Tuesday, December 29, 2009

The consensus on ‘Avatar’: It’s too long

Even people who rave about the 3-D science-fiction movie “Avatar” agree that, at 162 minutes, it’s too long.
The problem of cinematic bloat is spreading in Hollywood. Big-name directors have a hard time delivering movies that are two hours or less in length any more. They seem to think longer is always better.
Many moviegoers are speaking out about “Avatar” on Twitter. More than 300 people have posted messages on Twitter since it opened Dec. 18 saying that the movie, which runs 2 hours and 42 minutes, is too long, especially for 3-D.
More than a dozen have complained about headaches and how uncomfortable it is to wear 3-D glasses for so long.
My favorite comment was from “JerryMeehan,” who said Avatar “took out my eyes and stepped on them.”
Another Twitter user, “kdando,” said “Avatar” was spectacular, but way too long – “almost punishing length.”
Before “Avatar,” the movie people most complained about as being too long was disaster flick “2012.”
In the last month, at least 28 people on Twitter have posted notes about “2012” being too long at 153 minutes. Since the movie opened on Nov. 13, at least 265 people have complained about “2012” being too freaking long.
Other movies getting complaints from moviegoers about their length include “Sherlock Holmes” (128 minutes) and “Invictus” (134 minutes). On home video, movies registering complaints from viewers include “Funny People” (146 minutes and 153 minutes unrated), “Inglourious Basterds” (153 minutes), and “Public Enemies” (140 minutes).
Twitter user “energyface” summed up the feelings of a lot of people on Dec. 12 when he tweeted: “Dear Film Directors: When was the last time you heard anyone say ‘that movie was too short'? That’s right, never. No one has EVER said that.”

No comments: