The Run Time Length Thread

[FaT_tONle]

We all know it's not going to be true cmon guys... I take you back to X-3... SHH confirming it... 144 minutes... a report coming out of nowhere... EVERYONE thought it was the real deal... What happened? 104 minutes... that's Fox for you. Don't start doubting Donner over what will probably amount to be a trash report in a few months.

 

[Sam Fisher]

90 mins or 2 hrs, no way I'm skipping this movie.

 

[chaseter]

Oh Sam.

 

[Sam Fisher]

No, I don't want green eggs and ham



{Why your post reminded me of Dr. Seus I don't know}

 

[chaseter]

Lay off the drugs

 

[Sam Fisher]

Lay off the drugs

Stupid is as stupid does

 

[theJust]

I'll catch the movie early through the trailers.

 

[alexlachiusa]

IMDB has listed the running time as 118 minutes.

If that's true then I'm happy.

 

[Spider-Vader]

Maybe Marvel should try to get a deal where they get full creative control of their franchises & cross-over, while Fox distributes & gets the same money.

 

[chaseter]

IMDB has listed the running time as 118 minutes.

If that's true then I'm happy.

They were wrong about X3's run time when we first got word it was short they had a lengthier run time which was false. They also said Aunt May would become Carnage in SM3.

Fact is...they are still editing the movie from a quote not 2 days ago so to think this movie is done and ready to go this early is a bit unfounded so I wouldn't be investing too much in someone posting a run time

 

[YJ1]

Gavin Hood is not Brett Ratner.

Hugh Jackman is head honcho in the production of Wolverine, not just the lead actor (X3).

David Benioff is a GOD next to Zak Penn and Simon Kinberg.

Wolverine on his own CAN justify a 90 minute movie (Mad Max, The Road Warrior, First Blood, etc...)

The removal of certain cameos may be further evidence of Jackman and Hood's plan to keep this movie about Wolverine and not other mutants.

*the removal of those cameos may also be indication that FOX is dropping the proposed X-Men: First Class movie.

DING!

All great points and all trump the typical fanboy Fox bashing that always hits new heights on these boards. A longer running time to flesh out development is always better but I'm going to wait and see it before I start to rant. Silly me.

Fox deserves a lot of criticism at times but they have delivered as well. Without Fox pushing Wolverine through, there would be no legitimate comic adaptation film for 2009. That means they get the benefit of the doubt from me. (Please don't mention Watchmen...)

 

[alexlachiusa]

Why shouldn't we mention Watchmen?

 

[def28]

Everyone complains when they put to many cameos in the movie. But if they cut out cameos that might be pointless and not serve the movie everyone complains more. Cant make everyone happy. I really doubt Storm is an essential part of Wolverine. But if she was to be cut, they should have not showed her in the trailer. Teasing fans is kind of asking for it.

Im sure the running time will be more then 1 hour 30 min. The re-shoots/additional scenes probably were not even added in to the cut yet. Bottom line, they are still editing. They don't even know the official time.

 

[TheVileOne]

Hey when X-men 3 came out people were ready to believe any and all false propaganda that was going around. Not surprising that the same would happen here.

Under two hour running time, wouldn't surprise me.

Fox and most movie studios want movies under two hours.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I still want to know why anybody would expect the movie to big longer than an 1hr 40? If it is in the final cut, I will be surprised.

For some reason Fox likes it that way, eventhough the biggest comicbook movies have either been very near or over 2hr's. You know movies like Spider-Man 1, 2 and 3, TDK, Iron Man, X2 and Batman Begins. The only over 200mil one that bucks this trend is X3 and thats because it was a sequel to X2 ofcourse.

Unlike others on here I thought that both Batman movies and X2 were too long. X2 by a little bit. I believe that 1:50 to 1:55 minutes would be a great runtime and much appreciated by me because these uber long action adventure films are wearing out their welcomes with me. But Fox always has to take things to the extreme so I expect 1 hour and 35 minutes.

 

[protocida]

Storm is important to the Plot. Follow me:

Spoiler

Cel. Stryker creates the Team X to capture mutants. The Team X goes to South Africa capture Storm, and violently attacks her village to find her. Wolverine realizes he didn't signed up for that during the mission, and runs away, moving the Plot foward.

Without Storm, they'd have to insere another reason for the mission, or make a really genious copy-and-past work.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Fox deserves a lot of criticism at times but they have delivered as well. Without Fox pushing Wolverine through, there would be no legitimate comic adaptation film for 2009. That means they get the benefit of the doubt from me. (Please don't mention Watchmen...)

So people have to watch it because it's the first May movie... and the only of the summer obviously? I am sorry but how about fans watch only the comicbooks that are good? Unless this gets reviews somewhere in between TIH/IM I am definitely passing on it.

 

[TheVileOne]

Sure people say the Batman movies are too long.

But The Dark Knight still made over $530 millin and almost a billion worldwide.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Sure people say the Batman movies are too long.

But The Dark Knight still made over $530 millin and almost a billion worldwide.

Your point being? A movie can be good and too long. Titantic made 600mil in 1997 (at much lower tickets prices) is it above criticism like TDK seems to be in some people's minds? The Dark Knight was used as an example of my general dislike of movies being overly long now or days. I'm bashing all overly long movies. I decided to use a great movie as my example because it could have been better if tighten IMHO and it's a source of annoyance for me. Could I have used Transformers or Superman Returns as an example? Yeah, but I didn't because it would have been way too easy to pick on those poor films.

During my go on the Spider-Man boards I kept hearing how many didn't equal quality and I agreed that it didn't. It seems now that money does equal quality in the fanboys eyes. Strange.

Anyway this isn't a Batman thread so I'm done with the topic.

 

[FrostBite]

So people have to watch it because it's the first May movie... and the only of the summer obviously? I am sorry but how about fans watch only the comicbooks that are good? Unless this gets reviews somewhere in between TIH/IM I am definitely passing on it.

Wow, if I listened to reviews that much I'd be one dull little boy.

 

[chaseter]

Your point being? A movie can be good and too long. Titantic made 600mil in 1997 (at much lower tickets prices) is it above criticism like TDK seems to be in some people's minds? The Dark Knight was used as an example of my general dislike of movies being overly long now or days. I'm bashing all overly long movies. I decided to use a great movie as my example because it could have been better if tighten IMHO and it's a source of annoyance for me. Could I have used Transformers or Superman Returns as an example? Yeah, but I didn't because it would have been way too easy to pick on those poor films.

During my go on the Spider-Man boards I kept hearing how many didn't equal quality and I agreed that it didn't. It seems now that money does equal quality in the fanboys eyes. Strange.

Anyway this isn't a Batman thread so I'm done with the topic.

Yeah this isn't TDK talk but he is talking about run time. But...there are many many more movies that are over 2 hours long that are greatly successful films than compared to 90 minute flicks

Titanic was nearly 3 hours btw. Look at the top grossing films of all time...how many are 90-100 minutes
http://www.movieweb.com/movies/boxoffice/alltime.php

 

[TheVileOne]

Just saying it's this dumb, flawed studio mindset.

Fans like longer movies.

Audiences also like longer movies provided they are a big, theatrical experience.

A movie has to go above and beyond what someone can get at home in order to inspire people to go to the theatres. The Dark Knight did that.

Why should we trust Fox now when they've butchered so many potentially good comic book movies and they hacked up the run time to make sure they were under an hour and 45 minutes?

 

[FaT_tONle]

Wow, if I listened to reviews that much I'd be one dull little boy.

Well if you are just going to make up your mind that you are seeing the film regardless... then it just shows you can't get away from the Marvel brand. If you can't get by as a movie goer without these films then that is even worse. Believe me it will be tough passing up on this film... I still have it in my sig. But I have two strikes on me after X-3 and SM-3... that's why I won't take a chance with Wolverine unless I am certain it will be a quality film.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Well if you are just going to make up your mind that you are seeing the film regardless... then it just shows you can't get away from the Marvel brand. If you can't get by as a movie goer without these films then that is even worse. Believe me it will be tough passing up on this film... I still have it in my sig. But I have two strikes on me after X-3 and SM-3... that's why I won't take a chance with Wolverine unless I am certain it will be a quality film.

I take it this moviegoing thing is a big deal for you.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I take it this moviegoing thing is a big deal for you.

Sure... why not? I mean you want to blow ten dollars off to see some bull **** film and be entertained then go for it. Everyone does that every now and then. But when you start talking about these superhero films... I NEVER want to see the integrity of these characters compromised... it's a big deal to me. X-3 and SM3 are examples of compromising the integrity of the characters and the source material. Fans shouldn't stand for it.