Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is locked, and the final running time is around 140-something minutes. That’s right, Indiana Jones 4 is almost two and a half hours long!? Previous installments ran 115, 118, 127 minutes respectively (and in order from Raiders to Last Crusade). So it appears that a bump in running time makes sense mathematically, but does an action movie sequel really need to be that long? Jeff Wells reports that the film screened for the first time only recently, and is scheduled to have one more internal screening early next week before the final elements are to be sent to the printer in prep to be subtitled for the film’s premiere at the Cannes Film Festival on May 18th.
I’ve heard from a bunch of different people that the film will be screened only a couple days before it’s domestic release (May 22nd) for press, which fits up with the Cannes premiere timeline. I have yet to talk to anyone at Paramount who has seen the film, and don’t expect to, as security is quite tight on this one. But I have been told by a couple people to “keep expectations low”. Devin at CHUD has also heard the same kind of buzz from industry insiders. I too am hoping for the best. One thing is for sure, Indiana Jones is expected to make some serious cash at the box office.
Discuss: Is 140-something minutes too long for an Indiana Jones movie?
April 16th, 2008 at 1:41 am
“keep expectations low”
Uh-oh, lol, sounds like it could be a stinker.
April 16th, 2008 at 2:04 am
I’d happily watch a 300-hour Indiana Jones movie. BRING IT ON!
April 16th, 2008 at 2:14 am
I am glad it has a longer running time, I hate when they cut tons of stuff to fit the movie into an “average run time” for an action movie.
35 more days!
April 16th, 2008 at 3:43 am
Hell fucking no. Lets see.. Indiana Jones movies come out how often? How many more are there going to be?
Yeah.
April 16th, 2008 at 4:03 am
I need an allthelife Indiana Jones Movie!!!!!!!!!!!
April 16th, 2008 at 4:37 am
I’ve not a perfect english.
Some people have allready seen the movie and find it not so great ?
April 16th, 2008 at 4:53 am
Fuck. That “keep expectations low” quote just REALLY bummed me out. I don’t know if I can even see this movie anymore. I’m so nervous about it turning out like the goddamn Star Wars prequels (which I cared less about and therefore could deal with the disappointment). See, this is why they never should have made a fourth film, IT CAN ONLY DISAPPOINT. Sigh…
One thing is for sure: KOTCS is going to rock my world. For better or for worse. And if it happens to be for worse it will totally be Lucas’ fault for vetoing the motherfucking Darabont draft.
Jesus… I sound so bitter and paranoid. See what the prequels did to us? They turned us all into the Anne Frank of fandom. Damn you George, you goose-stepping asshole!
Having said all that, I still have faith. So much faith, in fact, that I would step blindly into a seemingly bottomless chasm. I just hope there’s an invisible bridge in place to stop me from falling.
April 16th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Hey akuma,Watashi wa Korin. How are you?
Any length in time is fine with me.
April 16th, 2008 at 9:21 am
I heard in Darabont’s draft Short Round comes back as a prostitute with revenge on his mind. Now that’s cinema! I know you people in general hate sequels so I suggest stop fooling yourselves. The rule of diminishing returns was created by George Lucas. Will the kids now in 20 years get stoked about a Superbad sequel?
April 16th, 2008 at 9:25 am
The fact that we haven’t seen an Indiana Jones film in years makes us miss it even more. I wouldn’t mind the film being longer than 140 minutes. Indiana Jones rules.
April 16th, 2008 at 9:27 am
If you bastards can watch Titanic, over and over and over again that it was kept running for nearly six months in theaters I’m sure that 2 hours and 20 mins is nothing.
April 16th, 2008 at 9:40 am
the longer the better
April 16th, 2008 at 9:53 am
The trailer was just bad. It would be fine for any other movie but this is a Spielberg/Lucas flick. And more importantly it’s INDIANA JONES!!!! How could they release such a poorly cut trailer? Perhaps both Lucas and Spielberg have truly lost it. We’ll know on May 22nd.
April 16th, 2008 at 10:03 am
140 minutes means it will most surely drag. AH why do they do this?
April 16th, 2008 at 10:14 am
whatever. this movie is going to pwn. Lucas and Spielberg are the man , respectively.
i hate the haters , irony for ya. it is so much better to be a liker of things in life then a hater. its going to be a fun movie. people who hate on Lucas are just jealous they could never accomplish what he has. fact.
- Dr. Van Rumplelurk
April 16th, 2008 at 10:22 am
The more indiana, the better…
April 16th, 2008 at 11:34 am
that’s only thirteen minutes more indy than last time!!!
April 16th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Three words sum how I feel about this film:
THE DARK KNIGHT
April 16th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Definitely more than a bit worried.
Everything I have seen, heard or read about this movie just screams “going to suck” its not even that it will compare poorly against other Indy flicks (it will) but it is likely not to be good compared to recent action flicks either….
I am as big a fan of Indy, Lucas and Spielberg as any…but this movie seriously has me worried…..
I am more excited about the damn Clone Wars Animated Movie ( 2 1/2 hour TV show trailer) than this now….ugh
But all that said, i got my brown hat and popcorn ready just in case….
April 16th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Have we as a society really developed attention spans so short that we can’t sit through a movie just over 2 hours? I’m not even going to comment on the purported quality of the movie….I’m just disappointed that anything can receive flak purely based on running time.
Do we need our movies in canned 22 minute segments, or delivered via soundbites on Twitter? Come on, people, allow yourselves to be immersed in the experience and let things develop.
Sometimes I wonder if this rampant impatience is dooming us all.
April 16th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Incredibly stupid, shallow question. Leave it to fanboy kids to even think this is relevant. Terry Gilliam was right about American audiences.
April 16th, 2008 at 4:34 pm
This was a stupid question like Drew just said. Its not relevant because you can’t compare runtimes of today with runtimes of the past. Some movies today have 10 minutes of credits at the end so thats a little different to the 1950s film where at the end it just went “THE END.”
April 16th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
silly.
I compare the “expectations” line to someone that has had sex with a supermodel and then downplays the experience because they only had 10 orgasms.
April 16th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Can I please get this straight? No one has seen the movie, but “industry insiders” are saying “keep expecations low.” On a movie they haven’t seen. Huh?
Let me guess — the “industry insiders” are named Frank and Darabont.
If no one has seen the movie, who are the “industry insiders” reporting on a movie they haven’t seen? And why would Spielberg show it to Paramount instead of Lucasfilm, which is actually the producer of the thing? This article makes NO freakin’ sense.
April 16th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Edward, actually if you read the article it does say there was a screening last week for paramount execs. But the industry insiders, I mention, who haven’t seen the movie might have seen pieces, clips in editing, the script, been on set, or have strong knowledge of the film’s production. Yes, they could be wrong, they havent seen the finished film, but I was just told that it would be a good idea to lower your expectations, not that the movie is going to be bad… Heck, even George Lucas is going around trying to lower fan expectations… doesn’t that mean anything?
April 16th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
And to answer your second question: Spielberg shows it to Paramount because they are #1 the distributor and #2 the marketing department for the film.
April 17th, 2008 at 3:46 am
Let’s not forget that critics thought ‘Raiders’ was a dud too. And they despised the sequels. Don’t worry about what the “insiders” think, and don’t worry about what the critics think. Their criteria for what makes a movie good is not the same as ours. Lucas’ statement to USA Today is simply another marketing strategy. The lower the expectations, the happier we all are once we realize how great it really is. Believe me people, we won’t be disappointed.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:33 am
Peter, again, you’re going to have to get your facts straight — my company works directly with Lucasfilm, and I can assure you that while Paramount may be handling some aspects of marketing, this area sits with Lucasfilm. Remember the main credits? They are helpful guides. It’s a Paramount Pictures presentation of a Lucasfilm Ltd. production. Dissect that properly, and you’ll have a better understanding of the way it’s all working. Paramount’s involved with this film, but Lucasfilm is the producer. Technically speaking, I believe Steven Spielberg is under contract to Lucasfilm on this one.
April 18th, 2008 at 7:40 am
“Keep expectations low…”
This just sounds like pure bullshit. To my knowledge very, very, very few people have seen the entire movie. Some of those quoted above probably aren’t even among them; they just want to sound important. C’mon you guys, Spielberg, Ford, Allen (Lucas on the sideline) how can this movie be anything but fan-fucking-tastic! I for one am sure that they wouldn’t have done this movie if they didn’t believe in the script and the story 100 per cent. They made a trilogy that is widely considered one of the hightlights of movie history and an integral part of,well…popular culture. I don’t think they would risk screwing up the franchise. Comparing Shia to Jar Jar Binks is not fair. The trailer doesn’t give me one good reason to think that this would be the case. Spielberg is good at directing actors and Ford knows this character like the back of his hand. The other actors aren’t exactly new at this either. I love everything I have seen so far and I am sure most of the fans share this sentiment. This movie is going to kick serious ass and I can’t wait to see it at least ten times in theaters. Now, dear Steven Spielberg, if you will please have Indy 5 ready for theaters by May 2010, my friend.