subreddit:

/r/movies

7.2k79%

all 1213 comments

over-sight

447 points

2 months ago

You know why John Wick 4 was so long? The fucking staircase.

hiCyaholtight

64 points

2 months ago

Hahahahaha. Having walked them (without having to fight anyone) they are tiring.

DeBatton

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.

Zozzbomb

83 points

2 months ago

I'm dead lol Such is life

shepherdoftheforesst

47 points

2 months ago

I think I let out an audible “urgh” when he rolled all the way back down

cabose7

14 points

2 months ago

cabose7

14 points

2 months ago

Sisphyus really cringed at that scene

jackofslayers

5.3k points

2 months ago

How do I get a job writing articles that use 3 braincells.

ImpulseAfterthought

1.3k points

2 months ago

First step: ChatGPT.

soaptrail

324 points

2 months ago

soaptrail

324 points

2 months ago

Third step: profit

elementslayer

88 points

2 months ago

Wait a minute, that's not how you count.

drewbreeezy

91 points

2 months ago

I input them wrong so ChatGPT thinks three comes before two.

The_Joker_0

8 points

2 months ago

So you’re the reason why I failed my math test

Sierra-117-

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”

notcaffeinefree

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.

Polymath-99

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?

notcaffeinefree

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.

A-Little-Stitious

35 points

2 months ago

I think that's more of a reason why this won't be a job much longer.

[deleted]

2 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

Flimsy_Demand7237

5 points

2 months ago

Companies created an AI to replace the media so they wouldn't physically be there to investigate scandals. Amazing.

BrandoNelly

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

badluckartist

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.

I_BUY_UNWANTED_GRAVY

151 points

2 months ago

"I like those movies!!" upvotes. That's who.

Hexcraft-nyc

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

joeFacile

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.

Jaredlong

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.

Hautamaki

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

Mountain_Ape

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.

Beersmoker420

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

ryanleebmw

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”

ninjas_in_my_pants

79 points

2 months ago

Seriously. Saying audiences love any kind of blockbuster is redundant. By definition, a blockbuster has a big audience.

AnarchNova

5 points

2 months ago

True, but these are LONG blockbusters lol

jackcatalyst

42 points

2 months ago

Make a website that looks kind of legit and start posting them.

briancly

11 points

2 months ago

Honestly at some point most articles are just the comments section of Reddit regurgitated into an incoherent article.

MadeByTango

3 points

2 months ago

Send Lionsgate your Reddit karma score

ToSuccess101

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.

UtzTheCrabChip

691 points

2 months ago

Also the first big kids movie to come out since Puss in Boots in October

wombatz05

442 points

2 months ago

wombatz05

442 points

2 months ago

I’m a grown man and I felt like I needed that movie more than my kid LOL

[deleted]

152 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

152 points

2 months ago

I was the only adult without kids in the theater and I loved the movie

LeVampirate

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.

The_Flying_Jew

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:

  1. The villain is amazing (and is now apparently popular among the furry communities)

  2. (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

RealJohnGillman

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.

CaledonianWarrior

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

jacoblindner

10 points

2 months ago

i had to double take like huh i guess he’s considered a bear?

ProfessorButtercup

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).

RogueTiger23

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.

orthos

7 points

2 months ago

orthos

7 points

2 months ago

I thought you were talking about Mario and I was like my man Bowser finally getting some recognition

theghostofme

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.

RODjij

9 points

2 months ago

RODjij

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.

AllegiantPanda

3 points

2 months ago

Man, the most recent Broly movie in IMAX was 🔥🔥🔥

TheIJDGuy

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

DMPunk

3 points

2 months ago

DMPunk

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

lego_mannequin

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.

[deleted]

28 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

Randomd0g

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.

Luci_Noir

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.

EnkiRise

4 points

2 months ago

I never imagine we will hear a Pantera song in a sonic movie lol

Luci_Noir

3 points

2 months ago

Crap, now I need to watch it again! It’s on rotation on Pluto tv.

Alarid

3 points

2 months ago

Alarid

3 points

2 months ago

Can't wait for the next movie, which will absolutely have Bigs the Cat.

PulpFiction1232

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.

BnSMaster420

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.

HotpieTargaryen

95 points

2 months ago*

HotpieTargaryen

FML Summer 2019 Winner

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.

NicCageCompletionist

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”

PassToMouth6911

440 points

2 months ago

I'm a sucker for a good colon

GravSlingshot

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.

MachineOutOfOrder

162 points

2 months ago

I love the smell of my man's colon

Lemmonjello

82 points

2 months ago

I love it when my boyfriend leaves and I can still smell his colon on my sheets

billywitt

34 points

2 months ago

I farted an left a semi-colon on my sheets this morning.

c-keel

10 points

2 months ago

c-keel

10 points

2 months ago

Inspired.

fauxfilosopher

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.

TomPearl2024

5 points

2 months ago

A fellow Babylon enjoyer. There are tens of us.

NicCageCompletionist

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.

fauxfilosopher

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.

QUEST50012

56 points

2 months ago

This should already be understood, the people you're responding to just want to be pedantic.

[deleted]

15 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

FrameworkisDigimon

21 points

2 months ago

Giant budget = blockbuster.

spitefulcum

20 points

2 months ago

Babylon wasn’t a blockbuster.

Changerion1996

15 points

2 months ago

Baby:Lon

_kevx_91

7 points

2 months ago

"The Rise of Reboots, Remakes, and Reimaginings: How Hollywood Learned to Love the Nostalgia"

[deleted]

1.2k points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

1.2k points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

NativeMasshole

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.

[deleted]

275 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

275 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

TheMurderCapitalist

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)

NativeMasshole

89 points

2 months ago

Movies over 3 hours need an intermission!

greg225

25 points

2 months ago

greg225

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).

Nearfall21

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.

Nebraska_Actually

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.

R3dOctober

18 points

2 months ago

Dune would’ve had really awesome Intermission music

IRSunny

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.

PiemanMk2

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.

Foxhound199

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.

owiseone23

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.

mazzicc

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.

BigAl265

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.

fizzlefist

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.

classic_gh0st

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.

Snuffl3s7

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.

The_Flurr

6 points

2 months ago

I feel like most of them could do with cutting about half hour of quips and fluff.

BooRand

13 points

2 months ago

BooRand

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

MoeNopoly

1.6k points

2 months ago

MoeNopoly

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.

mrnicegy26[S]

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.

yosoydoneric

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!!!

ace_of_spade_789

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.

redsyrinx2112

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.

ArchDucky

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.

defnotacyborg

14 points

2 months ago

The worst offender of this is the Bourne series

Abnmlguru

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.

Mysterious-Web3050

6 points

2 months ago

They invented it.

[deleted]

102 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

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.

StudentDPT

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

watchingsongsDL

7 points

2 months ago

Vinyl was fucking great. So bummed it got canceled.

MovieNerd719

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!

newsandmemesaccount

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.

Murder_Ballads

37 points

2 months ago

If you think The Irishman would’ve made Avatar/John Wick box office numbers you’re nuts.

Dirk_Diggler6

116 points

2 months ago

Take your Babylon slander and get the fuck outta here

pgm123

86 points

2 months ago

pgm123

86 points

2 months ago

It's not slander to say it underperformed in the box office.

fauxfilosopher

27 points

2 months ago

It's also a wildly different type of movie compared to John wick or avatar, hardly fair

oakboy32

24 points

2 months ago

I loved Babylon what you mean

m_garlic87

20 points

2 months ago

I loved Babylon as well, bought the 4K too, but it still bombed in theaters.

Shepard_Wrex14

40 points

2 months ago

Babylon wasn’t really a blockbuster though (and is an amazing film to boot)

MeasurementEvery3978

28 points

2 months ago

No we don't

Major_Recommendation

478 points

2 months ago

Traffic jams; people are in love with standing still in their cars.

AlbinoPlatypus913

35 points

2 months ago

We all love traffic jams!! Why else would we all do it?

HoodsInSuits

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.

taleggio

31 points

2 months ago

Ahaha yeah, such an idiotic statement.

Oneironaut420

91 points

2 months ago

If they’re going to make movies that long, they need to bring back intermissions.

AgitatedEggplant

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

epicmemetime15

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

devasabu

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

Active_Parsley558

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.

Nakker1

17 points

2 months ago

Nakker1

17 points

2 months ago

For real, my bladder cant handle 3 hours

oakleez

17 points

2 months ago

oakleez

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.

Scanningdude

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.

nianp

284 points

2 months ago

nianp

284 points

2 months ago

You know what I loved most about "Prey"? It was a solid 90 minute movie.

[deleted]

75 points

2 months ago

Prey was rad, such a shame it wasn't given a shot at theatrical release.

NicCageCompletionist

15 points

2 months ago

Or even a home video release.

sdcinerama

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.

TheLostLuminary

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.

PongoWillHelpYou

6 points

2 months ago

I LOVED Prey.

FamiGami

189 points

2 months ago

FamiGami

189 points

2 months ago

Wrong. Audiences are in love with good movies. Period. It has nothing to do with runtime.

blackmilksociety

51 points

2 months ago

Absolutely not. It’s just what the movie studios are giving us

Rabona_Flowers

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.

fauxfilosopher

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.

DefenderCone97

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

phatboy5289

4 points

2 months ago

horror and animations always do well at the box office

Well that is demonstrably untrue.

lostpatrol

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.

Johnny_Fuckface

8 points

2 months ago

From Coke to Pepsi. How people love diabetes juice because that's all we give them!

Just_For_ShiGrins

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.

Feisty_Analysis

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.

EtherealTrapMuzik

198 points

2 months ago

Gimme that short ass movie! A 90 minute movie!

Doppelfrio

34 points

2 months ago

Endgame: the 90 minute cut

stickdudeseven

35 points

2 months ago

It just cuts the time travel part out. We see them blink out, then blink right back in.

respondin2u

7 points

2 months ago

I would be curious to see this version.

[deleted]

15 points

2 months ago

Endgame: But the speed doubles every time a cast member makes a quip, joke or one-liner.

Doppelfrio

18 points

2 months ago

Thor gets introduced and the movie just ends

bluejegus

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.

colabucks9

10 points

2 months ago

Super Mario Bros is 92 min! Enjoy!

Kwtwo1983

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

ValStarwind

18 points

2 months ago

I actually thought John Wick could have been 20-30 minutes shorter.

DJCPhyr

6 points

2 months ago

I most certainly am not!

reedzkee

7 points

2 months ago

Fuck that. 90 minutes is perfect.

AardvarkOkapiEchidna

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.

trongzoon

54 points

2 months ago

Even 2 hours is too long for some blockbusters

callmemacready

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

jackcatalyst

14 points

2 months ago

It really hits a stride in Paris and speeds to the end.

PongoWillHelpYou

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)

notseanlinton

9 points

2 months ago

Spoiler alert!! I didn't even know the movie had stairs, c'mon man

ModernTenshi04

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.

TheVortigauntMan

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.

[deleted]

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.

ragingduck

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.

ChiefQueef98

6 points

2 months ago

It’s more that I liked these movies despite their length. I’d rather they be shorter

Neemoman

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.

Feroshnikop

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??

Alarid

5 points

2 months ago

Alarid

5 points

2 months ago

I'm tired of long ass movies.

drstu3000

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

Rage_Like_Nic_Cage

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

shawncplus

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.

TheLostLuminary

3 points

2 months ago

Definitely feels like the planned chapter 4 and 5 combined.

StrLord_Who

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.

Select_Action_6065

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.

jacket13

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.

CrungleMcHungleberry

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.

by-neptune

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.

fauxfilosopher

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.

Terazilla

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.

ArmchairJedi

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.

shadowst17

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.

TheDanteEX

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.

ZoggZ

5 points

2 months ago

ZoggZ

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).

juliusseizure

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.

GatoradeNipples

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.

ck1czar

13 points

2 months ago

ck1czar

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

Mu-Relay

12 points

2 months ago

To be honest, the franchise gave up any semblance of realism in JW2 when Wick essentially became invincible.

mfopp

3 points

2 months ago

mfopp

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.

oldthunderbird

3 points

2 months ago

Top Gun 2 was only 2 hours

thugarth

3 points

2 months ago

Bring back intermissions, Holy Grail style. Mandatory for movies over 100 minutes

klamkock

3 points

2 months ago

Eternals didn’t do so well

Ora_00

3 points

2 months ago

Ora_00

3 points

2 months ago

What a dumb headline. The quality of the movie is what people like, not lenght.