‘Ideal’ movie running time is 92 minutes, poll claims

Tools    





This is a doom brought about by our own hands
I have never seen anyone all but having a total meltdown just because a dictionary definition was used in a discussion.

But, if people continually seem to be referring to different things when they use a term, why wouldn't it be perfectly appropriate to try to remind everyone what the term was originally used to signify?



I have never seen anyone all but having a total meltdown just because a dictionary definition was used in a discussion.

But, if people continually seem to be referring to different things when they use a term, why wouldn't it be perfectly appropriate to try to remind everyone what the term was originally used to signify?

A joke is not a meltdown. I'm casually sitting on a bus, mostly looking out a window at trees. I'm fine.



The trick is not minding
I have never seen anyone all but having a total meltdown just because a dictionary definition was used in a discussion.

But, if people continually seem to be referring to different things when they use a term, why wouldn't it be perfectly appropriate to try to remind everyone what the term was originally used to signify?
Crumbs is very passionate about films, and will argue about them as he sees fit, and sometimes it rubs some the wrong way but really he is searching for common ground and good faith. He means well.



But it was wildly indulgent
No argument there.



Crumbs is very passionate about films, and will argue about them as he sees fit, and sometimes it rubs some the wrong way but really he is searching for common ground and good faith. He means well.
I will be sure to keep that in mind.



The trick is not minding
It feels like I'm being haunted by a Corax possessed AI. Which is honestly probably exactly what I deserve.
All of your sins from RT and Corrie have come back to haunt you. The ghost of past anonymous normies forced to read your long, but well written, posts in response to their earlier posts have taken sentience and have their sights set upon you, the author of their pain, as they were beaten into submission with a wall of text (again, well written!). And so, they have returned it in spades.
Hear their laughter echo in the empty corridors of forgotten forumns, somehow willing itself incorporeal to move past the confines of the forums, all dead and gone. Hear their laughter, filled with anguish, as they call out to you, their antagonist. Followed by the clinking of what you swear is two bottles together….
“Crumbsrooooooom…..come out to plaaaaaay. Cruuuuuumbsrooooommmmm….come out to play-ay! CRUUUUUMBSROOOOOMMMM! COOME OUT TO PLAY-AY!”



I think one reason why many blockbuster movies are longer is because they need to justify high ticket prices. And with the length comes lots of CGI spectacle.



92 minutes seems a bit extreme for me but not too far off. I start to have second thoughts about watching a movie when I see the runtime is past 2 hours and really start to question if I actually want to watch it if it's more than 2.5 hours.

I recently watched Killers of the Flower Moon and while I thought it was very good, that 3.5 hour runtime was not needed and it negatively affected my enjoyment of it. That epilogue in particular had me rolling my eyes.
What? But the epilogue was the best part.



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
OK, If you take my son to scouts and my daughter to swimming we have a deal.
Mark F managed to be a parent and a cinephile at once. Yours are only excuses.
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.



All of your sins from RT and Corrie have come back to haunt you. The ghost of past anonymous normies forced to read your long, but well written, posts in response to their earlier posts have taken sentience and have their sights set upon you, the author of their pain, as they were beaten into submission with a wall of text (again, well written!). And so, they have returned it in spades.
Hear their laughter echo in the empty corridors of forgotten forumns, somehow willing itself incorporeal to move past the confines of the forums, all dead and gone. Hear their laughter, filled with anguish, as they call out to you, their antagonist. Followed by the clinking of what you swear is two bottles together….
“Crumbsrooooooom…..come out to plaaaaaay. Cruuuuuumbsrooooommmmm….come out to play-ay! CRUUUUUMBSROOOOOMMMM! COOME OUT TO PLAY-AY!”

If there is an after life of any sort, rest assured, some higher power has already informed them how definitely shit their taste was, and hopefully explained to them how debating works, and they've only come to apologize to me over how ****ing annoying they all must have been when they were alive.



I think one reason why many blockbuster movies are longer is because they need to justify high ticket prices. And with the length comes lots of CGI spectacle.
There's a similar thing with video games, where consumers/reviewers use the time it takes to complete the game as a major selling point (or criticism, if it's short). This isn't entirely unreasonable, but it also reveal which people are approaching which things as simple time fillers/mere entertainment, rather than works of art.