The ‘why’ of three-hour epics.
‘Why no 90-minute movies?!’; The complaint came from a customer at the cinema where I work, frustrated at the growing absence of shorter-length films. While dramatic, the sentiment reflects a wider trend in recent cinema. From Wicked: For Good (2025) to Avatar: Fire and Ash (2025) and Marty Supreme (2025), and many other award season contenders all clocking in past the 2-hour mark and far beyond.
Now to go back to the statement at hand, it feels fair to assume that the individual – like many others – seems to be at their wits end with such runtimes. Pleading with the multi-billion-dollar studios and independent artists alike to reject exorbitant runtimes and bring back the tight 90-minute flick. Such a narrative does merit some credit, given that we as consumers are constantly bombarded with content from our phones, tablets, laptops, and other devices. With short form content on platforms such as TikTok increasingly depriving individuals of their ability to switch off, ‘just one more video’ has become the battle cry of a dopamine-deprived generation. Social media platforms frequently overwhelm users with low-value, rapidly consumable content, reflecting the extent to which attention has become capital in the digital economy.
Nevertheless, long-runtimes are not a form of punishment concocted by filmmakers and studios alike to reclaim your attention and quell second screening. Films since the mid-20th century have been neither long nor short. The justification in a film’s runtime traditionally relies on its concept – or story. Does the story require 3-hours, or 2? Take The Brutalist (2024) which clocks in at a mammoth 3 hours and 35 minutes with the theatrical release including an intermission – something which is common in global markets such as India.
Brady Corbet’s film is nothing short of a masterpiece. A saga depicting the experience of Jewish-Hungarian immigrant Laszlo Toth, a maverick architect fleeing Nazi persecution in search of a better life in America. Corbet explores the immigrant’s experience over a decade and dissects beliefs of the US as a ‘melting pot’ of cultures and instead tells a story of how cultures are homogenised and individuals ripped of their identity in American society. Frankly, such an oversimplified description of The Brutalist would never do it justice as it delves into so much more. But therein lies the justification of its runtime. Its story is enormous, layered, and thematically dense to such a degree that to shrink it would undermine its complexity.
On the other hand, Joseph Kosinski’s F1: The Movie’s (2025) eye-watering 156 minute runtime is a head-scratcher. Starring Hollywood icon Brad Pitt alongside rising star Damson Idris – their positions in the cultural zeitgeist reflected in their characters. Kosinski’s film is a pastiche to classic Hollywood tropes – the disgraced, wily veteran reluctantly returns to his previous stomping ground, where he must learn to coexist with the hotshot rookie and maybe even get the girl! This basic structure can be viewed in all four of The Expendables (2010, 2012, 2014, 2023); most of The Fast and the Furious franchise, and every Jason Statham film. For all of the adrenaline that Kosinski can summon from his use of practical effects, a car turning a corner loses its verve after the 20th time – unless you are an F1 fan. The point I am making is that F1: The Movie really doesn’t earn its runtime, its an old fashioned hero gets the girl and regains his pride narrative. Which, for a film just an hour shorter than The Brutalist, is a simplified rehashing of an all too familiar story that doesn’t need an epic runtime.
Shifting gears now, 90-minute films such as Lady Bird (2017) don’t tackle as complex a social issue as immigration and cultural identity. Opting for a minimalist narrative, wherein the life of a teenage girl and her interpersonal relationships are the focus. The scope and depth are what qualifies runtime. The reason F1: The Movie is unworthy of its grand runtime is because it, frankly, does very little with it. Kosinski doesn’t explore complex social issues such as immigration and cultural identity the way that Corbet does with The Brutalist.
In contrast, other filmmakers may intentionally seek to lull you to sleep. A style referred to as slow cinema, interested in exploring the most miniscule features of experience. Innovators of this cinematic form – such as Chantal Ackermann and Apichatpong Weerasethakul – are not concerned with the mainstream appeal or accessibility of their work, opting instead to manipulate time to the benefit of their art.
At the end of the day, it’s okay not to like films you deem to be ‘too long’. It’s a matter of taste Whatever pulls you away from doom scrolling into oblivion – having consumed 30 consecutive AITA reddit stories on TikTok – has justified not just its runtime, but its existence.
Image Credit: NBC Universal
