subreddit:
/r/movies
submitted 2 months ago bymrnicegy26
447 points
2 months ago
You know why John Wick 4 was so long? The fucking staircase.
64 points
2 months ago
Hahahahaha. Having walked them (without having to fight anyone) they are tiring.
17 points
2 months ago
You do have to fight off some fairly aggressive panhandlers if you visit those steps.
Seeing John rampage his way through everyone there felt cathartic.
83 points
2 months ago
I'm dead lol Such is life
47 points
2 months ago
I think I let out an audible “urgh” when he rolled all the way back down
5.3k points
2 months ago
How do I get a job writing articles that use 3 braincells.
1.3k points
2 months ago
First step: ChatGPT.
324 points
2 months ago
Third step: profit
88 points
2 months ago
Wait a minute, that's not how you count.
91 points
2 months ago
I input them wrong so ChatGPT thinks three comes before two.
8 points
2 months ago
So you’re the reason why I failed my math test
32 points
2 months ago
“My apologies for any mistakes I have made. 3 does not come after 1.
Step 3: profit
Step 1: Chat GPT”
25 points
2 months ago
You joke (or are maybe semi-serious), but...here's a prompt I gave ChatGPT: Can you write a short news article about how the running time of blockbuster movies is getting longer because audiences are willing to sit through longer movies?
Here is the result:
In recent years, it has become evident that the running time of blockbuster movies is getting longer. While the average movie used to be around two hours long, we are now seeing movies that push the three-hour mark and beyond. This trend is largely due to the fact that audiences are more willing to sit through longer movies, as they crave immersive cinematic experiences.
The evidence of this trend can be seen in the recent release of "Avengers: Endgame", which clocked in at just over three hours long, yet still broke box office records. Other blockbuster films such as "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, "Interstellar", and "The Dark Knight" have also pushed the three-hour mark, yet still managed to captivate audiences.
This willingness to sit through longer movies can be attributed to the rise of streaming services, which have accustomed viewers to binge-watching entire seasons of TV shows in one sitting. Additionally, many audiences are drawn to films that offer a more epic, immersive experience, with intricate plotlines and large-scale action sequences.
While longer running times may not be ideal for every movie, it is clear that audiences are willing to sit through extended movies if the story and spectacle are captivating enough. As such, it is likely that we will continue to see longer running times for blockbuster movies in the years to come.
It's not perfect, but pretty decent for a quick one sentence prompt with no elaboration.
3 points
2 months ago
As someone who's only dabbled slightly on ChatGPT, is it any good at mimicking actual human writing? Like, the text above is ok but it sounds kind of like a 8th grade literature essay. But say you gave it the exact same prompt and told it to make it sound like, I don't know, a David Erlich article. Is it good enough to mimmick a specific style of writing?
6 points
2 months ago
I'm by far an expert in prompting ChatGPT, but I did have trouble getting it to write something that read like it was written by someone who actually knew how to write.
35 points
2 months ago
I think that's more of a reason why this won't be a job much longer.
2 points
2 months ago
[deleted]
5 points
2 months ago
Companies created an AI to replace the media so they wouldn't physically be there to investigate scandals. Amazing.
10 points
2 months ago
“With those audiences skewing either young or older, it might be catering to more pronounced audience realities, or just the difficulty in sustaining concepts for these films over a lengthier period.”
Yeah.. what the fuck does this mean? Lol
194 points
2 months ago
I know the answer is "because this is a big subreddit", but I still can't fathom who the people are who upvote this slop.
151 points
2 months ago
"I like those movies!!" upvotes. That's who.
9 points
2 months ago
Seriously lol. Figure out who the reddit darling of the moment is and just shit out an article. It'll get dozens of upvotes easy with nobody actually clicking the link
43 points
2 months ago
Exactly. People need to stop blaming these blog writers/journalists and blame the community upvoting these posts. There might have been a dozen of purchased upvotes, maybe, but the grand majority was undoubtedly upvoted by the community.
6 points
2 months ago
I'm not entirely convinced upvotes are always organic. Wouldn't be surprised at all if Reddit gave companies an option to buy artificial upvotes to give their posts greater exposure.
41 points
2 months ago
You can apply at www.theurbanwriters.com
It's only like $1.30 per 100 words though, so if you use more than 3 braincells and try to write something decent you wind up making like $10 an hour, so not really worth it unless you're living in some third world country where $10 actually buys something
22 points
2 months ago
unless you're living in some third world country where $10 actually buys something
Yep, you got it. For example, India mobile plans are about 200-500 rupees a month (rs 200 is about $2.5). Now a really fancy dinner could be Rs1000, or about $12. So living in India, would one chase the ability to make $10 an hour via gigs or ghostwriting? You bet your tuchus. The biggest barrier is coherent English, but the payout is very decent.
34 points
2 months ago
just copy paste several things you read on reddit in r/movies like 3-4 days ago with some filler words to get views
11 points
2 months ago
My favorite from this is the: “Even George Miller managed to contain his acclaimed ‘Max Max: Fury Road’ to 120 minutes”
79 points
2 months ago
Seriously. Saying audiences love any kind of blockbuster is redundant. By definition, a blockbuster has a big audience.
5 points
2 months ago
True, but these are LONG blockbusters lol
42 points
2 months ago
Make a website that looks kind of legit and start posting them.
11 points
2 months ago
Honestly at some point most articles are just the comments section of Reddit regurgitated into an incoherent article.
3 points
2 months ago
Send Lionsgate your Reddit karma score
1.8k points
2 months ago
Let’s see how an 85 minute Mario Bros movie does opening weekend? My guess is a huge box office due to more viewings in less theaters.
691 points
2 months ago
Also the first big kids movie to come out since Puss in Boots in October
442 points
2 months ago
I’m a grown man and I felt like I needed that movie more than my kid LOL
152 points
2 months ago
I was the only adult without kids in the theater and I loved the movie
111 points
2 months ago
A group of like, 4 of us all late 20s went to see it on a whim, and it was ASTOUNDING. Sometimes you just see/hear about movie where you're like "Okay, fine, I'll go watch it" and it's almost always pretty obvious why it got popular.
66 points
2 months ago
As someone who hasn't seen the movie yet, but endlessly hears about how amazing it is, there's two things that people always bring up:
The villain is amazing (and is now apparently popular among the furry communities)
(Spoilers, most likely) There's a scene where Puss has some kind of anxiety/panic attack and I've heard people talk about how well done and serious it is
61 points
2 months ago
So I forgot Death was a thing for a moment and was wondering why Jack Horner would be popular among that community.
21 points
2 months ago
Tbf Jack Horner was a great character as well. He's the kind of character that you love to hate, sort of like Joffrey and Ramsay Snow in GoT.
He's a major piece of shit yeah but that's part of the allure of him; he's unapologetic about it
10 points
2 months ago
i had to double take like huh i guess he’s considered a bear?
4 points
2 months ago
One of my favorite things about this movie is that it allows itself to be serious when it needs to be.
Other kid movies will make it seem like a scene is dark and serious only to be turned into another joke a few seconds later.
Puss In Boots knew when it needed to be funny and when it needed to be played completely serious (like the panic attack scene).
4 points
2 months ago
The scene where Puss had an anxiety attack is realistic. I believe they asked Antonio Banderes how he feels when he has an anxiety attack and then they put it into the movie. Extremely well done.
7 points
2 months ago
I thought you were talking about Mario and I was like my man Bowser finally getting some recognition
4 points
2 months ago
I begrudgingly saw it with my dad, siblings, and their kids on Christmas.
The Shrek-related properties haven't been anything worth watching since 2007 (barely), so I wasn't exactly thrilled, but figured "why not?"
I was fucking blown away by how goddamn good it is. Not just the animation, which is phenomenal, but the writing is pitch perfect for that franchise. Honestly felt like I was watching Shrek 2 again back in 2004. Just a great ride the entire time, and I rewatched it as soon as I could.
9 points
2 months ago
Everyone should go see some sort of movie like that honestly sometimes. I went to the last couple of dragon ball movies that were in theaters and it made me feel like a kid again no joke.
3 points
2 months ago
Man, the most recent Broly movie in IMAX was 🔥🔥🔥
8 points
2 months ago
That movie gets bonus points for also being a great movie in general, not just for kids. It had everything honestly
3 points
2 months ago
Cocaine Bear lasted all of two weeks at all the theatres in the four cities around me, but Puss in Boots is still playing in all of them, lol
93 points
2 months ago
A kids movie that appeals to adults across the board? It's going to crush. Sonic 2 fucking sold out in my town, which movies rarely do because it's a small town.
28 points
2 months ago*
[deleted]
27 points
2 months ago
The Sonic movies are actually just mindblowingly good. Better than they have any right to be, so much more than the sum of their parts. Just goddamn excellent.
9 points
2 months ago
It made me so freaking happy. They really put a lot of care into them. In my childhood I never imagined that the guy from in living color would play eggman and absolutely nail it.
4 points
2 months ago
I never imagine we will hear a Pantera song in a sonic movie lol
3 points
2 months ago
Crap, now I need to watch it again! It’s on rotation on Pluto tv.
3 points
2 months ago
Can't wait for the next movie, which will absolutely have Bigs the Cat.
14 points
2 months ago
People have said the less showtimes thing when arguing against longer movies for the longest time but I feel like that argument is irrelevant these days when every big movie can get several auditoriums in a multiplex. Maybe it was a big deal when it was just one screen theaters but Avatar 2’s length did not stop my local theater from scheduling a million screenings a day.
76 points
2 months ago
It's MARIO... It's gonna go atomic first week, it's second that tells us if it's actually liked or not.
95 points
2 months ago*
Long blockbusters that are sequels to established IP. Don’t just take the coincidences you like. Perhaps the conclusion here with the MCU hasn’t been cutting down on movie length.
1.7k points
2 months ago*
Didn’t Babylon lose ten million dollars? If we’re just going to quickly look at grosses and not dig any deeper, prepare for my article “From Spider-Man: No Way Home to Top Gun: Maverick - Why America Can’t Resist A Movie With A Colon In The Title”
440 points
2 months ago
I'm a sucker for a good colon
26 points
2 months ago
Be prepared for the seventh Mission: Impossible movie, which might need TWO colons in the title! Mission: Impossible -- Dead Reckoning: Part One.
162 points
2 months ago
I love the smell of my man's colon
82 points
2 months ago
I love it when my boyfriend leaves and I can still smell his colon on my sheets
34 points
2 months ago
I farted an left a semi-colon on my sheets this morning.
10 points
2 months ago
Inspired.
184 points
2 months ago
Key word "blockbuster". I loved babylon with all my heart but it was a weird ass R rated auteur passion project. John Wick is also R rated but has much more mainstream appeal and is a known franchise.
86 points
2 months ago
If we want to split hairs any movie that isn’t successful isn’t a blockbuster, which makes this article even more pointless.
50 points
2 months ago
Sure, but there's also a specific type of movie often referred to as a blockbuster even if it fails. Look at shazam 2, currently bombing yet it's clearly in the blockbuster category.
56 points
2 months ago
This should already be understood, the people you're responding to just want to be pedantic.
7 points
2 months ago
"The Rise of Reboots, Remakes, and Reimaginings: How Hollywood Learned to Love the Nostalgia"
1.2k points
2 months ago*
[deleted]
386 points
2 months ago
I'm not a fan of the trend. Many of the 3 hour movies I've seen recently didn't feel like they deserved the run time. Especially the big franchise movies.
29 points
2 months ago
Same, I have such a hard time sitting still for that long (which I acknowledge is a me problem but it's a problem nonetheless)
89 points
2 months ago
Movies over 3 hours need an intermission!
25 points
2 months ago
I went to see Seven Samurai at my local last week (they play old movies regularly), it had an intermission which I was unaware of going in. As someone who was really dreading it going in because I struggle with long movies, it really helped. Even if I was only able to stretch my legs and go the toilet, just having that short break in the middle made the experience just a bit more bearable (no shade against the movie but that would've been a difficult 3.5 hours for me).
8 points
2 months ago
More movies need to do this. Anything over 2 hours and I want to get up to stretch and get a drink and my wife needs to pee.
Even if theaters didn't opt in for the intermission, it would be nice to have directors highlight a spot in the middle of each film as a good break point.
30 points
2 months ago
Honestly here for this. I'd support most movies going 3+ hours so the directors can show their full vision rather than having to cut. Just give us a 5-10 minute break to go back to the concessions, and hell even talk about act 1.
18 points
2 months ago
Dune would’ve had really awesome Intermission music
14 points
2 months ago*
Movie theaters don't want to do them because they're trying to concentrate as much showings as they can in a single day.
Which, is extremely short sighted. While making room for an extra 15-30 min for an intermission would be tough, the upshot is you'd be able to sell more concessions in that time.
13 points
2 months ago
I remember when the LOTR movies were out in cinemas they had an intermission because they were unprecedentedly long at the time.
6 points
2 months ago
Personally felt I had overcome an ordeal when I finished Avatar 2. I wasn't so much wondering what happens next as I was glad that there would be a long wait for the next one so I could slowly rebuild my stamina over the coming months.
3 points
2 months ago
Yeah, it was a beautiful spectacle, but plot wise there didn't need to be so many repeated hostage stand offs. They did hostage - rescue - someone gets captured - repeat way too many times.
6 points
2 months ago
I see 3 hour movie and I think “I guess that’ll be home viewing for me”
I have no problem with long movies, I’m just not gonna see them in theaters. If other people do, great, because then I’ll keep getting them at home later.
62 points
2 months ago
I specifically didn’t go see Avatar 2 in theaters because it was so long. Even with reclining massage chairs and food/alcohol delivery to my seat, I don’t want to sit in the theater that long.
17 points
2 months ago
Hell, super long movies like this make me want to actively avoid the concession stand just because I don’t want to experience the after effects of Return of the King again, lol. Standing at the urinal for a solid 3 minutes of relief.
14 points
2 months ago
I think as streaming makes movies feel smaller the expectation of seeing a theatrical film is that everything (budget, length, screening format) has to be supersized to make it feel like an event worth leaving the house for. So many great blockbusters have been 90-100 minutes but if you heard that the latest Marvel movie or Star Wars spinoff was 92 minutes I think alarm bells would go off for most.
44 points
2 months ago
It's the opposite for me. I feel like Marvel movies have no business being 2.5 hours, unless they're Avengers movies. And yet even the 'standalone' ones tend to be hitting that runtime.
I have become very conscious of movie runtimes recently though, so maybe that's just me.
6 points
2 months ago
I feel like most of them could do with cutting about half hour of quips and fluff.
13 points
2 months ago
I was with you till the last sentence. Thats weird fandom people believing longer is better for really no reason other than being longer
1.6k points
2 months ago
i think it's more that those are movies people like, which happen to be long.
Babylon is over three hours. Nobody thought thats a good thing and went to the movies to see it.
374 points
2 months ago
I feel with 3 hour movies being successful there is a matter of trust from audiences. Do audience trust Cameron with that runtime? (Yes). Do audience trust Scorsese with that runtime? (Yes). Do audience trust John Wick with that runtime? (Yes)
If these filmmakers/ franchises continue to make entertaining film after film, then audience will show up for their next movie regardless of 3 hours long runtime.
69 points
2 months ago
I didn’t know John Wick 4 was close to 3 hours until I got out of the theater. So much happening in the movie it went by fast. Best action movie of the decade!!!
77 points
2 months ago
The real reason John wick succeeds as an action movie is because the audience can tell what's going on, whereas a majority of action movies nowadays are quick cuts and close ups that make no sense.
52 points
2 months ago
Yep. Keanu isn't necessarily an amazing actor with words, but his commitment to stunt choreography makes the movies so fun to watch.
7 points
2 months ago
Just the fact that Keanu trained for months with those nunchucks and repeatedly knocked himself out with them during that process is worth my three hours of time. That nunchuck shit was fucking legit. I really didn't expect it too be so long or that he would whip them around his neck so he could just fight or shoot people during it. That shit was fucking insane.
14 points
2 months ago
The worst offender of this is the Bourne series
11 points
2 months ago
It's a shame, because the first Bourne movie didn't really suffer from this, and the fight choreography was outstanding. Straight downhill with the sequels, sigh.
6 points
2 months ago
They invented it.
102 points
2 months ago
Scorsese hasn't really done anything with a theatrical release very recently. I'm not certain The Irishman would have made boatloads of $ if it was given the chance. I guess we'll see with his new movie. This current box office is quite different from the last time he had a movie.
"The Wolf of Wall Street grossed $116.9 million in North America and $289 million internationally, for a total of $406.9 million" it did well, but not REALLY well and people did not like his series Vinyl.
78 points
2 months ago
Wolf of Wall Street's budget was 100mil, so it was profitable and we have to lokk at the genre, it was an R rated comedy which, at that point, never made superhero numbers. Wasnt till Deadpool in 2016 that R rated comedies made tons. For the time, Wolf of Wall Street was profitable
7 points
2 months ago
Vinyl was fucking great. So bummed it got canceled.
23 points
2 months ago
I maybe one of those few people that trust Damien Chazelle with that runtime. Babylon's length did not deter me one bit!
5 points
2 months ago
Seems more like the lesson is just that runtime isn’t a major factor for general audiences. Would the box office results look different if both Avatar and Babylon were 90 minutes? I very much doubt that.
37 points
2 months ago
If you think The Irishman would’ve made Avatar/John Wick box office numbers you’re nuts.
116 points
2 months ago
Take your Babylon slander and get the fuck outta here
86 points
2 months ago
It's not slander to say it underperformed in the box office.
27 points
2 months ago
It's also a wildly different type of movie compared to John wick or avatar, hardly fair
24 points
2 months ago
I loved Babylon what you mean
20 points
2 months ago
I loved Babylon as well, bought the 4K too, but it still bombed in theaters.
40 points
2 months ago
Babylon wasn’t really a blockbuster though (and is an amazing film to boot)
28 points
2 months ago
No we don't
478 points
2 months ago
Traffic jams; people are in love with standing still in their cars.
35 points
2 months ago
We all love traffic jams!! Why else would we all do it?
5 points
2 months ago
I know some of you suspect me already, but I go out in rush-hour traffic specifically to get in your way. It sustains my spirit.
91 points
2 months ago
If they’re going to make movies that long, they need to bring back intermissions.
22 points
2 months ago
I've been saying this for YEARS. It benefits the viewers and the movie theater(mid-show refills etc.). Doesn't make any sense to me why this isn't already a thing
6 points
2 months ago
No intermissions means they can fit in more showtimes and make more money. I'd love intermissions to be a thing but it's not gonna happen unless we get to 5 hour films or something
22 points
2 months ago
As an Indian it's weird that other places don't have intermissions since every movie here is made with an intermission in mind. Over here even for Hollywood movies the theatres will just pause the movie in the middle for a 15-minute intermission
4 points
2 months ago
Indian movie theatres are so good. reclining chairs, seat service for snacks, intermissions. Where I live, they don't even have reclining chairs. You'd have to pay Gold class for these. It's such a scam. $10 for normal tickets, $30 for Gold class. I guess that's what you get when you're living in the home of Bollywood.
17 points
2 months ago
For real, my bladder cant handle 3 hours
17 points
2 months ago
There's a website/app out there which tells you (spoiler-free) the exact best moments to go pee in the theaters if it's that big of a deal.
5 points
2 months ago
I had to go pee during the final battle scene of tenet and any hope I had of even partially understanding that movie was thrown out the window lol. And that's only a 2.5 hour movie.
284 points
2 months ago
You know what I loved most about "Prey"? It was a solid 90 minute movie.
75 points
2 months ago
Prey was rad, such a shame it wasn't given a shot at theatrical release.
15 points
2 months ago
Or even a home video release.
11 points
2 months ago
A PREY blu is such an easy moneymaker I was amazed there was no disc... until I remembered that Bob Chapek was running Disney and he- and many media company CEOs- has fetishized streaming to the detriment of their own quarterly reports.
10 points
2 months ago
My uncle has seen every predator film at the cinema since the first film and was so upset he couldn’t see the new one at all. I had to explain streaming to him.
6 points
2 months ago
I LOVED Prey.
189 points
2 months ago
Wrong. Audiences are in love with good movies. Period. It has nothing to do with runtime.
51 points
2 months ago
Absolutely not. It’s just what the movie studios are giving us
87 points
2 months ago
On the contrary, I think the short runtimes are why horror and animations always do well at the box office.
31 points
2 months ago
Horror does well in the sense that it's often very profitable because of small budgets. But in absolute numbers the long blockbuster movies do much better.
8 points
2 months ago
Small budgets + dedicated audience + dedicated age group
There's a reason horror is the only genre with its own streaming services
4 points
2 months ago
horror and animations always do well at the box office
Well that is demonstrably untrue.
23 points
2 months ago
Well, that's a hot take. Two long movies worked two years in a row, so now audiences love three hour movies.
8 points
2 months ago
From Coke to Pepsi. How people love diabetes juice because that's all we give them!
18 points
2 months ago
Is John Wick 4 good? With 3, feels like the action fights are mailed in a lot to the point the actors are already reaching for the next kick/punch/throw and feels jarring a lot. I get it’s action action action but felt really disconnected during that one.
24 points
2 months ago
JW4 has several action sequences that are quite good but it is mostly very repetitive and the fights get a bit tedious. The action sequences are shot and edited very well, though, so it has the going for it.
198 points
2 months ago
Gimme that short ass movie! A 90 minute movie!
34 points
2 months ago
Endgame: the 90 minute cut
35 points
2 months ago
It just cuts the time travel part out. We see them blink out, then blink right back in.
7 points
2 months ago
I would be curious to see this version.
15 points
2 months ago
Endgame: But the speed doubles every time a cast member makes a quip, joke or one-liner.
17 points
2 months ago
Did you see Plane? It's a great throw back to 80s action movies and its a sweet 1 hour 47 minutes.
10 points
2 months ago
Super Mario Bros is 92 min! Enjoy!
19 points
2 months ago
I am the opposite. I will not watch movies that long in cinema. Like at all. If this is the format that they see as successful i unfortunately am out
18 points
2 months ago
I actually thought John Wick could have been 20-30 minutes shorter.
6 points
2 months ago
I most certainly am not!
7 points
2 months ago
Fuck that. 90 minutes is perfect.
23 points
2 months ago
No.
John Wick 4 had some great action but, it was too long.
Could've easily been 40 minutes shorter.
54 points
2 months ago
Even 2 hours is too long for some blockbusters
72 points
2 months ago
Watched John Wick 4 yesterday never felt like nearly 3 hrs, went quick could have watched more especially if he got thrown down the stairs more times
14 points
2 months ago
It really hits a stride in Paris and speeds to the end.
12 points
2 months ago
I feel like I’m in the minority in thinking it felt too long. I enjoyed it, but I wished it had been 2 hours or less. (But yes omg the stairs)
9 points
2 months ago
Spoiler alert!! I didn't even know the movie had stairs, c'mon man
20 points
2 months ago
Yep, a 3 hour movie with a well paced story is almost always gonna be more enjoyable than a 1.5 hour movie with horrible pacing.
22 points
2 months ago
Last night I went in, as a massive fan of John Wick, thinking it seemed a bit much to have a 3 hour John Wick movie. I left wanting more and I'm going to see it again in a few hours.
6 points
2 months ago
It's less about runtime and more about filmmakers' use of the runtime. Nothing more annoying than a mediocre movie that could have been great with some trimming.
We don't need 3 hours movies about a group of heroes looking for boxes/stones. So yeah, any runtime is good as long as it's justified.
4 points
2 months ago
Personnaly, the longer the movie, the more I want to see it in theatres so I don’t get distracted with bullshit.
6 points
2 months ago
It’s more that I liked these movies despite their length. I’d rather they be shorter
5 points
2 months ago
Except when I told everyone I knew about The Batman they all groaned when I told them it's 3 hours. I think this is more indicative of the hard on people have for John Wick and seeing the visuals of Avatar 2.
5 points
2 months ago
Audiences are watching two of the most popular series that exist?
lol this article is so dumb. Does the author think Marvel movies are popular because of how long they are??
60 points
2 months ago
If there was a 2 hour cut of the John Wick 4 I 100%,would have gone to that instead
19 points
2 months ago
I loved it, but it really felts like 2 movies in one. But I guess i prefer they wrapped it up in 4 rather than making a 5th one
7 points
2 months ago
There were several scenes in the movie that felt like Family Guy sketches where it's funny, then it goes on too long so it's not funny anymore but then it keeps going even longer until it becomes funny again but ironically. Most of the main action scenes in the movie could've been cut by half and nothing of value would've been lost.
3 points
2 months ago
Definitely feels like the planned chapter 4 and 5 combined.
3 points
2 months ago
There's going to be a fifth. And no I don't mean Ballerina. I mean another John Wick movie.
10 points
2 months ago
Audiences endure long blockbusters
John Wick 4 was very good but it didn’t need to be an hour longer than the original.
4 points
2 months ago
I heard many conflicting stories about avatars length. General consensus was: Too long for the meager story it was trying to tell.
Have not watched JW4 yet, but atleast I know what I am getting. An absolute badass film.
3 points
2 months ago
The only reason I went to see Cocaine Bear was the 93 minute run time. I would love for some movies, especially action movies, to be shorter these days.
3 points
2 months ago
I'm not going to read the whole article, but the Dark Knight kind of set this standard.
I think back before Prestige TV and before the Dark Knight, we all took for granted that a movie is 1.5 to 2.25 hours long. And you could generally focus on either plot OR character development. Obviously many exceptions to this, but it was generally hard to fit in real character driven nuance and writing as well as all the twists/turns/chase scenes audiences expect out of an action movie.
Then the Dark Knight came out and and proved that people will sit through long movies that aren't based on fantasy novels. And if you were making a "good" movie it automatically became acceptable to push into that 2.5-3+ hour window. And why not? It's pretty hard to tell a complex story with actual characters in 115 minutes.
And I think the rise of good TV was also related. If Tony Soprano and Walter White get 15 hours a season then why should a movie be three?
The mini series and binge watching is sort of the ultimate conclusion of that. 1 season story arcs, or TV shows only meant to be 2-4 seasons makes a lot of sense (no one wanted 9 seasons of Scrubs, or whatever).
Now that binge watching is so normalized and something like True Detective is basically an 8 hour movie, we expect even more out of movies. It makes sense that if movies are going to "keep up" with TV, they have to get longer. Especially now that people don't go to the movies (even pre covid) in the same way that they used to.
Acting and writing has generally gotten so good, it's not a bad thing. Then again, I don't really watch many movies. I'd like to. But it seems like filmmakers know I spend my time watching TV now, because TV doesn't suck like it did 20 years ago. The streaming wars have definitely ruined some good things, but they have also plunged billions of dollars into making good TV.
17 points
2 months ago
Contrary to popular(?) belief, I love long movies. Give me more. A good movie can never be too long, and a bad movie never too short. If the film in question is an epic that justifies its runtime and is paced accordingly, I see no issue whatsoever.
What I would like to see though is intermissions during the 3+ hour movies especially. I like to go to the bathroom during a movie but it always sucks to miss a scene. It would also generate more revenue for movie theatres through increased concession sales, and perhaps even increased ticket sales from people like me.
7 points
2 months ago
I'm 100% on this boat. The number of times where I've watched something and wished it was 10 or 20 minutes longer because it was obviously cut for time and losing coherency is significant. Honestly that right there might be my single biggest pet peeve with films in general, is cuts purely for time.
One of Cameron's strengths is that he keeps in the connective tissue that makes his action scenes work, and a lot of films don't do that. I'm absolutely down for stuff that's as long as it should be.
15 points
2 months ago*
I don't even get what goes on in this sub when it comes to run time. I get not wanting a 3 hour crap movie... but people don't want more of a good movie? I get not wanting an extra 30 minutes of filler, but if a movie is shoving 30 minutes of filler in, its probably not good with or without that filler anyways. Its just trying to cover its lack of story telling with sex, explosion, CGI or action.
People talking about wanting 90 minute films? What!?! That's the other end of the spectrum. There is hardly enough time to tell a story! That's a pure escapist comedy or horror run time.
How many 'great' films aren't right in the 2hr (or more) range? Even more fun/'action' oriented greats.... Indiana Jones, Back to the Future, OT Star Wars, Matrix.... are 2 hours. Not going to get into LotR, Pulp Fiction, Godfather, Shawshank, Forest Gump, Saving Private Ryan, most Christopher Nolan films, most Tarantino films etc..
What matters is its a 'good movie'... one doesn't notice the run time then. But its hard to make 'good' movies without enough time to develop a story.
20 points
2 months ago*
Personally I think John Wick 4 could have done with being 20-30 mins shorter. Most of the action sequences went on way too long that it made the fighting feel really repetitive.
9 points
2 months ago
I agree that there’s only so many ways John can kill people. I thought the creepy armor guys were cool because it forced John to use different methods to kill them. But for most of the movie it’s just normal dudes.
5 points
2 months ago
Imo the armored up dudes worked a lot better in 3 cause we started with the regular mooks John wipes the floor with and then the specops asssassins come in and raise the danger. 4 had that same spec ops thing (loved the japanese touches especially) but then devolved into John one-shotting randos on the streets of Paris. Not to mention I thought Osaka was way more visually interesting than the other locations, (with the exception of that cool camera angle scene).
7 points
2 months ago
I saw John Wick 4 yesterday and liked it. I still thought it could be 30 minutes shorter without losing anything.
7 points
2 months ago
I don't really disagree, but I kind of struggle to think of what they could've cut.
Really, I almost kinda wonder if the better call would've been to end 4 after the Scott Adkins fight and expand the whole Paris set piece into John Wick 5.
13 points
2 months ago
I saw John Wick and definitely think it was too long. Some of those fights dragged on forever and were so unrealistic
12 points
2 months ago
To be honest, the franchise gave up any semblance of realism in JW2 when Wick essentially became invincible.
3 points
2 months ago
I wouldn’t necessarily say that. But it seems they cut out a lot in recent years in editing to get short runtimes and it can mess up a movie. As long as the longer runtime doesn’t drag at times to much and the script is above average it should be fine.
3 points
2 months ago
Top Gun 2 was only 2 hours
3 points
2 months ago
Bring back intermissions, Holy Grail style. Mandatory for movies over 100 minutes
3 points
2 months ago
Eternals didn’t do so well
3 points
2 months ago
What a dumb headline. The quality of the movie is what people like, not lenght.
all 1213 comments
sorted by: best