Movie length?

SGrayWolf · Post by **SGrayWolf** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 2:35 am

A question that I've been wondering about.... Has there been a certain time length that's been decided regarding the movie yet? I hope this question hasn't been asked and answered yet and I simply missed it.

An hour? Two hours? Longer? (like the LOTR movies?) I know I wouldn't mind sitting through a long kickass werewolf movie, hehe.....

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 3:24 am

Well, the story line takes place in a day.

So I say this will be a 24 hour movie.

Nouska · Post by **Nouska** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 5:21 am

I can see everyone at the cinema, sitting uncomfortably watching an long winded but essential ending... with water...

SGrayWolf · Post by **SGrayWolf** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 11:09 am

Figarou wrote:Well, the story line takes place in a day.

So I say this will be a 24 hour movie.

You tease....

Scott Gardener · Post by **Scott Gardener** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 6:41 pm

We die-hards would generally prefer an epic, but two hours would probably be about right for the casual. An hour and a half was the standard of the eighties and early nineties, though they're now fudging to about 100 minutes--that's good for a movie after all the intelligent plot has been edited out, like Underworld.

Most brainier works tend to run longer. That doesn't always mean that they feel longer, mind you; The Matrix and its sequels flew by.

I'd suggest two and a half hours if we die-hards are the bulk of your target audience, or at least two hours and ten minutes.

Again, it might also depend on the editing process. I understand how things can run longer or shorter than you had in mind, and I wouldn't want you sticking in crap just to stretch the time out. But, more importantly, for the love of God and Goddess, don't cut essential story element just to crop it into 90 minutes. We've already got a ton of movies like that. (Again, Underworld had plenty of running and jumping scenes they could have trimmed in order to preserve what might have been a great story, had they actually bothered to develop it.)

akujiwolf · Post by **akujiwolf** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 8:05 pm

I can't stop laughing about the underworld comments. My family loves that movie, and what is really sad is my mother is a die-hard vampire fan, and she loved it. I'm still figuring that one out. I seriously have no clue how long the movie will run but i can guarantee it won't be stripped of essential story development.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 9:23 pm

akujiwolf wrote:I can't stop laughing about the underworld comments. My family loves that movie, and what is really sad is my mother is a die-hard vampire fan, and she loved it. I'm still figuring that one out. I seriously have no clue how long the movie will run but i can guarantee it won't be stripped of essential story development.

Well, if it ends up getting stripped down, there is always the 4 disc Special Edition DVD gift set that comes with a 6inch werewolf resin figure!!

hint..hint...nudge...nudge..wink...wink!!!

SGrayWolf · Post by **SGrayWolf** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 12:08 am

That's the important thing, keeping the essentials in the movie..

It seems when scenes are cut out of a movie (for time constraint or other reasons), character development scenes are generally high on the list to be removed first.

I hope too much doesn't end up getting tapered out though.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 12:14 am

SGrayWolf wrote:That's the important thing, keeping the essentials in the movie.. It seems when scenes are cut out of a movie (for time constraint or other reasons), character development scenes are generally high on the list to be removed first.

I hope too much doesn't end up getting tapered out though.

When I view the Director's cut/special edition DVD, I always wonder why a certain scene was taken out. It made perfect sence with it in there. Sometime one little scene edited out can end up taking more scenes out in other parts of the movie.

Apokryltaros · Post by **Apokryltaros** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 12:55 am

So, I take it that it would be too much to ask for a total of 30 minutes' worth of transformations?

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 1:07 am

I wouldn't advise suggesting a minimum or maximum film length. It all depends on how long it takes to tell the story. Some stories are too complex to cram into a short period of time, (LOTR), while others are deligtfully well told in a short sprint. Extending the film with "filler" scenes, or overloading it with over the top transformation scenes that drag on forever,( regardless of how cool they are to watch), would not help the movie.

Akujiwolf wrote:... I seriously have no clue how long the movie will run but i can guarantee it won't be stripped of essential story development.

I think that says it all. Just wait and see.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 1:11 am

Vuldari wrote:I wouldn't advise suggesting a minimum or maximum film length. It all depends on how long it takes to tell the story. Some stories are too complex to cram into a short period of time, (LOTR), while others are deligtfully well told in a short sprint. Extending the film with "filler" scenes, or overloading it with over the top transformation scenes that drag on forever,( regardless of how cool they are to watch), would not help the movie.

Good point. Well noted.

Hope I'm not the only one who sees this.

ShadowWolf · Post by **ShadowWolf** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 6:16 pm

I say make the movie however long it needs to be to be good. If it's too short, then the movie feels rushed and you're left scratching your head because you can't see how they got from point A to point B. But by that same token, if it's too long, you're left to wonder what the main plot is, and you'll eventually find you're self saying "ya, ya, ya, we've seen this all ready, get on with it." Though personally, I think the former is a much bigger problem with movies in general than the latter.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Sat Dec 25, 2004 7:40 pm

Typical popcorn flicks nowadays run for 90 to 110 minutes, whereas movies that involve development of both the plot and the characters tend to run more around 160. From the look of things, this movie is going to be one of the latter.

Maybe the editing team could consent with the actors as to what scenes to cut out; nobody will know what scenes develop character and which ones do not more than the actors that had to play those characters for seven months straight.

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 1:34 am

Terastas wrote:Typical popcorn flicks nowadays run for 90 to 110 minutes, whereas movies that involve development of both the plot and the characters tend to run more around 160. From the look of things, this movie is going to be one of the latter.

Maybe the editing team could consent with the actors as to what scenes to cut out; nobody will know what scenes develop character and which ones do not more than the actors that had to play those characters for seven months straight.

Well, I hope this movie turns out to be a big juicy steak flick instead of a popcorn flick.

Silverfang · Post by **Silverfang** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 8:58 pm

Yeah , i hope this movie turns out how we hope and pray it should do... and ok this is off topic , i'm back after line problems (No net in over a week

Damned ISP) and then my compy goes poof after corrupting its HD

NightStorm · Post by **NightStorm** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:36 pm

Mmmm a long flick does sound good. but a balanced flick would be better. Maybe because I'm a chick, but some comedy and romance would soften the hard, sharp edges.....plus some killer rock music tooo

THE PACK Message Boards

Movie length?

Movie length?

Just a few more hours, and I'll be right home to you