On Why I Love Long Films

When Quentin Tarantino’s “The Hateful Eight” was released last year, a friend of mine complained about the film’s running time that was close to the three hour mark. However, that did not affect me in watching it. In fact, a lot of my favorite films have a running time close to three or even four hours. Francis Ford Coppola’s “The Godfather” films, David Lean’s “Lawrence of Arabia” and “Doctor Zhivago”, Akira Kurosawa’s “Seven Samurai”, Sergio Leone’s “Once Upon a Time in America” and Stanley Kubrick’s “Barry Lyndon” are some of my favorite films that exceed those running times. The running times of those films may seem daunted but by the end, you are awarded an experience. I get that film studios today try their best to keep a film’s length right around two hours so that there will be more showtimes. For all that, cutting a film’s length just to get that two hour mark will tarnish the story. Take for example Ridley Scott’s 2005 historical epic “Kingdom of Heaven”. The theatrical cut was two hours and forty four minutes and was criticized for the uneven plot. The following year, Scott released his director’s cut that added forty five minutes, bringing the film’s running time to three hours and fifteen minutes. This made the film not only better but also necessary to tell a story, especially for an epic. Those kinds of films were made to be watched on the biggest screen at the theater. “The Hateful Eight” was shot on 70mm as was Paul Thomas Anderson’s “The Master” that only a select number of theatres were presenting it in that form versus the preferred digital projection. Next summer, Warner Bros. will release Christopher Nolan’s war epic “Dunkirk”, shot in IMAX 70 mm in select theatres that will show it in its true form. Hopefully, that will transition into more films that are longer and visually stunning.   

What are some of your thoughts on long films? Love or Hate?