Movies and TV Shows

6 readers

2 users here now

General discussion about movies and TV shows.

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:

::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::

Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!

Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [!thebear@lemmy.film](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)

Related communities: !entertainment@beehaw.org !moviesuggestions@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

admin@lemmy.film

180

Ridley Scott Has a ‘Fantastic’ Cut of ‘Napoleon’ That Runs Four-and-a-Half Hours and Features Way More Joséphine (variety.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Bloodyashes@lemm.ee to c/moviesandtv@lemmy.film

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For a theater, yes. But for home video, where people can and often do watch movies in chunks anyway, length doesn't matter as much.

I'd love it if he just dropped it as two films, released a month apart. That would drive people to see the first part so that they can be caught up for part two.

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately that likely wouldn't work great. The only people that would be interested in watching part 2 are the people that watched (and liked) part 1. And business is often a numbers game

[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's fair. But presumably the same number of people would watch part 1 as would watch the whole thing. And maybe even more, because of the lower time commitment.