How long is a feature film?

[Number216]

In Japan they often have 60 minute features... including one of my favorite films Tetsuo... they still have double bills over there... though cinema isn;t very big any more... straight to video is much more popular + thriving than here tho; Eg. Miike Takashi's astounding output.

Japan has a hell of a lot of 45 minute features, and I don't see why they don't do that here in the US.

That would work quite well for films like "Open Water" and "Elephant", films that are around 80 minutes long, but feel like 3 hours, each. Both of those films would probably do better as 45 minute shorts, but it seems there's not really a market for short films in the US.

Quite sad, really. Plenty of brilliant short films out there.

[wahiba]

According to Lew Hunter in his book Screen Writing the average length is 117 minutes.

Of course, after reading such an exact figure I naturally started checking, and still do on a casual basis.

Yep, 117 minutes is spot on. Try it.

[Taqi]

Longer the better for me. Anyone here seen Out 1 noli me tangere or Satantango - I'd love to see either of these but cinemas in the UK do not seem keen to show these.... shame :roll:

[munnin]

Longer the better for me

you should try watching some bollywood flicks then they usually run for , at least, 3 hours - of course, there are a lot of sing and dance sequences...

[FILM-THURSO]

Okay, are you ready for the word of god? (AMPAS to you and me).
The official defining length for a feature film is 80 minutes in physical length, e.g. 1000ft = 10 minutes, 8000ft = 80 minutes.

HOWEVER. If a film measures 80 minutes in physical length it has to be accompanied by additional material on national release because projectors don't all run at the same speed exactly and one projector alone will be running a different speed by the end of each screening day.
Motor settings is one reason, machinary warming up and loosening is another. By the end of a day the machine will be going faster. First show might run for 82 mins whilst the last runs for 77 mins.
"Police Academy 4" is an example of this and it was 80 mins dead on so it had a cartoon as well in it's UK release.
If the programme runs shorter than stated times even though the audience have seen the whole film, the audience is entitled to more film because they've paid for 80 minutes entertainment.

There are other catagories of 'Feature' definition too, it's the same with shorts, trailers and adverts. Adverts and trailers have 4 catagories- teaser, standard, long (or extra long)and double length.
Animated features are shorter, usually between 70- 80 mins. A live-action film between 35 to 70 is usually a 'short' feature.

Most modern movies are between 95 to 120 mins and this is the expected norm by modern viewers. If the film is under 90 minutes your audience will be looking for at least a 'short' or even a double-bill- (not a common thing nowadays). Whether a film is pro, budget or amateur makes no difference to the destinctions. That's about the size of it.

[steve hyde]

I always took it to be about 90 minutes minimum - though I'm sure I read about one film that was 70 minutes being touted as a feature - what do people think the minimum running time in order to be classed as a feature should be?

Scot

Basing my input on gut instict. I would say 40mins is a short feature and anything less is really the territory of the short film. Another way to approach this question is by asking what is short? That might offer some insights into what isn't a feature...

We could argue this in quantitative terms...eg. how much time, the running length of the footage itself etc. or we could consider what a short film is in qualitative terms with a quantitative constraint: Time...What besides running time, makes a feature film different from a short?

For a short, the story structure is much different. It has to be much more economical in terms of story telling strategy. It has to be really tight. You have to have more "unknowns" for character development, for example. You have to tell more of the story visually and aurally and can not rely on dialogue as much (or at all)

....perhaps I'm off topic, but if we are going to question what constitutes a feature, then I think we need to also consider what constitutes a short...

Cheers,

Steve

[FILM-THURSO]

I think if you follow the standards I listed above you will find that they are within the parametres that most people conciously or otherwise tend to adhere to when making a film. If it is a feature length movie it will be between 80 to 120 mins, or short film not over 35 mins and so on. The destintions are there for trading standard reasons. If you buy a bag of potatoes that states 5 kilos on the bag but has 4.75kg inside just because the last tattie wouldn't fit the size of the bag- you get my drift. If the public goes to a feature film it has to be within a specific running time to legally promote itself as a 'feature' film. In the UK "Police Academy 4" would have breached trading laws if the main programme fell under the minimum 1 hour 20 minutes so it had to have a 'short' with it to guarentee the minimum feature time.
It's not a question of what constitutes anything other than a 'fair' amount for your money.
In the beginning of cinema it didn't apply because films were largely shown as part of variety shows and were often not the 'feature' of the show. However as cinema grew the situation changed and minimum standards had to be set.

The official shortest film is one of the "Mini Adventure" advert serries for the Mini. The film is only 10 seconds yets conforms to all the destinctions of what a film is meant to be and expected to contain. The shortest soap show is the Nescafe Gold Blend serries from the 1980s. Each were only 15 to 30 seconds lond but people were tuning to find out whether the man and woman would get it together.