No, 3 hours and 20 mins (not including previews and post credits).

I've never understood this. How's it any different than binge watching a few episodes of a TV show in a row?

In all honesty the story, while true, just isn't interesting enough to me to sit in one spot for that long... I'm sorry those natives were murdered back then, but it just isn't a fascinating story IMO

I'd much rather Martin got the band back together for one last gangster movie, but I'm glad you enjoyed the show

A master at the medium could make any story compelling. I'd watch a couple arguing about where to go to dinner if Tarantino directed it, ya know?

Also, consider the bang for the buck. You get 3.5 hours of epic filmmaking, acting, and storytelling for the same price as a generic 90 minute Marvel movie written by committee and AI.

You gotta see it. I saw it.

My complaint is there is no intermission. 4 hours is longer than I can hold my pee, especially when I'm drinking beer from the snack bar the whole time.

I can pause a TV show or take a 5 minute break between episodes when I need to go to the bathroom grab a snack etc. Having to sit on one place for 3.5 hours or feel like you're going to miss part of the movie isn't ideal.

I understand if the only issue is watching it at the theatre. Some people just don't want to watch a 3 hour movie period, but they'll binge watch a show.

Drink your Pepsi and piss in the cup you barbarians.
sec

Yeah I agree I don't get that. If I was worried about overall run time on something I'm watching at home I'd just stop halfway through & watch the 2nd half later like it's a sequel. However a movie makes it's money off box office so when a movie is so long I only want to watch it at home, I would say that's a problem for the studio.

My wife went & saw it this weekend, she was super pumped about it (coincidentally she was in Pawhuska when they were filming, just happened to have a trip planned to go to the Pioneer Woman Lodge) She said it was good, but complained about the length & said they easily could have effectively told the story & cut a ton of time off. I was actually interested in seeing it, but after hearing her review I'm waiting til I can watch it at home.

We really enjoyed it. I don't think I looked at my watch until about 3:15 in, I felt overall the pacing was fine. Disagree you could cut substantial time and still have a cohesive story.

The audiobook was 9 ****ing hours and I don't know what you'd cut.

How do you get this audiobook? Don't you usually have to have an expensive monthly subscription for such things? I'd consider getting it if it was just like a flat 20 bucks, but a VK isn't looking to add another subscription service ya know Buehler? Ain't nobody got time for that.

It’s 14.63 on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Killers-of-Fl...s%2C218&sr=8-1

I pay the audible subscription but by August im out of credits. I listen to a lot of books.

:LOL:Oops. Placed that wrong. Should've been below. But you get it.

:clap:

You can take a break. They need a damn intermission for a movie that long