Are movies too long?

Here’s a Friday Question that became a whole post.

Michael Dorsey wondered:

Question: You mentioned in your review of "Licorice Pizza" that the film felt too long. I find that this is true about most movies released nowadays. Do you find this as well, and do you have any theories as to why?

I have been mocked on numerous occasions for harping on this subject, but YES, I think most movies are too long.   Especially comedies.  Comedies over two hours wear out their welcome.  People get tired of laughing (assuming it's good and they laugh at all).   A 90 minute comedy is perfect.  

When you think about sitcoms being a half-hour (and today they’re more like 19 minutes), 90 full uninterrupted minutes is plenty of time to tell a story and get in your laughs.  

Why are movies so long these days?  I think you can answer that by asking this question instead:  Why weren’t movies longer in the past?   

By “the past” I mean before streaming and cable and video rentals.  

Movies lived and died by how well they did in theaters (remember those?).  The longer the movie; the fewer the daily showings.   If your movie was under two hours you could squeeze in one more showing a night.  More people in the theater meant more concessions sold, which is really how theater chains make their money.  That $9 tub of popcorn you bought cost $.09 to make. 

So a lot of theaters and studios put pressure on filmmakers to keep their running times down.  In many instances, the studio retained final cut, and if the director didn’t deliver a film with a suitable running time the studio would hack away.  Lots of good movies were destroyed that way.  

Over time and with other ways studios could profit off their releases, that became less critical.  Plus, we went through a period where directors commanded more power and creative control.  Indulgence began to creep in.  

Today, the only movies having any real impact at the box-office are comic book superhero flicks.  They’re expensive “event” movies and since they charge ridiculous prices to see them, studios are allowing longer films so the audience is fooled into thinking they’re “getting more for their money.”  

And if a movie is streamed, who cares how long it is?  It’s not like you’re programming something behind it.  

Sometimes now on blu-ray they’ll feature “the director’s cut,” which is always way longer.  How many of those are actually better?  (Some yes, but I submit most no.) 

LICORICE PIZZA is waaaaaaay too long.  And as a reader pointed out, most of the scenes in the trailer aren’t even in the movie.  I bet the first cut was 3 1/2 hours or more.  So to Anderson, the movie was cut way down.  But did he need twenty minutes of people running?   I would rather have seen some of those omitted trailer scenes. 

There are some movies that do warrant a lengthy running time.  Usually they are big sagas with scope.  BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA.  But not KNOCKED UP.  

And I’ll leave you with this truism in the theatre, usually spoken during out-of-town tryouts:  Take out twenty minutes and the show runs two years longer.


from By Ken Levine