Look fellas, I've got to find this Awesome chick and nail her good... |
|
I know that I'm not the only person who thinks Tarantino is a genius. While I'm well aware that there are those who think less of him than the stain they scrub out of their underwear after a hard night of partying, I'm not alone in wondering why it was that GRINDHOUSE failed. Some people have blamed an Easter release weekend, saying that people weren't all that interested in seeing a trademark Tarantino venture while they celebrated the death of Christ. Some blame a poor (and almost non-existent) marketing campaign that left too much to the imagination.
However, the biggest finger usually is the one pointed at the length of the film. Weighing in at a hefty 191 minutes (that's 3 hours and 11 minutes for the mathematically impaired out there), most speculators feel that this was too much to ask from an audience. I have to beg to differ. The majority of film goers these days are used to investing far more time.
Let's do some calculations, shall we?
One recent summer hit, SPIDER-MAN 3, clocked in at a decent 140 minutes (2 hours, 20 minutes). Being that it was one of the biggest items to hit the screen, even prior to the normal summer kick-off 3-day Memorial Day weekend, most people bought their tickets in advance. Factor in a few minutes to use one of the online ticket purchasing sites, a few minutes more (including transportation time) if you're like me and purchased your tickets in advance from your local box office, add on the hour or more that most of us arrive at the theater early in order to avoid getting stuck in the front row and you're up to a minimum of 215 minutes (3 hours, 35 minutes).
Since I have my calculator out, let's try a little subtraction. Chances are, you would have spent an additional 15 minutes waiting to see one long-winded tribute to Spider-Emo (that's with me factoring in only 9 minutes to purchase your ticket and find your seat for GRINDHOUSE) than it would have taken for you to witness two separate and unique films packaged as one. Not to mention all those uber-cool fake trailers contributed by some of film's most enterprising new directors (Eli Roth and Edgar Wright amongst them).
Yet SPIDER-MAN 3 annihilated previous box office records, pulling in a whopping $151.1 million dollars on its non-holiday weekend. In order to make up for a long running time, GRINDHOUSE opened on 3,700 screens. However, it barely eked out a mere $11.6 million on its opening holiday weekend.
Another recent summer release, PIRATES OF 
The day Spidey's FOB shirt was in the wash |
|
THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END, enjoyed a healthy Memorial weekend opening. Pulling in an estimated $142.1 million in 4 days, while it wasn't able to best the record set just weeks before by the little Pete Wentz wanna-be superhero, Captain Jack and crew still managed to skewer the previous record set for the 4-day weekend ($122.9 million as set by X-MEN: THE LAST STAND in 2006).
PIRATES also contained more reels than the average movie. A considerable 168 minutes long (2 hours, 48 minutes), it most likely didn't break the webbed crusader's records due to fewer showings caused by extreme length. I say extreme because I have to ask: What more is there to show when it comes to the story of a fictional pirate based on a ride at Disneyland? Hell, Steven Spielberg was able to wrap up WWII and the tale of what life was like for Jews in German concentration camps in only 27 minutes more than it took Verbinski to finally get around to showing that – yes! – Jack wins again.
My personal experience with PIRATES included me purchasing tickets for my daughter and myself on Thursday for a Friday evening showing, arriving at the theater 45 minutes prior to the movie's scheduled start time, sitting through 5 full-length trailers (averaging 3-4 minutes apiece) and... well, loss of sensation in my butt about mid-flick. Add all of that together and you have a 4 hour commitment. Trust me, I would have been willing to give more of my time to watching pretty girls get their legs severed than watch another minute of Keira's sourpuss expression or Orlando's tortured knitted brow.
The whole idea that people aren't willing to sit through long movies is ludicrous to me. Over and over again it's been proven that if there's anything that Americans (and slowly, the rest of the world) like more than sitting on their asses, it's not going to be easy to find. The average running time of an NFL game is around 3 hours. For an NBA game? 2 and a half hours. The same goes for most NHL games. Major League Baseball games averaged 2 hours and 45 minutes back in 2004.
When Tarantino was interviewed some time back, he was questioned as to why his movies were so long. The reporter wanted to know if he thought that people would be willing to sit through a 2+ hour long movie and Quentin nearly lost his shit. He pointed out that there was no reason why people couldn't be expected to sit through something that had a plot if they could be mindless drones in front of their television for a sport which ran for 3 hours and 
What do you mean I didn't best the Spider? BUT I'M WEARING MORE EYELINER!! |
|
included advertisements for beer between plays.
As I was looking up the running length of SCHINDLER'S LIST, I noticed that it was ranked the #7 most favorably rated movie on that other movie website. The top ten all included movies which ran over 2 hours in length, save CASABLANCA at #6 which runs a paltry 102 minutes (1 hour, 42 minutes). One of the movies on the list was from Tarantino, his seminal PULP FICTION, the movie that got that reporter to question its run-time of 154 minutes (2 hours, 34 minutes – although the extended version is an additional 14 minutes long), sitting pretty at #5.
Seeing that this was a list compiled using the average of votes as given by the average movie fan (PULP has over 219,000 ratings), I'd say that people have no problem with watching a long movie. In fact, it appears that the majority of the highly regarded movies, including foreign numbers like BUONO, IL BRUTTO, IL CATTIVO, (better known as THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY) which clocks in at 161 minutes (2 hours, 41 minutes) and SHICHININ NO SAMURAI (better known as SEVEN SAMURAI) which shows at 207 minutes (3 hours, 27 minutes in its restored time or 141 minutes – 2 hours, 21 minutes – in its original US running length) are longer than average.
I guess that's why they're as good as they are, being above average and all.
While a longer running time in no way guarantees that a movie is going to be better, as evidenced by the summer blockbusters pointed out above, it usually signifies that more thought and time went into making the movie. Think about how much had to be edited. How many scenes ended up on the proverbial cutting room floor. Factor that in while you're doing the calculations for the ridiculous amount of time that people are willing to sacrifice for something so mind (and butt) numbing.
As hard as it seems to be for the movie geek nation online to accept, GRINDHOUSE didn't "fail" because of any of their chat room speculations. It failed for a very simple reason: it wasn't accessible to a large enough audience. There weren't enough people out there who were willing to throw down cash for a retro throwback to '70's cinema schlock. As almighty and powerful as the fanboys and girls of this nation believe that their collective opinion is, it's still not going to get people to turn out in droves.
At least, not like a lucrative Kellogg's advertising tie-in can.
 email this column to a friend
Comment on this Column:
Sorry, you must be a member to add comments to columns.
Join or Login. |
 Subscribe to MatchFlick Movie Reviews through RSS
|
| Neglected Foster Child of Hollywood |
Every other Wednesday
Not-so-gentle musings from the girl who is saving room in her uterus for Tarantino's spawn.
|
| AwesomeZara |
She's awesome, who would have guessed that?
|
| Contact |
If you have a comment, question, or suggestion, you can send a message to AwesomeZara by clicking here.
|
|
