I prefer a movie to have a minimal running time of 2 hours.
This ... this, I do not understand. A movie should be the length needed to tell its story, no more and no less. A crime epic like HEAT
needed all of its nearly three hours, but Ghostbusters
was a taut 105 minutes, Casablanca
is perfectly paced at 102 minutes, and WALL·E
was, what, 90 minutes long?
My point is that there's no reason to have an artificial criterion for the length of a movie -- that's an idea as ridiculous as saying that a novel needs to be at least 350 pages long.