Fzzt posted:
I can understand a reboot after a franchise has sat dormant for a decade or more but overall I just wish they'd create new adventures, movies now usually are less than 90 min so watching them re-create the fall of krypton, kent farm yada yada just seems like a waste of precious time.
Studio execs don't realize the reason we all rabidly lined up for 3 back to back movies of LOTR was because the story was so compelling.
You make it seem like movies are getting shorter. They're not. Superman Returns was almost 2 1/2 hours. Here's a graph of the average movie length of the top films of each decade.
10s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 79 minutes
20s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 98 minutes
30s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 96 minutes
40s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 109 minutes
50s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 114 minutes
60s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 127 minutes
70s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 125 minutes
80s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ ¦ 129 minutes
90s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ 127 minutes
00s ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦ ¦ 129 minutes
Not that a disagree with your point. I don't need to see the fall of Krypton recreated every time they make a Superman movie. But they'll certainly have a lot more than 90 minutes to tell whatever it is they want to tell.
