• Like Us On Facebook
    • Like us on Facebook

  • +1 Us on Google
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Facebook
    • Follow us on tumblr.

  • Search

The running time of The Amazing Spider-Man has been revealed on AMC’s website, and it may disappoint fans hoping for a longer film like The Avengers or The Dark Knight Rises.

The running time is 1h 30 mins. It’s very short for a blockbuster, especially a Spider-Man film, as the originals all had running times of over two hours.

What do you think of this running time?

Thanks to user V-Money and AMC for the tip.

This article was written by a Hypable user! Learn more and write your own right here.

  • Lewis

    Just like a classic film really, not the modern let’s make everything almost 3 hours long mantra, I like this, I think it could be done well if they pace the film well :)

    • CliveRogan

      Long films aren’t a modern thing.  Gone with the Wind is nearly four hours long.  Anyway, films should be as long as they need to be, some films can only carry an hour and a half wheras others need over three hours to breathe.  This seems like the former as I don’t see how there’s enough story to merit over two hours.

  • Tucker

    I’m not really interested in seeing the movie anyway, still haven’t gotten over the fact that they’ve recasted characters and are basically using rehashed plot lines that were already in the first film.

    • http://www.marcusforsberg.net/ Marcus Forsberg

      They aren’t recasting anyone nor reusing anything, though. This is a *reboot*, it’s not related to the old three films at all. People seem to have a hard time understanding that part.

      • http://twitter.com/AntaraC Antara Chowdhury

        Exactly. A recast, for example, is when they replaced Edward Norton with Mark Ruffalo to play the Hulk. But a reboot is completely different. And of course some plot elements are going to be the same, they have to be somewhat faithful to the original comic book story. The interesting part of a reboot is to see what they do differently.

  • Azeem

    They spent around $200 million on a 90 minute film. Personally, I doubt this is true. Until I hear it from Marc Webb or Sony, then I will believe it.

  • GeekGirl101

    …in all honesty, I’m not surprised. High hopes is not something I have for this film. 

  • gcw07

    Honestly if this is just based off of one theater listing a time I’m not sure I believe it yet. More then likely they had to enter some time to list it at all on their site so they just picked what is there. I don’t think the final run time is even completed yet. It is still 2 months off so I doubt a final cut has even been done.

  • http://twitter.com/dreamfall31 Kevin Slechta

    90 minutes is a perfect length for a summer action movie!  Especially one I’m not too interested in!  I bet it’s shorter because they spend probably almost no time on his transformation…hopefully.  But like I said, this is probably the big film I’m least interested in.  I want to see what they do different, but I’ve never been a big Spiderman fan.

  • Guest02

    it was going to be short since the beginning. Sony is trying to profit off of it as much as possible so less to film and edit and more teather showings =$

  • Meselyn

    I’m not disappointed at all. To me…a 1h 30mins is the perfect time for a film that’s trying to re-establish a franchise. If it does well and they make another one, then that’ll warrant a longer run time. Don’t bore people for 2+ hours if they’re watching a movie they don’t want to see. Have them leaving a movie that they’re dying to see more of.

  • Hehedied

    I’m not excited for this anyways.

  • http://hypable.com John Thrasher

    I think 90 minutes is just right…unless it’s The Dark Knight Rises in which case it needs to be 900 minutes.

    • moonshoespotter1712


  • Rajah

    *Reserving Jugdement*

  • http://www.youtube.com/fravit Fravit

    However long it takes to tell the story properly, I’m fine with.

  • Samuel

    I think it’s just right, some superhero movies can run on way too long, in my opinion.

  • grapes9h5

    The Raimi films were always way longer than they needed to be. 90 mins does sound short for an origin story movie like this but often a leaner movie is a better movie.

    • grapes9h5

      But how do we know this source is correct??? The movie doesn’t come out for a while, it would think it’s still being worked on in the editing room.

  • http://www.facebook.com/nikolausaldrich Nick Aldrich

    The AMC website also says Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst are starring in it. It’s very likely this isn’t accurate. The studio will make an announcement when they know, which could be likely that they don’t know. A lot change still between now and July.

  • http://twitter.com/mariaggonzalez Maria Gonzalez

    1 hour and 30 minutes = music to my ears!

  • Greg

    this is waayy too short

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Josh-Gara/100000256399459 Josh Gara

    Um, I’m calling bullsh*t. Not a single other source has revealed the running time and the movies still in post, how would they have a definitve running time? It opens in July… its May. If it’s officially announced, then nevermind what I said, I’ll be pissed.

  • robertjbaum

    From director Marc Webb:
    “Yeah, it’s right around two hours. There was something on some website that said it was an hour and 30 minutes, or something like that. No. Every once in a while, it’s really interesting because you hear people talk about information that gets out and you’re like, “Oh, yeah, there’s some truth to it.” But sometimes, things come up and you’re like, “What are you talking about?!” That’s one of those things. I just don’t know where that came from.”


  • Thejoker83187

    Marc Webb already commented on an interview that was posted on superherohype.com and said that this running time is not true. he said the movie clocks in at around 2 hours. not sure if that includes credits or not so if it includes credits, then the movie itself could be 1 hour and 50 minutes… if 2 hours is just the film itself, then it probably is just as long as spider-man 2 and might be 2 hours and 10 minutes with the movie and credits roll altogether. but marc webb confirmed that its around 2 hours which sounds perfect to me.   1 hour and 30 minutes isnt enough time to establish a full blockbuster … theres not enough time for story building … ghost rider 2 was 88 minutes … movie was terrible.

  • Nicole_l87

    90 mins? it can’t be. how about this web?

  • Ronsil

    its funny how all of you were so excited to hear that it is only 90 minutes based on one site, as you thought they could do a movie of this caliber justice in 90 minutes (credits included) … then must have been disappointed when the movie came out and you all found out it is the length it deserves to be to serve justice to this character on the big screen, 136 minutes was the actual running time .. that’s a good length .. im not paying $20 for a movie that is only 90 minutes, probably only 83 minutes once you discount the credits … especially when its spider-man, a major comic book hero that cant have a complete story told in 83 minutes. im glad it was 136 minutes. the movie was good and complete … here is hoping that the sequel is longer, maybe 160 minutes, given that there are several characters, so that way they can all receive a fair amount of screen time.

Hypable encourages the community to use our Comments feature to hold thoughtful, polite, and critical discussions. We do NOT tolerate inappropriate, rude, or downright mean discussion towards the news story's subject matter or towards other Hypable users. We reserve the right to delete or ban comments and users who violate these guidelines.