Brit pleads for shorter movies

A British critic interviewed on the BBC railed against increasing movie running times. She said she sat in the audience thinking like an editor, noting what stuff could have been shortened or cut out completely. The interviewer suggested that movies were getting longer to compete with streaming video, but she blamed directors. They have too much power and make movies longer and longer out of some ego thing. She longed for days when studios kept them under control.

The critic A.S. Hamrah's review of The Irishman in 2019 noted that the movie was three and a half hours long. Hamrah has a morbid hatred for television of any kind. He saw the Scorsese movie in a theater and said he'd have been happy to sit there watching for a couple more hours. He said that it was people watching it on Netflix who complained that it was too long. He thought it was because admirers of streaming video were used to watching things in 45 minute chunks. 

I say give them what they want. Make forty-five minute movies, save a fortune and give other people a chance. You could make two or three times as many movies. And watch two or three times as many.

There's a channel on broadcast TV that kept showing old 1950's dramas and westerns like Trackdown, Have Gun Will Travel, Alfred Hitchcock Presents and others, and they were great, all half hour shows, originally 25 minutes not counting commercials. I think now they've been cut down to 22 minutes. That seems extremely short for anything but a sit-com, but I didn't find myself wishing they had dragged on for another half hour. 

There were 1950's AIP horror movies I watched on TV in the middle of the night in the '70s. I was in junior high school. Watched such movies as The Day the World Ended and Attack of the Crab Monsters, and I never noticed how short they were, only an hour long. In the '50's, they'd release them as double features so you'd get two hours of movie if you paid to see them in a theater.

But now, after years and years of being shamed for watching TV, people like Hamrah want me to feel like an idiot for not wanting to sit on a couch for four hours watching people murder each other.

I've wondered what the natural running time for a movie is, how long they would be if they didn't have to make it worth your while to go to a theater. Movies were fairly short before they had to compete with radio and TV. B movies were short because they were intended as the second feature in a double feature.

The intertitles in silent movies were often narration rather than dialogue which allowed them to move quickly. They could explain people's motives without ponderous character development. This "show don't tell" nonsense is killing us.