The Run Time Length Thread

[Ace of Knaves]

I think all that is left to do now would be the SFX touch ups and what not.

 

[Secret_Riddle]

Why are you here when all you're doing is being a cynical wang-head?

YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE ...

Until you do, no use getting your panties in a bunch about it.

Running time isn't a crystal ball to magically tell us, "Oooh the movie will suck", or "Ooooh this movie is amazing".

We don't know either way.

Until it drops I'd rather at least be hopeful that it will be great instead of talking about it as if I edited the final cut.

The movies confirmed to have had a troubled production, the producer claimed that the movie was way under 2 hours (and the story so far seems like it would need sufficiently longer), the movie is under development by FOX (a company with a terrible track record for bastardizing very good ideas and established franchises), and it's a sequel to one of the most disappointing comic movies ever. Like I said these are all signs. I didnt say running time was the sole reason for not being optimistic..if you thought that then I probably just wasn't clear enough.

Anyways I don't really like being told that my "panties" are in a knot and Im sure you wouldn't either (I wear boxers, so if anything its those that are knotted)..and I'm just keeping expectations in check for the above reasons (X-Men 3 forced me to adopt a realist stance towards most comic book movies..compiled with Spider-Man 3..although the Dark Knight is starting to reverse that trend)

If this Arclight cinema thing is true..it's a very good sign that hopefully the director has had more control over the cut of the movie. We'll see though. After X-Men 3, fox has to win me and a substantial amount of fans back, and on May 1st maybe they will.

And come on no one likes being called a wang head either..although cynicism is probably accurate

 

[danoyse]

Let's not have any name-calling, please.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

The movies confirmed to have had a troubled production, the producer claimed that the movie was way under 90 minutes (and the story so far seems like it would need sufficiently longer), the movie is under development by FOX (a company with a terrible track record for bastardizing very good ideas and established franchises), and it's a sequel to one of the most disappointing comic movies ever. Like I said these are all signs. I didnt say running time was the sole reason for not being optimistic..if you thought that then I probably just wasn't clear enough.

Anyways I don't really like being told that my "panties" are in a knot and Im sure you wouldn't either (I wear boxers, so if anything its those that are knotted)..and I'm just keeping expectations in check for the above reasons (X-Men 3 forced me to adopt a realist stance towards most comic book movies..compiled with Spider-Man 3..although the Dark Knight is starting to reverse that trend)

If this Arclight cinema thing is true..it's a very good sign that hopefully the director has had more control over the cut of the movie. We'll see though. After X-Men 3, fox has to win me and a substantial amount of fans back, and on May 1st maybe they will.

And come on no one likes being called a wang head either..although cynicism is probably accurate

Bolded; Errrr...wha?

 

[danoyse]

Bolded; Errrr...wha?

Lauren Shuler-Donner said during an interview that the movie was "well under 2 hours." Oddly, no one had heard from her since.

Someone from AICN also reported after that news that their source has heard that movie is going to be about 2 hours, and not the "way under" originally reported.

It's anyone's guess right now.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Yea I remember Shuler saying that. He either made a typo or is deluded!

And I think a 1 hr 45 mins runtime would be appropriate for this. The first X Men film was around that run time, and i thought it was brilliant. And in that one we had to be introduced to all the characters but it didn't feel over stuffed or whatever.

 

[sdc10]

Lauren Shuler-Donner said during an interview that the movie was "well under 2 hours." Oddly, no one had heard from her since.

Someone from AICN also reported after that news that their source has heard that movie is going to be about 2 hours, and not the "way under" originally reported.

It's anyone's guess right now.

If the movie is at least 1 hr 45 min then my excitement for this movie will def go back up. However as it stands judging from the same recycled shots in the trailers leads me to believe this may be on the shorter side. But nothing would make me happier than being wrong.

 

[Secret_Riddle]

Bolded; Errrr...wha?

typo meant to say under 2 hours

 

[TNC9852002]

Yeah, and also take into account that this movie only has like 3 or 4 primary characters and a handful of supporting characters, unlike the longer X2 which had almost more than double that amount.

I'm thinking 110 minutes still would be great.

-TNC

 

[LastSunrise1981]

Seems like the fanbase of Wolverine is experiencing the same dilemma that X3 had. No one knows the official runtime and there's so much drama, confusion, and uncertainty going around simply because of the fact that everyone knows the record of Fox.

In all honesty, I can see this film being 97 minutes. I doubt we'll ever get an official runtime for this film until its release date.

 

[TNC9852002]

Seems like the fanbase of Wolverine is experiencing the same dilemma that X3 had. No one knows the official runtime and there's so much drama, confusion, and uncertainty going around simply because of the fact that everyone knows the record of Fox.

In all honesty, I can see this film being 97 minutes. I doubt we'll ever get an official runtime for this film until its release date.

That seems slightly exaggerated to me. I mean, I really don't see what you're talking about here.

 

[danoyse]

That seems slightly exaggerated to me. I mean, I really don't see what you're talking about here.

Fox notoriously releases films that are far too short.

 

[LastSunrise1981]

That seems slightly exaggerated to me. I mean, I really don't see what you're talking about here.

As Danoyse stated, Fox has a reputation for releasing short films. I'll explain what I mean in a better fashion that way you'll know where I'm coming from.

As X3's release date got closer and closer issues with the running time came up. "Sources" close to Fox stated it was a 2hr and 20 minute movie if I'm not mistaken. Then eventually different run times started to come up and Fox was making up lies to ease the fans fears.

This situation is just reeking of the same situation simply because fans want a longer film and I agree with them. Personally, I feel Logan's origins and his journey demands a two hour film. It only makes sense in my opinion. I wouldn't be surprised if we look up one day and saw this film at 98 minutes.

 

[TNC9852002]

Notoriously short is a relative concept.

Surely it's been proven that other studios are very capable of releasing short films.

You're just picking on FOX because..

Well, you can.

 

[Downhere]

Notoriously short is a relative concept.

Surely it's been proven that other studios are very capable of releasing short films.

You're just picking on FOX because..

Well, you can.

In regard to comic book films, Fox has been the one to release the shorter ones.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I reckon there will be a directors cut DVD anyway. Daredevil DC was like a whole new film, hopefully if this one is short, they follow suit.

 

[TNC9852002]

In regard to comic book films, Fox has been the one to release the shorter ones.

Shorter, eh? but is that "short"?

What's the average length? Is there a set standard?

I dunno, maybe it's just me, but I've never been completely convinced about this, aside from what happened with Daredevil.

 

[danoyse]

Notoriously short is a relative concept.

Surely it's been proven that other studios are very capable of releasing short films.

You're just picking on FOX because..

Well, you can.

No, he's right. Fox has a rep for releasing (too) short films. With X3, we first heard about the short run time when the movie was screening at Cannes. It listed the run time as 1:43, and there was some confusion as whether it was an hour and 43 minutes, or it was a misprint and the run time was actually 143 minutes (a few 'sources' claimed it was). 143 minutes really didn't look likely, but it was possible.

Then a mod started a thread saying they heard from a source that the movie was actually going to be about 2 hours 20 minutes long. I wasn't a mod then, so I don't know the backstory, but whatever they heard wasn't something that was made up.

Not sure what happened in the long run, only that we got a 1 hour, 43 minute movie.

And no one's complaining about Fox just to complain. Their track record speaks for itself. Their superhero movies are far to short and they meddle too much in the production process. No one can blame fans for not trusting Fox with their superhero films. Fox did that to themselves.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I think 1hr 45min is a good time for this.

The first X-Men wasn't more than that, and I thought it was brilliant. It had to introduce new characters and a new universe but still seemed clear and not too jumbled and packed.

 

[WeaponXProject]

I think 1hr 45min is a good time for this.

The first X-Men wasn't more than that, and I thought it was brilliant. It had to introduce new characters and a new universe but still seemed clear and not too jumbled and packed.

It didn't seem short but it lacked action scenes...most were real short and this movie seems to be full of action so I hope it has enough time to tell his story as well.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Good point.

 

[Theweepeople]

In regard to comic book films, Fox has been the one to release the shorter ones.

WB/New line cinema comic film run times
300 1hr 57min, Batman 1989 2hr 6min, Batman Returns 2hr 6min, Batman Forever 2hr 2min, Batman and Robin 2hr 2min, Batman Begins 2hr 20min, The Dark Knight 2hr 30min, Blade 2hr 0min, Blade 2 1hr 57min, Blade 3 1hr 54min, Catwoman 1hr 44min, Constantine 2hr 1min, A history of Violence 1hr 36min, Spawn 1hr 33min, Superman 2hr 23min, Superman 2 2hr 8min, Superman 3 2hr 5min, Superman IV 1hr 30min, Superman Returns 2hr 34min, TMNT 1hr 33min, TMNT 2 1hr 28min, TMNT 3 1hr 35min, V for Vendetta 2hr 11min, Watchmen 2hr 43min

Fox comic film run times
AVP1 1hr 27min, AVP2 1hr 26min, Daredevil 1hr 37min, Elektra 1hr 37min, Fantastic Four 1hr 46min, Fantastic four 2 1hr 29min, From Hell 2hr 2min, LXG 1hr 52min, X-Men 1hr 44 min, X-Men United 2hr 14min, X-Men The Last Stand 1hr 44min, Dragon Ball 1hr 30min

Disney/Miramax
The Crow 1hr 57min The Crow 2, 1hr 31min, Judge Dredd 1hr 36min, The Rocketeer 1hr 48min

Sony/Columbia
Ghost Rider 1hr 50min, Hellboy 1hr 52min, Men in Black 1hr 37min, Men in Black 2 1hr 28. Spider-man 2hr 1min, Spider-man 2 2hr 7min, Spider-man 3 2hr 20min

Universal
Hellboy 2 1hr 50min, Hulk 2hr 15min, The Incredible Hulk 1hr 54min, Timecop 1hr 39min, Virus 1hr 40min

Paramount
Iron Man 2hr 6min

Lions Gate
The Punisher 1hr 59min, Punisher War Zone 1 hr 47min,
The Spirit 1hr 48min

Dreamworks
Road to Perdition 1hr 59min,

Dimension Films
Sin City 2hr 5min

MGM
Tank Girl 1hr 43min, Bulletproof monk 1hr 43min


Of the companies I've listed the major comic book producing films studios are WB(#1), Fox(#2), Sony(#3). Warner Brothers clearly has the best ratio(70.8%) of comic film run times around 2 hrs per films produced. Sony has a very modest ratio(42.8%). That isn't good but, it's not bad considering the source material for most of their comics. Sony at least understood that their prized franchise(Spider-man) shouldn't be rushed.

Fox on the other hand has a dismal ratio(16.7%) for films with run times close to 2 hours. Fox's ratio is quite bizzare because it's clear that they understand that comic book filmmaking is a lucrative business or they wouldn't have acquired the rights to so many franchises. What's also strange is unlike some of the minor players in this business Fox acquired the rights to comics that are either iconic or have great source material.


As for the other companies who are minor players in this business there's really not much to comment on. Most of them have only acquired the rights to a few comics that are either unknown to mainstream audiences, or have mediocre to weak source material.

 

[chaseter]

Notoriously short is a relative concept.

Surely it's been proven that other studios are very capable of releasing short films.

You're just picking on FOX because..

Well, you can.

Puhlease

 

[chaseter]

No, he's right. Fox has a rep for releasing (too) short films. With X3, we first heard about the short run time when the movie was screening at Cannes. It listed the run time as 1:43, and there was some confusion as whether it was an hour and 43 minutes, or it was a misprint and the run time was actually 143 minutes (a few 'sources' claimed it was). 143 minutes really didn't look likely, but it was possible.

Then a mod started a thread saying they heard from a source that the movie was actually going to be about 2 hours 20 minutes long. I wasn't a mod then, so I don't know the backstory, but whatever they heard wasn't something that was made up.

Not sure what happened in the long run, only that we got a 1 hour, 43 minute movie.

And no one's complaining about Fox just to complain. Their track record speaks for itself. Their superhero movies are far to short and they meddle too much in the production process. No one can blame fans for not trusting Fox with their superhero films. Fox did that to themselves.

Amen sister.


Buy me a drink!?

 

[JP]

Yeah, TNC are you serious?