How long should movies be?
Some of you can't even sit down for a 90 min movie.
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
How long should movies be? Some of you can't even sit down for a 90 min movie.
If the movie is good, any length works.
If the movie is pozzed goyslop filled with diversity hires, then no length can make it watchable.
you shouldnt be commenting in your own thread ideally
There used to be a consensus that 90 minute movies were for entertainment and 2+ hour long movies were boring Oscar bait and the ones between 90 and 120 minutes were a coin toss. Lord Of The Rings and then capeshit changed that. I used to think I was somehow more intelligent for liking long movies but now I have higher respect for short concise story telling.
based. i do enjoy watching bloated modern movies and thinking what a decent director/studio exec would cut from it.
90 minutes-2 hours is fine. 2+ hours is when it starts getting too long
For me it's 2h45m. You just know you're going to get kino
too long
if i was to stand up at the 88 min mark and shout
>GET TO THE POINT
would the whole cinema clap and cheer
I was watching some stuff from the 30s recently, and they were between 1 hour and 1:15. Really good length because there is no filler.
30 seconds.
I've got better things to do than waste over 2 hours on trash
why not just stop it half way through and pick it up later if youre enjoying it?
It entirely depends on the story and content, a movie can be two and half, even three hours of it's all quality and no filler, but some movies these days don't even deserve to go past the 90 minute mark.
Babylon is 3 hours and pretty good
67 minutes
depends on the movie
for example dunc should be 15 minutes long, dunc 2 0 minutes
>dunc should be 15 minutes long, dunc 2 0 minutes
kek
I hear this more lately, but honestly I have always preferred longer movies. If the runtime is less than 2 hours I actually tend to be more put off. Not that a good movie's runtime determines if I like it, but I find that a lot of the time to really give the characters, world and story time to develop comfortably, and give you time to really spend in its world and get drawn in, 2 hours or more is usually needed. Between about 2 and a half and 3 hours seems to be the sweet spot for me. But I really like movies with a feeling of bigger or epic scope to them, too, so that is just me.
I've found it depends alot on the genre. For horror, 90 min is fine, but if a movie is good, 3 hours is fine too, I've watched infinity war and Endgame back to back multiple times, because I like big ensemble movies, but I couldn't watch hereditary and midsommer back to back
if I can't watch it in tiktok format then I'm just not interested so 8 seconds
i watch movies on my own time in the comfort of my own home. i wish most movies were longer. if i love something i want more of it. its that simple
>people complain about movies being too long for some reason
>people never complain about 40ish minute episode shows that have multiple seasons
it baffles me that anyone wants movies to be shorter than they typically are. my favorite format now is the 8-ep season shows because theyre basically long movies that dont overstay their welcome
8 episodes is too long. They inevitably make one of those filler that barely advances the plot. The real sweet spot is 6 episodes. That's more than enough for a good production to tell a story.
fair. i wouldnt mind 6 eps either. a lot of movies from the past could have benefited from being short shows instead. book-adaptations in the past had to cut a lot of content just to cram one book into a single movie
i just fell asleep watching inherent vice and went through an entire sleep cycle. i was awoken by walking phoenix railing some chick.
if its over 3 hours its long
If the movie can sustain your attention for 2 hours, then it's a good length. If it can only sustain your attention for 90 minutes, then that's the perfect length for it. If it can sustain your attention for 3 hours, then 3 hours is perfect. So on so forth. The length is entirely dependent on what story it's trying to tell, how its trying to tell it, etc. If it tries and fail, and loses the audience's attention, that's when it's too long.
>If it can sustain your attention for 3 hours, then 3 hours is perfect.
There is no 3 hour movie that can't be told just fine in 90 min.
It's not just a matter of if the story can be boiled down to a shorter length. Literally any story can be shortened to a paragraph summary, so if that's how you evaluate it, just go read the Wikipedia article. But if a movie has engaging sequences, is visually interesting, has great performances, all or any of those things, and uses it to stretch the running time up to 3 hour, then that becomes the perfect length for it. There are some films that are three hours and I finished watching them and thought
>I would have watched more of that
It's not the norm, but those that are, I would not want them any shorter.
>If it can sustain your attention for 3 hours, then 3 hours is perfect.
There is no 3 hour movie that can't be told just fine in 90 min.
>if, at any point, i fall asleep
you're just fat
>you're just fat
my bad, i initially put pop out for a dart but it probably wouldnt resonate with ya. i guess you missed the point where attending to any distraction means the movie sucks
If u don't have the attention capacity to watch a 2 hour movie you can't do anything important anyway and should fricking die
What a lazy argument "you don't like x or y? That must because you are literally incapable of consuming x or y!". You can use similar arguments to dismiss all criticism, "you think this movie is full of plot holes and boring scenes? You must be incapable of understanding it!". Also sitting on your ass consuming a movie is not something that requires a strong constitution.
Reducing the quality of a movie down to its run time is the laziest argument possible. A film can be good or bad at any length.
>
>sitting on your ass consuming a movie is not something that requires a strong constitution.
Yet some people cannot even manage that. Maybe that particular 3-hour movie really is too long, but to be against movies of a certain length on principle is akin to fatties saying "well I'm not the moronic one, seats SHOULD accomodate to my diminished ability and if it doesn't it's a flaw"
Most people who have such short attention spans indeed will not accomplish much with their lives. Maybe some millionaires just can't sit through a movie either but I'm sure 99.99%+ of "ADHD" people are guaranteed failures
Still not a meaningful argument, plenty of functional people would actually consider it a virtue that you are only willing to waste a certain amount of your time on pure entertainment. This would be a good personal attack if it was an activity that was actually important. If you can prove that geniuses and hard workers all love sitting down blowing 5 hours on movies and TV i'll concede, but I'm willing to be the average "cinephile" who watches movies for hours on end is not among the world's top income earners.
Better a cinephile waste of space than a social media-addled waste of space
>consooming media
>important
I don't really care about runtime as long as the film is good enough to justify it. If a film is 5 hours long and good I'll sit through it. Saying that, some films take the piss with the length for no good reason. Capeshit is the biggest culprit for this. Capeshit shouldn't be longer than 120 minutes unless it's really, REALLY good, like X-Men 2. Endgame is three fricking hours long and a huge chunk of it is characters just moping or quipping while JARVIS invents time travel.
The longer it is, the better it needs to be. This works exponentially. There are a lot of movies in the 60-80 minute range that are just a trifle, a silly little lark with a pleasant ending and they are just grand. A lot of pre-codes are like this. As you go pass that 80 minute mark, though, this shit better be worth my time.
If it's fast paced, two hours is fine.
If it's le slow-burn crawl pace, no more than 90 mins.
Historical films should be three hours at the bare minimum.
It doesn't really matter, however it seems like a lot of directors see movie length as an ego thing now which inevitably will lead to bloated movies full of boring scenes.
if, at any point, i fall asleep and the missed scenes did not contribute to the plot, the movie's too long
There is something nice about a nice tight 90 minute flick
90 is fine
2 hrs is ok
3 hrs is FRICK you sersiously kill your fricking self film maker homosexual, way too long
unless it is LOTR then it is kino
Fricking zoomers, take your Ritalin and sit still for a couple hours. It's not that hard.
big time zoomer thread
I'm fine sitting down and running a couple of the LOTR movie directors cuts back to back.
My problem is smartphones have turned me into pseudo adhd spaz, I can't go an hour without checking my phone, fricking around on it while i'm watching it. Really need to push myself just focus on the, especially if it's a new movie and I want to give it a fair viewing.
If it's bad, 0 minutes.
If it's good I don't want it to end.
Over 150 minutes and it starts to become a presumption on the viewer, a presumption that can be filled for actual classics like Spartacus or Ben-Hur but not for stupid shit like The Irishman.
Al Pacino alone keeps that movie from becoming a complete slog. It still is but he lead to me actually finishing that shit.
Whenever i have the 2 hour movie conversation with people their excuse is always like. "But i have to peeeee."
This always confuses the fck out of me. Are peoples bladders always this weak or do movies stress people so much that they force themselves?
This is why I never get a drink at the movies and I eat really salty popcorn by the bucketful. Really shrivels up the ol kidneys. I have never taken a pee break at the movies
I just piss before the movie starts. Always works.
This is what i mean. Why do people need to apply piss tactics as if they are on the brink of exploding when they do not damage control it for a hour. I do not want to derail the thread but im starting to feel im the odd one out for only having to go like two to four times a day. And yes im drinking a healthy ammount.
Some people are unhealthy morons who drink soda more than they do water plus all kinds of other things like energy drinks so they need to piss even more than most people.
i usually make it but I chug 44oz of soda every movie, my gf cant go 2 hours without using the bathroom no matter what
I fricking love a good long movie. Going to the theatre and watching a 2-3 hour movie that's well done is cinemagoing at its absolute peak. If you dont have the attention span for it then go play fricking fortnite or roblox you fricking gnat brained monkey
if im enjoying a movie i want it to be 2 to even 3 hours. a good kubrick, coen brothers, tarantino, lynch, even nolan, scorsesee I'm disappointed when theyre over at the 2 hour mark or earlier, oppenheimer for example wasnt a minute too long imo
The ideal film length is 2h15m
i dont care what anyone says, a 4 hour john wick movie would be better then a 2 hour john wick movie.
theres other reasons for movies being 2 ish hours other then that being an ideal movie watching time right?
They should be as long as Das Boot original uncut version
Movies should be 3-4 hours long. That is if the movie is good.
If it's sop then 90 minutes is enough.
based
samegay
I got depression because of this. I find life fascinating and want to learn things but I just can't focus. I can read an interesting book but after a while instead of satisfaction I get this crushing feeling of despair. Like a vacuum sucking out all the joy. So I need to do something else. Unable to develop skills and deep understanding I became depressed because everything worth doing takes focus and all these instant gratification activities aren't fun anymore.
I still want to watch the 8 hour long cut of The Thin Red Line. I hope that surfaces one of these days.
I gotta get into a mindset in order to watch a movie, if I do so, any length works
2 hour YouTube videos are no problem most of the time, but it's not like I put my full attention into it
90 min
It's on a bell curve. Shorter than 60 minutes is always unwatchable, anything longer than 4 hours is unwatchable. At above or below 2 and half it needs to be greater to still hold the screen time (only super good movies can be 90 minutes and only super good can be 3 and a half hours).