What the heck happened to attention spans?

[Demetrius]

I watch movies. I say this because I want you to know that I watch them a lot. Growing up we had no TV reception, so we watched movies. As I grew older I had my own car and money, this allowed me to watch even more movies.
Yesterday, while watching Balls of Fury* I found myself idly contemplating the decline of basic storytelling elements in film. This lead into thinking about attention spans, and how they affect the film market, as well as just how our pace of life enforces multitasking and regulates even movies into short bursts that must fit in a certain amount of time. I remembered watching old films with intermissions and missed them. The pace of the films was slower then, yes, but they didn't drop as much content (studios edit the hell out of films to hit the demographic run-times) and the story never really suffered. I almost drooled at the thought of the Lord of the Rings trilogy being allowed just an hour more per film, with an intermission thrown in so we can empty and refill ourselves. So I guess the whole point of this is twofold; I'm for the return of the intermission (and films of depth which you would see more of with the additional time allowed), and don't both seeing Balls of Fury.

*I really enjoy bad movies, they often have an honest joy about them, but Balls of Fury sucked. I can't even describe what it sucked because that piece of my soul and hour or so of my life have been rent from me.

[ArlanKels]

society is adjusting to the belief and preference of instant gratification.

Cellphones == instant conversations.

Internet == instant conversations and downloads.

Instant downloads == movies on demand, tv shows on demand, games on demand.


Attention spans are inherently going to lower as the tolerance required to withstand periods of "boredom" and/or "waiting" will become less common.

[Demetrius]

Yet, at the same time we crave four hours of story in 90 minutes.

[Doc ock rokc]

I agree with dem some times the wait makes the movie (or at least the climax) better but also there is the "too-much-build-up-to-a-disappointment" movies (*Chough*transformers*chough*)
then there are those movies that just didn't make sense Spider man 3 (it needs no "chough")
but we need (or i think we need) theses so we can tell the great movies from the bad

[Demetrius]

Now imagine Transformers with a two and a half hour allowed running time... There would be character development for the Bots and the people, the story would've had more time to flesh out and I would've cared when Jazz got ripped in half.

[Frostatine]

It's just not as effeicient, most of a movie's money comes from opening week, so they make really really good previews so people come and see the movie. Then by the time the world has realized that the movie is Horrible, it doesnt really matter. Also, the quicker they pump out movies the more opening weeks you get, resulting in more money.

The only real exception to this rule is a movie that has been aforementioned to be a trilogy, quadrilogy, etc. Then, they have to worry about people coming back, and are obligated to do a good job-usually

Personally I think that Pirates of the Caribbean is not so great, but whatever.

[Demetrius]

I think that Pirates is another movie that would've benefited from an intermission, I could've peed and then bought more crap, making more money for the theaters.

[P-Sleazy]

Hey now, movies are an hour and 20 minutes long now so that when they go on TV you can fit in 40 minutes of advertising space. Thats a nice bit of money!

[Frostatine]

Yeah what is it these days for ad space on TBS? $300,000 a second?

[Mike McC]

Originally Posted by Demetrius

Now imagine Transformers with a two and a half hour allowed running time... There would be character development for the Bots and the people.

But, on the flipside, It still would have been a Michael Bay film, and you generally want to keep those as short as possible, to minimize the pain.

Here's the thing. I really don't want movies to be that long. Do I have a short attention span? No. But I also don't want to be sitting around watching something for more than 2 1/2, 3 hours. An intermission doesn't magically fix that. Somehow, being told and shown a narrative that way tends to limit my imagination and put me in a light trance like state, and that wears on me after a while. I can sit down and read a good book for hours on end, because that actually stimulates my mind, and I don't get the same burned-out feeling. And I think a lot of other people feel the same way.

If anything, I'd prefer movies to return to a more serial format... but, with TV shows like Lost and Heroes, there's not much need for serial format movies to be made anymore.