All of the Oscar related threads made me start thinking about the films that have won the Academy Award for Best Picture. I visited the Oscar site and can honestly say that I’ve seen nearly every one of them. I didn’t like all of them by any stretch of the imagination, and the the ones that I did enjoy the most had one thing in common: good pacing (which is a product of the writer, in my way of thinking), and good editing. All of the films I enjoyed the most moved along at a good clip, so that even the films with long running times didn’t seem that long. Here’s a breakdown of the running times of the last 10 Best Picture winners and their running times, compared to the running times of a few previous winners:
A Beautiful Mind - 130 minutes
Gladiator - 150 minutes
American Beauty - 122 minutes
Shakespeare in Love - 122 minutes
Titanic - 194 minutes
English Patient - 160 minutes
Braveheart - 179 minutes
Forrest Gump - 141 minutes
Schindler’s List - 185 minutes
Unforgiven - 123 minutes
It Happened One Night - 105 minutes
Casablanca - 142 minutes
All About Eve - 94 minutes
Bridge on the River Kwai - 161 mintues
The Apartment - 125 minutes
The Sting - 129 minutes
I haven’t worked out the numbers, but, by and large, the films have gotten progressively longer (with a few exceptions, e.g., Ben Hur, Patton, and a few other big, sprawling films), while I think we will all agree that the quality is getting progressively weaker. Why is that I can sit through 161 minutes of The Bridge on the River Kwai or 142 minutes of Casablanca (I never paid attention to its running lenghth - it moves right along without a spot where you say to yourself, “Why is this here? They could have cut this out.”) and be willing to watch the films again and again, but sitting through 141 minutes of Forrest Gump once is pretty difficult and 194 mintues of Titanic at all is damn near impossible?