AT LENGTH
Please, please, PLEASE tell us that David Kronke was not joking when he wrote that there are plans to release theatrical movies in shorter “studio cuts” on video (Film Clips, Dec. 28).
Such a service for audiences is desperately needed, since neither the multiplicity of producers on a given film nor the overpaid heads of studios have the guts to force their windbag auteurs like Cameron, Costner, Scorsese et al to cut the running times of their films down to reasonable lengths.
Of course, if such a service is available, it will probably kill the theatrical market as audiences wait for the shortest and best versions on video.
TOM STEMPEL
Los Angeles
*
I am one of the 1,528,962 aspiring screenwriters in Southern California. If and when I ever sell a screenplay, my agent and/or attorneys will be instructed to demand that the finished work never exceed 100 minutes. Period. Ninety-two or 93 minutes seems better, since I begin squirming around 80.
Movie length, in my opinion, is one area of human experience where shorter is better.
ROBERT STUART RICHARDS
Lancaster
Only good movies
Get the Indie Focus newsletter, Mark Olsen's weekly guide to the world of cinema.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
