Originally Posted by swanlee
I saw the 48FPS 3d version in the theater and I enjoyed it alot. I'm more than happy to sit through a long film that slowly draws you into the world then most wam bam thank you mam films these days. I liked the Original trilogy and felt this one fit right in and I don't see what the complaining is all about.
I like long epic movies, they are pretty rare these days.
The complaints have little to do with the length or pacing of the movie, but with the wheat-to-chaff ratio being so very low. We would prefer it to be edited down, not because our butts hurt, but because we saw so much worth editing out. And besides, IMO the pacing of this film was very fast and quite comparable to the pacing of your modern breathless multiplex blockbuster. Nothing at all like a slow-paced noire or a long epic from decades ago.
Ultimately it's a matter of subjective tastes. I'd love a three-hour, slow-paced film based on the Hobbit if I felt it had even two and a half hours of content in it. I just felt this one barely had one hour of content, if that. YMMV.Edited by CatBus - 2/12/13 at 10:41am