Movies Are Too Long Now! - Rant
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 06. 2022
- I was supposed to see the new Elvis movie a few days ago but didn't realize until a little before the movie showtime that it was 2 hours and 45 minutes long! That was a hard "NO" from me. Movies are getting way too long now. Like an old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn, I'm going to aggressively get mad about movie runtime. Sure, occasionally a set of films will justify the long runtime (Lord of the Rings Trilogy) but often they overstay their welcome (The Hobbit Trilogy). Movies need to get back to the basics. Simpler plots, quotable dialogue and a shorter length!
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @adamdoesmovies
My Patreon:
/ adamdoesmovies
My Social Media:
linktr.ee/adamolinger
Narrated by: Adam Olinger
Edited by: Adam Olinger - Zábava
A film has to earn its runtime. Today’s films hardly justify a 90 min runtime
I wonder if the long film length is why I find myself skipping through movies so much now. I never did that a few years ago. I am getting older, but my tastes haven't changed. I don't skip through many movies but there are some that either it's the length or the content but I get so f'ing bored. They just drag on. No interesting dialogue or meaningful action or drama, just filler. The latest Fantastic beats film is one that bored me to death. I don't think I'll ever be able to sit though that with out skipping parts.
A good story and entertainment justify a 90 minute run time. Just goes to show that there aren't many out there. The first movie I watched post-lockdown was _Unhinged._ That was a brilliantly entertaining movie to watch at the cinema and it was money well spent. It went for 90 minutes and I never felt cheated at all. _Get the Gringo_ was thoroughly entertaining and was 90 minutes.
They can be made, and the advantage is they are not a chore to be re-watched, rather than having to schedule an entire day to fit in a 3 hour Marvel movie.
Yeah, you’re right, I think it’s mostly padding
Not only are some movies way too long - Previews and advertisements before movies are insufferably long as well. I saw a 715 Black Phone showing with my friend last week and when the movie finally started he leaned over and whispered: "Dude, it's 745."
Yeah we started noticing this a couple years ago - now we just reserve our seats and show up 20-25minutes post start-time just in case it comes on “early” 😆🙄
I couldn't agree with you more. A bad 2+ hour movie is hell, and only makes the movie and the experience even worse.
Sitting through the second Wonder Woman or Fast 9 and having no idea that either are nearly 3 hours. Even at home. I forgot I even saw F9.
Exactly! If a movie is amazingly done and well paced, like Speed Racer, that's fine. But if it's terrible, don't waste my time. Even the awful Clash of the Titans remake had the decency to cut it at 1 hour and 45.
Oh God, I agree with this so much. I miss when 2 ½ - 3 hour run times meant it was a big, epic, special event film. Now every movie is roughly that length and it's just completely exhausting. I've been watching Season 4 of Stranger Things lately and good lord, every episode is feature film length and even though I'm ultimately enjoying it, it feels like such a chore. I sorely miss when movies used to be ninety minutes and TV shows were thirty or even forty minutes.
If it feels like it's a chore and exhausting, it slowly stops being entertainment and starts to become tolerance. You will see the final episodes, as you feel you've invested this far into the series. Gone are the days where people fought tooth and nail to watch an episode after crave for an entire week to indulge and see what happens next. Writers are lazy now and studios don't care. I found series OZARK was the perfect balance of cliffhanger episodes and not overstaying its welcome.
Like that Zack Snyder's cut...ain't no way in hell I'm watching a 4 hour movie.
@@PhantomFilmAustralia "I found series OZARK was the perfect balance of cliffhanger episodes and not overstaying its welcome.'
And I found the same pleasure in Emergency! on DVD (that 70s NBC medical/action series w/Randolph Mantooth, Kevin Tighe et al.); the episodes were roughly 50 min. give or take, and the movies (the original pilot film in 1972, and the 6 later-series TV movies in 1978 and 1979) were each roughly 100 min., also give or take. Even more of a plus: the subject matter was of a form that had the episodes getting in, moving at a good clip, and getting out (fires, rescues and lifesaving medicine and treatment); far as I recall, none of them were boring.
I groaned when I saw the 2 hour 39 minute runtime, but the movie ran by in a flash for me. I was so impressed. It felt like a rollercoaster. Super stylized and fun.
It took me a week to finish Elvis. Tom Hanks was just cringe and not in a good way.
If the movie makes you want to check your phone or look at your watch means the movie is dragging on and is too long.
A 3 hour Scorsese movie can seem a lot shorter than a 2.5 hour Judd Apatow film. Movies should never overstay their welcome. It limits rewatches and DVD/Blu Ray sales. If anything, it should finish telling the story with the audience still wanting more.
Sometimes the difference between a good movie and a bad movie is 20 minutes.
BINGO!
Movies are only long when you're not enjoying them, but if you like a film I think you won't complain if it was 3+ hours runtime.
I remember back in the 2000s feeling jipped when a movie was under 2 hours long. Nowadays I'm cautious when a movie is over 2 hours long.
I've learned that getting more movie does not equate to getting your money's worth.
I feel like the length of the Elvis movie was justified, given how eventful his life was.
Almost everyone's life is eventful or full of events. Editors need to be more vigilant about the length of movies
I agree with you that films are to long now. If you do a double feature the key is to cut out previews. They are like 20 to near pushing 30 minutes. You need to time it out correctly so you are late to the first film and get into the second film about 25 minutes late. I haven't gone to the cinema in a long time and I don't care for sitting, usually in an uncomfortable seat, for that long.
I've been doing that recently because the theater I go to has no-less than 10 movie trailers. That said, a lot of people got screwed over because for some reason Jurassic World 3 had zero trailers before it so people were missing the first 15 minutes of the film, haha. It was one of the rare times I actually went at show start.
Yes. God the previews in front of Jurassic World were 24 minutes. For a 2 and a half hour film, that's 3 hours. For a 3 hour film, that's pushing towards 4.
@@AdamDoesMovies Seems like your doing your best here at the game. I used to like it to do a double feature. It is especially cool if it is the same genra if you can make that happen. I am a horror guy so I used to get pretty excited when I could swing a horror double feature. You are very correct they are just to long these day.
i remember saying the same exact thing OUT LOUD about Mission Jurassic Impossible. "jesus how long is this thing"??
those are two different movies you clown
Agreed. It was very refreshing to watch a few 90s movies recently and be surprised how short they seemed to be, while still feeling perfectly satisfying!
It used to be that 2.5+ hour runtimes were reserved for ABSOLUTE EPICS like Lawrence of Arabia, but a MARVEL Superhero movie does NOT need to be nearly THREE HOURS long!
Rant was way too long. Whatever happened to the good old days when a rant ran for just a minute and a half?
Anyways, I have never understood the criticism that movies are just too long and that studios can't hope to hold a person's attention. We know before hand how long they are. If it is too long, skip the theatrical adventure and wait for streaming.
'Ticked Off Vic' rants are short, to the point, and loud!
Some movies that long can go by before you know it, and some just drag on.
I’m ok with a 2 plus hour movie if the story is engaging, but sometimes even that feels like work. Especially the ones that are setting up the next movie’s plot before they finish the one they’re currently on.
Most of my favorite films are ones that got in, told their story well, and wrapped up in 80-90 mins.
Elvis was a incredible , I just did not even know how long it was . It was incredible masterpiece
There's nothing wrong with long movies. There's a lot of stories, whether biographical or fiction, that need tohave long runtimes in order to make sense. The problem is that when the movie is boring (a.k.a. not that interesting or good), it becomes a chore to get through. I suppose it's more frustrating for you because you can't just walk out of the theater and stop watching since you'll be reviewing the film later on this channel.
There are a lot of people who don't possess the patience to appreciate _slow-burners_ (The Godfather)
Other times, If the 3 hour movie is engrossing, the time will fly. Nowadays, most of the time, people are checking their phones in the second act because the movie is dragging on because of overindulgent directors.
Elvis was excellent, the runtime was just fine. I think the problem is previews going for 20-25 minutes is the problem.
There are times, like when I first watched Magnolia, that I was so engrossed in the movie that I would have been ok with a fourth hour. It's all about the skill of the storyteller.
Director, Paul Thomas Anderson has later said that the movie would have benefited from trimming it by 25 minutes. I would agree with that, but every person takes from a movie differently. It was perfect for you, and that's what matters.
Glad someone else said it. The reason I didn't go see The Batman in theaters was because of the 3 hour runtime. Watched it the day it came out on HBO Max and really enjoyed it. Have been meaning to watch it again but everytime I choose something else that's usually older because of that 3 hour runtime. Certain films can justify being that long. Most comic book stuff cannot.
That movie is WAY too long
@@AdamDoesMovies I seriously thought it was reaching the credits before the last act even started. I had no clue that was even coming. I would rather watch something that's around 90 minutes because if I'm going to spend 3 hours watching films, I can at least watch two.
Spider-Man: No Way Home is another. Could justify it once in theaters and once at home. After that you have to devote too much time for it.
The movies that get re-watched are usually only around 100 minutes.
The Batman was 2 hours and 56 minutes it's not 3 hours
I've been saying this for years, it started after 2016 actually, movies like The Batman don't fit the runtime of the plot, 2:10 or 2:20 mins would've been perfect and more tighter, but nope, and fans want to justify it cuz it's Batman....gimme a break
I said this somewhere else but that is absolutely correctly. Se7en is a far better film than The Batman (The Batman was clearly inspired by it) and it runs at 2 hours 7 minutes. The perfect length with great pacing and a much more memorable story.
@@AdamDoesMovies I haven't seen that yet and I believe you, so many classics I gotta get to but I will
@@ninjanibba4259 man you are missing out, I really ENVY you for being able to watch it for the the first time
@@breesybird9207 oh I plan to, before this year ends, I would have seen Seven and the Alien movies, along with Rocky and Rambo
@@ninjanibba4259 all excellent choices and I’m sure you’ll enjoy them
I don't personally agree. Movies take forever to release. The longer the movie, the more content can be added. An obvious statement. Some stories have to be told with as much detail as possible or you either get a chopped to hell version that sucks, or you have to wait years for a part 2 unless they're filmed together like LotR. Even then they usually make you wait a year. I'm not going to be around forever, so I want as much as I can get when they do release. It also makes it more worth your money for a more superficial answer. Unless the movie just sucks, I say the longer the better if it calls for it.
I agreed. I don't agree with his take on movies being too long, As long as a 3 hour plus movie has good storytelling and we'll put together content, Then I'm all here for it.
@@Feliciathedoll Yeah. If he can't sit through a 3 hour movie it sounds more like an attention span issue on his part, not a problem with the movie.
I loved ELVIS! I actually thought it was too short. They tried to cover his whole career in that runtime and left out lots of stuff.
I agree, saw Elvis with my family yesterday and didn't feel the time and would have been happy to watch an additional 30 minutes.
What's forgotten in this criticism is unlike other movies Elvis is a stand alone depicting his life without any sequels.
@@John451vfr I felt the same way about The Irishman. A movie that is fantastic because it's able to be long.
Depends on the movie...length of the movie isn't the biggest issue we face..it's too long in between movie releases. When a movie gets a sequel, especially marvel...the production teams think we will wait til our kids graduate college. Secret wars is 2025 and deadpool is 2024..making me care less.
I loved Top Gun because they kept it simple and didn't drag it out into some 3 hour epic. The story got right to it and the mission was easy to understand. Once you watched them train for the mission you knew exactly what was supposed to happen, and when. When shit went wrong, that made it all the more tense. Brilliant.
I think it depends on the movie. There have been movies that a ruined because they needed to be longer David Lynch’s Dune comes to mind. But I do agree not all moves need to be extra long. I also agree just as some moves could use a long run time we need more short 80 to 90 money movies. I just don’t won’t movies mandated a length. Just keep in mind if set up rules about what a movie has to be you are going to limit creativity.
I totally agree that movies need to be shorter on average. Big fan of 90-minute movies. But I will say that Elvis absolutely makes use of its runtime and is one of my favorite movies of the year. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.
Movies are way too long.They have been for the past 20 plus years.2 movies in December are over 3 hrs long and don't need to be that long Avatar 2 and Babylon.2 hrs or less is fine with me.
Ferris Beuller’s Day off… classic. You should review a few oldies like that, Wierd Science, or Real Genius
You're right movies are to long now why can't movies be short like they used to be like with the Godfather trilogy
Movie studios nowadays are basing the longer runtimes on the “binge” culture that’s prominent nowadays. People love to binge TV shows hours at a time, so movie execs figured that they can make longer movies without annoying the audiences because of that. Boy, were they wrong, apparently.
I feel that 2+ hours long a movie has become some kind of reputation badge in the industry even though it destroys the final product. Perhaps some directors would like to go back to 90 mins but 90 mins is seen as a less valuable product.
99% of movies don't have a plots rich enough to span them for over 2 hours. All they do is bore you with unneeded scenes that don't help the plot. They are pure boredom.
I can easily binged entire seasons of shows. Attack on titan and Fma: Brotherhood being my favorites, so watching a long movie is np for me but I get your point.
So true. We saw Dr Strange 2 recently, and it was too long. Marvel type bubblegum movies are taking so much of our movie view time. And yeah, you're right about the one liners. Nothing memorable in movies now except Michael Bay-esque frenzies of explosions and CGI. It's getting tiresome.
Dr Strange 2 could've easily benefitted from 30 minutes less runtime.
@@damonappel 30% less bloat. 30% less lazy editing, and 30x more regard for sense, even with suspension of disbelief thrown into the mix..And WTAF is with the evil witch queen destroying worlds for two make believe kids? Does the #MumLife hashtag represent some kind of weaponised immunity from consequence? How can such a thing possibly be incorporated into a character with whom audiences should sympathise? Thanos wiped out half the Universe, and he was a great character, with whom we could sympathise, right up to the very end. Wanda in this was just weird and had nothing likeable about her. The best villains are those we also kinda like. Trouble is, this film didn't really have too many likeable or engaging good guys either. It was pretty crap.
@@benjaminroberts And 30% more actual "multiverse" would've been nice, too. (Rather weird that No Way Home had more meaningful "multiverse" action, than the movie named for it.)
@@damonappel word. Looking back, it was actually a bit shit. 30% more shit.
I watched the Cable Guy once and got so sucked in I had no clue it was 90 minutes due to how fun it was.
I was gonna do the same deal back to back but decided to go to the gym 😅 I'm about to head in to see Elvis now
Preach on brother! Movies do not have to be so long!
If a film is 2 hours and more, it better be good.
You know a film is good when it feels like it’s been a hour, when it’s been 2. You know? That’s a good film. It’s all about capturing your interest.
And you know a film is bad when it feels like it's been 3 hrs., when it's only actually been 30 minutes.
I agree Lad why no one else brings this up is crazy oh I forgot CZcams half of these reviewers are company shills. Your videos be on point and you have stand true to your word about not becoming a shill. Peace with two fingers
Bruh, plus the movie theaters don't start the movie on freaking time! A 6:40 showing actually begins at 7 or even later!! So when the movie is over 2 hours long, and on top of that it's a bad movie, that seriously sucks.
Movies need what we used to get in English class, a teacher with a red pen crossing out the unnecessary fat.
whats your preference, binge release for shows or weekly?
It's all in what you get out of it. If you enjoy the film the time will fly by if you dont you'll suffer through it
It depends. WB gave Justice League a hard 2 hour limit and it blew chunks because of it (and probably other reasons). But I'd still much rather sit through Snyder's absurd 4 hour one anyday. But, like I said, it depends. I did feel that Fantastic Beasts 3 was entirely too long because it didn't have a story which warranted it. I was fine with Jurassic World's length in theory, but I still wish the plot had something to do with, I don't know, dinosaurs. Who thought that locusts were a good idea?
As someone who works 2 jobs, I literally don't have time for 2+hr movies anymore. If I watch something that long, I have to plan my whole day around it, but if the movie is 1.5 or 2 hours, that's doable. It feels like much less of a waste of time
Younger people I noticed tend not to mind the longer run times.
Because they sit on their phones while watching
That end credit was so real. I was actually walking back to my phone from the lobby when I heard your end credit calling me out. Lol
I miss 90min films
My theory: Studios think the longer you have to sit there, the more likely you are to come out saying you liked the film.
It's a lot harder to admit you wasted 2 and a half hours of your time.
As a big Elvis fan I had to see it, definitely was a long one but it moves at such a fast pace that the runtime isn't a chore. But I agree! Keep it to two hours max!
The last James Bond film was complete madness.
I love myself a good Adam rant!!!
I also hated the modern music they put in there. I don't hate modern music but outside the chorus literally no words went with the damn movie. Esp the outro song
That's one major criticism I've heard about it (and I agree with that one)-- that the hip-hop and rap in the Elvis film is presented as if Elvis actually sang such songs way back when.
3:09 You mean Jurassic Word: Abomination?
Going back twenty years movies have been way too long. It's understandable that movie adaptations especially ones based on books usually have a longer run time. You look at action films like the Transformers, Pirates of The Caribbean, and The Marvel franchises to name a few are atrociously over long. Did Pirates of The Caribbean At Worlds End have to be 2 hours and 50 minutes? The same can be said of one of my favorite crime dramas "Heat", a bloated 2 hour and 50 minute run time. It would have been much more engaging film if it only had a tight 2 hour run time.
I agree with you completely on this one
TOTALLY CORRECT. I’ve been saying for a while now. These films are obese! Cut the blubber, then cut the fat, then go on a diet, and starve for a few days. On another point, I really missed your “STRONG FEMALE LEAD” line. I think you could have squeezed it in their some where.
As a double header that is a bit much. I remember doing Speed / Lion King. That worked. You got to get at least one comedy or animated movie in there or you'll be home late.
Don't ever stop, Adam.
I haven’t really seen that manny movies in theaters in the past two years but I kinda agree with you. Especially on the strangers things comment, 100%.
You can add “and too expensive!”
Unless you are making some small film, most films have expensive CGI so obviously it'll be more expensive, with CGI you can do things which wasn't possible decades ago
@@buzzwithdrip6347 The quality is going down too.
@@jstreets1983 well that's the writer's fault tbh
I've stopped watching movies because of that
TOO LOOOONG . Films are getting wayy too long. Subscribed.
No sound bro
Yea. I was so scared the sound just went out on my phone lol. Then I clicked on another video and it was fine
You might be too early for your own good. There is sound!
@@AdamDoesMovies No sound on mine either.
@@AdamDoesMovies ok. I'll try again. Love your vids dude
@@simonbru1 I’ve experienced this, if you love yourself some Adam like I do and you click the video too fast it won’t play. Give it a couple mins and it works itself out.
Yup..( short and to the point )
Bloat is an epidemic in entertainment. There’s too much focus on bringing in new characters and setting up the next installment. But I love that Netflix has a 90 minute movie category.
Not really. It's either remakes, reboots, or spinoffs. I wouldn't really call that entertainment. Star Wars has 16 spinoffs, and it's post trilogy films are really reboots of the originals. I also love that Netflix has a 90 minute movie category.
Omg yes! I don't understand why they need to be so long! Movies like Lord of the Rings make sense to be long given the source material, but something like The Batman (which I loved) doesn't need to be 3hrs long. [insert heavy sigh]
There was a segment on one of 3 Buck Theater’s videos on The Batman that talked about a shorter version of The Batman that was screentested. One of them saw it. According to them, people didn’t like it relative to the 3 hour version (and he agreed with that). It apparently missed a lot of key plot points that were in the 3 hour version and wasn’t as interesting.
Adam longer films have stronger impact than shorter films, we spend more time with the characters and the story and that's why the longer films are better, Most Oscar Best Picture winners are very long films. maybe your problem is movies which are long these days are not using the duration properly.
And the way you just described the new Jurrasic world film plot, well tbh even Lord of The Rings plot is super simple but it's 11 hours long and smaller films like 1 hour 30 minutes have too much fast pace at times and although who wants to get bored with slow pacing like The Irishman but slow pacing is an art too, which is important and 2 hours 30 isn't that long . Too much fast pacing can make us have less attachment to the characters and doesn't set the world very well too. *Cough* Rise of Skywalker, Fast pacing works best with comedy.
And having too much plots in new Stranger Things is not a problem to me it's more fun just like older Game Of Thrones seasons, Duffer Brothers really tie all the strings at the end of the season in a satisying way
I can only pick one title for these videos but I go over the multiple issues with the longer runtimes of films in the last few years.We don't really disagree on any of the points you made. I make some of them in the video.
Oscarbait usually runs anywhere from 2 hours to 2 hours and 45 minutes but those films have a reason for being that long. They aren't summer blockbusters. And a lot of times, they feel like a waste too. A film does not need to be that length to make you think and create discussion. It just needs to be a solid tight script.
@@AdamDoesMovies I think people aren't writing better scripts for long films that's it. Longer Films are still better imo.
By The Way the Final Episode of Stranger Things this season will be 2 hours 16 minutes long lmao. Sorry to you
And that Eleven Deepfake you mentioned in that video wasn't a deepfake it was a younger actress.
@@randomfools808 I agree but who says you can't make a great script for long films, Some of the most beloved films are super long and it's a super common trend.
I heard that about Stranger Things. That whole season has been too long but whatever. I still enjoy it enough. Batman being 3 hours is a great example of being way too long. To me, the length took away from the overall enjoyment and not add to it. Se7en (which it pretty much mimicked) is just over 2 hours and is about as perfectly paced as a film can get. It does more with less time.
There is no far on TG Maverick. The love story is essential the whole theme of the movie. Outside of that I don't disagree with this video. Go Adam!
Double Feature...
BABY!
🤪
It's the writing. The writing is terrible. Yes editors need to do a better job, but the writing..... I am pretty sure all the really famous David Lean movies (Bridge, Lawrence and Zhivago) are 3 hours long each, yet don't seem that long to me. Solaris 1972 and Stalker 1979 are roughly 2 hours and 40 minutes and earn that time IMO. Unpopular opinion, but I think Aliens Theatrical is just a better movie vs Cameron's Director's Cut. A shorter good movie is always welcome though, in the 90 minute range.
Also, a lot of famous movies are long. The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is close to 3 hours long, but tells the story well, looks good and is a fun ride; same for Once Upon A Time In The West. I also feel like Blade Runner 1982 covers more ground in 2 hours than Blade Runner 2017 which is closer to 3 hours long. Just because something looks good, doesn't mean it can sustain its runtime on looks alone. So writing needs A LOT of help these days and editing probably needs to be better as well. That is why I like older movies better.
Talk to lord of the rings they’re 3-4 hours each movie and avengers endgame duhhhh quit complaining on movies are to long if you watch them
And damn, had no idea Elvis was 2 hours and 45. Thought it would be an hour and 50 like most dramas. I could go see it for free using Regalpass and won't because that's too much. I don't need the theater experience for that length. I'll wait the 30-60 days until it shows up on streaming or online. Films this year have been showing up a lot faster than the past outside of a few exceptions like No Way Home. Doctor Strange was like a month and 2 weeks.
I do triple features some times, last Thursday and watched bobs burgers again, the black phone, and Elvis. And then today I watch Elvis, the black phone, and the minions.
I agree dude, movies are too long and I get sometimes in lord of the rings case or avengers endgame it’s about stretching the lore of the world or characters out and that’s fine. But then we have tons of other stuff like Jurassic World dominion, I was fidgeting in my chair towards the end of the film I just wanted to get up and leave lol
Watching this as Total Recall feat Arnold Schwarzenegger is playing in the TV.. 80’s 90’s movies rock
And hey Adam, I’m with you on the love story BS that they often shoehorn into these blockbuster films. Trim the fat! At least that’s what my wife tells me😀😂
The irony is that almost all '80s movies were around 90 minutes and had a tacky love scene wedged in at the end of second act.
Me too-- that's what did the 1997 Titanic film in with me (the romantic and society filler, not to leave out the nudity [even if it's artistic, nudity is something I very rarely care for in movies]).
It depends on how good the movie is If the movie is really good and it has great characters while telling a good story then I can watch it all day long. Zack Snyder's Justice League is a good example it told a good story with characters that I grew up with and they were all amazing in this movie and I'm also sucker for comic book movies so I didn't mind it being 4 hours or even longer because there was never a dull moment in the film.
The Elvis movie justified its run time because it does a great service to the story of Elvis. I would recommend seeing it. The performances are fantastic and it moves at such a fast clip it didn’t feel like 2 hours 45 minutes at all. Hit all the right notes for me, and the ending was so emotional. Austin Butler will be nominated for Best Actor for sure.
That's good to hear!
I agree with you that movies are too long but not that Top Gun Maverick was a good movie. I can’t believe people are into that crappy movie!
Okay if no one is going to talk about how trailers these days spoil movies for us hardcore movie goers then I will.
Marvel has this ridiculous habit of literally playing the entire movie in their 4 or so trailers and tv spots.
Dr. Strange was the last movie whose trailer I saw more than it's teaser.
I refused to watch Thor 4's trailers past the very first teaser. I have been avoiding CZcamsrs B rolls that contain clips from it. I want to enjoy a marvel movie for once after years of trailer spoiling.
More = Better
At least that's what the studios think
It's like they think movies follow the CZcams algorithm. More watch time = more 💰
They need to bring back the intermission break.
ADM do a review on “PUMP UP THE VOLUME “ 90’s classic…
I couldn't agree with this more
Amen Adam Amen!
Preach !!!
I do not envy editors and studios for trying to please millions of different people like myself. I ask a movie to be confident and take its time, but I also have to admit I subjectively do not want any film to waste my time.
Hey I totally agree movies are just to long now. They should tighten up the script and run time. Also shows like stranger things do string along the story way to long. I liked Stranger Things Season 3 but it just went on for way to long
Yeah you make a good point.
Shorter movies also mean more screenings, so more money made. Runtime is a serious consideration for me when buying physical media. Longer runtime usually equals lower rewatchability.
It’s a movie about someone’s whole life, you’re delusional if you think that doesn’t justify it’s long runtime. Also, your comparing fictional movies that are meant to entertain people to a documentary about Elvis. It should’ve been longer than 2 hours and 45 minutes because it left people wanting more.
it's not a documentary tho is it? it's a movie
also, you're*
Go look at my comment on another comment bud
Same thing I thought when i saw that Elvis runtime lol
90 min is the sweet spot in my opinion
Please tell me about the chains that are locking you to your seat during a BAD long movie
At least he doesn't talk shit about movies he didn't even finish like most youtube critics 🤡
If your movie is longer than 90 minutes, there should be a good reason
I agree movies are way too long but a lot of older movies have had deleted scenes that are funny that get cut to save 5 minutes. the scenes are not needed and easily forgotten and would rather have a studio cut a few good scenes for run time. we will see them in DVD extras or youtube anyway.
I like a good 90 minute movie, myself.
I feel like 90 minutes is too short. My perfect time is 2h to 2h 15. Any longer and I get antsy.
I love you adam. Keep telling the truth 🤙💪🇧🇪😉😍
Yes, movies these days are too long....Lawrence of Arabia, 1962, 4 hours. Dr. Zhivago, 1965, 3 hours 19 minutes. Cleopatra, 1963, over 5 hours. 1900, 1976, over 5 hours, etc.
I wish they were Lucy Lawless. She's friggin' awesome.
But somehow im already unsatisfied that Thor love& thunder only has a runtime of 2 hours...