Figs
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2006
- Messages
- 26,630
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 31
My friend's dad saw a early premier of it, he said its 2 hours and 10 minutes.
Take it or leave it, but it's a valuable source for me. 130 minutes.
Did he like it?
My friend's dad saw a early premier of it, he said its 2 hours and 10 minutes.
Take it or leave it, but it's a valuable source for me. 130 minutes.
Not doubting you at all Marvel. Just wondering why there's different times and why.My friend's dad saw a early premier of it, he said its 2 hours and 10 minutes.
Take it or leave it, but it's a valuable source for me. 130 minutes.
Not doubting you at all Marvel. Just wondering why there's different times and why.
IM2, TIH and I believe Spiderman all had runtimes over two hours if I remember correctly. Well, TIH's was just under two hours. I think if it's quite a bit over 90 minutes that that's a pretty decent runtime for a film.
Whatever you thought was just an opinion and often times leads to a self fulfilling prophecy.
We talked about Spider-man 3 before, but I don't see how anyone could think a two hour and 20 minute film could feel rushed. Good greif I damn near fell asleep in the middle of that movie, I don't see how anyone could say it was rushed.
IM2 is listed as 119 mins on the UK BD, and yes Spiderman 3 was over 2 hours, but the thing with these movies is we know how much ground they have to cover, as soon as I heard IM2 was shorter than IM1, I knew aspects would be rushed, as it had A LOT more story and characters to cover, I think Thor has more of both than IM1 did to cover so I just personally hope we get more than 114 mins as that just doesnt seem enough.
With those 3 movies, its an opinion shared by a lot of people though, one of the main criticisms of all 3 movies was that aspects were rushed and characters didnt get the attention they should have.
You dont think Venom's storyline was rushed? Or the symbiote for that matter? Hell, even Sandman's story felt rushed to me during that movie, not to mention JJJ got less screentime than he did in any of the previous movies.
Two hours and 20 min is plenty of time to tell the story they wanted to tell. Perhaps if they'd used some of the screen time Peter spent dancing or crying like a little b****, they could have fit more character development in, or given more scenes to JJ.
I hope that here in Portugal the running time is the same.
No, they often post the runtime of "test screening" version way before theatrical release and does not even correct "After" release. And it seems 130 min was just like that case. If BBFC says it's 114min then, like the others said, it's 114 mins. besides even "lame" IMDb has corrected 130 to 114 a few days ago.Rotten Tomatoes has it running two hours and ten minutes, and they're pretty reliable. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1197233-thor/