Are movies getting longer?

This article is a repost promoting content originally published elsewhere. See more things Dan's reposted.

Are movies getting longer? (Stephen Follows)

Either I’m getting older or movies are getting longer… and longer … and longer.   So which is it?  I took a look at the numbers. I studied the running time of the top 100 US-grossing films since 1994 (2,200 films in total) and all films shot in the UK 2005-14 (2,142 films). In summary… The median length of …

Either I’m getting older or movies are getting longer… and longer … and longer.   So which is it?  I took a look at the numbers.

I studied the running time of the top 100 US-grossing films since 1994 (2,200 films in total) and all films shot in the UK 2005-14 (2,142 films). In summary…

  • The median length of a top 100 US-grossing films between 1994 and 2015 was 110 minutes
  • Running times have increased in six of the past seven years
  • The longest films are historical and western films and the shortest are animations and documentaries.
  • Peter Jackson makes the longest movies in Hollywood, with a median running time of 169 minutes.
  • The median running time of UK feature films (2008-14) was 94 minutes.
  • Films with lower budgets have shorter running times
  • The complete extended Lord of the Rings and Hobbit trilogies are a combined 21 hours long

It’s reassuring to read that I wasn’t the only one to observe this trend in filmmaking, and to find that somebody else had done the research to save me from feeling the need to do so myself! The full article also makes a number of other interesting observations; worth a read.

The Bullshit Web

This article is a repost promoting content originally published elsewhere. See more things Dan's reposted.

The Bullshit Web (pxlnv.com)

My home computer in 1998 had a 56K modem connected to our telephone line; we were allowed a maximum of thirty minutes of computer usage a day, because my parents — quite reasonably — did not want to have their telephone shut off for an evening at a time. I remember webpages loading slowly: ten […]

My home computer in 1998 had a 56K modem connected to our telephone line; we were allowed a maximum of thirty minutes of computer usage a day, because my parents — quite reasonably — did not want to have their telephone shut off for an evening at a time. I remember webpages loading slowly: ten to twenty seconds for a basic news article.

At the time, a few of my friends were getting cable internet. It was remarkable seeing the same pages load in just a few seconds, and I remember thinking about the kinds of the possibilities that would open up as the web kept getting faster.

And faster it got, of course. When I moved into my own apartment several years ago, I got to pick my plan and chose a massive fifty megabit per second broadband connection, which I have since upgraded.

So, with an internet connection faster than I could have thought possible in the late 1990s, what’s the score now? A story at the Hill took over nine seconds to load; at Politico, seventeen seconds; at CNN, over thirty seconds. This is the bullshit web.

But first, a short parenthetical: I’ve been writing posts in both long- and short-form about this stuff for a while, but I wanted to bring many threads together into a single document that may pretentiously be described as a theory of or, more practically, a guide to the bullshit web.

A second parenthetical: when I use the word “bullshit” in this article, it isn’t in a profane sense. It is much closer to Harry Frankfurt’s definition in “On Bullshit”:

It is just this lack of connection to a concern with truth — this indifference to how things really are — that I regard as of the essence of bullshit.

I also intend it to be used in much the same sense as the way it is used in David Graeber’s “On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs”:

In the year 1930, John Maynard Keynes predicted that, by century’s end, technology would have advanced sufficiently that countries like Great Britain or the United States would have achieved a 15-hour work week. There’s every reason to believe he was right. In technological terms, we are quite capable of this. And yet it didn’t happen. Instead, technology has been marshaled, if anything, to figure out ways to make us all work more. In order to achieve this, jobs have had to be created that are, effectively, pointless. Huge swathes of people, in Europe and North America in particular, spend their entire working lives performing tasks they secretly believe do not really need to be performed. The moral and spiritual damage that comes from this situation is profound. It is a scar across our collective soul. Yet virtually no one talks about it.

[…]

These are what I propose to call ‘bullshit jobs’.

What is the equivalent on the web, then?

This, this, a thousand times this. As somebody who’s watched the Web grow both in complexity and delivery speed over the last quarter century, it apalls me that somewhere along the way complexity has started to win. I don’t want to have to download two dozen stylesheets and scripts before your page begins to render – doubly-so if those additional files serve no purpose, or at least no purpose discernable to the reader. Personally, the combination of uMatrix and Ghostery is all the adblocker I need (and I’m more-than-willing to add a little userscript to “fix” your site if it tries to sabotage my use of these technologies), but when for whatever reason I turn these plugins off I feel like the Web has taken a step backwards while I wasn’t looking.