The release of Martin Scorsese’s “Killers of the Flower Moon” in cinemas today has sparked inevitable talk of film runtimes again thanks to the movie clocking in at a substantial 206 minutes (3hrs 26mins).
That’s three minutes shy of his film “The Irishman” at Netflix which clocked in at 209 minutes (3hrs 29mins), but also follows on from some other films of late to boast chunkier runtimes from “Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour” running 169 minutes (2hr 49mins) which is notably longer than most concert films, to Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” which came in at 180 minutes (3hrs).
To be fair all three justify their runtimes with little in the way of padding and, in the scripted films case, a ton of source material to rely on. Nevertheless the runtime is seen as a factor both in terms of limiting the number of sessions per day, and turning away some who balk at such a commitment in one sitting.
A poll conducted this week by The Journal with over 8,000 responses indicates two hours is the limit for the biggest segment of the population (34.3%) followed by two-and-a-half hours (27.9%). Three hours and four-plus hours were neck-and-neck at 12.5% and 12.3% respectively, whilst 90 minutes or less and a three-and-half-hour limit both scored in the single digits.
Debates have raged over the years be it from exhausted parents unable to muster the energy to watch an overly long epic, to some cinephiles who think you can’t make a masterpiece that’s under two hours.
There are also arguments to be had that it’s a response to streaming which has seen some TV episodes expand to near feature length whilst there’s a perception (carrying over from gaming circles) that wrongly equates runtime with value.
What’s your take on runtimes, are films this year too long? Have your say in the comments below.
