The generic military villain was admittedly one of the better parts of the first film, but even bringing him back just shows how much a rehash this and the other sequels will be.
He's a cool actor. I enjoyed him in the Don't Breathe movies and on the TV show I saw him on, Terra Nova. So I guess on that level I'm glad to see him back.
Can't say movie running time bothers me so long as the pacing is right.
There's plenty 3+ hour movies that flew by. Wolf of Wall Street, The Green Mile, Schindler's List, Endgame...the list goes on
And there's plenty sub 3 hours movies that I felt every minute of. Prisoners being the one that always comes to mind because God damn that film was visually, tonally and thematically bleak.
__________________ Sweating on the streets of Woking
Right, he could have said something about the pacing, and "this is the ride I think audiences will want to go on," etc, because that's the sort of thing he's usually said when explaining his extended cuts. But instead he sounds like a crotchety old man fundamentally misunderstanding the difference between going to a theater and binging TV shows at home.
I don't know the exact length. I think I just read somewhere it's nearly 3 hours.
The exact length isn't really the point. The point is James Cameron's odd response:
"I don't want anybody whining about length when they sit and binge-watch [television] for eight hours ... Here's the big social paradigm shift that has to happen: it's okay to get up and go pee."
The subtext that I hear is, "eh, it's okay if you miss a scene here or there... it's not that immersive or engaging. You probably won't miss anything major. I'm a dummy that doesn't understand that people pause the TV at home." If it's okay to miss something here or there, then why not cut the length down a little for the theatrical release, and do your extended cut later? I'm pretty sure that's what he did with the first one.
KMC Community Forums
May 11th, 2022 08:35 AM
Attachment: 
