How much do you really care about X3 being only 103 minutes?

How much do you care about the running time

  • I don't care at all, I know this movie will rock regardless how short.

  • I do perfer a longer running time and i'm a bit dissapointed but its not that big of a deal

  • This sucks, I want this to be the best and last as long as possible, but we will see.

  • This is horrible, its going to totally ruin it for me!


Results are only viewable after voting.
Brett Ratner is a certifiable *****e bag! But don't claim bandwagoning here, b/c i thought this WAY before he was hired on... I'm glad its 53mins long! If they're going to let something like this happen than this franchise deserves to go down in/as a flaming pile of sh$@#! And EVERYONE can have equal blame for years to come.
 
Prognosticator said:
Brett Ratner is a certifiable *****e bag! But don't claim bandwagoning here, b/c i thought this WAY before he was hired on... I'm glad its 53mins long! If they're going to let something like this happen than this franchise deserves to go down in/as a flaming pile of sh$@#! And EVERYONE can have equal blame for years to come.

53 minutes... what the hell are you talking about??
 
If it is 103 minutes then yes, I'm disappointed, but if I'm going to complain about anything, I'll do it after I see the movie. That's only fair to Simon, Zak, Brett etc.
 
TheSumOfGod said:
After further editing, it'll be 88 minutes long. And the DVD director's cut will be 144 minutes long. :o :p

you mean 'producer's cut'! brett ratner has been on record to say he can't/doesn't like to make long movies. it's not in him.
 
103 minutes? i could take a dump for longer than that!

...needless to say, i voted for the last option.
 
Prognosticator said:
you mean 'producer's cut'! brett ratner has been on record to say he can't/doesn't like to make long movies. it's not in him.

But then again, if Peter Jackson were the one directing X3, it would be 3 and a half hours long, and there would be giant CGI Sentinels from the beginning to the end. :o
 
Prognosticator said:
you mean 'producer's cut'! brett ratner has been on record to say he can't/doesn't like to make long movies. it's not in him.
Red Dragon was 119 minutes. That's not a bad length
 
a film should be as long as it needs to be in order to tell its story sufficiently.

i'd rather have a short tight film rather than a long one with lots of unnecessary scenes involved.
 
*xmenfan* said:
OMFG this sooo sucks :mad: :down

Yes but he also said this, ...i'm really not sure if that's with or without credits. so could be longer. honestly, i never clocked it...
 
Aiden said:
Red Dragon was 119 minutes. That's not a bad length

yeah, i know. that's the exception to his rule. a lot of us were using the 'red dragon' example to show faith in hopes that he would duplicate a longer effort for x3.
 
rashad said:
Yes but he also said this, ...i'm really not sure if that's with or without credits. so could be longer. honestly, i never clocked it...

okay...doesn't matter. that's like holding out for x3 to suck (time wise) as opposed to it completely blowing!
 
Prognosticator said:
yeah, i know. that's the exception to his rule. a lot of us were using the 'red dragon' example to show faith in hopes that he would duplicate a longer effort for x3.
How long was The Family Man. X3 will still be good
 
nevermind you guys about the time... at least we get to see an x3. sighs!
 
Aiden said:
How long was The Family Man. X3 will still be good

hahahahhaha! Who ever said The Family Man was a good movie?? I don't know a single person who liked it. It's forgettable at best. It's a sad day when people use The Family Man to prop up Brett Ratner:down
 
I liked the Family Man. I know many people who do
 
berzerko89 said:
nevermind you guys about the time... at least we get to see an x3. sighs!

but dammit(!), in this day and age movies can be as good as possible! scripts can be marvels in their own rights, special effects are good enough to make us cry, and actors finally respect comics/heroes enough to take the material seriously...

...so why, then, do we have to put up with mediocre treatment of some of the most respected modern-day literature in America? sorry, i honestly want to see x3 as much as any of you (if you can believe that), but if i'm going to pay $10 damn dollars, i wouldn't mind seeing a live-action movie that has a running time longer than 'The Little Mermaid'!
 
Aiden said:
I liked the Family Man. I know many people who do

(sigh!) and that's ok. i'm sure many many people 'like' it, but it's not Great! It's not Spectacular. You don't Love It. And i think there's just too much expectations with stuff like x3 and people like myself don't want to walk out of the theaters saying, "ah, it was ok." I did that last summer with FF, and now i'm like, "that movie totally sucks hard!"

Meanwhile, Warner Bros. is busting out of the seems with fantastic work. I cried during Batman Begins b/c the theater experience itself was overwhelming! V for Vendetta (conversion changes aside) was outstanding! The best movie so far this year...

...So why shouldn't x3 HAVE to stack up against these movies? It SHOULD by all rights, be as good or better than them. But at 103 minutes, that's a stiff argument to make:(
 
You cried at BB?

Anyway, X3 will rock. If it doesn't I will eat my hat [again]
 
Plus, WB seems to be cranking all their high-dollar movies into IMAX as well! Batman, Harry Potter, V, Superman Returns... I don't see Fox giving that kind of respect to it's features. It's a shame too. I want all of these movies to be successful...but we'll see. I hope it changes every way i look at a 103 minute movie!
 
Prognosticator said:
sarcasm numbnuts. i was making an outlandish statement.


This is the second time I've had to speak to you today regarding name-calling. Mark my words, there won't be a third.

Knock it off--unless you're campaigning for some down-time.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"