Do you think most movies are too long?

fuzzybuddy

fuzzybuddy

SF VIP
Location
The Sticks, Northeast PA.
I'm not a movie buff. The last movie I saw in the theatre was "Oppenheimer". It was good, but I kept thinking, "OMG! Get on with it!" To me, there was a lot of "filler". The movie running time was 3 hours. I get it that people are going to balk about spending $15-25 for a 45 minute flick. Do you think movies are too long?
 

If it keeps my interest, if I'm not saying "get on with it" all the time, then it doesn't matter how long a movie is. But if doesn't keep my interest, then regardless of how short it it, it's too long.
 

RadishRose said:
Yes, just one of the reasons I'm not much of a movie watcher like I once was.

What's worse, is the series like they have on Prime, Netflix, etc. They really drag out.
Click to expand...
Before I choose a movie, I check the time. It has to be less than two hours, preferably closer to 1.5.

Almost all series I watched could eliminate 1 or 2 episodes. Some EU ones are only four; that’s much better.
 
raybar said:
If it keeps my interest, if I'm not saying "get on with it" all the time, then it doesn't matter how long a movie is. But if doesn't keep my interest, then regardless of how short it it, it's too long.
Click to expand...
Pretty much my feeling. Plus, I don't start watching ones I know will be two hours or more if it's already 9pm, and I might get drowsy.
 
Last edited:
I don’t spent money going to movie theatres. All movies are watched at home. Most movies are around the 2 hour range and the ones I’ve seen that go toward the 3 hour range I think were needed. I’m just a viewer who has no movie making experience but if a movie WAS too long I can always change the channel and watch something else. With the movie exposure we have these days, there’s really no need to be bored with extra long movies. If it’s in the theatre, you can always walk out.
 
Last edited:
I think audiences have changed. Probably because they've been served up a lot of "empty calorie" media in recent times. People have come to expect a series of sugar hits, a big bottle they can suck the corn syrup down through a nipple.

Fiber? Protein? Phytochemical nutrients? Nah, just open up another box of bonbons and bag of Cheetos.

That's not to say that flicks never get padded out stretching too little story, or that others are not just an exercise in self-indulgence by a director. I'm sure we can all think of examples.

But we can easily go back as far as the 1950s and find films that modern audiences can't sit through. I've even heard people claim recently that The Wizard of Oz is far too long. I just heard somebody say that about Close Encounters of the Third Kind last night.

So I don't think the movies and the series are too long or too slow. Audiences are just addicted to fast food media now.
 
I didn't used to think movies were too long, but I do now. And I agree, @fuzzybuddy, there's usually a good 100 minutes of filler in a 120 minute movie. But these days, I'll yell "Get to the freaking point!" at a 12 minute youtube video. I'll also have a little kanipshin over youtube ads that are more than 4 seconds long, so, could just be me.
 
PeppermintPatty said:
I don’t spent money going to movie theatres. All movies are watched at home. Most movies are around the 2 hour range and the ones I’ve seen that go toward the 3 hour range I think were needed. I’m just a viewer who has no movie making experience but if a movie WAS too long I can always change the channel and watch something else. With the movie exposure we have these days, there’s really no need to be bored with extra long movies. If it’s in the theatre, you can always walk out.
Click to expand...
Same here with regard to going to theaters. I get too frustrated with rude people (usually younger ones, of course ;)) who use their cell phones and/or talk during the film. And the number of previews drives me batty. I've tried to circumvent that problem by simply arriving later, but I still get frustrated. So I watch virtually all of my movies at home.
 
dilettante said:
But we can easily go back as far as the 1950s and find films that modern audiences can't sit through. I've even heard people claim recently that The Wizard of Oz is far too long. I just heard somebody say that about Close Encounters of the Third Kind last night.

So I don't think the movies and the series are too long or too slow. Audiences are just addicted to fast food media now.
Click to expand...
I agree with your point; however—and I'm not a filmmaker, of course, so I have to throw in that caveat—I still find some longer modern movies could use some judicious trimming. One of my absolute favorite films is Jurassic Park, which clocks in at 2 hours, 2 minutes, but personally had me on the edge of my seat up until the end (and still does). However, I recently saw Anatomy of a Fall, which is just a little longer, at 2 hours, 32 minutes, and I couldn't wait for it to end.

Just my two cents.
 
Really depends on the film. Saw Papillon and lost interest in it about halfway through. Memorably a very long movie for me. Other movies can be 2 1/2 hours long but, I don't notice because it kept my interest.
 
fuzzybuddy said:
I'm not a movie buff. The last movie I saw in the theatre was "Oppenheimer". It was good, but I kept thinking, "OMG! Get on with it!" To me, there was a lot of "filler". The movie running time was 3 hours. I get it that people are going to balk about spending $15-25 for a 45 minute flick. Do you think movies are too long?
Click to expand...
Yes many modern movies are too long but it depends on content. A movie like Titanic or Gone with the Wind needs to be long for clarity and neither were boring IMHO.
 
I hate movies that show the credits first. I don't want to watch the credits. I want entertainment and I want it now, not 3-5 minutes from now. Show the credits at the end so I can skip them.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top