I’m not sure the way to improve this movie is to make it shorter

Why not?

This sentiment has been brought up in multiple justifications for leaving in scenes that don’t really work and aspects of the film that are broken, and it seems to point to the idea that a movie being short disqualifies it from being good? Or “better” in this specific instance.

It’s like there’s an arbitrary notion that the goodness of the movie somehow counts less if the movie is only 90+ minutes long. I don’t understand why - if through proper pacing and clever editing, which is usually only ascertained by actually trying ideas out and seeing how they work in the larger context of the edit - the only way to make the movie better seems to involve keeping all the broken bits that are already there and that we know don’t really work very well, and then adding even MORE broken bits to it and trying to tape them all back together, for the sake of not much more than being able to say “well, it’s not too short, at least.”

What are the targets that are most important to aim at and hit when it comes to making a better version of this film? Is overall run-time really one of those targets?

It’s not like Star Wars stops being “Star Wars” because it’s not over 2 hours long. Being a fan-editor is tough enough as it is considering all the things that have to be compromised before you can even start. Why add even more unnecessary complications and roadblocks to making the best thing you can?