Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/9/2006 8:26:16 AM EDT
187 minutes, does it have an intermission? My wife has a small bladder.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:33:50 AM EDT
Come on people, we're leaving for the theater in a few minutes and I need to make a decision on what to see.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:34:23 AM EDT
No intermission.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:35:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GerberSchwintz:
No intermission.

+1
They havent done intermissions for years, IIRC.

Kharn
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:35:59 AM EDT
There is no intermission. And I'm sure you'll have to sit through 20 to 30 minutes of advertising at the start. So in fact you will be in there for more like 210 minutes. The most uncomfortable viewing experience I've had in a long time.

If you want to make your own intermission go out during the bug/worm attack scene. Nothing happens there of substance.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:40:32 AM EDT
Mucho gracias.

Gods & Generals was almost 4 hours, there was an intermission.

Just don't know if I want to sit for 3 hours. Return of the King was tough.

Might be watching Grandma's Boy and The Ringer today.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:40:57 AM EDT
The last movie I saw that had an intermission was "Gettysburg."

Any movie up to three hours should have one.

Even "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" has one, sorta.

Bilster
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:44:42 AM EDT
Given that most films these days are around 90-100 minutes (mostly due to short attention spans), one would think that a 190 minute film would have an intermission.

I don't have any trouble following a film for that long, it's just that my lack of an ass results in butt pain after a while of sitting in one place.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:45:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Slogger78:
There is no intermission. And I'm sure you'll have to sit through 20 to 30 minutes of advertising at the start. So in fact you will be in there for more like 210 minutes. The most uncomfortable viewing experience I've had in a long time.

If you want to make your own intermission go out during the bug/worm attack scene. Nothing happens there of substance.



+1
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:51:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Burley:
Given that most films these days are around 90-100 minutes (mostly due to short attention spans), one would think that a 190 minute film would have an intermission...



+1

I don't care if they run ads or whatnot during the break, but the intermission for extra-long movies is an old/abandoned practice that should be revisited IMHO.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 8:55:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Slogger78:
There is no intermission. And I'm sure you'll have to sit through 20 to 30 minutes of advertising at the start. So in fact you will be in there for more like 210 minutes. The most uncomfortable viewing experience I've had in a long time.

If you want to make your own intermission go out during the bug/worm attack scene. Nothing happens there of substance.



Tell her to go anytime before the boat gets off the rocks. After that, things start happening. Not a bad movie and the special effects were pretty good.

It also gets my vote for the ugliest woman ever seen in a film.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:05:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:07:46 AM EDT
That would have made a fine 80 minute movie.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:08:32 AM EDT
Who needs an intermission now that they make Depends?

I have to give the movie thumbs up as well. Very underrated, in my opinion. I can't imagine why it didn't do better.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:09:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By imposter:
That would have made a fine 80 minute movie.



+1

It was truly in need of an editor.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:12:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:
Good movie, however at one point during the part on skull island "Loud Lady" behind us said "What the! (apparently looking at her watch) they aren't even back to New York yet!"

However she wailed at the end like she was at a loved one's funeral...



The end was the happiest part of the movie. I could finally get the hell out!

I thought it was a decent movie in serious need of an editor. If Jackson cut 30 to 45 minutes I think it would have been a good to very good film. By the 2 hour mark I really didn't care anymore. I've never seen a movie with so much irrelevant filler in it.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:50:32 AM EDT
It hasn't come to town yet, so I haven't seen it. Sis tells me it a pretty good movie. Slow in the first hour, before Kong shows up. But then really takes off when he does.

Only time I saw the trailer in the theatre I let out a "Get Some!" when Kong reached up and swiped the wing off the plane. Then I remembered I was in the theatre.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 9:55:06 AM EDT
When king kong is on the ground fighting two t-rexes I leaned over to my friend - "Dude! King Kong is going Chuck Norris on some dinosaur ass!" Hysterical laughter from the nine seats around me.
Link Posted: 1/9/2006 10:00:50 AM EDT
I was surprised nobody else thought up a "Kong-Fu" remark!

That movie seriously needed some editing. Too much of a good thing. It was much better than I expected but they took a looooonnng time to get to the point and heck, we all know how it turns out anyway. Not like there was going to be surprise ending. Easily could have shaved 45 minutes off.
Top Top