Would You Sit Through a Three-Hour Cut of 'The Avengers?'
kyle 2012/05/08 23:05:18
Bigger usually is better. But would that equation apply to The Avengers?
I know what you’re thinking. Joss Whedon’s blockbuster was big enough.
By uniting six all-stars from the Marvel universe in one
Earth-shattering adventure, the film raised the bar for summer movie
special effects and might have changed the way the film industry
approaches the construction of franchises for years to come.
But did The Avengers need to be longer?
Whedon’s theatrical cut runs 2 hours and 22 minutes. But the director made headlines when he told Collider that he planned to release a longer cut – expanded by an additional 30 minutes – on the film’s eventual Blu-ray.
On the surface, that sounds great. You loved The Avengers … why wouldn’t you want to see more, right?
But on the flip side, scenes usually are cut for a reason. They disrupt
flow. They contain unnecessary exposition. They just don’t fit. What
are in these deleted scenes? How do they factor into the film’s overall
narrative? We’re just going to have to wait for the Avengers DVD to hit
stores later this year.
My question to you today is, “Would you want to sit through a three-hour cut of The Avengers?”
Studios regularly re-release movies back into theaters. The Weinstein Company just announced that the Oscar-winning The Artist is making a victory lap in multiplexes starting Mother’s Day weekend. James Cameron’s Titanic recently set sail again. It’s wholly possible that Marvel/Disney decides to drop the longer cut of The Avengers back
into theaters at some point. Does that make sense? Or is the cut that
originally comes out the one that should stay intact, and leave the rest
for DVD and Blu-ray? Let us know your thoughts below!
See Votes by State
Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions