Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.

Why Are Films Getting Longer?

There's always been long films. Always. The original cut of Cleopatra (1963) ran for 350 minutes, and Satantango (1994) runs for 450 minutes. These two films were anomalies when released, a movie event (less so for Satantango) that was done more to show what could be done, than for any artistic reasons. My central thesis is that films nowadays are, by and large, longer now than at any other point in cinematic history. More films spend more minutes telling more story than they ever did in the past. Is this a good thing, or a bad thing? What are the reasons for this shift in attitudes? Where is all this imagination and/or money coming from? Will we really have given over fifteen hours of our lives to the Transformers series by the time Michael Bay is finished with us?
This article is over 11 years old and may contain outdated information

guillermo-del-toro

Recommended Videos

No. It isn’t. Pacific Rim was shot digitally, and clocks in at 132 minutes. That’s mammoth, and Guillermo del Toro’s career has been stratospheric. Another fine example would be Neill Blomkamp – South African director of District 9 (112 minutes) and the upcoming Elysium, starring Matt Damon. Google has Elysium running at 120 minutes, and Google never lies. Both longer than you’d expect. Michael Bay’s Transformers series is comprised of a series of movies all over two hours long.

Does this make those directors better? No, of course not. It does show, however, that they are more comfortable exerting their creative vision over that increased running time, with such massive budgets and movie studios watching their every move. Filmmakers today have never had it so good – anybody can pick up any camera and make a movie. Werner Herzog stole his first movie camera from a local film school, a scenario unimaginable now. Films are getting longer because the tools that allow longer films to come about with greater ease are being used by new directors at an increasingly early age. The new breed – Sam Mendes, Neill Blomkamp, Guillermo del Toro, Peter Jackson (to name but a few) – have the confidence, the equipment, the experience and the money to make films as long as they do.

What I’m saying is that the reason films are getting longer isn’t because of just one of those factors, but all of them combined. The older, more established directors – Stephen Spielberg, Quentin Tarantino – are using the skills they accumulated with film in conjunction with those factors to give them more freedom too. Francis Ford Coppola shot Apocalypse Now in 1977, and it nearly bankrupted the director. Nowadays, shot on digital, it’d be a piece of cake.

The directors of tomorrow are growing up with access to HD cameras and industry-standard editing software. Gareth Edwards’ film Monsters, released in 2010, was shot on DV cameras, on location or in the director’s flat, without permission from anyone. Directors are coming up fast and with skill, enough money, equipment, and inspiration, they’re going to want to tell longer and longer stories. And I intend to let them. Isn’t it just so exciting?


We Got This Covered is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Rob Batchelor
Rob Batchelor
Male, Midlands, mid-twenties.