Learn Hardcore Greek: Η ταινία ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή που η διάρκεια της μου φάνηκε μικρή. - The movie was so impressive that its duration seemed short to me.

τόσο + adjective/adverb + που + result
e.g. Ήταν τόσο κουρασμένος που αποκοιμήθηκε αμέσως.
He was so tired that he fell asleep immediately.

In your sentence, it introduces a result clause: the movie was so impressive that it felt short.

Why is it εντυπωσιακή and not something like εντυπωσιακό or εντυπωσιακός?

Greek adjectives agree in gender, number, and case with the noun they modify.

η ταινία = the movie
- gender: feminine
- number: singular
- case: nominative

So the adjective must also be:

feminine, singular, nominative → εντυπωσιακή

Other forms would match other genders:

εντυπωσιακός – masculine (e.g. εντυπωσιακός άντρας)
εντυπωσιακό – neuter (e.g. εντυπωσιακό έργο)

Why does the sentence start with Η ταινία and not just Ταινία ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή…? Is the article η required?

In Greek, the definite article (ο, η, το) is used much more often than “the” in English.

Here η ταινία means “the movie”, referring to a specific movie that both speaker and listener know (for example, the one they just watched).

Without the article (Ταινία ήταν…) it sounds very unnatural and ungrammatical in standard Greek.
Generally, when talking about a specific instance of something, you will almost always use the article:
- Η ταινία ήταν καλή. – The movie was good.
- Η συζήτηση ήταν ενδιαφέρουσα. – The discussion was interesting.

In η διάρκεια της, what exactly does της mean, and why does it come after the noun instead of before it?

Here, της is a weak (clitic) possessive pronoun in the genitive singular feminine. It means “her/its” and refers back to η ταινία.

η διάρκεια της = its duration (literally “the duration of it/her” → the movie’s duration)

In Greek, these weak possessive pronouns normally come after the noun:

το βιβλίο μου – my book
το σπίτι του – his/its house
η διάρκεια της – its duration

If you want to emphasize the possessor, you can use the strong forms with σε:

η διάρκεια της ταινίας – the duration of the movie
η διάρκεια σε μένα – not natural; you’d say σε μένα with the verb instead: μου φάνηκε μικρή vs φάνηκε μικρή σε μένα.

Can I also say η διάρκειά της instead of η διάρκεια της? Is there a difference?

Yes, you can say η διάρκειά της, and that’s actually the more careful / formally correct written form.

What’s happening is about accent rules with clitics:

Base form: η διάρκεια (stress on ά)
When a clitic (like της) is added, in standard spelling the stress often shifts to the last syllable of the noun and is marked again:
- η διάρκειά της (with an extra accent on the final α)

In everyday writing and especially informally, people often just write η διάρκεια της and don’t mark the extra accent, though η διάρκειά της is technically the correct form.

Meaning-wise, there’s no difference. It’s purely a matter of orthography and stress marking.

How does μου φάνηκε work? Is μου the same as “to me”?

Yes. μου here is a weak (clitic) pronoun in the genitive, often corresponding to English “to me” / “for me” in this kind of structure.

φάνηκε is the aorist (simple past) of φαίνομαι = to seem / to appear
μου φάνηκε literally: it seemed to me

So:

η διάρκεια της μου φάνηκε μικρή
= its duration seemed short to me
(subject: η διάρκεια της, indirect experiencer: μου)

You can also say:

Η διάρκεια της φάνηκε μικρή σε μένα.

This is still correct, but μου φάνηκε is more idiomatic and natural in everyday speech.

Why is it φάνηκε and not something like ήταν (was)? What nuance does φάνηκε add?

ήταν μικρή = it was short (a more objective statement about duration)
μου φάνηκε μικρή = it seemed short to me (a subjective impression)

So:

Η διάρκεια της ήταν μικρή.
You’re stating as fact: the movie’s duration was short.
Η διάρκεια της μου φάνηκε μικρή.
You’re stressing your personal perception: maybe it wasn’t actually very short, but because the movie was so impressive, you felt it was short.

This matches the cause–effect idea introduced by τόσο … που: it was so impressive that it seemed short to me.

Why is the adjective μικρή in the feminine form?

Again, adjective agreement:

Subject: η διάρκεια (της)
- feminine, singular, nominative

So the adjective must be:

μικρή (feminine singular nominative of μικρός, -ή, -ό = small/little/short)

Other forms:

μικρός – masculine (e.g. μικρός δρόμος – a small street)
μικρό – neuter (e.g. μικρό πρόβλημα – a small problem)

Here μικρή describes η διάρκεια, not the movie itself.

Could I use σύντομη instead of μικρή for “short”? Would that change the meaning?

Yes, you can say:

Η ταινία ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή που η διάρκειά της μου φάνηκε σύντομη.

Both μικρή and σύντομη work, but they have slightly different usual flavors:

μικρή = small, little, short in a more general way.
σύντομη = short/brief usually in a more time-focused or formal context
(e.g. σύντομη ομιλία – a brief speech)

In everyday speech about movies, μικρή is very natural and common.
σύντομη sounds a bit more formal / “bookish” but is still correct.

Can I change the word order to …που μου φάνηκε μικρή η διάρκειά της? Is that still correct?

Yes, Greek word order is fairly flexible, especially when the grammatical roles are clear.

You can say:

…που η διάρκειά της μου φάνηκε μικρή. (original order)
…που μου φάνηκε μικρή η διάρκειά της.

Both are grammatical and natural. The differences are subtle and mostly about focus:

η διάρκειά της μου φάνηκε μικρή
starts by highlighting “its duration”.
μου φάνηκε μικρή η διάρκειά της
can sound a bit more like “it seemed short to me, its duration”, slightly emphasizing your experience (μου φάνηκε) first.

The weak pronoun μου must stay right next to the verb (before it in affirmative sentences), but the subject (η διάρκειά της) and the adjective (μικρή) can move around more freely.

In this sentence, what exactly is the role of που? Isn’t που usually “who/that/which”?

που is very versatile in Greek. Here it is not a relative pronoun (“who/which”), but a conjunction introducing a result clause after τόσο:

τόσο … που … = so … that …

So in this context, που ≈ “that” in English:

Ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή που…
It was so impressive that…

Other uses of που:

As a relative pronoun:
- ο άνθρωπος που είδα – the man who I saw
As an informal linker in speech:
- Μου είπε που θα αργήσει. (colloquial) – He told me (that) he’ll be late.

In your sentence, it’s clearly part of the fixed τόσο … που structure.

Could we replace που with ώστε in this sentence? For example:
Η ταινία ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή ώστε η διάρκειά της μου φάνηκε μικρή.

Yes, that’s possible and grammatically correct:

Η ταινία ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή ώστε η διάρκειά της μου φάνηκε μικρή.

ώστε also introduces a result clause (“so … that …”), but:

τόσο … που … is more common and more colloquial.
τόσο … ώστε … sounds more formal / written.

In everyday spoken Greek, most people would naturally say τόσο … που … in this kind of sentence.

Is it possible to say the sentence without τόσο, like Η ταινία ήταν εντυπωσιακή που η διάρκεια της μου φάνηκε μικρή?

No, that version is not natural Greek.

The structure … που … expressing a result needs a degree word like:

τόσο (so)
or τέτοιος (such), etc.

Without τόσο, που in that position doesn’t work as a result-conjunction. To express a causal or result idea without τόσο, you would have to phrase it differently, for example:

Η ταινία ήταν τόσο εντυπωσιακή, γι’ αυτό η διάρκειά της μου φάνηκε μικρή.
(…it was so impressive; that’s why its duration seemed short to me.)

But Η ταινία ήταν εντυπωσιακή που… by itself is not acceptable. The τόσο … που pattern is basically a fixed construction.