Movies don’t need to be over 2 hours long

r/

Some directors get carried away.
If it takes you 3 hours to tell a story, maybe it’s not that tight.

Too many movies feel bloated with unnecessary scenes, subplots, or dramatic pauses that don’t add anything meaningful.
It’s not about attention span, it’s about storytelling.

A well-paced 90–120 minute movie can hit harder, flow better, and leave a stronger impression than an almost 3-hour epic that overstays its welcome.

Long doesn’t always mean deep. Sometimes it just means long.

Comments

  1. AutoModerator Avatar

    Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!

    I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

  2. Limbo_28 Avatar

    There can be long movies and short movies. Let the creator do it as he pleases. If you don’t enjoy a type of movie, that’s fine.

  3. notmenotwhenitsyou Avatar

    batman v. superman: dawn of justice would agree

  4. ramen2005 Avatar

    Yes. If a story cannot be told in less than two hours, make a series of movies.

  5. Briarcliff_Manor Avatar

    Really really depends, some movies feel way too long for no reason. Some movies over 3 hours are just amazing and not boring at all (Green Mile or the 1st LOTR for instance).

    So yes, no need to make a film over 2 hours for the sake of it, but sometimes it fits perfectly.

  6. xtra_obscene Avatar

    That probably explains all the movies that aren’t over two hours long, then.

  7. Pablo_Undercover Avatar

    I’ve seen some 90 minute movies that absolutely suck and some 3 hour movies that are absolute masterpieces and of course vice versa. I do agree with you though that 2 hour is the perfect movie length. I will say though sometimes I find 2 hours 30 min movies to be the most bloated. If you watch a 3 hour long film you know you’re in for a bit of a slow burn with a lot of characters etc. I find 2h30m runtimes tend to be the worst of both worlds and have really inconsistent pacing

  8. PenguinFootballClub Avatar

    Completely disagree. There are some movies that are so much better with the Director’s long cut and they give you important details. “Kingdom of Heaven” is the perfect example of that, the movie is x100 better if you watch the Director’s Cut and it makes a lot more sense.

    Also, LOTR.

  9. pouldycheed Avatar

    Shorter movies often have tighter pacing and stronger impact. Long films can feel dragged out with unnecessary scenes. A focused 90–120 minute movie can say more with less.

  10. randJoe43 Avatar

    3 hours is the ideal length of a movie 2 and a half hour tolerable. You are making shit up, make more of it. I am not leaving my home and going to a theatre for a movie with 94 min or 107 min runtime.( I’m generally talking about major production offerings not indie stuff, I know it’s a costly business)

  11. puffbus420 Avatar

    I think movies should be longer ill binge watch a whole season of a show why not a 8 hour movie

  12. Interstellar_Lemon Avatar

    Some just do need the extra runtime. I cannot imagine Interstellar or Lord of the Rings being any shorter, they would have to remove so many important things that the movies would suffer greatly.

    I do agree that SOME movies are too long, but let’s not generalize here. It is absolutely necessary for many of them.

  13. Icy_Trainer5329 Avatar

    Definitely disagree. Not every story is the same and can be told in 1.5 hrs. Sometimes you need to really flesh out the plot and have enough screen time for proper character development. You come out of a movie like The Titanic or The Brutalist feeling like you really got your money’s worth. In fact many times I find shitty movies to be the ones that didn’t spend enough time on certain plot points that leave me wanting.

  14. ottoandinga88 Avatar

    It greatly depends on the pacing tone intensity etc etc

    I think most people would agree that in very few circumstances does a popcorn action movie deserve to be over around 2 hrs 10 mins maximum, which sadly has become commonplace

  15. SeedieEdie Avatar

    I watch a lot of older movies and length is one of their blessings.

  16. ProgrammerNo3423 Avatar

    I think saying “no movie should be over 2 hours long” might be overkill. There are 3-hour movies that are amazing from start to finish, but in recent years, i agree that there have been a lot of movies where you’re at the half-way point and you’re like “there’s still over an hour of this movie??”

  17. Case_Blue Avatar

    The lord of the rings almost was 90 minutes long because Harvey Weinstein didn’t want 3 movies, but 1.

    Would that have been better?

    By contract, the hobbit was 1 movie worth of material maximum. But they made 3.

  18. DreadPirateGriswold Avatar

    So where did the 2-hour limit come from?

    Why is 2 hours good and anything beyond that is not?

  19. Dandandandooo Avatar

    I guess it depends on the type of movie. I would expect superhero action movies to be 2 hours or longer

  20. CoolKanyon55 Avatar

    I recently watched Ben-Hur from 1959 and it was 3hrs 32 mins long. I loved every minute of it and wished it was longer. I guess it depends of the film.

  21. Greedy-Razzmatazz930 Avatar

    Wait until this guy finds out about books

  22. spiderglide Avatar

    I was watching Matrix 4 and the first half hour was great. It went down hill from there. This was a movie that at 90 minutes could really be good. But it was 2.5 hours and was average at best.

    Back to the opinion: some long films would benefit from cutting – most of Tarantino’s films for example.
    Others should stay long – most of Leone’s for example.

    Every film has an ideal length. But the number depends on the film. And the people determining the length aren’t always right.

  23. ynab4file Avatar

    > Long doesn’t always mean deep. Sometimes it just means long

    So change your post to “Sometimes movies don’t need to be over 2 hours long” and then delete it cuz it’s not unpopular

  24. Rokovar Avatar

    Euh stories can vary in range you know.

    Lord of the rings is uncut 12h long for one story and they didn’t fully cover the story. And LOTR is not slow paced at all.

    Not every story is a 30 page book

  25. redditinyourdreams Avatar

    Sounds like you’ve never watched a good movie

  26. NeilSilva93 Avatar

    Get in the bin. Imagine films like Casino or Goodfellas being an hour and a half

  27. Galgan3 Avatar

    Just confess that you have tiktok brain. Longer and more details a movie has, the better it is. Granted it has to have a good stroy telling and decent pacing and cinematography, but that applies to all media regardless of length.

  28. Ornery-Tea-795 Avatar

    What they should do with longer movies is add an intermission to refill drinks and snacks. Or go pee.

    I don’t mind longer movies as long as I’m watching at home, then I can pause whenever I need to

  29. Quirky_Tea_3874 Avatar

    You’re right. Zack Snyder’s Justice League should have been 6 hours rather than just 4.

  30. CankerLord Avatar

    I don’t think this is an unpopular opinion. It’s not extreme enough an opinion. It’s basically just “some movies are too long”, which is just a statement of fact. Some movies are too long, some are too short, some are the right length.

  31. Candid-Bee6259 Avatar

    Wait till op hears about TV shows

  32. J-DubZ Avatar

    They don’t need to be, but they don’t need not to be either.