Is there a particular reason why Hollywood writers are so fricking awful at pacing nowadays?
Is there a particular reason why hollywood writers are so fricking awful at pacing nowadays?
Is there a particular reason why Hollywood writers are so fricking awful at pacing nowadays?
>umm why is this not hecking 20 s long like my hecking tiktok vids are no cap fr mom where is my pepsi??
ADHD riddled zoomies
Ain’t you ever heard brevity is the soul of wit
>Nooooo my shirty cashcow blockbuster has to be almost 3 hours looooong!!! Don't like that??? Must be a zooooooooooomieeeeee
Older films were shorter
Intermission?
I think they literally just stopped teaching "kill your babies" in screen-writing classes.
audiences are moronic so they need to waste 30 minutes up front spoonfeeding character development and 15 minutes on the back for an epilogue or 2
This makes a lot of sense. I remember watching Wonder Woman 84 and they spent a while setting up Diana meeting Barbara and becoming friends
Instead of just starting a movie with them already being friends as if the audience wouldn’t understand two characters talking and that they knew each other
JFC. Why not just make movies 5-10 minute clips?
>romance movies spend so much time having the mains meet each other, just make them in a relationship in the beginning, the audience would know what's going on
>horror movie, spends so much time killing and the origin story, just have the villain's head on a spike and some dead corpses lying around to show what happened
>titanic, just show the underwater ship and skip all the bullshit that leads to it
This is what movies were. Usually an extended opening and closing of 20 or so minutes and then 5-10 minutes of shorter scenes. OP's right. You have no pacing anymore. People really noticed it with Judd Apatow. He would let scenes play as long or as short as the laughs dictated. But it spread to non-comedy films with Marvel. There is no feature length cohesion. It's like they are made with tiktok clips or youtube shorts in mind
Another thing I imagine is just people being more polite/pussies in production so they don't want to tell people "this scene is boring, doesn't add anything to the plot, isn't funny so cut it out" because it would hurt screenwriters feelings or not cutting out long shots because it would hurt cameramans feelings or if director realizes a scene is shit he wont delete it because it would make actors feel bad
>there can only be 3 hour movies or 5 minute clips NOTHING INBETWEEN
>romance movies are too fast when they just focus on relationship of 2 characters, you need to add scenes of lonely guy peeling and eating an orange uninterrupted for 20 minutes at the start and then insert a subplot about how the girl went to the movies and watched commercials before the film started that lasts 30 minutes
>horror movie, it can't just have murders and scary stories you need to have characters stop by and be educated by a black woman about history of local herbs and tell her opinion on capitalism, this character wont even die or appear later in the movie at all
>titanic, it focuses too much on characters it should have extra 5 hours of just zoomed in waves
You would have a nice day if you had to watch 80s and 90s movies that would just play out normally
Is there a particular reason you think movies have only reached 2 and a half hours in recent years? Is there a particular reason you think good pacing is dependant on overall length and not the delivery of the story itself? Any particular reason your thread sucks?
The little mermaid animated movie was 87 minutes long and told a complete story. The movie adaptation is 150 minutes long. Why is that a thing? Why do you need to almost double the length of a movie to tell the same story? There's no reason other than shitty writing.
moving away from VHS length limit has been disastrous to blockbuster movie quality
I think they want to maximise "stats" for their streaming services
>Look our users spend 10 hours on average this week, that's 2 hours longer than on other services!
Go watch Con Air and this piece of shit and tell me which movie a person with ADHD would like more
Movies used to be way more ADHD in 90s, faster and shorter
Multi-generational nepotism is bad enough. Add in diversity hires and.. bingo!
There were no diversity hires though
I genuinely think there is a mentality within the studios that audiences simply want MORE quantity for the high price of tickets now. Also all blockbusters (possibly for the same reason) have insanely bloated VFX heavy action sequences. There are times during capeshit, even if I'm enjoying it, where my eyes just glaze over at the endless CGI sequences. A movie like Oppenheiner running 3 hours I get, but fricking Indiana Jones? Raiders was a big action spectacle and it didn't even reach 2 hours. The RLM review said the opening set piece is like 20+ minutes. Anyone know how long the other threes openers are? I know people complained Temple's was very long, because Berg wanted to do a musical number.
They just can't help themselves with unnecessary spam that bloat the movie instead of having a concise message.
>96
kek
>"Nope" *taps constitution*
>"Bitches be opening dey legs too much"
They can't differentiate action and dialogue.
I think they can't differentiate what's relevant to character and plot and what's simply extraneous. The amount of shit in modern films that isn't relevant to either and isn't interesting enough to justify keeping is enormous.
I blame Judd Apatow and Scorsese. They give other directors the wrong idea - if you don't have the guys who can improv, maybe don't just spin scenes on endlessly.
You don't blame guys for doing something right, you blame the imitators who try it without understanding why and when it works.
This shit has been in movies since forever, though. Look at Back to the Future and all the bullshit scenes in that (90% of the 1980s scenes for example..)
Back to the Future is a tight 116 minute script that doesn't waste any screen time. What "bullshit scenes" are you referring to?
>clocktower (obviously except the lightning strike part)
>guitar sequence
etc
There's not a great deal devoted to the clocktower other than foreshadowing and tension building. It plays a central role in getting Marty back to the future in the story.
Guitar sequence is conflict along with a satisfying resolution for his parents and it was already alluded earlier how important that was to their romance. The Johnny Be Goode part is a bit of fun to release tension after the kiss and before the final climax.
What is the "etc"?
i think its an ego thing. they really think every minute of screenplay they wrote is gold
>buy pizza
>get 16 inch for $10
>fricking nice
>buy pizza
>get 12 inch for $10
>wtf?
>pay $20 to see movie
>it's 1 hour and 30 minutes long
>pay $20 to see movie
>it's 2 hours and 30 minutes long
Literally why are you complaining that you're getting MORE for FREE?
>pizza is covered in wienerroaches and rat shit
BUT THE TOPPINGS ARE FREEEEEE
Just because you don't like wienerroaches and rat shit is your fricking problem, mate.
Not a comparison.
Not a response
Valid response. Enjoy "Ant Man badly quips with D list comedian for 5 minutes"
For you it's Ant Man. For me he's Celery Man.
An extra hour of shit is still shit
Pacing is more important than length. I'd rather watch a 90-minute thrill ride than a 150-minute slog.
They are ego maniacs where no one will tell them to shorten up their scripts
The golden rule
>Exploitation/Horror = 75 - 90 minutes
>Normal film = 90 minutes
>Big action spectacular/SRS BSNS oscar b8 = 120 minutes
>Epic = 180 minutes
>Exclusive extended mini series edition = 2x120 minutes
Prove me wrong.
>Are we spending 20 bucks for the 90 minute movie or are we spending 20 bucks for the 180 minute movie?
How should I know moron
It'd happening to series now too. See the new season of Black Mirror. Twilight Zone style show
>30 min regular episode
>60 min very special episode
New season - let's just randomly spread 30 minuted of story over 75 minutes because why not
Longer = more epic-er
It's the studio.
They literally think "more expensive movie" means "it should be longer".
People tolerated movies creeping up from an hour 40 at most.