Interesting conversation going on at my favorite forum (uh oh, maybe it's becoming second favorite. well, regardless, I'm not telling you where the other one is... ;-) )
It was mentioned, that one of the things (among many, as we know) that has really changed after Vatican II, was the distinction between Low Mass and High Mass.
Now, I realize this may not have been so cut and dry in every parish, but if my understanding is correct, then at most parishes, most of the Masses were 45 minutes (or even 30), music-less, or else with a smattering of hymns. Then, every parish had it's "main Mass," which was High Mass, and while I'm not sure exactly how long that would normally be, it was the one with all the frills, and was definitely going to be longer than the other Masses. And you knew which one it was!
So, people who wanted Mass to be quick and easy, went to one of the Low Masses, and those who wanted the full "experience," could go to High Mass.
SINCE the Catholic Church is pretty much the only one that "requires" weekly Mass attendance, and now that we have lost this distinction, if Mass goes over 60 minutes, everyone is complaining and leaving as soon as they can.
Wouldn't that be interesting if we brought back this distinction? (For many other reasons also than the ones I've just mentioned.) Say, at St. P, if people KNEW that the 4:30 pm and 8 am were going to be less than an hour, with no incense, not even any sung Mass Ordinary (ok, now I'm getting into dangerous territory,) and Father would talk on the faster side; and then that the 10:30 am Mass would easily be 1.5 hours, with LOTS of singing... and it was always this way every week, then people wouldn't complain about the long Mass, since they would only be there if they wanted.