I am for two and a half hours, that seems to work nicely for films. I loved LotR but honestly, those movies need an intermission!!
What do you think?
Lu 
Avy by me, siggy by Dernhelm_of_Rohan
You suck a lollipop, and you sing a song. Get it right, Jo!
Topic starter
Posted : January 2, 2011 10:56 am
I would say 2 and a half hours to 3 hours. They seem to work for most fantasy film series.
Posted : January 2, 2011 11:18 am
Even though it's hard to adapt VDT into a feature film, I feel like the movie is too rushed and would have been better if they could slow things down. I think the pacing for both LWW and PC was well-done so I think 2 and a half hours would be a good length for the subsequent movies.
Posted : January 2, 2011 1:14 pm
Two and a half hours is my choice, because it really worked for LWW and PC, and any shorter than that would result in a fast-paced movie (like VDT). Too long would become agonizing as well, so the betweenie works the best in my opinion. 
Posted : January 2, 2011 1:43 pm
Two and a half hours. That worked well for the other two movies, and it wasn't so long like Lord of the rings, where you need a break by the time you get to three quarters of the way through 
I stand with the Lord at my side, always.
For Narnia and the North!
Be the change you want to see in the world.
Avatar by MissAdventure
Posted : January 3, 2011 5:04 am
2 1/2 hours for sure. Dawn Treader was too rushed, when I first heard it was only two hours I was just shocked. I know as a fact there was more to the film (from interviews I got with the cast and crew, there are a TON of deleted scenes). LWW and PC are perfect for length, so again... two and a half hours.
Leader of the A.N.T.I. M.U.P.P.E.T.Z. (American Nitwits Think Intelligently vs. Malevolent Undercover Pals Planning Eventual Takeover of Zivilization.) RP in Ditto Town! PM to join!
Posted : January 3, 2011 9:23 am