Fans of director Denis Villeneuve and cinematographer Roger Deakins are undoubtedly stoked for Blade Runner 2049, the upcoming sequel to Ridley Scott’s sci-fi epic. Those same fans probably wouldn’t mind if either of those guys made a movie that clocked in at almost three hours long. Blade Runner 2049 might be putting that theory to the test, as Villeneuve’s latest film is rumored to have the longest runtime of any blockbuster since Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar.

Blade Runner 2049

Sounds okay to me! As someone who loves Villeneuve and Deakins’ work (especially together), I find that length pretty exciting, but if you’re suffering from excessive runtime fatigue, I get it. It might be difficult for more casual viewers to commit to a film that’s almost three hours long, especially if they didn’t particularly enjoy sitting through super-sized events like The Hateful Eight (168 minutes) or Martin Scorsese’s recent output (both Silence and The Wolf of Wall Street clocked in at over two hours and 40 minutes).

But as IndieWire points out, the alleged runtime of Blade Runner 2049 isn’t that much longer than many recent superhero blockbusters — Captain America: Civil War, Marvel’s longest superhero film to date, was 147 minutes long, and most fans didn’t seem to mind.

It’s definitely in keeping with the recent trend of longer blockbusters that require bigger time commitments from audiences, but a new film from Villeneuve and Deakins seems like it’s worth the effort.

Blade Runner 2049 hits theaters on October 6.