|
 On 08/09/2016 at 09:58 PM by dustin See More From This User » |
We saw the release of 5 comic book films in 2016. Deadpool had a run time of almost 1 hour and 50 minutes, finding a soft middle ground just over the standard 90 minutes. Suicide Squad, the final comic book movie of the year, comes in at 10 minutes over 2 hours. Both of these films are funny, feature a lot of violence, and are easier to watch than the other 3 comic book movies that came out. While all 5 comic book movies have a mix of good and bad qualities, the longer movies feel drained of their energy by their climaxes, as do the audiences.
Disney’s Civil War, Fox’s Civil War, and Warner’s Batman v Superman all clocked in at around 2 hours and 30 minutes. This makes watching them even once a commitment. Of the 3, the easiest to edit down to 120 minutes or less is Civil War. The film would have much more energy if they cut out everything with Scarlet Witch, Vision, Ant-man, and Spider-Man; and if they cut out the whole airport battle sequence. Really, Civil War has no reason to be titled after the comic series that was driven by outlawing of secret identities. Civil War would be better if it did not try to put on a civil war between Avengers members and just focused on Captain America, Iron Man, Winter Soldier, and Black Panther.
Batman v Superman is a film that should have been 2 different movies— The Batman (pick a title) and Superman: Doomsday. At no point should the pitch have been Batman v Superman. The fight between the two caped crusaders could have still happened. The fight was awesome to behold but it was never the climax of the script. They could have made a 90 minute Batman film and set up Joker and Harley for Suicide Squad while also giving cameos to Dian Prince/Wonder Woman and Clark Kent/Superman. Then in Superman: Doomsday, we get the ultimate confrontation between Batman and Superman, we get the creation of Doomsday and all of the Lex scenes, and generally get a solo Superman film that tells the story of his death (as broadcasted in the title).
Why does time matter so much with movies? Movies are not books. Movies deliver a narrative whose success depends on pacing and energy. Writing a movie is a challenge in itself in terms of outlining and timing. The challenge is to tell a story within a limited timeframe—to not go under or too far over 90 minutes. It is a medium like music in that you have to deliver a consumable package to a mass audience.
There should be a new rule going forward with comic book movies. No movie should go over 2 hours in length that is not called Infinity War or Justice League or Age of Apocalypse (the Apocalypse story people care about). I am looking directly at you, Wonder Woman, Black Panther, Thor 3, Spiderman, Deadpool 2, and every solo picture that follows. If you are not dropping the Lawrence of Arabia of comic book stories then you need drown your darlings.
A lot of movies push the 2 hour mark these days. 90 mintues seems old fashioned to me lately.
I didn't even look at the running time of Suicide Squad before or after the film. I didn't think it was overly long or anything. It seemed paced just right. Now movies that push the 3 hour mark like Lord of Rings I really notice. I start squirming in my seat even though I love those films.
Ant Man and Spider-Man were two of the highlights of Civil War, and I think the Russos did a masterful job of balancing so many characters. I can't comment on the DC movies, as I have no desire to see them. I tried watching both Man of Steel and Batman V Superman and had to turn them off because I rolled my eyes so much during the scenes I watched I was afraid of them getting stuck permanently. Personally I think those movies should have been no minutes long, and I think movies should be long enough to effectively tell a story, whether it's an hour or three. I don't think there should be some arbitrary time limit just because they're based on comic book characters. I will say that Marvel's movies are in danger of becoming too bloated by the time Infinity War rolls around. Once that comes out, I think they need to dial it back a bit and not have so many guest appearances in the solo films. I love all the characters and the way they interact, but part of what made the Avengers special is that it brought the separate characters together. If they're together in every movie, why even have an Avengers franchise? Biggest mistake I see with DC (besides putting Zack Snyder in charge--he's only good when he's working with someone else's material) is that they put the cart before the horse and are trying to establish a universe before giving us reasons to care about individual characters.
I think ALL movies should follow that 2 hour rule. I've seen very few movies that I thought, "Wow, they really needed three whole hours to tell that story!"
I like your idea of Superman vs Batman being two separate movies. Have Batman take on the Joker/Harley with bits of Superman thrown in just to anger Batman, or have Wonder Woman being the one character that connects the two storylines.
As for Civil War I think Marvel did a good job in using that flick to be a sort of quick origin story for Spider-Man and Bllack Panther to setup the next wave in comicbook movies, but I did think the flick as a whole was a bit too long. I like the two hour rule and I agree with Cary that all films should follow this. There are a lot of flicks that could be even better if they were shortened.
Edit: I didn't read your other post because I haven't seen the flick yet. I'll check it out once I finally watch Suicide Squad
Comments