There is always something daunting about a long running time, especially in this current climate of films. I know of many who never watched The Godfather films due to their length, and many who immediately dismissed The Irishman on its length alone, also dismissing the immense pedigree of the talent involved. But why? What is so daunting about a long running time? Especially in this era of home viewing where technically you could view the film in multiple sittings. However, I have to strongly advise against this practice. I viewed The Irishman for the first time in the cinema in one sitting (with one momentary bathroom break), and it was the absolute perfect way to watch that film. I was reminded of Robert Evan’s decision making regarding the possibility of an intermission in the first Godfather film. At the time of 1972 it was hither to unheard of to have a film of over two and a half hours without an intermission. Such was going to be the case with The Godfather, with the placement of an intermission following the Sollazo murder. Evan ultimately went against this as he felt the intense momentum caused by the killing would be completely lost with the addition of a ten-minute interval. I feel this way with Scorsese’s latest; by viewing the film as a whole, then you are embarking on the journey of Frank Sheeran and you are not allowed to leave it and as we view his life deteriorate around him, we feel every moment more strongly. With intermissions this would be undoubtedly lost.
 |
| Credit |
Intermissions were just common practice in their day, it made the film more of an event, as well as helping along with the length. The budget for certain epic films were judged almost solely by their length, it was a chief aspect of the process. Tarantino brought the intermission back for his recent epic The Hateful Eight to great effect, although some felt the film lost its way or was indulgent in its length, I believed that was simply delightful and was never bored for a frame. But this was a limited release aspect at certain cinemas, most cinemas just showed the film without a break and left people to their own devices to schedule urinations or other activities. After all it was Hitchcock’s oft-quoted line that the length of a film “should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder”. But for me an intermission is more than just a "p*ss-break", it’s a time to let certain elements of the film sink in. I always return to Once Upon a Time in America, where the intermission is positioned not a time economic for a toilet break, it is instead placed almost near the end of the film following a truly horrifying and emotional scene that needed time to sit and breathe and consider the effect that it would have on the rest of the film. Hence, more than just a "p*ss-break"
 |
| Credit |
These are the facts according to a study over on Stephen Follows' blog - “Average running times fell during the 2000s, only to start rising again in the most recent decade. Last year, the average movie lasted 96.5 minutes”. I believe this is mostly down to the birth of the superhero epic, a term referring to the over-indulgent length of most of the current slew of Marvel and other superhero films, who almost feel that it is their duty to be overly long. It is commonly judged that a film can be about 2 hours, depending on the genre, that a musical can be 2 and a half hours including an interval and that a novel can, well… be just about as long as the author wants. This is of course why so many books are unfilmable, as they span so much space and time usually, of course there are exceptions. So many film musicals lose songs due to the loss of an intermission, instead of retaining the whole experience of the show by including one for the cinematic release – a further hindrance caused by running time politics.
I consider a long movie to be 3 hours or over, and I have a general rule of thumb that if a film is entertaining, interesting and just plain good, then the longer the better. My go-to review for both The Wolf of Wall Street and The Irishman was that they “were three hours long and I could have gladly watched another hour”. The cardinal sin of course is a film that doesn’t justify its length. I have often commented that I could watch all three and a half hours of The Godfather Part II every week, but wouldn’t dream of sitting through all of Avengers: Endgame again. Although they are nowhere near epic in their length, another sufferer from this is current slew of comedy films. Gone are the days of the tight 90 min studio comedy, in are the days of the overblown comedy drama. All the while sacrificing efficiency for extended scenes of improvisation, or worse scenes of comedy so under-written that they feel improvised. The biggest culprits of this that jump to mind are the Apatow field of comedies, writing this essay I re-watched The 40-Year-Old Virgin the day before and there is just no reason why that film is 2 hours long! As I say I long for a return to the tight 90 minutes of Airplane! or even the tight 90 minutes of a very loose and improvisational film like Caddyshack, where the director and editor had the hindsight to keep the running time down. Bridesmaids is just wonderful, but it really doesn’t need to be that long and really suffers in it’s third act due to its length. The economy of a Clue compared to the free-wheeling frivolity of a This Is 40, seems to be an emblem of a bygone era. Superbad, The Skeleton Twins and Forgetting Sarah Marshall are three very economic recent comedies that I’d recommend, with The Skeleton Twins juggling both high comedy and low drama with expertise all around the 90 minute mark (much to its advantage).
 |
| Credit |
But has the epic film ever left us? Not really, every Marvel film is at least 2 and a half hours and most action/superhero films of it’s ilk are of a similar length. I have often commented on the borderline insufferable dullness and length issue with the majority of the Marvel cannon, but it really doesn’t matter, they make their money in abundance and seem to be getting longer and to be similarly being praised for it. Bring back the intermission. Bring back the epic masterpiece. In doing so you will ultimately bring back the event of going to the cinema and the thwarting that home release is doing to the industry will devolve with some time. Mark my words.
-Thomas Carruthers
0 Comments