What's with the short movies?

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

What's with the short movies lately? :angry:

 

From my favorite movies, here's some that I thought were too short:

 

Star Trek: Insurrection 1 hour, 43 minutes

The Time Machine 1 hour, 36 minutes

Jurassic Park III - 1 hour, 33 minutes

Signs - 1 hour, 46 minutes

 

What about you? Do you have some favorite movies from recent years that you thought were too short?

 

Come on Hollywood, bring on the 2 hour, 30 min movies! :lol:

[~Crims~ 0]

Those movies are fine. I hate sitting for 2 hours and 30 mins in a theater. Only very few movies pull off keeping my interest through the whole thing such as Two Towers.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

Two Towers was like 3 hours or longer, right?

 

ALSO: A 2-part tv episode is 1 1/2 hours. I prefer a movie to be more towards the 2 hour length, other wise it feels like a glorrified tv movie! :angry:

[RikerChick 5]

I have a hard enough time finding a babysitter for the short movies let alone a long one. Bring on the short movies!

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

OK, maybe I can deal with a "short" movie...

 

But, THE TIME MACHINE and JURASSIC PARK III only being an hour and a half long each? That's just not right! :angry:

[A l t e r E g o 9]

What's with the short movies lately?

1. Theater turn-around time. The shorter the film, the more times it can be shown throughout the day. :angry:

[poguemahone 0]

1. Theater turn-around time. The shorter the film, the more times it can be shown throughout the day. :angry: 

and along with that, the DVD comes out a few months later and generally has "bonus footage", which sometimes is alot

[Takara_Soong 4]

Two Towers was like 3 hours or longer, right?

 

ALSO: A 2-part tv episode is 1 1/2 hours.  I prefer a movie to be more towards the 2 hour length, other wise it feels like a glorrified tv movie! :angry:

LOTR: TT was 2 hours 59 minutes. There are standards for how long a movie can be. I read that Master of Disguise had about 15 minutes of credits at the end so it would qualify as a full length movie. With the credits it came in a 1 hour 20 minutes.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

1. Theater turn-around time. The shorter the film, the more times it can be shown throughout the day. :lol: 

and along with that, the DVD comes out a few months later and generally has "bonus footage", which sometimes is alot

Well, not for me. There's only 2 favorite movies that got more than 5 or so mins of extra scenes.

 

STARGATE - About 10 mins worth of restorred footage.

THE ABYSS - About 30 mins worth of restorred and completed footage.

 

Most of my favorite movies that end up short... stay short. :angry:

[Theunicornhunter 2]

I've actually seen a movie in a theatre twice in the last two years; you got it LOTR - Fellowship and Two Towers. Everything else I rent. The fact that I live in a small town with limited theatre access doesn't help. And I really shouldn't be on these boards because I've never seen Nemesis - it didn't play here and I was working too much overtime to drive out of town. So here's to May 20th though I pretty much know what to expect.

 

What you miss in big screen view you make up with the rewind button and not missing anything for restroom breaks

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

It helps if ya have a really big tv too... :angry:

[removed 0]

i thought jurassic park 3 was terrible. waaaaay too short. i saw it at a good theatre so i wasted $13 for a short and crappy movie. jurassic park 1 was the only one ill watch over and over

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

I liked all 3. The 3rd was the best, and that's why I wished it'd be longer! :angry:

[Yillara Skye 1]

It all depends on the movie....LOTR now that was good to have it be nearly 3 hours long, while several other movies are much better short...and don't get me started on how they should have let Nemesis run longer than 2 hours!

[Syperphobia 0]

I personally think that they have short movies now due to the significant economic structure ... everyone is so scared to do anything today that it risks busniess' inferstructure. To do an 3hr feature with no one seeing it can make a big conseqence with the producers... Also Spiderman was suppose to be longer, but due to the 9/11 attack they had to delete some scenes Personally I wish the people of New York should just move on with their lives and leave the movie people alone with original projects.. but I am glad that they are letting loose a bit of the violence scenes. It makes one understand the value of reality from fiction.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

I personally think that they have short movies now due to the significant economic structure ... everyone is so scared to do anything today that it risks busniess' inferstructure.

I dissagree. I don't know anyone who's "scared" as a result of 9-11. Everyone I know is moving on with live as if it were just another day. If we live in fear, they win, so I won't live in fear.

[Syperphobia 0]

Well America is slowly making a come back while the scare is leaving us.. The Core took a dramatic risk of having all those "natural" death situations.

[Theunicornhunter 2]

The scenes deleted from Spiderman actually showed the WTC towers. I think they were right in removing those - peoples' feelings were too sensitive at the time. If movies are getting shorter its for economic reasons. Special Effects are incredibly expensive and they seem to have forgotten how to make movies without special effects. The digital age has also made us more time conscious. Try watching a movie from the 70's sometime. They can spend five minutes just filming a person walking across the room - I fast forward I can't stand it.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard 1]

Try watching a movie from the 70's sometime.  They can spend five minutes just filming a person walking across the room - I fast forward I can't stand it.

[Yillara Skye 1]

Try watching a movie from the 70's sometime.  They can spend five minutes just filming a person walking across the room - I fast forward I can't stand it.

Some of those movies from the 60's and 70's one should fast forward throught the ENTIRE thing, some move SOOO slowly!!

[removed 0]

i think some of the movies from the 60s and 70s are the best. just look at the old star wars movies compared to the new ones. the old ones are wwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyy better. and you cant forget alfred hitchcock and the old James Bonds. especially the ones with Sean Connery. they rock!

[ddillard 2]

I agree with picard on this one, I hate short movies. I am one that does not go to the theaters much anymore because the movies are so short. I mean I pay eight bucks to see it, and I don't think that a 1 1/2 hour movie is worth it. If they would bring back the min 2 hr movies I would start going back again.