Can we start a global petition to demand Hollywood learns how to edit?

For about the last 5 years, I have walked away from most movies saying, "they could have trimmed 15-20 minutes." Sometimes more. I don't have a problem with 3 hours movies. The Godfather is one of my favorite movies of all time.

BUT - if you're going to make a movie that long, there needs to be a point. Things need to be happening. The story's pace needs to remain steady.

Let's take The Dark Knight for example. This movie was simply stellar for about the first 90 minutes. Then, it started to drag for 15-20 minutes before the 45 minute mini-movie about Two Face started. The entire pace and feel of the movie shifted.

Does Benjamin Button REALLY need to be 3 hours long? It was written by the guy who did Forrest Gump. For me, Gump worked. BUT - there was pacing and something was constantly happening.

I think the King Kong remake is a great example of this problem. I really enjoyed most of the scenes of the movie. But, 3 hours was simpy way too much for what was going on in the movie. Maybe my attention span is too limited.

My official plea to Hollywood: It's OK to make a movie that is 105 minutes long.

I am with ya.

_________________

And when they lower the movies down to 1.5 hrs, we'll see rants about movies that cost $10 to watch being too short.

i think ben button was probably the appropriate length, but it sucks because cutting anything wouldn't have made the movie any better

also peter jackson should really stop making movies where he gets carte blanche because i don't really need to see a four hour... whatever he's going to remake/adapt next

_________________

On the topic of movie lengths - Gone Baby Gone is an example of a movie that is "the right length". Sorry, I'm duping up a bit on my movie threads

But, that movie was tight from start to finish. The pacing was great. It starts of strong, continues at a solid pace, dips in the middle, and ratchets it back up at the end.

I didn't think Dark Knight was too long at all. In fact, often I think movies aren't long enough.

When I watch older movies, I'm often struck by how much slower paced they are than movies today. Maybe the problem is that our average attention span has shortened?

I actually agree with Frib on this, I often find myself wanting a good movie to be longer. Of course it depends on the movie and its quality. Take the best of the deleted scenes and add them. I thought LOTR was a good case of this, because IMO some of those deleted scenes were quite good.

I agree with Frib on this too. I watch a lot of old, classic movies. The pacing and storytelling is so different. So much is done with expressions, implied meaning, and backstory that you just don't see today.

I disagree, Lord of the Rings could of easily been twice as long.

_________________
Jake Rivers - Senex Legio
Get off my Lawn alliance

LOTR is an exception to many of the norms of today.

I found I cared a lot less about the length of a movie after I quit smoking.

_________________

the better a movie is, the less its length matters

_________________

return of the king could have been a bit (read : a lot) shorter.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

Man you are not kidding Van. That fucking movie ended a dozen times.

I think that was the one that I watched at the midnight showing. Was that the last one (lotr)? I was genuinely pissed that it kept not ending.

_________________

I just watched the nearly 5 hour extended version of Return of the King over Christmas break (again) and I loved every minute. Then again, I'm still a total LOTR fan, and I just can't get enough.

see i think the extended version of fellowship is as good as that series ever got. it makes me sad to only have one of those editions on my dvd rack, but not as sad as it'd make me to spend money on the other two

_________________

I personally am far more concerned with movie quality than movie length. I saw Epic Movie which came in at the low length of like 83 minutes... and was the biggest waste of money ever. I saw Swingers which is like 83 minutes... and that is one of my top five movies of all time.

And I will echo whomever said that the ending for the final Lord of the Rings movie was way too long. I sat there just thinking... We done yet? Can we finish now?

_________________

This really hits it on the head. As mentioned, I love a lot of longer movies. But somewhere along the way, in order for a movie to be "important" it needs to be long. When you glance at your watch, that's bad.

Benjamin Bucket was long and started to drag, but wasn't too bad. Good movie, not quite a Forrest Gump, though.

Seven Samurai.

There's your good, long movie.

Err wait, Benjamin Button.

IT WAS SUPPOSED TO!!!! /sigh.

I thought The Dark Knight was fine. But I enjoy movies being a bit longer. I can sit and watch the extended Lord of the Rings trilogy in one sitting if I have the free time.

_________________

I know, I know

But.. still.. maybe it was the directing that made it seem to drag at the end more than it should. I dunno. I didn't really mind it at the time because I had a mega huge boner for LOTR, but it hurts on replay. heh-

Once Upon a Time in America is why you dont cut movies just so they arent long.

_________________
"We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."

Was chit chatting today with a friend and Resevoir Dogs came up.

Resevoir Dogs is an example of how to make a terse, tight, effective movie and keep it well under 2 hours.

Maybe I should compile a list of excellent sub-2-hour movies.

I really liked LOTR, and I'm not much of a Tolkein fan. But that last movie dragged on too long with the endings. Despite that, I'd rather have movies on the longer side. If it clocks in under 2 hours, I'm kinda disappointed (if it's a good movie)

I cannot hear 'Stuck in the Middle With You' without thinking of that movie.

_________________

Pirates 3: At World's End

Another movie that had no business being 3 hours long.
Did we really need to watch Johnny Depp sit in Limbo for 15 minutes arguing with himself. Did we really need the 45 minute subplot about Calypso that goes absolutely nowhere other than saying "this is why we want to save Jack.

Does a movie have to be fast paced to be good? For example-- and this isn't even a super-slow movie; just a medium slow movie-- how about Dances With Wolves? I've always loved that movie.

No, a movie does not have to be fast paced to be good.

However, if you're purposefully adding slow parts, that are irrelevant to the story and are just boring, then you need to rethink that.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

and it goes the other way too, if you're adding action where there really shouldn't be, the movie is worse

_________________

Good point - "action" does not necessarily mean fast paced. Take Matrix Revolutions for example. That movie was virtually a fight scene from start to finish and one of the more boring movies I've ever seen. Silence of the Lambs has very little action, but is intense and "fast paced" from start to finish.

Crimson Tide is one of my favorite movies, and it had almost no action. It was, however, incredible tense almost all the way through. Great stuff.

I liked that movie.

It annoyed me a little. You obviously knew there would not be nuclear war, but I found myself siding with Gene Hackman until he went all apeshit,.

This is totally off-topic, but one of the reasons I loved the book The Sum of all Fears is because I had that mentality "Jack Ryan will stop the nuke from going off in Denver" and it definitely didn't end that way. Sure, some people saw it coming, but I didn't. The part where the bomb blew up the Super Bowl actually gave me chills (no pun intended).

I would normally bitch at you for giving away a spoiler... but I guess once a movie is 5 years old I lose that right.

Yup, you lose that right.

ps: Vader is Luke's pop
pps: Lillard and Skeet were the killers
ppss: Jenny has Forest's kid, then dies of AIDS shortly after they get married
wkrp: Jack freezes to death while holding Rose's hand

That and the advertisements for the movie all show the bomb going off, soooooo....eh. =/