the greatest film actors who has ever lived, with a two-line role.  I'm actually not sure Christoper Nolan knows the difference between good and bad acting.

Oh yeah, I've only seen Aiden Gillen in this movie, but just based on that performance, I'm with you Polka. He was incredibly off-putting.

Thomas Lennon was in this though. He's almost as good at John Hurt.

I'll always remember Aiden Gillen as the man who gave the worst performance I have ever seen by an adult human in a movie (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=124.msg304922#msg304922).

Thomas Lennon is great, but how jarring was his appearance in this movie?  Nolan's created this hyper-serious superhero world and then suddenly you have Lt. Dangle on screen for 15 seconds making cartilage jokes.

I'm so with you about Aiden Gillen, he almost singlehandedly ruined The Wire (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=9518.msg306209#msg306209) for me. What is it about him, his dumb teeth? Or maybe it's that he looks like an Edward Norton that wasn't left in the oven long enough? I don't know..

Quote from: polkablues on August 23, 2012, 07:57:15 PM
I'm actually not sure Christoper Nolan knows the difference between good and bad acting.

Based on this interview with Gary Oldman (http://www.empireonline.com/interviews/interview.asp?IID=1527), he just lets the actors turn up on set and do whatever:

The first day we got to a set - a night shoot - it was me getting out of a cop car on the dock, looking up at the round-up of villains, not knowing who the hell had rounded them up. We did the first rehearsal and he said, "Oh, OK, so you're playing him like that." "Yeah." And he went, "Huh. OK. All right. Take?" And I went, "Yeah." And we did a take and he went, "Very nice. OK. Do you want another one?" And I said, "Well, I've come all this way." He went, "Alright, do another one." We did take two and he went, "Terrific. OK, moving on..."

Holy hell this was a goofy mess. But for me it was also the most fun of the trilogy, mostly for the campy aspects and Catwoman. It was more playful and didn't take itself as seriously as DK. I definitely agree with the following:

Quote from: S.R. on August 06, 2012, 01:25:13 PMI watched it again this weekend and it's actually a lot of fun if you don't take it seriously and just view it as a campy comedy.

Picolas nails the criticism on the script. That third act man, what in the what. You guys already said all of this better than I will but I want to get this out - why do they cram in so much into these movies? Why add another villain at the end? Why does Batman spend the majority of the film training to beat Bain, who I felt was a genuinely scary and worthy villain, only for Catwoman to shoot him so easily? Why was Marion Cotillard even in this? How did they ever lock picture with a death scene as unconvincing and ridiculous as hers?

Phew. I feel better.

Quote from: ©brad on December 28, 2012, 09:11:23 AM
How did they ever lock picture with a death scene as unconvincing and ridiculous as hers?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20071004224840%2Fstarwars%2Fimages%2Fc%2Fc4%2FShmidyng.JPG&hash=25dfa4a34b446622a0d3e56bce6188428ac97411)


And you know you've seen worse than the one above

Quote from: AntiDumbFrogQuestion on December 29, 2012, 11:15:01 PM

Quote from: ©brad on December 28, 2012, 09:11:23 AM
How did they ever lock picture with a death scene as unconvincing and ridiculous as hers?

(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20071004224840%2Fstarwars%2Fimages%2Fc%2Fc4%2FShmidyng.JPG&hash=25dfa4a34b446622a0d3e56bce6188428ac97411)


And you know you've seen worse than the one above

I have. In the Dark Knight Rises.

I actually thought that death followed by the string swell focusing on Anakin's face was one of the only cinematic moments of the whole prequel trilogy.