Giantrobo

I've been watching a some Classic films lately. As a matter of fact just this morning I saw finally "SUNSET BOULEVARD" (1950) for the 1st time. Well, I noticed that this film and others from around that time have rather short end credits. Fine with me by the way. Another seemingly popular way to end some of the other films from back then was to just end with "THE END" and a bit of fanfare and that was it.

Well it seems the credits in most of today's films just go on and on and on. When did this "trend" begin? Was there a "ground zero" or even a particular reason for the change? Was it the UNIONS? Director egos? What gives?

DonnachaOne

When everyone and their mother demanded a movie credit.

I see people's DRIVERS getting credits.

Giantrobo

I know what you mean.

Pointyskull

Wasn't the Richard Donner-directed Superman (1978) one of the first to have a really, really looooooooong opening credit sequence?

Nick Danger

I remember seeing Meteor on TV years ago. The credits took the last ten minute segment.

Boy gets girl, everything is okay.
Announcer: The conclusion of Meteor after these messages.
Four minutes of commercials
Closing credits run until the news.

My favorite credit I've ever seen was 'Honeytruck driver'. I mean, does it have to be recorded for posterity the name of the guy who drove the portapotty truck?

Michael Corvin

To me it has to be because of CGI. Used to be they would list the f/x house that did the work. One line of credits.

Now they seem to list every employee that works at said f/x house.

Add in the fact that a lot of movies today use multiple CG companies and voila - 20 minutes of credits.

Damfino

25%

Try watching the closing credits of one of the Lord of the Rings Extended Edition DVDs. This figure isn't that much of an exageration.

kitkat

I used to be one of those people who always sat through the credits at the end of a film. Partly, they are interesting, and partly it's just sort of nice to chill out for a few minutes and mentally transition from film world back into the real world. These days I only do that occasionally. 2-4 minutes is nice; 5+ minutes is just too long.

And yeah, I think CGI is one of the main causes of this. There are just so many more people involved in the making of a film these days and who wouldn't want to see their names in the credits? It's a little bit of immortality and something for the grandkids to get a kick out of.

tonyc3742

What makes it even worse, if this movie [or television program] is shown on TV, usually the networks squash it to the side to make room for a commercial. I ugess they 'have' to show the credits, but if you're going to show it, at least let it so the people can see their name on the screen!

Song/music information, since a lot of movies use songs from other artists, they have to give credit.

Sometimes I like to watch them as well, or at least sit through them, like Kitkat says, to slowly break the mood rather than 'Okay, we're done.'

Buford T Pusser

Watch the new version of "Walking Tall" for some long ass credits. The film is only 87 minutes long and there were 12 minutes of credits!

First they change the character's name from Buford Pusser and then that. The travesty!


:buford:



BTW, we just watched "Elektra" and I believe the DVD Talk review said the credits were 8 or 9 minutes long out of 90 minutes or so.

DRG

A credit-related pet peeve of mine... when I sit though the credits to find out the name/artist of a song I liked in the movie, but when they get to the song credits 1) they cluster the songs on the screen so your eyes have to scan quickly before its gone, and 2) the artist names are in some microscopic font that would be difficult to read in a still frame, yet alone scrolling. Yet the name of the 'Driver for the 2nd Assistant Hairdresser' and every other useless credit is in some normal size font, all in one (unclustered) straight line.

TomOpus

I always thought it had something to do with all the unions requiring a screen credit for each union member.

Anywho.... for the most part, I'm a credit reader. Call me crazy. Of course I loved those credits on Airplane and Top Secret!.

calhoun07

What is the suck is when you learn later on you missed something at the end of a movie, like a bonus scene or an addendum to the ending, and you already got up and left the theater because you don't want to sit through the long credits any more.

I think the credits should be comprised of the main people involved period. If you didn't do work on the actual SET then you don't get credit. Drive whoever around, get donuts for whomever, do CGI work in another country, or whatever, you don't get your name listed unless you were on the actual set or shooting locations doing the phsyical work of making the movie.

And for the rest of those, if it's so important to those people to get credit, put up the name of the company that did the CGI work and put up a website address where people can get a full listing of those involved in that work, if they give a rat's ass.

littlefuzzy

The older movies used to put most of the credits at the front, and of course they didn't have Joe Star's Assistant's Driver's Hairstylist's Caterer's Gopher... (okay, that credit is probably a bit exaggerated...)

ReservoirDog45

Just a bit

resinrats

This would end up cutting every single cgi effects person out of the credits. It would also cut James Earl Jones out of the Star Wars credits since I doubt he ever got near the sets.
I think it is only fair to list everyone. However, they could speed them up or have two columns of info.

I have to admit, I would watch any credits if they had images behind them. Outtakes or alternate takes or something.

RocShemp

How about only list people actually involved in the creation of the film. By that I mean remove the caterers, assistants and on-set masseus (or however you spell it). If you were involved in the actual pre-production, production and post-production in a real way (and by that I mean that getting someone coffee and Krispy-Kreme Donuts doesn't count) then you should get a credit. Otherwise, forget it.

Oh and it'd be okay to list music and film clips related info cos that relates to rights issues.

jlm71176

Shadow of the Vampire has some insanely long opening credits. Between 7 or 8 minutes if I remember correctly. 10% of the running time was nothing but credits if you can the closing credits as well. Not that I measure the worth of a movie based on running time. I've seen as many 90 minute movies I wish were longer as I have 2 hour long movies I wish were shorter.

Jackskeleton

It's a way for hour films get a little padding to seem worth the 7.50 or so.

Rammsteinfan

Does the person who writes the credits get credit?

TomOpus

Only when it's a Fincher flick

glassdragon

did you notice that at the end of the the extended lotr's it listed THE WHOLE FAN CLUB. I swear, the credits are like 25 minutes long :/

Scotts35

^ People could payed to get their names in each of the 3 EE's so yeah they know. The longest credits I can remember from cleaning theaters was for the Matrix Reloaded. Good lord. And thats counting the sneak preview at the end, which sucked because customers would always wait, with lines in the lobby itching to get in.

calhoun07

You read the credits when there are scenes and outtakes on the screen? LOSER!

FinkPish

Wow, I guess I shouldn't be getting any credit since I work in post-production months after the movie is shot. Sounds fair to me....

There is a lot more work that goes on beyond the shooting of the actors acting and shit blowing up; many months more in fact. The average ratio of post-production to physical production is about 3:1, on smaller films and rushed-to-theaters studio pics.