Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 101 to 107 of 107

Thread: The Batman

  1. #101
    Quote Quoting transmogrifier (view post)
    I've seen it, and I can safely say The Batman did not need to be three hours. I would have lopped off the entire third act, to be honest.
    I would've left the final third intact and cut some material out of the middle, but yeah, it was too long on the whole, and this is an issue that I actually kind of agree with baby doll on in general. I'm a bit sensitive to runtimes not being the right length anyway, and, while there are movies that I feel should've been longer (like Notorious), it's more common that they feel too bloated instead, especially when it comes to modern Hollywood, where it feels like the studios are trying to cram in more "spectacle" in order to compete with at-home streaming. To be honest with you, it kind of feels like the industry is regressing back to where it was in the early-mid 60's, when they were competing with TV, and they felt like fluff like The Sound Of Music ​had to be almost three hours in order to feel more special, you know?

  2. #102
    collecting tapes Skitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Neo-Ohio
    Posts
    16,569
    Quote Quoting baby doll (view post)
    Still, I would contend that very few films really need to be longer than eighty minutes (and there are a lot of films feel long at eighty minutes). In other words, most contemporary movies are long only due to the incompetence and/or self-indulgence of their makers.
    Again I feel you're shifting the conversation. I'm not disagreeing with you that a fuck ton of mainstream summer fair is overlong...I agree...the only statement I've made is that there isn't a standard runtime cinema length. If it's earned and it works, then a 4 hour movie works. Giving examples of failures doesn't work against this. We know some movies are too damn long, hell, I've said this many many times. But then a flick comes along that is looooooong and every frame I want to kiss. I agree in economy, but I also think

    Here we go, 4am insomnia thoughts....

    Economy also might.....might!....lack vision. That IS NOT a defense of these overlong movies, BD! Don't interpret that way! But make a short film or make an epic. Do what is right for the story.

    Even being a batman fanboy, I haven't seen the film yet, I have no idea. It could be an hour too long, I don't know.

  3. #103
    Guttenbergian Pop Trash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    The Yay Area
    Posts
    5,243
    Quote Quoting baby doll (view post)
    Also late Godard: Passion, Nouvelle vague, Notre musique, and Adieu au langage are all around eighty minutes, and Ici et ailleurs is only fifty minutes and is as dense as fuck.
    Sure, but then Historie(s) du cinema is 266 minutes in total.
    Ratings on a 1-10 scale for your pleasure:

    Top Gun: Maverick - 8
    Top Gun - 7
    McCabe & Mrs. Miller - 8
    Crimes of the Future - 8
    Videodrome - 9
    Valley Girl - 8
    Summer of '42 - 7
    In the Line of Fire - 8
    Passenger 57 - 7
    Everything Everywhere All at Once - 6



  4. #104
    Quote Quoting Pop Trash (view post)
    Sure, but then Historie(s) du cinema is 266 minutes in total.
    Well, it's a TV series in eight parts, and given its subject (the history of the twentieth century as seen through the history of film and vice-versa), as well as its aesthetic density, the series doesn't strike me as unnecessarily long or indulgent (I wasn't ever bored by it). Incidentally, Godard released an eighty-minute digest version for theatres that I've never been able to see.
    Just because...
    The Fabelmans (Steven Spielberg, 2022) mild
    Petite maman (CÚline Sciamma, 2021) mild
    The Banshees of Inisherin (Martin McDonagh, 2022) mild

    The last book I read was...
    The Complete Short Stories by Mark Twain


    The (New) World

  5. #105
    Quote Quoting Skitch (view post)
    Again I feel you're shifting the conversation. I'm not disagreeing with you that a fuck ton of mainstream summer fair is overlong...I agree...the only statement I've made is that there isn't a standard runtime cinema length. If it's earned and it works, then a 4 hour movie works. Giving examples of failures doesn't work against this. We know some movies are too damn long, hell, I've said this many many times. But then a flick comes along that is looooooong and every frame I want to kiss. I agree in economy, but I also think

    Here we go, 4am insomnia thoughts....

    Economy also might.....might!....lack vision. That IS NOT a defense of these overlong movies, BD! Don't interpret that way! But make a short film or make an epic. Do what is right for the story.

    Even being a batman fanboy, I haven't seen the film yet, I have no idea. It could be an hour too long, I don't know.
    There is a standard runtime for commercial films and it's dictated by economic, rather than aesthetic, considerations. In the '30s, when films were shown on double bills and the success of any individual film was of less significance due to block booking, that length was ninety minutes or less, and by and large films benefited from this restriction, restrictions often being a spur to creativity. Today, when each film has to be something special to draw people out of their homes, it's 135 minutes, and the films suffer from having to fill out all that extra time.
    Just because...
    The Fabelmans (Steven Spielberg, 2022) mild
    Petite maman (CÚline Sciamma, 2021) mild
    The Banshees of Inisherin (Martin McDonagh, 2022) mild

    The last book I read was...
    The Complete Short Stories by Mark Twain


    The (New) World

  6. #106
    collecting tapes Skitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Neo-Ohio
    Posts
    16,569
    Quote Quoting baby doll (view post)
    There is a standard runtime for commercial films and it's dictated by economic, rather than aesthetic, considerations. In the '30s, when films were shown on double bills and the success of any individual film was of less significance due to block booking, that length was ninety minutes or less, and by and large films benefited from this restriction, restrictions often being a spur to creativity. Today, when each film has to be something special to draw people out of their homes, it's 135 minutes, and the films suffer from having to fill out all that extra time.
    I didnt say anything about commercial films or hollywoods selling model. I was only talking about cinema as art, and I'm not disagreeing with you about economy being a positive, the only thing I'm still saying is that...artistically...movies dont have a standard runtime. imo, to say the artform has a "standard runtime" is to say films longer than whatever standard is set is too long. This simply can not be, as some films (as we discussed) earn their run time, well therefore, some stories are worth the run time.

  7. #107

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
An forum