AMC Theaters has updated their official website with the recently revealed Rating for the Transformers: Bumblebee movie and its Running Time.
Clocked at just 1 hour and 54 minutes, the new Travis Knight movie is the shortest Transformers Live Action Movie to date. If we take away about 9 minutes for the credit roll, the actual movie may turn out to be a comfortable 1 hour and 45 minute long family-friendly movie.
This upcoming movie is approximately 1 hour shorter than Transformers: Age Of Extinction; which holds the longest running time for a Transformers movie.
- Transformers 2007 – 2 hours and 23 minutes
- Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen – 2 hours and 30 minutes
- Transformers: Dark Of The Moon – 2 hours and 34 minutes
- Transformers: Age Of Extinction – 2 hours and 45 minutes
- Transformers: The Last Knight – 2 hours and 29 minutes
- Transformers: Bumblebee – 1 hour and 54 minutes
Transformers: Bumblebee is rated PG-13 for ‘sequences of sci-fi action violence‘.
Update: This running time is also confirmed by other theater chains across the globe.
Update running time change 119 min
Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer longer movie lengths, as I like movies to have breathing room.
And I don't get all of these comments about the later movies being too long when literally every single one of them have been long. The 2007 film is just as bloated as any of the sequels, and perhaps even more considering the stories they were all trying to tell.
Not that I have anything wrong with Bumblebee's runtime. I just think it's funny how fans have double standards between the five different Bay Transformers films, as if some of them are fine in run time and others, which are barely longer, these unacceptably long films, when in fact they're all in the same general time range.
In theory this means the movie is not going to waste your time. If it's good, you might come out wishing for more, which could be a good thing. "Leave while they want you to stay" and all that.
Good. I want to leave the theater wanting more. 2.5-3hrs is way too long for a movie. There's a few exceptions but keeping it under 2 hrs is typically a good idea.
Thank Lord Jesus almighty
< 2 hours is probably okay for a tighter focused story like this, but 2.5 is much more common for larger Sci-Fi stories.
Good. Hopefully this will make for a more streamlined runtime.
Sorry I meant 2 hours long haha
Wait, Age of Extinction was longer than The Last Knight? I wouldn't have guessed, Last Knight felt like it was never going to end.
I never realized that the other TF movies were even over 2 hours long…
Just curious any chance you think this movie will be a critic success to help get the stigma of the previous films away from it.
Or drink as much as you can and let it all out before showtime.
This movie keeps getting more and more appealing. Movies 2-5 were far too long WITHOUT including the ridiculous drek that made even less sense than the already nonsensical "plots".
I really thought I was going to skip any other movies after the nonstop shitfest that was Last Knight but I'm going to support the hell out of Bumblebee. Opening night for sure, and if I deem it appropriate I'll go again and bring along my four year old.
Few sadists in here?
2.5 hrs of incomprehensible plot, shaky cam action, explosions and magic eye puzzle characters is not enough!!! I need moooooooooore!!! More damnit Michael Bay!!
Nearly two hours is good for this Bumblee film. Enough time to develop a decent story and for the new director to build his own world… less chance of random location jumps to appease Chinese investors for the last act.
I remain hopeful!
For myself, I think two hours is a good running time for a movie. Partly based on my own attention span, but really it's enough time to tell a complete story without leaving the audience restless.
Movies can be longer, but they need to earn that extra run time. The Lord of the Rings movies have enough story and character to justify it. Star Wars the Force Awakens had enough story and character to justify more time, and still didn't go much over the two hour mark.
The Transformers movies? No way. I didn't mind the first few but these movies just aren't that good. It's absurd how long they are considering how little they have in the way of story and/or interesting characters.
These movies don't have to be high art. They can just offer a fun diversion. I should be able to walk out of a Transformers movie and feel like it was a fun ride, the movie equivalent of a roller coaster. Instead, I'm bored and exhausted by the end.
Even if the story and characters in Bumblebee disappoint, the run time should hopefully allow for a fun experience that doesn't leave me asking, "when will this end?".
theres some showtimes that are out in my area at least in atom tickets it says pre order tickets now but they arent in amc theaters
I love longer movies BUT Quality over quantity. Make sure the movie is good first.
The shorter runtime also has something else that will lead to this film's success: more showtimes and a greater ease for people to fit it into their lives.
With it being less than two hours theaters can squeeze another 2 to 3 showings out every day. ANd that means it is easier for people to go see it. Instead of "Well, we can get up at 9 am or wait till right at lunch or go at 4 and have a late supper…" people can easily jump into it and then go about their lives. Which means that it will bring in more money against the cost.
RoboCop's Runtime was 1hr 42 minutes uncut it does a lot in that time, Dredd was 1hr 35 Mins that was a breath of fresh air, as a sub 100 minute runtime, and taut editing, a real throwback. If you're pushing 120+ mins then your film is likely to be flabby, I prefer Bloat Free films. This is a trend that James Cameron and Peter Jackson are slightly responsible for, with big effects blockbusters that also performed in awards ceremonies, the Money men said lets have more of that, and so big effects picture runtimes crept ever upward from 150 minutes, and that got flabbier and more bloated when really even at script stage the red pen should have be wielded more brutally.