MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Impact of attention span changes on film...

Impact of attention span changes on film and television...

posted 3 months ago by Hereonlyforfun (156)
16 replies | jump to latest

Do others wonder if the changes regarding human attention spans will impact the pacing of film and television when it comes to storytelling?

Research is showing that technology is greatly changing human attention spans - that more things need to be done to engage our attention and I wonder if this will impact storytelling as these changes resonate.

Will viewers become more impatient with slow-burn storytelling and people's brains demand storytellers to quickly tell their stories?

Will movies with aspects like Speed, Hardcore Henry and programs that go a mile a minute start to greatly outnumber movies and programs that take their time to tell the story? Or will things stay relatively the same?

Just curious.

[–] samoanjoes (57538) 3 months ago

Matt Damon said that the worries the future generation will get movies no longer than half an hour because people can't stay focused.

[–] VinceD (10022) 3 months ago

Aren't runtimes trending longer though? I feel like most films I watched in the 90s were around 90 minutes. Now it seems like most films are over 2 hours.

[–] capuchin (3263) 3 months ago

I think they are, yes. And people still binge-watch TV series. As I say at foolish length in my other post, the focus we bring to TV and film is of a different quality to the focus we might bring to dicking about on our phones. I really don't think it has much crossover impact.

[–] samoanjoes (57538) 3 months ago

We had a post here a few years back with a chart that showed the average movie length by decade and there hasn't been much of a change in length since the 90s.

[–] fourlemons (2445) 3 months ago

I can only speak from personal experience but I have the attention span of a gnat and yet can watch hour long shows (and/or binge several shows in a row of any length) if they are good enough. There are some shows that are so good that I'm sad when the hour is over or I have to pry myself away from the TV so that I don't binge an entire season or more in one day. Examples:

Game of Thrones
Beef
Baby Reindeer
Breaking Bad
Succession

The shows don't have to be short. They just have to be really good.

[–] Hereonlyforfun (156) 3 months ago

Yes, I agree with you and I don't think the issue will be with premiere storytellers, but as time goes by, and as with most things, imitation and fads seem to be guiding forces in storytelling in hopes of cashing in instead of producing compelling stories and acting.

One odd thing is how film noirs often clock in at just over an hour and rarely more than two.

And it makes me wonder if epics like Horizon are doomed from the start (another aspect of the impact of technology changes and stream includes how long films at home come with pause, rewind, watch again, or captioning, while none of this remains in theaters).

Just sort of rambling...

[–] parkerbot (9702) 3 months ago

Possibly.

But I think people still want to be entertained and a TikTok video isn't the same as a 90 minute movie or 45 minute TV show.

[–] capuchin (3263) 3 months ago

There isn't really any such thing as a fixed human attention span that can get shorter or longer. Sometimes you read that the attention span has dropped from X to Y. That's not really true. If you read the attention span has dropped to 8 seconds -- shorter than a goldfish -- it's bollocks.

In psychology, there are different categories of attention: selective attention (the ability to focus on one thing without being distracted by something happening simultaneously) may be shortening. The research seems to suggest we are more easily distracted than we were twenty years ago. But no-one can put a reliable figure on it.

Sustained attention is situational and task dependent. In some situations, we can only focus for minutes at a time. In others, we can focus for hours. Because it's situational and task dependent, it'd be pretty much impossible to draw empirical conclusions about it. Too many extraneous variables to do any reliable experiments from which to gather the data.

The amount and length of attention we might give to operating a vehicle is very different from the amount of length of attention we might give to listening to our boring friend drone on about their ex-partner.

Similarly, the amount of attention we might give a YouTube or TikTok video is different from the amount of sustained attention we might give a film or TV show.

So, basically, no I don't think it'll affect pacing of film and television. And I don't think people are going to need shorter films either. They have very different expectations of social media than they do traditional media. You focus differently when you're watching films or television than you do when you're scrolling through social media.

That said, editing / pacing has got faster over time. Average shot length has gone from about 15 seconds in 1930 to about 3 seconds now. Whether that's due to (perceived) lower attention spans or simply stylistic choice is questionable. But people have been complaining about it since at least MTV launched.

[–] Hereonlyforfun (156) 3 months ago

I guess I should have used different wording than "attention span" and instead used something like the change in things that engage our interest.

[–] capuchin (3263) 3 months ago

A change of wording wouldn't alter my core point: sustained attention is situational and task dependent, so I wouldn't expect to see a change in how people are able to focus on film and television due to their use of technology.

[–] Hereonlyforfun (156) 3 months ago

I have an entirely different opinion than you. For one thing, anecdotally, I can tell a difference in my own habits and how technology has changed them. For example, about a decade ago I started reading the majority of books on an E-reader, and I can tell a difference in the way my brain now functions. I often do not find myself reading for as long as I did with physical books. My brain and habits have changed and have been influenced by technology. Researchers are also finding that electronic devices are impacting us in different ways, one of them being we can't stay on a page for long without moving on. The vast capabilities of these devices manipulate us into seeking more and more stimuli to keep us engaged.

Secondly, Psychology Today just had a very good article on learning, teaching, and electronic devices and what was found is not good at all. And before you type some insult like, "Psychology Today! That's pop science." I will stop you and say those cited in the article were scientists and researchers and not opinion writers and their findings based in research and science.

Not only these, but there are many, many reports of how technology is impacting the mind and how we experience things.

So, I guess we will both have to agree to disagree.

[–] capuchin (3263) 3 months ago

Oh, I'm not going to 'insult' you or Psychology Today. The point is that attention is rather more complex and difficult to research than people seem to imagine and that there is no empirical evidence of a decline. I've no doubt at all that you can feel a decline in yourself during particular tasks. Me too. And yet in other tasks, none at all.

Anyway, I've said my piece on the subject. I won't bang on about it any more.

But I'll leave three links to articles, because you might find them interesting:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38896790

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/are-attention-spans-really-collapsing-data-shows-uk-public-are-worried-but-also-see-benefits-from-technology

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/oct/23/the-big-idea-are-our-short-attention-spans-really-getting-shorter

[–] Hereonlyforfun (156) 3 months ago

Thank you for the links.

[–] AndyKing1967 (39039) 3 months ago

tl;dr 😉

[–] 123Guy (7620) 3 months ago

Ha good one!

[–] Zarkoff (2035) 3 months ago

Small sample size, but my 15 year old nephew sits through movies like the Shining. It's two hours long and kind of a slow burn.