Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

Bloated films that most need editing down


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-10-2013, 11:16
Ads
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pimlico, central London, UK
Posts: 12,000

I was watching This is 40 the other day, which is a reasonably amusing 90-100 minute film bloated out to 135 minutes. There were numerous scenes and even characters which added nothing to the movie and should have ended up on the cutting room floor.

Then there is the Hobbit in which every scene and set piece felt like it was being drawn out as long as possible in order to get nearly 3 hours out of half a fairly thin book.

I guess both the above movies have very famous and big name directors and producers behind them, which means the Hollywood suits aren't allowed their normal right to edit movies down to size.

Can anyone give any other examples?
Ads is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 06-10-2013, 11:50
Justicar
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,522
Agree with The Hobbit. Too many overlong action scenes.

I thought Django Unchained could have done with being at least 30 minutes shorter.
Justicar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 12:02
dearmrman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Utopia
Posts: 4,447
All of James Cameron films, with the exception of The Terminator.
dearmrman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 12:48
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,814
LOTR: Return of the King (Peter Jackson) - Do we really need 30 minutes worth of endings? Just go for the coronation and end it there.

Watchmen (Zack Snyder) - Too bloated to function as an independent film, too far away from the comic to function as an adaptation. Too many irrelevant flashbacks. Kill off all the flashbacks, except for the attempted sexual assault and The Comedian shooting the pregnant Vietnamese woman. I'd also kill off Doctor Manhattan's mars monologue (sorry comic book fans, it's 10 minutes long and adds nothing to the story).

Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino) - 4x20 minute conversations? Just Really?
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 13:16
Ads
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pimlico, central London, UK
Posts: 12,000
Definitely agree with Django unchained and the ending of LOTR: Return of the King
Ads is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 13:21
Ancient IDTV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,982
Gettysburg - Far too much yacking on. They'd have been better off cutting down on the dialogue, and spending more on the combat scenes.
Ancient IDTV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 13:37
Takae
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,244
Ben Hur

Once Upon a Time in America

Almost all Quentin Tarantino films

Almost all Zack Synder films (Watchmen, Man of Steel, Sucker Punch, 300, etc.)

The Eye (original)

Saving Private Ryan

Gone With the Wind
Takae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 14:28
mialicious
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 2,833
heat
dark knight rises
zodiac
gangs of new york
king kong (2005)
the departed
braveheart
independance day
armageddon
castaway
saving private ryan
the green mile
mialicious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 15:31
Virgil Tracy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 19,536
I was watching This is 40 the other day, which is a reasonably amusing 90-100 minute film bloated out to 135 minutes. There were numerous scenes and even characters which added nothing to the movie and should have ended up on the cutting room floor.

Then there is the Hobbit in which every scene and set piece felt like it was being drawn out as long as possible in order to get nearly 3 hours out of half a fairly thin book.

I guess both the above movies have very famous and big name directors and producers behind them, which means the Hollywood suits aren't allowed their normal right to edit movies down to size.

Can anyone give any other examples?
Funny People is even worse , 153 minutes of Adam Sandler ffs!
Virgil Tracy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 15:53
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,814
Funny People is even worse , 153 minutes of Adam Sandler ffs!
It's definitely too long, but I really enjoyed Funny People.

It's almost a shame he did it, but I know now that he can actually act and doesn't need to rely on the same sub-par shit he normally does.
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 16:10
Michael_Eve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,658
'Cleopatra' with Liz Taylor could've easily lost a couple of hours.

'Carry On Cleo' used the sets, I believe, so that was a positive from the film. THAT's a classic.
Michael_Eve is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 16:27
Cheap Thrills
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 242
A lot of the Judd Apatow directed/produced films could do with some editing.
Cheap Thrills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 16:28
elnombre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,862
All the Nolan Batman movies.
After Titanic and subsequently The Lord Of The Rings trilogy there seemed to be this mindset that any serious blockbuster had to skirt the 3 hour mark. Some really boring shite came out in the wake of that, but I've more or less forgotten what.
elnombre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 18:22
rfonzo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,802
As previously mentioned. The Departed. Also, Forrest Gump.
rfonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 19:19
elnombre
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,862
As previously mentioned. The Departed. Also, Forrest Gump.
I'm curious what you'd cut from Gump.
elnombre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 20:42
Shak2005
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bradford , UK
Posts: 574
Peter Jackson - King Kong - way too long to get King Kong to appear.
Shak2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 21:14
quirkyquirk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,276
With the exception of Fistful Of Dollars and For A Few Dollars More,anything by Sergio Leone.Too self indulgent for me.
quirkyquirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 00:41
Jonwo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Posts: 7,416
Peter Jackson - King Kong - way too long to get King Kong to appear.
King Kong is decent but far too long, it should have 2 hours maximum,
Jonwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 02:34
downtonfan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,353
One wonders how Django would have turned out had Quentin's editor Sally Menke still been alive. She was instrumental to his success.
downtonfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 08:46
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,814
One wonders how Django would have turned out had Quentin's editor Sally Menke still been alive. She was instrumental to his success.
Given she edited Inglourious Basterds, I'm going to say there wouldn't be a lot of difference...
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 10:13
dee123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 12,201
Given she edited Inglourious Basterds, I'm going to say there wouldn't be a lot of difference...
I don't have a problem with how long Basterds ran. I did have a problem with Django though.
dee123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 10:15
timebug
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 598
I always thought that 'The Deer Hunter' could have lost the first hour easily.They are mates,we get it,no need for the long drawn out wedding stuff!
Agree on Peter Jacksons 'King Kong' too.First hour is wasted,not 'atmospeheric' and giving the characters a back story.Who cares,most of them are gonna die in a minute anyway!
timebug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:10
woot_whoo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 17,410
'Cleopatra' with Liz Taylor could've easily lost a couple of hours.

'Carry On Cleo' used the sets, I believe, so that was a positive from the film. THAT's a classic.
'Cleopatra' was a turgid mess, but from what I've read, it was actually butchered down from a longer and more coherent film. Apparently Elizabeth Taylor ran to the toilet at the intermission of the film during its premiere and vomited with horror at the way it had been edited.

It should either have been two separate movies or one shorter one - the compromise of one overly long movie with important chunks still missing was a disaster. The story of the film is more interesting than the film itself!
woot_whoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 12:30
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,754
Cut an hour and a half out of Lost in Translation and just have ten minutes of Bill Murray looking bored. You wouldn't lose anything really.
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2013, 13:05
Ginger Nut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,442

Watchmen (Zack Snyder) - Too bloated to function as an independent film, too far away from the comic to function as an adaptation. Too many irrelevant flashbacks. Kill off all the flashbacks, except for the attempted sexual assault and The Comedian shooting the pregnant Vietnamese woman. I'd also kill off Doctor Manhattan's mars monologue (sorry comic book fans, it's 10 minutes long and adds nothing to the story).
They could have cut everything but Rorshak for me.
Ginger Nut is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:45.