ST How Long Will TFA Be?

I just want to point out that Kasdan wrote and directed Wyatt Earp with Costner in 1994 and that was 191m ( 3h 11m) long and then the expanded video version was 212m (3h 32m) long.

It was an absolute and total BOMB at the box office.

I guess that put him off movies that were too long!



They should have done Dances with Wolves 2!

 

Thread merge

 

2 hrs & 1 min - the shortest yet.....

 

How long...well..are you asking in the metaphysical sense or a period of duration....?
A 1.5hr film that feels like 3hours or a 3hr film that feels like one and a half....i would prefer the latter over the former.

 

I think they're going to try to keep it to as close to ANH in length as they can (2 hours 5 min). (The quotes about "wanting to re-create the experience of seeing SW in '77 and all).

 

So only distributed on film (which will limit it to very few theaters) mono sound, and only a 32 theater opening?

That is just weird.

 

My guess, in light what Kasdan said in the Vanity Fair article, about 130 minutes with credits. Which pretty much falls in the range of the previous movies. Apparently the intention for not having the movie really long is to have the fans wanting more. But the way Kasdan worded it, it sounds like the movie has a rushed ending, because he said (I'm paraphrasing this) people will leave the theater befuddled that the movie ends too soon. Which is kind of the case with Empire Strikes Back- people were expecting some type of satisfying conclusion.

 

That is easily explained.

Audience member: "Look it's Luke! YAY!!"

IRIS OUT

Audience member: "What? It's over? Is there a post-credits scene?"

 

2 hours, 14 minutes, 39 seconds

intro and credits will consist of 9 minutes alone;

Short,to the point and having us wanting more..... maybe

 

I'm thinking as long as ROTJ.

 

I would put money on it falling between 2 and 2.5 hours, as many others have said.

 

30mins

 

Uh- there have been plenty of 'IIRC' studios that have released movies well over 2 hours. Look at all the top highest grossing films over the last decade or so and you'll see that they were well over two hours.

 

2:15 is perfect. I've never been left wanting more by a 3 hour plus movie.

 

Right around 2 hours (not including credits, just pure movie). Based on what Kasdan said, I wouldn't be surprised if it ticked in at just under 2 hours.

 

The movie will be 1 minute, the shortest movie ever.

 

2hrs 12mins 18secs

 

2 hour and 4 minutes.

 

It's going to be tight. Three acts clocking in at 40 minutes each is the goal from what we're lead to believe. Perhaps Act II clocking a bit longer than the end capped acts. A tick over two hours for certain.

 

I'd say two hours and fifteen minutes would be perfect. Maybe two hours and twenty. If it gets up to two and a half hours, that might be stretching it out a little too far.

 

yeah the film has so much ground to cover with the new characters and plots. This will be the longest of the three films. guessing 160 minutes.

 

between 2 hours-2 hours 5 minutes. Kasdan talked about how they opted not to go with a huge bloated movie, and go lean and mean like the old school movies from this genre. Now I am paraphrasing but that was the jist of it. If you think of Jaws, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars, Empire, Jedi, ET, all of them were about 2 hours, and I think thats perfect. As much as I enjoy Lord of the Rings, a 3 hour movie for this genre just seems too bloated in the end. You can get away with it for The Godfather because the story and characters need to be fleshed out, but not for scifi/fantasy movies.

 

yeah i would be fine with 150 to give everyone screen time. 120 seems a bit small for all the work they need to do.I do think the second one could be really short in comparison, like 110 minutes or so.