Why are most films over 2 hours long these days?

[Ilovepearjuice]

Fair enough that there are some films that have so much content that it's really needed (LOTR for example). However, so many films I've seen recently seem to be tipping over the 2 hour mark when, in my opinion, they could easily be condensed into 1.5 hours! The latest James Bond is a good example - good start and ending but a tedious middle scene with too much car chasing.

Is it just me or is it more rare to find a film less than 2 hours these days?

Just to add, I do have a fairly short attention span, and I'm usually only up for 1.5 hours of TV before bed on weeknights... So maybe that's why I've come to notice it!

Because film directors are narcissists. And the studios used to rein them in but don't any more.

Even animated and pixar films seem longer these days. Some of the classic Disney are just over an hour!

I’m completely with you OP. Bond is a great example of where half hour could’ve been cut out. I swear most films were 90 minutes in the fairly recent past. It’s not that I don’t have an attention span for a long movie either, I do, I love a good long movie but most movies these days seem to just pad out for the sake of stretching to 2 hours or more.

Because they assume everyone has loads of free time and like sitting down for that long maybe.
It wouldn't be as bad if they'd bring back intervals.
I can't be bothered to go to a long film.

I have started watching 80’s and 90’s film for this reason alone, 2 hours + can fuck off.

I just watched Army of Thieves on Netflix. 2h 9m. Started off so promising. The middle was dragging on and on. If they cut a few scenes and kept the sparky beginning vibe, I think it would have been genuinely good.

I always get frustrated with unnecessarily long chase scenes in horror films or thrillers. We get it, the bad guy is after them.
Also with unnecessarily long scenes to 'build tension' so basically nothing happens and we have a close up of the hero/victims eyes/sweaty brow/chewing lip/sitting in silence etc.

Haven't seen the new JB film but I'm not really interested in it tbh.

@brokenbiscuitsx

I’m completely with you OP. Bond is a great example of where half hour could’ve been cut out. I swear most films were 90 minutes in the fairly recent past. It’s not that I don’t have an attention span for a long movie either, I do, I love a good long movie but most movies these days seem to just pad out for the sake of stretching to 2 hours or more.

Thank you. I completely agree! I'm all for it too if the content is there. 9 times out of 10 they are drawn out for the sake of it.

As mentioned above, some film directors are ridiculously self-indulgent and don’t think of their audience and nobody dares to tell them otherwise.

It’s quite a skill to structure a story and make the points you want to in less than 2 hrs. But Back To The Future (best-constructed film ever, IMVHO) managed it.

I can’t be doing with super long films. I too prefer 80s ones for that reason.
I gave up with the cinema altogether a long time ago mainly because people don’t know how to behave in there. Plus it’s way too loud.

There's a not very nice but eloquent expression, "editing is killing your babies'. Basically, you might love the very very long scene in the rain (Bladerunner) but everyone else wants you to get on with the story. That's what the director's cut used to be for.

@MrsTerryPratchett

There's a not very nice but eloquent expression, "editing is killing your babies'. Basically, you might love the very very long scene in the rain (Bladerunner) but everyone else wants you to get on with the story. That's what the director's cut used to be for.

I think this would be an idea for a really great movie actually.

Lonely but passionate director with tragic backstory directs his magnum opus inspired on said tragic events of his life. Studio does not approve his most revered scenes and director goes slowly crazy after a long battle with the production team...

... Just as long as it's no longer than 1.5 hours

I remember going to a mate's house as a teenager to watch The English Patient, not knowing how long it was. Bloody hell - 2 hours, 42 minutes apparently.

I love that Netflix now has a category for 90 minute films. If I put something on at 10pm, I don’t still want to be watching it past midnight!

I totally agree.
90 mins is perfect.

Yes I don't want to dedicate two hours or more to a film...90 minutes is just right

Yanbu. Is v annoying. 1980s movies are ao much better than the stuff they make at the moment. I want a fast pace!!

I think it started with the death of the B feature. When there were two films on the bill, the main feature had to be a sensible length.

I also think it's because these days everything has to be a Great Big Important Event.

I remember when people were shocked at how long Titanic was and now it’s the norm! I completely agree that great movies can be wrapped up in 90 mins and as the pp said, Back to the Future is the perfect example of this!

Quite enjoyed the new bond, but Dune can do one - so long and so much was just talking

I'm always so pleased when a film is under 2 hours like in the good old days.

Drives me mad. Films wrapped up complex stories in around 90-100 minutes for decades and now there are these great flabby overlong things which need a bloody good edit. Tarantino, I'm looking at you, mate.

Lonely but passionate director with tragic backstory directs his magnum opus inspired on said tragic events of his life. Studio does not approve his most revered scenes and director goes slowly crazy after a long battle with the production team...

Dune was HOURS. And only half the bloody story. They didn't even get to the desert for most of the film. Urg.