It certainly isn’t in anything Aaron Sorkin writes!
4 Likes
Great points, though I don’t think a runtime limit from the get go is as new a dilemma as you may think…certainly within major studio filmmaking, anyway. A famous case from 2017 was WB’s CEO mandating a 2 hour or less runtime for Justice League, and before that I’ve certainly heard of cases, particularly Ridley Scott’s films…Zack Snyder had the exact same issue re: IMAX actually on Watchmen as well in 2009, and so did Cameron on Avatar, it was before IMAX moved to digital projection which removed the runtime limit for the most part.
1 Like
Thanks and indeed, there’s certainly always been marketing pressures from the studios (interesting to hear that even the likes of Scott get an earful. But ultimately there’s probably some wriggle room. A technological hard limit is a little different. But, i’m sure technology will somehow remove the limit before too long and this’ll be a cinematic time capsule in years to come where BD’s can market the scenes cut due to Imax.
Oh obviously, in fact that limit is basically all gone with IMAX released being almost all digital…except for Nolan who will insist -and put own money towards - his movies be released on IMAX 70mm filn. We don’t even know if EON will spend money on making prints for this yet, as opposed to just digital copies!
NTTD is just a case of specific and unique circumstances in that regard - purely as the BFI IMAX is the only one of their flagship screens worldwide that doesn’t have laser projection. Had it been released November this year this wouldn’t at all be an issue - the film would be as long as they want, and they wouldn’t be making prints at all, as there would be an IMAX by this time (the Science Museum, currently closed for a refurb and tech upgrade) that would be London’s flagship, with laser projection and able to show the film properly.
And yeah, I guess we have that already with Watchmen’s director’s and ultimate cuts, and Avatar’s multiple extended editions 
One of the first IMAX films ever released were Apollo 13 and Star Wars Episode II in shorter sub 2 hour cuts specifically for IMAX (back then the limit was very very short), very much sought after by some…
1 Like
I think these very long run times are going to be the norm going forward. I still stand firm in the belief that Quantum of Solace could have benefitted from at 15-20 more minutes. Spectre, on the other hand, feels bloated and could have been improved by cutting the London finale and lengthening the Morocco sequence.
5 Likes
No wonder - anything that makes that movie shorter is a blessing! 
Maybe someone should cut some scenes from SP and pop them into QoS 
2 Likes
Tickets on sale in Germany on Feb 27
1 Like
I’m waiting for the Australian ticket pre-ordering announcement. Can’t be too long to go…
In some ways it is returning to an old dilemma. Buster Keaton’s two-reelers had a maximum runtime of 22 minutes, and Warner Bros cartoons in the Classical Era were six minutes in length. I was at a screening years ago where Chuck Jones presented his favorite/greatest films, and he talked about the six-minute requirement and the creativity it unleashed. The key is to know what your limit is/how much time you need before you start–whether making a movie or writing a sonnet. As odd_jobbies notes, it is the after-the-fact imposition of a limit that causes chaos (which Joe Mankiewicz found out to his eternal regret).
I agree. Coppola also says he wants to trim THE GODFATHER PART III if Paramount will let him. His re-edit of THE COTTON CLUB helped the film immensely, if not completely solving its problems, so I hope he gets a chance to work on PART III.
2 Likes
Didn’t know that - very interesting. As you said, having limits going in to a project can help in some respects; focusing one’s resources, concentrating the mind upon the headline; it’s easy to get a bit lost wondering down all the alleyways the creative process throws up.
Good painters usually limit their palate, so as not to end up with too many colours competing. This lends to tone and mood, if in a slightly artificial way (paradoxically, learning to lie is the first lesson of an artist and storyteller if they want to tell truths).
Makes me wonder if all the writers and rewrites on NTTD were partially triggered by an ‘after the fact’ need to compress the script for imax. Perhaps an initial rewrite did this which itself rippled out causing a slew of other issues that weren’t present in the original draft, hence a more protracted, more complex process. It always amazes me how producers are often unaware of the ripple effect - when one thing is changed it often means changes elsewhere. Or are they in denial, or simply used to making problems other people will have to solve?
Writing is already rewriting, so who needs yet another reason to rewrite, such as a producer saying it now needs to be this long. In my experience it’s a novel job if I lock a cut without a producer having said at some point “I love it! Now can you add this, this, this and that and let it all breath more and make it 5 minutes shorter. Thanks, bye!”
Many producers don’t get that - I’ve had to specify more times than I’d like, whilst working as the “life’s a b****” writer on a production, that I need the whole script beforehand so I know about what I’m potentially risking elsewhere in the story when I make a change to a single scene.
1 Like
Canada Cineplex listing NTTD runtime at 1 and 53 minutes.
I wouldn’t put too much weight on that yet. My cinema listing for NTTD says 45 minutes. A placeholder.
Safin: “Time to die, Mr. Bond.”
Bond: “There’s no time to die, we’ve only got 45 minutes!”
3 Likes
They were limited to how much film could be loaded onto a reel (similar to the projection limitations faced today). And like today, Keaton faced the problem of his films making money–luckily his two-reelers were successful, so he could make them in his fashion. I love the stories about how–when he was stumped–Keaton and the crew would stop work and play baseball until inspiration struck. Chaplin had the same freedom to film (or not) until he was ready. The studio system and the coming of sound destroyed that freedom (and the careers of significant female directors), but the fact that their films are still watched and enjoyed today might indicate that they were onto something.
I do not have your or others’ experiences, but producers have been a problem for more than a century. Look what happened to Keaton once he became part of MGM or to Stroheim or Sternberg. Zanuck was a rare exception, but even he had his blind spots.
2 Likes
Film is almost done - cut is definitely locked
1 Like
PG 13, is that the same as a 12A in the UK?
Sounds like Guidance = Advisory, but I’m no expert!
PG13 rated films tend to be given a 12a rating in the UK, but they are two very different boards with different sets of markers. Mission Impossible 2, for example, is a 15, but pg13 in the US, Goldeneye is a 15 on DVD/Blu-ray because of the shot where Xenia head butted Natalia. Violence tends get you a higher rating in the UK than it does in the US, whilst “language” gets you a higher rating in the US than it does in the UK. MPAA to BBFC isn’t a perfect analogy, but it’s close enough to say NTTD is likely to get a 12a rating in the UK with a slight chance of a 15.
1 Like
PG-13 will usually get an M15+ in Australia - so will probably get a 12 in the UK (which Dunkirk received vs 12A for Spider-man: Far From Home)