Payne was diplomatic enough not to single any specific films out as the source of his ire, but it may not be entirely coincidental that his comments came on the US opening weekend of Martin Scorsese’s 206-minute Western, Killers of the Flower Moon.

The film has been widely praised by critics, though audience assessments, despite being positive on the whole, are neatly edited down by Rotten Tomatoes to “engrossing in spite of its slower pace and extreme length”.

The only director Payne did actually single out for naming and shaming was himself, conceding that his 133-minute latest is “still a little long”. He went on to offer some salient advice to his fellow filmmakers, asserting that “in the editing you want it to be as short as it can possibly be, but no shorter”.

Below, we take a look at some three-hour-plus marathons that could possibly have benefited from Payne on consultancy duty in the editing suite. Or perhaps we’re being too harsh, and this patience-testing selection truly warrant their considerable demands on our precious free time.

If you watched these five films back-to-back it would take you 16 hours, so with eight hours put aside to sleep, that’s a whole day mapped out. But are they actually worth the effort?

1. Inland Empire

David Lynch, 2006, 180 minutes

For some, three hours of David Lynch would qualify as an endurance test. For fans, however, this bizarre collision of a cursed German movie, a sitcom starring talking rabbits, an evil hypnotist, plenty of violence and abuse, seemingly unrelated plot lines, a pet monkey, and the presence of long-time Lynch collaborators Laura Dern and Harry Dean Stanton in lead roles, is 180 minutes of the director at his most disturbingly surreal.

Is it worth it? That very much depends where you stand on Lynch. If you’re a lover of films that have a beginning, a middle and an end you may well class it as pretentious drivel. If you’re not sure, maybe start with one of his more accessible works like Mulholland Drive and take it from there.

2. Oppenheimer

Christopher Nolan, 2023, 181 minutes

It was helped by stellar performances from a cast that featured bona fide A-listers in even the most minor roles; a director that has a reliable ability to stay just to the auteur side of blockbuster, while simultaneously sitting just to the blockbuster side of auteur; and a script that successfully mixed political intrigue with global annihilation, a dash of romance, and tragedy both personal and planetary.

Is it worth it? Absolutely. I stayed firmly rooted in my seat until the credits rolled, despite this making it highly likely I would miss my last train. In the event I needn’t have worried – if there’s one thing more certain than Nolan delivering a box office hit, it’s a British train being delayed.

3. Avengers: Endgame

The Russo Brothers, 2019, 182 minutes

Usually when we hear a film has a three-hour-plus run time, the first descriptions that come to mind are ones like “arty” or “high brow”, so it was certainly brave of the Russos to take a lengthy template usually reserved for Oscars-bothering fare and transplant it to a superhero movie. Not least because the attention span of your average eight-year-old Marvel fan is significantly shorter than that of a Scorsese devotee.

Is it worth it? It’s a film everyone should see, regardless of their stance on superhero yarns. Firstly because, having taken Avatar’s “highest-grossing film ever” crown a full decade after that film’s release, it’s a genuine cultural phenomenon. Secondly because, judging by the diminishing returns of Marvel’s output since, this may well come to be viewed as the final film of a golden era for the genre.

4. Avatar: The Way of Water

James Cameron, 2022, 192 minutes

It took 13 years, somewhere not too far south of half a billion dollars (estimated range from around US$250 million and US$460 million), and more shunted release dates than there are costume changes at a Beyoncé concert for James Cameron’s latest epic to finally land in cinemas last year.

Is it worth it? It is not. It might be enjoyable if you’re someone who enjoys watching a video game for over three hours, but in that case you might be better placed staying at home and actually playing a video game for over three hours.

5. The Godfather Part II

Francis Ford Coppola, 1974, 202 minutes

Equally undeniable, though, is that the film’s languid pace can drag somewhat. To Coppola’s cheerleaders, the almost interminable denouement is a sign of a director at the height of his powers, bravely eschewing mainstream cinematic norms. To the less convinced, it’s a self-indulgent, overly conscious attempt to be “arty”.

Is it worth it? With seven Oscars to its name and a reliably high placing in virtually every “greatest films ever made” list around, it’s definitely one to watch if you’ve somehow never managed it before.