Nolan trimming the script...

[Grissom]

For those who heard the Wally Pfister interview some weeks ago he said that the script was great and that it surpassed TDK. He however said that Nolan was in the process of trimming it down as it's very long. I know Nolan and his brother are great screenwriters but this had me thinking. When you trim a script of this nature, don't you guys think that some of the emotional maybe intense, psychological elements may be lost? I'm sure when they trim, they basically trim what they could do without, but still, they may trim out bits of dialogue that might be better for the audience to hear.

Also, with Ledger gone and hearing that Nolan wanted him for the third movie (after TDK, a producer was interviewed and he said such), do you think he might overreach? Do you think he might want to do too much with the film. Ledger's Joker was a formidable force in TDK and I'm just thinking that Nolan might want to do much more with this film to the point where it may be too much. I know a lot of people say Nolan can do no wrong, but what do you gusy think? Do you think the talk about TDK being cnubbed from a Best Pic nod affected how dramatic or intense he might make this film?. Will he make Bane and Catwoman characters that are different or have different motives other than the ones we saw in the comics?

Sorry for such a long post, just want to get your opinion.

[phantom stranger]

That's an interesting report as one of the criticisms directed towards DK was that it was too long. Certainly, I can see how a non-Batman fan can think such a thing. After all, there is a lot crammed into the movie. And it would've still been a huge hit even with the Two-Face story cut out and the movie ending with Joker's defeat.

Personally, I'd rather he film as much as possible because I'm not a fan of dumbing movies down for the general audience. Of course, Nolan isn't the type to figure things out later in the editing room. He has a plan from the start and that plan is to stick to the script. He mentioned that there were no deleted scenes in Dark Knight--that everything he wrote was filmed. And everything he filmed made it onto the big screen. Of course, we know there are at least a few exceptions to that. Like this, for example: http://host.trivialbeing.org/up/tdk-jul25-joker-chauffeur.jpg   

Still, I'm reminded of the release of Spider-Man 2. The worst criticism that film received was that it was too good; that there was nowhere for the franchise to go but down. Unfortunately, that ended up being true. The filmmakers tried to outdo themselves by giving more of everything (romance, action, villains, etc.) but the end result was horrible. Hopefully, history doesn't repeat itself with Dark Knight.

[Gotham Knight]

I'm not a fan of dumbing movies down for the general audience.

If that's the case, I'm amazed you could sit through Dark Knight. If anything he needs to trim as much as possible, so that this time instead of an overly analytical ADD seminar, he might actually make a movie.

[phantom stranger]

I'm not a fan of dumbing movies down for the general audience.

If that's the case, I'm amazed you could sit through Dark Knight. If anything he needs to trim as much as possible, so that this time instead of an overly analytical ADD seminar, he might actually make a movie.

I think I know exactly what scenes you're talking about. But I cut the film some slack because, after all, it is a Batman film.

[Matuatay]

I have the same concerns about "trimming" the script.  Personally I'd much rather see him go ahead and film everything and then just add the missing scenes to a dvd/blu-ray release. 

[Grissom]

Some good points there, it may seem a good idea to film everything and whatever is deleted can just make it to the SE dvd/bluray. However, you have to consider the budget as well, can't waste money filming "fat" so to speak. Speaking of budget, I hear there's a reported budget of 175 mil which is about 10 mil less than TDK. With all the location shooting and I'm sure pretty big action sequences, the budget actually seems a little modest, but I guess Nolan and Co. are just being fiscally responsible.

[phantom stranger]

Some good points there, it may seem a good idea to film everything and whatever is deleted can just make it to the SE dvd/bluray. However, you have to consider the budget as well, can't waste money filming "fat" so to speak.

Hey, I know a guy who spent 10 million on a scene which was integral to the very premise of the film and then cut it out a few months before the release because he just wasn't "feeling it."

[Grissom]

Yeah that happens, for example, Wb spent millions developing the superman movie in the mid 90'sand then scrapped it.

[Matuatay]

You bring up a good point about the budget, Grissom, and Nolan has proved himself time and time again as an effective filmmaker, so whatever he decides to "delete" will probably not have a huge effect.  And he might be able to shorten the dialogue in certain scenes to where the scene still has the same impact to the story, but with fewer words.  So we may end up with more rewrites than actual "deletes". 

[Grissom]

Yeah I agree with the rewrites, I remember some people made complaints about the exposition in the dialogue in TDk. I have to agree somewhat with that. You can say a lot with a little or just by some action on screen. Looking forward to the film though, he can wrap it up really well. I still think he was enormously snubbed for a Best Director Nomination for Inception, they may give him one for TDKR to make up. I actually read an article this morning saying just that.