Iron Man Running Time?

So he's basically not wanting to go over 2 hrs. That's fine by me. 1hr 59min would suit me fine. More does not always = better.
 
So he's basically not wanting to go over 2 hrs. That's fine by me. 1hr 59min would suit me fine. More does not always = better.
we are not talking here 2 hours or 3 hours. :o
 
If people are outraged over this, it's kind of odd since Favreau has been talking about this for the probable running time since 2006.

You know the TMNT movie we love so much from the 90's was less than 90 minutes without credits.
 
I'd say that's a pretty dumb thing to say.

Personally, I don't think so. Just check out most of superhero flicks on IMDb and you'll find that almost all of the crappy ones had runtime of only two hours as max.
 
Personally, I don't think so. Just check out most of superhero flicks on IMDb and you'll find that almost all of the crappy ones had runtime of only two hours as max.

Which ones specifically are you referring to?
 
Yeah but we are talking about the movie possibly being a lot shorter than 1 hr. 59 min. which is close to Spider-man length.
 
Yeah but we are talking about the movie possibly being a lot shorter than 1 hr. 59 min. which is close to Spider-man length.

Oh I know you were talking about it being shorter, but IMHO that would be the best outcome for the under 2 hour film, 1hr 50min to 1hr 59min makes sense to me, I would be worried if it was more in the 90 - 95 min range, I just can't see that being long enough to tell the story correctly.
 
Personally, I don't think so. Just check out most of superhero flicks on IMDb and you'll find that almost all of the crappy ones had runtime of only two hours as max.

Saying that a runtime of less than 2 hours is a guaruntee of a poor quality movie is idiotic. Period.
 
I just want to know specifically which ones he is referring to.

The Incredibles was a few minutes short of 2 hours.
 
X-Men was, what? 103 minutes? And to me, it felt much longer. Whereas X3 was almost the exact same length and suffered because they crammed too much crap into it. So to me it's less about length and more about quality.
 
X-men was 104 minute with credits. About the same as X3.
 
Here's a quote from Jon today 12/26/07:

We haven't locked picture yet, but I am fairly positive it will be much closer to two hours than 90 minutes.

So rest easy, true believers.
 
I just want to know specifically which ones he is referring to.

The Incredibles was a few minutes short of 2 hours.

I know just which one's he is referring to, IMO only X-Men and The Crow are the ONLY 90-100 minute CB movies that are good. All of the others, like Spawn, Elektra, the 2 FF movies, Bulletproof Monk, the theatrical cut of Daredevil, etc, and the worst one of all for me X-Men 3 were poor or average at best.

But if you look at the CB movies that are considered the cream of the crop, Batman '89, Batman Begins, X2, Spiderman 1 and 2 (and 3 for some people), Sin City, Hellboy, V For Vendetta, the first 2 Blade movies, Superman, Superman II,Sin City and Transformers (and for me personally)Superman Returns and Hulk, etc, the majority of them are at least 115 mins long if not longer in most cases.

So the majority of the time, IMO the longer the CB movie the better.


Here's a quote from Jon today 12/26/07:



So rest easy, true believers.

Thats put me at ease to say the least.
 
I know just which one's he is referring to, IMO only X-Men and The Crow are the ONLY 90-100 minute CB movies that are good. All of the others, like Spawn, Elektra, the 2 FF movies, Bulletproof Monk, the theatrical cut of Daredevil, etc, and the worst one of all for me X-Men 3 were poor or average at best.

But if you look at the CB movies that are considered the cream of the crop, Batman '89, Batman Begins, X2, Spiderman 1 and 2 (and 3 for some people), Sin City, Hellboy, V For Vendetta, the first 2 Blade movies, Superman, Superman II,Sin City and Transformers (and for me personally)Superman Returns and Hulk, etc, the majority of them are at least 115 mins long if not longer in most cases.

So the majority of the time, IMO the longer the CB movie the better.




Thats put me at ease to say the least.

I agree, most of the time, the longer the CB movie the better, it gives both the time to tell the story and time for great action, for me the longer the better.
 
Here's a quote from Jon today 12/26/07:



So rest easy, true believers.

Cool, thanks for the heads up.

90 min, IMO, is just too damn short, a little under 2 hrs like X-Men, 300, the Bourne triology is fine by me.
 
I know just which one's he is referring to, IMO only X-Men and The Crow are the ONLY 90-100 minute CB movies that are good. All of the others, like Spawn, Elektra, the 2 FF movies, Bulletproof Monk, the theatrical cut of Daredevil, etc, and the worst one of all for me X-Men 3 were poor or average at best.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and The Mask were good movies. And he said just under 2 hours running time, not 90-100 minutes. And he said super hero, not comic book.
 
Not a comic book super hero or super hero movie, but whatever.

Also the first MIB which I thought was good.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"