The Avengers How long should The Avengers be?

[Tacit Ronin]

At first I thought the distributor, or whoever would set a certain runtime

Ideally, the director should dictate the running time.

 

[Quasimod0]

2 and a half hours

 

[Spider-Fan]

Ideally, the director should dictate the running time.

Rarely does that happen.

 

[Tony Starkk]

Anything under 2.5 hours would be a disappointment.

 

[The Morningstar]

You guys are all kidding yourselves if you think this is going to be three hours.

I'm guessing 140 minutes or so at the most.

+1

I'd be shocked if it reached 150 minutes. I think 135-140 is the best realistic fit.

Like I said, this isn't about predictions or what is realistic. This is how long you think it should be.

Honestly, this needs to be well over 2 hours. Marvel would be idiots to try and keep the running time short.

 

[Iron_Stark]

At least three hours.

Movie needs to be epic.

 

[demitri_vampiro]

i'm hoping it will be at least 2.5 hours long. this one needs to be big and it needs to feel big. it has all the elements. marvel should take a bigger risk with this one and make it big and epic.
they should have done that with thor as well, since it had the elements and potential to be more epic. at the end it fell a bit short. thor was good but i just had a feeling it could have and probably should have been closer to LotR. especially since they kinda had the same opening with prologue and a battle.
so hopefully marvel will go big with this one.

 

[Doctor Jones]

This movie doesn't have to be three hours. You all think the running time equates to its scale. I know I may be contradicting myself because of what I said on the Thor running time, but I waited to pass judgement until I saw the film and that worked.

All that matters is that the story must be told right. Three hours is too much and too long. It could get boring. I mean three hours? For LOTR maybe, but this could be done in two and a half. I don't even want to sit and watch a three hour Avengers film. It should have a great pace to it that makes us pay attention. This kind of film needs that. Three hours would just take too long. At most, comic book films are at least two hours. I think this will go over that a bit, but it doesn't need to be 3 hours. Will its scope be huge? Yeah, this is a huge movie, but that doesn't mean it needs to be 3 hours.

 

[Aztec]

Personally I think it needs 3 hours, but given Marvel's track record I highly doubt they'll go for it.

What scares me most about this film is that the budget is only $170M, yet The Dark Knight Rises' budget is $250M. How is that possible? Nolan doesn't even go that insane on FX, and The Avengers has a full CGI main character and, most likely, a massive alien invasion!

 

[Guhndoi]

I reckon, 2Hrs 29mins 18s.

 

[The Morningstar]

This movie doesn't have to be three hours. You all think the running time equates to its scale. I know I may be contradicting myself because of what I said on the Thor running time, but I waited to pass judgement until I saw the film and that worked.

All that matters is that the story must be told right. Three hours is too much and too long. It could get boring. I mean three hours? For LOTR maybe, but this could be done in two and a half. I don't even want to sit and watch a three hour Avengers film. It should have a great pace to it that makes us pay attention. This kind of film needs that. Three hours would just take too long. At most, comic book films are at least two hours. I think this will go over that a bit, but it doesn't need to be 3 hours. Will its scope be huge? Yeah, this is a huge movie, but that doesn't mean it needs to be 3 hours.

What makes this any different from LOTR though?

Look at all the players involved; Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Hulk. All of whom have had their own movies previously. None of these characters can be underdeveloped or made to be wallpaper. This isn't like a normal ensemble movie, this is a movie that needs to have 4 lead characters. 4 stars of the show. They all need sufficient time to shine.

Then you figure in the supporting characters and the villains? This movie has gotta have a big running time.

This movie needs to be the LOTRs of the superhero genre. It needs to be the most epic superhero movie ever put to screen. Otherwise, what was all the build up and fuss about?

Maybe not 3 hours, but it has to be well over 2 hours. I'm hoping at least 2 and a half.

 

[WildcatNC]

It should be 3 hours. If they have to cut it to 2:30 for the theatrical release then fine, just give me my directors cut.

I honestly don't think a 3 hour epic for Avengers would be a hard sell to audiences though. As long as it delivers then all the ADD general audience people will be fine. There is A LOT to show/tell/develop for one movie. Its kind of unprecedented.

In the end though you should let the story dictate the length of the film. Use whatever run time is best to serve the telling of the story properly. I just can't see them doing that in 2 hours or less.

I'm gonna guess that its going to end up at about 2:20 minutes knowing Marvel.

 

[dodgers2213]

Iron Man has the most development from already starring in 2 movies.

Hulk is interesting, he has had 2 movies and developed in different ways. In TIH we didnt see much of Banner and a lot of Hulk, so we didnt get to know Banner too much. But is there really more to it then a smart guy has a monster inside him?

Thor's character has been developed well through the excellent character interaction in his movie. but may need more screen time because of the situation he is in

Cap remains to be seen on how fleshed out he is in his movie. A good amount of screen time would be dedicated to cap due to is time displacement

We need screen time for Nick Fury (finally), Hawkeye, our villains and their history (whoever it/they may be)

I'd say around ~3 hours with 30-40mins of the movie being PURE action....i let Thor slide with little action because its the origin and hellas entertaining without it and Iron Man 2 didnt deliver as well, and TIH raised the bar for cool as hell actions scenes. Also after all this build up, we're due for some screen shattering, mind blowing action that will rock all of cinema history

 

[WildcatNC]

Also after all this build up, we're due for some screen shattering, mind blowing action that will rock all of cinema history

Exactly. This has to be EPIC and deliver on the promise of all this build up. It can't just be a "pretty fun popcorn movie". It has to FEEL like the culmination of all these movies.


No pressure Joss, none at all. t:

 

[Doctor Jones]

These characters personalities have been developed. Now it's about developing all of them as a single unit and getting along and forming. They will all shine. I'm pretty sure this is going to be over two hours. But it doesn't need to be three. It's not, "It's all these characters and this huge build up dictates a epic three hour long film! It's the only way this can be epic!"

What should dictate the running time is the story. You guys are only setting yourselves up for disappointment.

Nothing is "should be" yet. Wait until we hear more about the story. This is in the hands of the director. He is going to know best possible way of how this story is told.

You would be surprised of how much can be done in less than three hours. Now I do agree, this should be more than two. With what all is going on. Yeah, definitely. But three is pushing it. That is alot of footage. And it's not all action. Most of the time it's dialogue and story driven scenes. I don't want 20 straight action sequences either. Because that can be boring. The finales are usually the longest. We may get a bit more, but not much.

I can understand the worry of this not living up the the hype, but it's not about the length in making it epic. It's about the execution of this huge scope and story. Longer isn't better. Just because this is a huge team up film doesn't make it an exception to how a story is told.

This is epic. But epic doesn't need to mean three hours.

 

[WildcatNC]

These characters personalities have been developed. Now it's about developing all of them as a single unit and getting along and forming. They will all shine. I'm pretty sure this is going to be over two hours. But it doesn't need to be three. It's not, "It's all these characters and this huge build up dictates a epic three hour long film! It's the only way this can be epic!"

What should dictate the running time is the story. You guys are only setting yourselves up for disappointment.

Nothing is "should be" yet. Wait until we hear more about the story. This is in the hands of the director. He is going to know best possible way of how this story is told.

You would be surprised of how much can be done in less than three hours. Now I do agree, this should be more than two. With what all is going on. Yeah, definitely. But three is pushing it. That is alot of footage. And it's not all action. Most of the time it's dialogue and story driven scenes. I don't want 20 straight action sequences either. Because that can be boring. The finales are usually the longest. We may get a bit more, but not much.

I can understand the worry of this not living up the the hype, but it's not about the length in making it epic. It's about the execution of this huge scope and story. Longer isn't better. Just because this is a huge team up film doesn't make it an exception to how a story is told.

This is epic. But epic doesn't need to mean three hours.

Yea, I said the story should dictate the length of the film in the end. My guess is 2:20 min.

The thread is how long do you THINK it should be though. I say 3 hours. t:

 

[Lord]

more than 2:20 but the ideal would be to have the same lenght as Avatar.

 

[Bubonic]

Fortunately they have done more than enough to establish all the main characters, we all know and love them and just need to have the formation of the team establish and the conflicts that entails. That is something that the X-men movies didn't have going for them and some of them turned out alright.

 

[Gamma Ra]

2 hrs and 30 minutes

 

[Gamma Ra]

2 hrs and 30 minutes

 

[Spider-Fan]

This movie doesn't need to be 3 hours. Yes, this film will juggle a lot of stories, but do you guys realize what goes into a 3 hour film? I say 2hr 30 mins, tops. I think it could prob get away with 2hr 20mins. This doesn't need to be 3 hours. It is not LOTR, no matter how much people want to think it is. This is a superhero movie with an ensemble cast. It is no more complicated than the original Star Wars trilogy was in structure and overarcing plotlines, and NONE of those films were anywhere near 3 hours. In fact, the longest original trilogy Star Wars film was 2hrs 13mins. The prequel trilogy had 2 films that were just over 2hr 20mins, and guess what? THEY WERE BORING!!!

Now, how is it with all these characters did the original Star Wars films effectively juggle so many characters in less than 3 hours? Because they were well written and didn't waste time. If you made Avengers 3 hours, it would get boring, IMO. Don't get too bogged down in how long the movie should be. It should just be long enough. Not 3 hours like so many of you seem to think it needs.

 

[alexlachiusa]

140 - 150 minutes would be ideal.

It would feel so rushed if it were under 120 minutes...or it would just be all action and no character development.

 

[Hypestyle]

it should be epic length, at least 2.5 hours, and even longer in an unrated director's cut dvd.. yes indeed..

 

[BigThor]

I think 2 hours and 30 minutes will do just fine for a film of this caliber.

 

[Green Day]

2 hours and 25 minutes