Support NeoGAF

[Bragr]

I can't recall seeing a movie that needed to be over 2 hours in ages. This idea that movies need to breathe or explain every arc is an excuse.

"I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead."

That's what we are dealing with, weak writers who don't have the elegance or skill to write a shorter movie so we are doomed to watch bloat for the rest of our lives. It's likely the result of some report that says the audience remembers the movie better if it's longer.

---

"The director shared the insight in reply to a fan on Twitter who asked whether the film is two hours and 29 minutes long, as has been rumored.

While he didn’t commit to that exact length, Gunn explained: "It’s around that long, although that’s not yet exact. And, I promise, not a second is wasted. There’s no fat. It was necessary to experience the full arc for every major Guardians character, not only for this film, but for the trilogy (or, I should say, trilogy plus)."

https://www.gamesradar.com/guardians-of-the-galaxy-3-runtime-james-gunn/

 

[Skyfox]

Appreciate the heads-up. This and the dress down of the robot chick means I'm out.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

I think this one will be alright. Better than the Apatow 2 hour plus comedies. Seriously any "comedy" that's released that's more than 90 minutes is an instant no for me.

 

[Spaceman292]

Only old people complain about long movies

 

[Kev Kev]

Since it's Guardians 3 I'm cool with it. Those trailers have been gut punching me right in the feels so I think it's going to be worth it. However I prefer for most movies to keep it under 2 hours.

 

[JimmyRustler]

Hate long movies. 90 minutes to 120 minutes used to be the norm and it was good as it mostly assured good pacing. Todays movies drag out way too much. There is hardly any 2,5 hour movie where I didn't think at least 30 minutes could have been cut.

I still remember when 3 hour movies were new and you had a break after 1,5 hours... Good times...

 

[Little Mac]

I prefer roughly 2 hours or shorter generally. However this is the last movie in a trilogy and there’s like 7 characters on the squad that need screen time and resolutions. I’m sure some will die. Probably Drax for sure (guessing). This is Gunn’s last Marvel movie as he is running DC now. The GotG cast are very loyal to him.

 

[Punished Miku]

Fine with me?

 

[Stitch]

Most Superhero movies are at least 2 hours long & most of them are longer.

The Battinson was 3 hours long

 

[LaughingStock]

Dumb movies shouldn't be allowed to be over two hours.

 

[Dr.Morris79]

Thats a lot of green screen.

 

[Sybrix]

As long as it doesnt have the insufferable 'comedy' elements the recent MCU films had

 

[GymWolf]

I would not be able to stomach more than 10 min even if it was 30 min long anyway.

 

[Tams]

Fine with me. I don't have bladder problems (yet).

 

[Mr Reasonable]

Duration isn't really a measure of greatness, but great movies that take 3+ Hours to tell their story can be really memorable experiences.

Dross that takes 2 hours to get to a CGI showdown that nobody cares about - not so keen.

 

[Bragr]

Only old people complain about long movies

Anyone over 30 I would say. People under 20 have grown up on this.

I can't understand how anyone can watch something like Avatar 2 and not feel their life being robbed of them by the entertainment industry.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

There are plenty of great movies that are 150 minutes-plus (I rewatched Giant a few weeks ago, for example). But, more and more new movies are in desperate need of a trim of about 20 to 30 minutes. I don't have any confidence that this movie will be better at 150 minutes than it would be at 110 minutes.

Should add that I don't plan on seeing it until it's on D+.

 

[AJUMP23]

I don't think I care. If the movie is good the length doesn't matter. Movies that are too long are movies like Avatar 2......What a waste of time.

 

[Daneel Elijah]

I don't know what is worse: relatively short masterpieces that make you want to see more of the world presented or mediocre films that try to use quantity to pally their lack of quality?

 

[Spaceman292]

Anyone over 30 I would say. People under 20 have grown up on this.

I can't understand how anyone can watch something like Avatar 2 and not feel their life being robbed of them by the entertainment industry.

That's just because Avatar 2 sucks. If a movie is long AND bad then yes I guess it's extra horrible.

 

[AJUMP23]

The one thing that movie length affects is re-watching them. I love LOTR but setting aside 3 hours for each one is very difficult in my current life. I like some of the marvel stuff but I do not want to make time to re-watch it.

Movie theater length in the movies only matters how many times I have to go to the restroom.

 

[analog_future]

It all comes down to whether the story justifies the length.

I'm happy to watch Lord of the Rings extended editions at 4 hours a piece, but get the fuck out of here with Transformers: Age of Extinction being 2 hours and 45 minutes long.


Definitely no issue with James Gunn's last Guardian's film being 2 and half hours. I'm confident it'll be worthwhile.

 

[GMCamaro]

I remember watching Lord of the Rings in theaters and wishing it would just keep going.

Guardians was pretty good, but the preview I saw, I don’t know, everyone looks so….tired?

 

[Alandring]

I don't care about the duration of a movie, as long as it's good.

 

[Catphish]

I’m don’t mind long movies. They should be as long as they have to be to tell the story per the director’s vision.

That said, anything over 2.5 hours should have a 10-15min intermission.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Only old people complain about long movies

Nah, only people that value their time.

 

[Spaceman292]

Nah, only people that value their time.

Oh please. Does the extra 30 minutes in the movie interfere with all your busy schedule and brain sugeries and cancer research?

 

[xrnzaaas]

I don't mind long older flicks (like The Godfather), but in the vast majority of the new ones this just means more filler scenes or long build-up to the actual plot.

 

[YCoCg]

It's capping off the trilogy and will be a send off for a few characters, why are you angry?

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Oh please. Does the extra 30 minutes in the movie interfere with all your busy schedule and brain sugeries and cancer research?

2 hours is enough for a movie, I’m happy to put that 30 minutes to other uses.
We all know that the increase in length (anyone remembers movies as long 30 years ago?) is driven to seek you more snacks and soda.

 

[German Hops]

As long as it's good.

 

[6502]

Movies waste too much time. 1hr 30m is long enough for most imo. They should at least feel short like TG Maverick.

 

[Paltheos]

As long as it's good, whatever, man. Mostly. I think 3 hours is the upper threshold for me for most films. Once it goes past that there's probably something you could have cut.

 

[Amory]

Movies generally these days are too long. It'd be one thing if they were long and lean, but they mostly just suffer from ineffective editing and there's a ton of fat left in.

 

[Blade2.0]

If it's good, don't care. if it's 2 hours+ of excruciating garbage *cough* All the Transformers films until now*cough* then just put a bullet in me.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Appreciate the heads-up. This and the dress down of the robot chick means I'm out.

Dress down? Like they scolded her or something?

 

[mortal]

Longer-than-average runtimes don’t work for every film. It largely depends on how enjoyable the film is, so there’s a certain amount of subjectivity.
When it's a captivating film it doesn't feel like it's been nearly 3 hours long. The viewing experience is notably different imo.

Blade Runner 2049 is one of my favorite films in recent memory, and it has a considerably lengthy runtime because of the style of pacing and editing. Not exactly an ideal movie experience for the average movie-goer.
However, it still appeals to a more niche audience, one that I’d consider myself part of.
Personally, I loved it and believed it served to elevate the film, given the premise and overall tone.

Again, what mostly worked for them on BR2049 won't necessarily work for every type of film, especially the ones with poor execution or numerous production issues.

 

[TheCed]

It really depends on the movies.

If too many things end up on the uctting floor, we get an incomplete movie that feel unsatisfying
If the movie is too bloated and has too many useless parts, it becomes boring and unfocused.

So far, Gunn has yet to disappoint me, so I won't mind.

 

[Spaceman292]

2 hours is enough for a movie, I’m happy to put that 30 minutes to other uses.
We all know that the increase in length (anyone remembers movies as long 30 years ago?) is driven to seek you more snacks and soda.

Movies have always been this long, grandpa.

 

[nightmare-slain]

Depends if it's good or not.

Some movies are an hour and a half long and overstay their welcome. Some movies run for 3 hours and you wish they'd never end.

Length is not important. You need to make sure your story is engaging and satisfying to watch.

It's not just movies but applies to books and games too. I've played 4-8 hour games that drag on and 100+ hour games that fly by.

 

[Fbh]

I'm way more annoyed by long TV shows, I miss when most stuff was 45 minutes now that it seems like 60 (sometimes 70-80) minutes episodes are getting more and more popular.
I just want to unwind a bit after dinner, not watch a fucking movie every day.

I don't mind long movies if they are good, though the last few ones I've seen have felt like they dragged a bit.

 

[Kacho]

I don't have attention problems or a weak bladder so it's whatever. If the movie is entertaining then I'm down for a meaty runtime. It all depends on the quality of the writing.

 

[Brian Fellows]

In a comic book team movie I'm fine with it. I hope every X-Men movie is 8 hours long.

 

[bitbydeath]

Guardians 3 will probably need it given there’s a lot to cover. A lot don’t.

 

[pauljeremiah]

Zero issues. A good film is always too short and a bad film is always too long.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Appreciate the heads-up. This and the dress down of the robot chick means I'm out.

Dress down?

 

[KrazyKrelian]

Longer movies are fine if they are good. Problem is that all Marvel movies have sucked balls since Thor Ragnarok. Giving up on the MCU since Endgame has been a fantastic choice.

 

[Bragr]

Zero issues. A good film is always too short and a bad film is always too long.

Nah, there is a good deal of movies that handles length poorly but are ok films.

A good example of this is Everything Everywhere All at Once. It handles the first hour badly, taking too long to explain things, you can get the gist of the movie pretty quickly but it overexplains and dumbs it down for the audience, ballooning the runtime past where it needs to go.

 

[IDKFA]

Only old people complain about long movies

Hate long movies. 90 minutes to 120 minutes used to be the norm and it was good as it mostly assured good pacing.

Do you both think movies 3 hours or over are a modern trend?

Gone with the Wind (1939) Lawrence of Arabia (1962), Cleopatra (1963), Ben-Hur (1959) The Godfather Part 2 (1974) and Apocalypse Now (1979) are just a few choice classics with runtimes over three hours.

Only the young, people with short attention spans and/or people with no film taste complain about movies being over 120 mins.

 

[Thaedolus]

2.5 is about the max I want for something not containing hobbitses. The only movies I’ve fallen asleep watching in recent memory are those forever long marvel movies