Is this the possible duration of Iron Man 3?

Is this the possible duration of Iron Man 3?

SPOILERS SPOILERS will be even Iron Man 3 will have 109 minutes?

News
By Portela - Feb 28, 2013 07:02 AM EST
Filed Under: Iron Man
Source: IMDB

Well, I was watching some movies on IMDB and came across a news. The new film in the franchise Iron Man 3 will have a duration of 109 minutes, so even 1 hour and 49 minutes. For a film of a successful franchise is very little, hey I expected that with the success of The Avengers movie was about 125-130 minutes. I was very sad because a movie grandiso and with many aspects, such as the Mandarin, Iron Patriot, the New Armor could not keep up in 109 minutes. I still prefer to believe that the film will be more than two hours, rsrsrs.

LEGO Announces Mini Bust Series Starting With Iron Man And Spider-Man
Related:

LEGO Announces Mini Bust Series Starting With Iron Man And Spider-Man
SPIDER-MAN: BRAND NEW DAY - 5 MCU Characters Who Should Be Paired Up With Tom Holland's Peter Parker
Recommended For You:

SPIDER-MAN: BRAND NEW DAY - 5 MCU Characters Who Should Be Paired Up With Tom Holland's Peter Parker

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Do you have what it takes to write for us?
Want to contribute?
JDUKE25
JDUKE25 - 2/28/2013, 7:26 AM
Yeah, that''s a load of crap, hopefully. 109 minutes is waaaay too short.
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 7:26 AM
"And why would IM3 be almost 30 mins shorter than it's predecessors?"

Well..if it's true, then that's because....that's how long they needed to tell the story. Longer doesn't always mean better.
NoobNoob
NoobNoob - 2/28/2013, 7:32 AM
i want at least 120 minutes
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 7:36 AM
Black is a pretty capable storyteller...just means there's no fat on the movie.
DefcoN
DefcoN - 2/28/2013, 7:42 AM
Unlikely. My guess is 150 minutes, if not a little more. In fact, I've just checked some theater's websites and it's running time is advertised as 120 min long.
LMB10
LMB10 - 2/28/2013, 7:45 AM
Already posted once, plus calling bullshit on this.

Supposedly the initial screening was 2hours 40 minutes. I expect that to be cut down to 2 hours 20, though.
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 7:49 AM
This article has proven to me that netnerds will call bullshit on anything. I actually expected to not really see any comments for once.
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 7:51 AM
"In fact, I've just checked some theater's websites and it's running time is advertised as 120 min long."

With trailers, that sounds about right.
SpiderParker
SpiderParker - 2/28/2013, 8:08 AM
Like IMDB has ever been a reliable source.
TheLokey1
TheLokey1 - 2/28/2013, 8:08 AM
Net nerds will call bull shit on just about anything, to be fair though, most Internet rumors are bull shit
Hellsing
Hellsing - 2/28/2013, 8:11 AM
If its 109 minutes then 109 minutes but I understand people calling bullshit its IMDB and its way too early for them yo have come up with a final cut when its still febuary pretty sure theres going to be a couple of screen tests in march before they decide the final runtime.
HongKongPooey
HongKongPooey - 2/28/2013, 8:12 AM
pleaseeeeeeeeeeee be bullshit
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 8:15 AM
No, I agree...if it's wrong, it's wrong. I just don't get why people are so upset that it's that long...if it is. Lots of great movies with plenty of dialogue, scope, and characters are around 1:49.

I imagine Iron Man 2, which I feel is almost as good as the first one, but a lot of people very vocally hate it, probably taught the studio to not meander around plot. No matter how long Iron Man 3 is, I'm sure it has little to no fat on it. And keeping it to tight action sequences, and necessary character moments/dialogue could easily mean 1:49.
HongKongPooey
HongKongPooey - 2/28/2013, 8:16 AM
also Stephanie Szostak is playing Bethany Cabe according to IMDB, when Marvel/Disney have confirmed nothing. IMDB posts so much shit...
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 8:32 AM
It's amazing how movies must seem to you guys. Plenty of movies around 1:50 end up having a complete story, with plenty of plot, characters, and other things to cover. When I first learned how to write screenplays, the idea was to tell your story as succinctly as possible. Making a script more than 120 pages (meaning, 120 minutes) seemed REALLY lazy. Yeah, sometimes a story is dense and epic and about a ton of people. But when it's one man's story, against all odds etc...I see no reason that can't be simply 1:49.

I really hope it IS true, just so you guys can see that one doesn't need to take over 2 hours to tell a solid story.
FirstAvenger
FirstAvenger - 2/28/2013, 8:46 AM
Yeah man, that's bull.
Orphix
Orphix - 2/28/2013, 8:54 AM
@ruadh

I'm with you dude. So many films overstay their welcome and you get bloated, meandering films with scenes which slow the whole thing down killing an excitement.

Keep it short. Keep it snappy. Keep it pacey!!!
Orphix
Orphix - 2/28/2013, 8:55 AM
And if I remember both CA:TFA and Thor were both shy of 2hrs.

Not sure about the other IM films.

So something around 1h 50m is kinda their usual length.
FalafelVsShawarma
FalafelVsShawarma - 2/28/2013, 9:29 AM
the last time we got CBM threequel that run in 100-109 minutes was "X-Men: The Last Stand"...

so......
BrotherQStark
BrotherQStark - 2/28/2013, 10:12 AM
It's still in post-production
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 10:38 AM
Eh...Snyder's only done one movie over 2 hours that I can think of, and Nolan's done a few under 140 minutes. Just saying, nothing is absolute.
ComicFan523
ComicFan523 - 2/28/2013, 10:51 AM
109 minutes is too short for an Iron Man movie, it should be at least two hours long, maybe a little bit more.
dezdigi
dezdigi - 2/28/2013, 10:52 AM
If it's that short, I'm sure it will feel very rushed. I know longer doesn't mean better but it usually is when it comes to super hero movies in my opinion. It gives more time for character development.
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 10:55 AM
" It gives more time for character development."

If you don't know the guy after 3 movies...
ruadh
ruadh - 2/28/2013, 12:58 PM
"Though I gotta say, when I was younger; I did feel the running time WAS WHAT made the movie feel important. "

Maybe that's what it is. I tend to forget to consider people's age when reading these.

It's also funny to me how long movies used to be frowned on. Now it's what the audience wants.
VenomSpawnRises
VenomSpawnRises - 2/28/2013, 1:32 PM
Current running time is around 2 hours and 40 minutes.
wambam91
wambam91 - 2/28/2013, 6:35 PM
@MrYurMomm it's possible that The Falcon could be in Avengers 2 seeing as he has been confirmed to be in Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
He's being played by Anthony Mackie
HongKongPooey
HongKongPooey - 2/28/2013, 7:06 PM
ok forget all that talk about a story can be told in 109 minutes, yes it can. But look at Iron Man 3 so far, so many new characters, AIM, explaination of many new things e.g. the Iron Patriot suit... It just doesn't seem likely that 109 minutes could fit everything in. But I'm not disagreeing that in that time a story can't be told, I just feel Iron Man 3 needs longer
Related Headlines
Latest Headlines

Hot Headlines Hot Headlines

Sci-Fi & Fantasy

Anime & Manga

Gaming

Horror

Cartoons & Animated Features

Action Movies & TV

Pro Wrestling & MMA News
View Recorder