Alyson HillTooo Looong!!!
April 7th 2008 23:18
I haven't seen Zodiac yet, and I can't wait to get it on DVD. In fact, I'm busting! My bladder is the size of a walnut, thanks to the birth of three kids in 5 years, and I knew in all good conscience that I could not go and see a movie like that without missing a huge chunk because I was busting and couldn't concentrate until I ran to the loo and back. You can't run to the loo and back during a movie like Zodiac because you will, for certain, miss something crucial. Zodiac runs for 2 hours and 40 minutes, and apparently its original was 3 hours 5 minutes, so I'm pretty sure it's a tight ship.
It's a compliment in a way that film producers/directors think we are smart enough to deal with so much information that they need to make movies run over two hours, or is it just vanity? Writers are constantly told to 'kill your babies' meaning the little bits that they are inordinately proud of, but don't move the story along. I can't help but wonder if film makers need a little workshop in this area. The cool thing about film making is presenting a story in the economy of a couple of hours (Woody Allen's films are all under 2 hours, and some are barely more than 90 minutes) - but modern film is edging along to three hours currently. For me that means that a) I'll be waiting for it on DVD, so I can pause for a pee, or b) it aint that great to hold me squirming in my seat to the end.
Older films marketed as block busters were HUGE...but remember that before the 80's, there was an intermission. Gone With The Wind had a couple. No such luck now...and some of those mega length films, aren't up to it. Miami Vice - one too many car chases. Superman Returns - one too many rescues; I mean really they were all very pretty people to watch and all, but rescue Lois, rescue the kid, rescue Lois again, rescue Superman...blahblahblah..enou gh already. King Kong - unfortunately no surprises there, the monkey is going to die, why drag it out? Pirates of the Carribean - Dead Man's Chest - I love Johnny Dep's version of Keith Richards, but I started to snooze, woke up and we still seemed to be at the same plot point 15 minutes later.
The series films like LOTR, Harry Potter and the soon to become Narnia series, I can forgive for being long. They are after epics that build on the characterisations and plot building of the films that have gone before. But the film makers still need to remember, particularly when it comes to the big kids films like Narnia and Harry Potter, that kids bladders are also not real big, especially after the inevitable giant cup of Coke they conned Dad into buying before they went in. And that inconveniences at least two people if they are under a certain age and the movie theatre is in a shopping mall, because the parent needs to chaperone them to the toilet, which in Belconnen Hoyts in Canberra is down the hall, down the stairs, and the other side of the lolly counter. If the kid who needs to go is older than all the rest, then that means all of you have to troop down and this is just a nightmare for all and sundry.
Keep it short, people or if you have to make it long make it tight, or even better bring back the Intermission!
What's that you say? My blog post is too long? Sh*t! Sorry. Point taken.
It's a compliment in a way that film producers/directors think we are smart enough to deal with so much information that they need to make movies run over two hours, or is it just vanity? Writers are constantly told to 'kill your babies' meaning the little bits that they are inordinately proud of, but don't move the story along. I can't help but wonder if film makers need a little workshop in this area. The cool thing about film making is presenting a story in the economy of a couple of hours (Woody Allen's films are all under 2 hours, and some are barely more than 90 minutes) - but modern film is edging along to three hours currently. For me that means that a) I'll be waiting for it on DVD, so I can pause for a pee, or b) it aint that great to hold me squirming in my seat to the end.
Older films marketed as block busters were HUGE...but remember that before the 80's, there was an intermission. Gone With The Wind had a couple. No such luck now...and some of those mega length films, aren't up to it. Miami Vice - one too many car chases. Superman Returns - one too many rescues; I mean really they were all very pretty people to watch and all, but rescue Lois, rescue the kid, rescue Lois again, rescue Superman...blahblahblah..enou gh already. King Kong - unfortunately no surprises there, the monkey is going to die, why drag it out? Pirates of the Carribean - Dead Man's Chest - I love Johnny Dep's version of Keith Richards, but I started to snooze, woke up and we still seemed to be at the same plot point 15 minutes later.
The series films like LOTR, Harry Potter and the soon to become Narnia series, I can forgive for being long. They are after epics that build on the characterisations and plot building of the films that have gone before. But the film makers still need to remember, particularly when it comes to the big kids films like Narnia and Harry Potter, that kids bladders are also not real big, especially after the inevitable giant cup of Coke they conned Dad into buying before they went in. And that inconveniences at least two people if they are under a certain age and the movie theatre is in a shopping mall, because the parent needs to chaperone them to the toilet, which in Belconnen Hoyts in Canberra is down the hall, down the stairs, and the other side of the lolly counter. If the kid who needs to go is older than all the rest, then that means all of you have to troop down and this is just a nightmare for all and sundry.
Keep it short, people or if you have to make it long make it tight, or even better bring back the Intermission!
What's that you say? My blog post is too long? Sh*t! Sorry. Point taken.
| 44 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
