90 minutes of cinema. are you game?
Just finished watching “A Wednesday”.. and no, I am not going to review and dissect the film as there are so many people busy doing it… My one line review would be “it was good and am happy for the film (and the kind of films) but not impressed as much”.. I am happy that it ended in 95 minutes and saved a lot of time specially on the nonsense it could have been if it had been a full length feature in terms of our average movie length (around 2 hours 20-30 mins).. In fact I feel it managed an impact only because it was a 90 mins film.. Just think of it of a full length film with a few action scenes and a few songs added and may be a love angle between deepal and jimmy.. or a lost love or some background of jimmy.. I feel happy that not only I managed to see the film but it saved a lot of time and remained focussed on the central conflict.. Still it was not a satisfying experience for a passionate cinema lover, as I find the film could not manage a decent graph in 90 mins.. The film remained straight for most of the time.. The supporting characters were not developed as their was no scope..
Anyway thats gets me to an interesting debate… and I would like the opinion of passionate film goers.. Do you think 90 min films are going to work for you? or you need atleast the 150 mins movie in the diet…
The Pros/Cons of 90 mins cinema I can see (feel free to add on)
Pros:
a. Tight scripts
b. Pace (Sarkar Raj worked for me as I found it quite pacey before interval, but later I found I reached 40 mins late in the theater)
c. Good for Films on Lesser Budgets (or middle of the road cinema)..
d. Can run on More screens per day (translates in to more revenue)
e. More stories to tell
f. Less Nonsense
g. Saves time
h. Can have two films in one show and gets same audience (far fetched, but it works in c grade)
Cons:
a. Could hurt the graph of the film
b. Less scope for Song and Dance Sequences (I am for the song and dance, but today sometimes they are more horrible than a RGV ki Aag.. the number can significantly cut down)
c. Less scope and space for Character Artists
d. People like Ashutosh Gowarikar would face unemployment
e. May not go well with people go on outing
f. Would not satisfy a passionate cine goer
What do you think?
Filed Under
Movies , 90 mins wednesday bheja fry short films
 2 readers recommend this post  Loading ... |
 Email This Post To Friends
|
|
Related Posts | |
16 Responses to “90 minutes of cinema. are you game?”
Leave a Reply
(Ref smilies)
Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.
-
Advertisement
-
- PFCOne 2008 Da
- Nothing found f
- WTF is masakalli
- PFCOne 2008 Da
- Dev.D Music Soundtrack Streaming R
- PFCOne 2008 Day Three
- Satyakam (1969) - Idealism vs Pragmatism
- Mickey Rourke & “The Wrestler”….
- Ye dosti…
- Defining Cinema of Indian New Wave
-
Advertisement
Hottest Today:
Recent Posts:
We should have both..script ke hisaab se..timing shud be decided..and an intelligent movie will have a 90 min plot but will still be a great watch for 3 hrs..like Lagaan and RDB
OM,
I know exceptions are on both sides.. but in general a mindset of trimming down a 2.30h film to a 1.30h film, not as a conscious decision but as a practice (as most of the makers take films to 2.10h-2.30h duration (or the screenplays) with unnecessary characters/sequences/songs & dance for the sake of making it a 2.30h film)
I ont know how to express but somehow I am not comfortable with the latest cinema which is fast and tightly picturized. For example too much of abrupt cuts and edits, fast camera movements, going backward and forward ( script and scenes ). I like them in some western movies but not in “my” hindi movies ! And yes I want songs !!! I am still hopeful that melody will come back
not in the world of multiplex… maybe US desi junta, yes.
If ticket costs are 300-400 in good theaters, then people who bring families, friends would be like - bas, itna hi?
For all those who watch pirated movies, its a boon.
Pavan, the introduction of 90 mins films is a good idea which will take off only if these movies do well at the B.O. There are certain scripts which wouldn’t last beyond 90 mins such as Aamir and Wednesday.
Such movies are also commissioned by the producers because after a limited theatrical release and hopefully having gathered critical acclaim, they are immediately released on DVD and also get a good price from content hungry TV channels.
Oops wat r u talking about dude mind it this is INDIA.
@ kcp
i totally agree with you
recently i felt something missing in sing is king
because of its rapid editing
we don’t enjoy pace
we want our movies to be relaxed
and
hopefully melody will come back
.
actors studio
.
america idolized there actors
they talk at actors studio like they are something very great just because they can act
well
america has to
because if you take away hollywood what is left … saal main ek Christmas
.
stall main jo aadmi baitha
abhi abhi jisne apni seet ke neeche gutka thoonka hai
wo bhi ye jaanta hai ki
‘karam pradhan vishwa kari raakha, je jas karahin te tas pal chakha’
.
aap is aadmi ko philosophy nahien pila sakte
.
india is poor not because it doesn’t know
india is poor because all that it has ever cared about is knowledge
money was never a much respected possesion
.
raah chalte kissi bhi aadmi ko rok ke poochiye
3 kabir ke dohe aur 8 tulsidas ki chaupai ek saans main suna dega
.
manoj kumar is right
‘deta na dashamlav bharat to yun chand pe jaana muskil tha’
.
per jinhone dashamlav khoja
woh phir isse paisa banane nahien baith gaye
dashmalav ke aage ki cheej khojne main lag gaye
.
india is poor because its richness attracted all the hungry people of world
and by that time
jain jo paani bhi chhan ke peete hain
yuddh karne layak nahien rah gaye the
.
manmohan sing amar rahein
kuch saalon main is stall waale ke paas bhi paisa hoga
.
philosophy aap delhi mumbai main kuch gamle main lage logon ko pila sakte hain
jinke liye abhi bob dylan bhagwan hai
.
baaki bharat ko aap manoranjan de sakte hain
gyan nahien
@Vishrant: Well Said Dude!
Depends on the script for sure - a wednesday is meant to be fast paced and tht’s wht is its appeal….but sometimes fast pace/no songs will not do justice…
take “amar prem” for example (watched the chingari song y’day…so fresh in memory as an example!)…u need the songs and the slow pace to depict the pain and suffering of the central characters…and this is a good example of the way hindi cinema does it differently…how cud u evoke the emotions that the picturization of “chingari koi bhadke” song conveys…sure we can quote several such examples!
Pradeep (@9)
If it depends on Script, then why haven’t seen much of 90 mins cinema in last 75 years? Also am not speaking of the era where music was music to ears and soul.. am speaking of today, where music is mostly insignificant to take movie forward… Am sure if you take films films from last five years and trim down them by an hour (or 40 mins), many of them can work for the audience..
ravptor(@4),
when you came out of theater after watching Wednesday, did it really mattered, or you cared, if it was 90-95 minutes only? did you felt cheated that I paid 200/300 per ticket and got only the half of length?.. haven’t seen any such voice raised so far.. infact it was the feel good mood that you take out with the film.. that you have seen a good film.. no matter if it was 95 mins.. (in fact I mentioned it earlier.. A Wednesday worked only because it was a short length film)
According to me it all depends on the story, one cant show a sholay or lagan in 90 mins or strech a wednesday to 3 hr …both will fail…its much like that we like some stuff in fast food and some stuff in cozy restaurants
Prashant (@11),
am not denying the fact that a three hour film or a ninety mins depends on the story..
am only wondering when we had so many craps in last decade (and so many “thoonse hue” characters and songs and dance sequences, just to make film length to 2.20-2.30h).. Many of them were good in parts but could not hold the quality to the complete length (can share hundreds of reviews where the “extended/kheencha huaa” length was the problem)
why didn’t industry thought of making 90 mins films earlier for so many years.. am asking you to judge on the films you have seen in last many years.. and for the forthcoming films, are you game if they are finished in 90 mins..?
Pavan @10
Get your point now…well its a tricky question, but i can say tht thr is a bit of indian mentality to get more (in terms of quantity!!) bang for the buck…atleast before they enter the movie halls…no wonder u hv several hit movies which try to fit in every masala possible into the movie…
on the other hand…walking out satisfied of the movie hall after watching a decent 90 mins flick could possibly take over tht feeling smtimes
its a tough call but i think both forms will stay (irrespective of the script and whether the movie “works” in a more refined sense!!) and find thr audience..
in somewhat more philosophical terms(and this has triggered by thot process)…What we are witnessing is a democratization of art(particularly cinema)…where the trend is governed by the masses…and not by what “works” or makes sense “artistically”..
unlike time immemorial…when art of the elite was mainstream and the greatest artists were most celebrated and rewarded as well….now the mainstream “entertainment” is dominated by what can be digested and enjoyed by the masses (a large part of which in india can now pay for the costly movie tickets!!)…while the more refined art/cinema is by and large limited to the fringes except once in a while critical acclaim or modest commercial success (compare bheja fry’s commercial success with singh is king!)…reminiscent of ancient times…when folk music would be popoular among masses but limited to fringes except catching fancy of the royal patrons once in a blue moon….
but essentially the mainstream popular and commerciallly rewarding cinema is pretty much the lowest common denominator and would probably be in the foreseeable future…
at the risk of sounding elitist (which i like to believe i am not!!)…i am certainly suggesting a certain dumbing down due to this phenomenon…thr hv been somewhat similar debates on this forum (remember a post from Subrat recently!) whether tht is necessarily a good thing or not!!
personally though, i wish and hope tht the “new wave” cinema we support on this forum goes from strength to strength!!
Pavan saab… i am quoting what Vijay had said earlier..
Monetary wise and revenue wise, theatre owners may have a problem with 90 mins movie, cause you cannot have an interval..no interval meaning..less selling of snacks and cold drinks, meaning theatre will not make enough money off it..hence may/maynot buy the movie..hence not many 90 min movies might be made…
This is a very interesting topic to get views from different quarters…and mind you, we are not even talking about a solution…i love such kind of discussions…
Pavan saab, there is another thought that goes around, am sure everyone might have heard it..For many people going to movies is like a holiday…they want to take their entire family out…and many want to enjoy a 3 hr movie with something of everyone…most families have planned a “holiday” to movies..then for lunch/dinner etc…hence, they might want to stay out of house for the max time…so, if they go for a 90 min movie..they will have spend that 90 min extra at home or plan for 90 min doing something else, meaning shelling some more money…
As for your point of ” thoonse hue” characters…me persoanlly would prefer a 90 min movie…only if i get thoonse hue characters( i like the word..thoonse hue..ehehe) are bombarded on me…
also…just to make the movie 3 hr..one doesnt have to create new characters..infact, this would be a great oppurtunity to go deeper into the psyche of the characters that already exist…let us know his motives, his aspiration or whatever the driving force of the characters are to do what they are doing…wouldnt that be cool?
I will give you an example…” Sangam” the raj kapoor movie..not many unneccessry caracters..and a long movie prob more than 3 hrs..but, instead of many unwanted characters..Raj kapoor..goes deep into the characters that he already has..gives enough time and space for his characters to develop and create a space in the viewers mind…ditto with Lagaan
Please let us keep this discussion going..i am loving it
Pradeep@11
I agree with u when u say that there is a bit of indian mentality to get more in terms of quantity. So dont you think the mentality of the people should change and not the movies??
Also,I feel that movies should stick to their plot and not unnesessarily deviate from it in the form of songs or love angles, unless its absolutly essential to the plot.If inspite of that, the length exceeds the 90-100 mins mark, then its fully acceptable.
And i also feel that watching films nowadays is not just an activity that is done as a family outing.People are intrested in watching good, intelligent films, and not just paisa wasool films.I must add that for me and my firends, watching “A Wednesday” was worth way more than the 100 bucks each we paid for it.So that essentially complicates the definition of what is paisa wasool and what is not.
@ Vishrant
Well Said Bhai …