Running Time Now Official

I think some of you are in denial.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0376994/

Also Known As:
X-Men 3 (USA) (working title)
X3 (USA) (promotional abbreviation)
X-Mehed - viimane vastuhakk (Estonia)
X-Men - L'affrontement final (France)
X-Men - viimeinen kohtaaminen (Finland)
X-Men 3: La decisión final (Spain)
Runtime: USA:103 min
Country: USA
Language: English
Color: Color
Sound Mix: Dolby
Certification: USA:PG-13 / Finland:K-11
 
I don't think my post argues either way.....and bTW IMDB is widely known for large scale errors.


the factt is there hasn't been a official US runtime announcement, thats all.
 
It might be known for errors, but look at what all these other people are saying. The ones that saw the movie have stated it's around 1 hour and 43 mins. If it were over 2 hours then something must have been cut.
 
icecsm16202 said:
It might be known for errors, but look at what all these other people are saying. The ones that saw the movie have stated it's around 1 hour and 43 mins. If it were over 2 hours then something must have been cut.
Click to expand...


Like I said.... i 'm not arguing i will be longer....justt we wont really know till its announced officially or it opens...its also been stated that somefolks have SUPPOSEDLY seen different cuts.


just keeping an open mind
 
TNC9852002 said:
Why would FOX have anything to do with X3's running time? I mean, what kept X2 from being under 2 hours?

-TNC
Click to expand...

Even if you don't want to believe that they dictated a shorter running time so they could maximize the amount of showtimes per theater/day the studio is still responsible and here is the other simple reason why: they stubbornly refused to give this production more time! They wanted to pursue their feud with Singer and Warners; they (as in Rothman :mad:) wanted to push X3 out before Superman. The release date was their primary concern, when it should have been story and quality. A longer movie would have probably put them behind schedule which is why it would make sense that they were asking for the "fast paced" (read : short and shopped off) story even when they were just starting to write.
 
Endeavor said:
Even if you don't want to believe that they dictated a shorter running time so they could maximize the amount of showtimes per theater/day the studio is still responsible and here is the other simple reason why: they stubbornly refused to give this production more time! They wanted to pursue their feud with Singer and Warners; they (as in Rothman :mad:) wanted to push X3 out before Superman. The release date was their primary concern, when it should have been story and quality. A longer movie would have probably put them behind schedule which is why it would make sense that they were asking for the "fast paced" (read : short and shopped off) story even when they were just starting to write.
Click to expand...

:up:
 
Retroman said:
James Bamford was credited too on X2 in the production notes and we all know that scene was shot but never released.:(
Click to expand...

Yes, but he's only listed as a stuntman in the credits....
 
103 minutes? That's pathetically short. That's shorter then the first one and that one was rushed enough as it was. X2 did NOT drag. At all. It was perfect. It looks like X2 is going to be the best of three after all is said and done then. My expectations for X3 are pretty much rock bottom now:(
 
If it takes 103 min. to tell the story, it's ok with me. From what I been hearing, this sounds like part 2 of X2 rather than a 3rd movie, which is fine in my opinion. I think this movie is going to be really fun.
 
I have no problem with the running time anymore. I'm just glad it's confirmed and we all can let the issue rest.

I watched X1 yesterday and it's a good movie even with the short running time. Who knows though, perhaps this one will be amazing and that it'll be so amazing that we won't think about the length.

In X1 there was quite a bit of dialogue, whereas the action really didn't take place until the climax of the film. Considering how brilliant the effects, the last battle, and the overall action looks in this film, I'm guessing that most of the big time action won't occur until the climax.
 
I think 1 hour and 45 minutes is okay...
But the film shouldve been 2 hours +...this is the end of a trilogy, maybe the last x film, and a few people even die....I think maybe too fast paced might not be good
 
I do agree that it's too short for a trilogy, but nothing can be done about it at this point. All we can do is hope for an extended DVD cut ala Lord of the Rings.
 
LastSunrise1981 said:
I do agree that it's too short for a trilogy, but nothing can be done about it at this point. All we can do is hope for an extended DVD cut ala Lord of the Rings.
Click to expand...


That's exactly what Fox is counting on.
 
I don't think it should matter. I just read one of the reviews of "The DaVinci Code", and at 2-1/2 hours the reviewer felt the story was "rushed."

It's quality, not the running time that matters.
 
kevhulk73 said:
Like I said.... i 'm not arguing i will be longer....justt we wont really know till its announced officially or it opens...its also been stated that somefolks have SUPPOSEDLY seen different cuts.


just keeping an open mind
Click to expand...
It has been announced officially. Retroman just gave us all these sources. Are you telling me that all these sources are wrong?
 
I think one of our managers at our theater said that X3 will be 119 minutes with previews..

-TNC
 
Let's hope your manager was right.
 
Ursavior01 got 114 minutes when he went to get his ticket today! :up:

Nearly 2 hours...
 
In my fair guess, based on what I know on how we usually time the movies, the movie should be 104 minutes not counting the end credits...So, it'll probably be around 112 minutes give or take with credits..

-TNC
 
It's been rated here in Mexico, but there's still no running time :confused: It's also weird that they haven't started selling tickets for the midnight screening. I wonder if they're waiting for the FINAL cut.
 
Endeavor said:
where is Ursavior Bamfer?
Click to expand...

In terms of what? I'm talking to him, currently... oh where does he live? The US... Anyway, he said its 114 WITHOUT previews
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 2,900 (members: 17, guests: 2,883)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,287
Messages
22,079,497
Members
45,881
Latest member
semicharmedlife

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"