Thursday, September 17, 2020

45 minutes of talking is now ideal


Then I read this by A.S. Hamrah:

...I saw The Irishman in a huge theater on a giant screen, and I did not want to get up, didn’t want it to end, and could have watched another hour of it if there was one. It seems like most everybody who watched it at home complained it was too long, redundant, and looked funny. It did not seem like entertainment to them. That was the message they sent out into the world and it reached me loud and clear. 

What does that mean? Do I have a false sense of duty to the cinema? Or have people who watch movies at home, even great ones, been trained by their quality-TV habit to want things to be bingeable in forty-five-minute chunks, easy to ignore, and better to listen to than to watch?

So I don't know if I should feel ashamed to be one of those people, or if I should take this as confirmation that I was on the right track. I guess it could be both. 

I watch 55 minute B movies and they don't leave me wanting more. I watch half hour episodes of The Twilight Zone, Alfred Hitchcock Presents or The Rifleman and I don't wish they had stretched it out another half hour. 

Just give the public what they want, especially if it's easier to do anyway.




No comments:

Post a Comment