Chevalier Bayard wrote:I think one person you don't know has hidden herself among the 5 people you knew (1 who liked + 1 who disliked + 4 who found it too short = 6)
Yes, I should have said 3 said it was good but too short.
Chevalier Bayard wrote:Regarding the duration, well, it used to be the norm years ago. I prefer that the movie stands 85 "full minutes" than it stands 2 hours or more with me looking at my watch from time to time, boring as obviously some scenes have been added to reach the 2 hours movie or more...
Indeed I have seen several movies this length (85 - 90 minutes) in the theater. Sometimes I have come out asking if that was all there was to the movieand other times I didn't realize how short the movie was. I think content is definitely more important than length, but if the viewer comes out thinking about the length of the movie, whether it be too short or too long, I think that it is an indicator that the movie was lacking something. The viewer wasn't engaged enough to not notice the time.
Edit: I do plan to see this movie, just not yet.