Except that longevity isn't and shouldn't be used as a judgment of success. It's merely a coincidence that they've been as long. It's forgetting entirely the fact that long movies used to be a rare thing.
I think the last time I felt that way about a movie was with Denis Villeneuve's first Dune movie. Absolutely spellbinding. But yes, I feel most directors get away with it because nobody questions them. I'm reminded of Scorsese who just recently after the release of Killers of the Flower Moon gave a theatre some hell for putting in an intermission in his 3hr+ movie. Now, I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know if it warrants its running time, but a theatre chose to have an intermission, which should technically signal that perhaps a movie is too long? Viewers will have their limits and they have rights just as much as those of the filmmaker.
Theatres make a lot of money via concessions, but I know I'm less likely to buy drinks if there's a long movie for the simple reason that I don't want to be missing much by either constantly going to take care of business or hold it in until the end. It's probably in the best interests of theatres of having shorter movies where they see more customers coming through over the course of the day buying concessions rather than less.
The last few times I've been at the theatre, they've been understaffed to the point that none of the restauraunt-style counters were open and serving food. If that trend continues, I could see them doing away with them completely and just going with vending-machine style fast food such as the pizza vending machines.
)
