Does Bond 23 Have To Be At Least 2hrs Long?

Q and M

Just thought about this after watching QOS. The longer Movies seem to have proved a hit such as OHMSS and CR. Considering QOS was so badly received, should there be a longer Bond 23

DanielCraig007

It depends on the story and what those 2 hours are made up of. I would generally prefer a film thats about 2 hours long.

Thunderpussy

I think just under two hours is best about 110 minutes or so. With modern editing techniques I think thats long enough to tell a good story and have plenty of action sequences. I personaly thought they could of trimmed at least 20 minutes or so from CR, and at the same time added about 15 minutes to QOS, if only to tell the audiance the plot. )

DanielCraig007

Thunderpussy wrote:

I think just under two hours is best about 110 minutes or so. With modern editing techniques I think thats long enough to tell a good story and have plenty of action sequences. I personaly thought they could of trimmed at least 20 minutes or so from CR, and at the same time added about 15 minutes to QOS, if only to tell the audiance the plot. )

I like to think of CR and QoS as one long 4 hour film. So there you have it. + - 5 minutes.

Thunderpussy

Only problem is the last 105 minutes or so of the four hour epic are a bit of a let down after the first bit. )

Mister White

I think the story should dictate the length of the movie. I would rather have a one hour film with a good plot, then a three hour film with a bad plot.

Napoleon Plural

Interesting.

You know, I wouldn't mind a three hour epic for Craig, like Lawrence of Arabia. A real panoramic film in 70mm. Real scope.

That said, it would have to deal with larger issues than just Bond and his own personal introspection.

What CR and OHMSS had in common was that they never cut away from Bond that much did it? He was onscreen for just about all the time. They were also debut films, but CR worked better for one reason because Craig's Bond is a low key presence at first, he really doesn't talk much at all for the first hour and it stops him getting on your tits. Lazenby had to come in strong from the off and had a harder job.

An epic could work with some time taken away from Bond a bit but ultimately people just don't take Bond that seriously and want to go home at the two hour mark. It has to work for both types.

DanielCraig007

I think its interesting that CR is the longest bond film and QoS is the shortest one... But then again I see them as one continuous 4 hour bond film.

EvaFan

I think it also depends on the story but have to say a rather see a bit longer Bond than a shorter one. Usually that gives the story a better chance to develop. But then again dragging on it just for the minutes is not good either.

Gassy Man

The next Bond should be more than two hours long. Bond films are an event, or at least they should be. Rushing to get to the good parts and trimming everything else out is the equivalent of turning filet mignon into a cheeseburger. A good, character-driven plot with the right amount of action will make the time seem much more expeditious than simply making it short.