Is the Imax version of the hobbit also 48FPS? Aslo How do I know beforehand which theaters have 48?
The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
71–80 of 146 posts
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#72Certainly captures a lot of my experience with The Hobbit. I saw it in HD/HFR, and I'm planning on going back to see it in 2D just so I can enjoy the Movie. I was distracted, and distressed at the experience - my entire "suspension of disbelief" was never engaged, and I constantly felt like I was watching a TV Show - one exception being where the Orcs where chasing everyone down inside the mountain, when I felt like…
> distressed at the experience I think this is interesting. Like yourself, and the author of the article, I applaud Peter Jackson for having the courage to try, and reserve judgement until I have the chance to see it myself next week. That said, I still think it's very much an open question whether people's responses to this are due to the intrinsic nature of 48fps or just due to how alien it feels. Personally, I can…
> Personally, I can't see how anything that replicates reality better can be intrinsically bad.
Simple. People don't watch movies for reality.
Just like how people prefer photos with bokeh in shots where in real life it would never appear.
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#73[deleted]
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#74I saw it last night in HFR 3D. It's actually the first proper feature film I've seen in 3D and I enjoyed it a lot. There definitely were moments where it looked like you were looking at actors on a set. The fidelity was so good that it was obvious the characters were wearing prosthetics and makeup. However there were plenty of scenes where the increased detail and clarity were a huge advantage, especially some of the…
Spot on with the "obvious makeup" in certain scenes. I still think 48fps is amazing. I wonder how it will look in non-fantasy-themed movies!
I guess it's due to the extra work they have to do to put the proper amount of color on the sensor, as the Red EPIC they used tends to mute them a little bit.
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#75Meh, I think it will just take time before people are A) used to HFR and B) directors/producers are accustomed to working with the new framerate.
The porn industry thought HiDef was going to be the end of their career, since suddenly everyone could see that the porn actresses were really just people with makeup on. Porn certainly hasn't died yet. Cinema won't either.
(Sorry for comparing porn to cinema)
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#76[deleted]
Almost every aspect of your post is wrong (regarding the author and the post) or irrelevant (regarding the content).
The author is a filmmaker and was comparing film formats. He watched the Hobbit multiple times on the same night at a state of the art cinema. He watched the (same) film in this film format order: 3DHFR, 3D, 2D, 3DHFR.
Therefore, the content could technically have been any film and the elements of immersion compared were across the same content.
It is shame there was no 2DHFR format to compare though.
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#77Once DPs get a hang of exposure and motion blur to look the same as on slower frame rates, this debate will be over.
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#78After I saw The Hobbit at 48fps, I'm having a hard time watching 24fps movies. Yesterday I watched The Shining by Kubrik. It was jittery, and that's a slow film. HFR is superior to 24fps in every conceivable way. I suppose color and sound were not considered "cinematic" back in the day just like HFR now. 3D on the other hand... I wish it would die. You have to converge at a distance and focus at another, and that's r…
At least the Hobbit was filmed on dual cameras and didn't just have 3D 'painted on' afterwards. For ordinary shots, it should have correct parallax.
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#79Disclaimer: I haven't seen the movie yet, in any format.
But I did see the clip of the Bilbo and Gollum scene played on Colbert the other week. Martin Freeman (who I've loved in other stuff, like Sherlock) was fucking terrible.
If the calibre of delivery is like that, I'm expecting unexpected rubbish. Even one of the scenes from McKellen Colbert played was pretty shit. Maybe I'm expecting too much from what is meant to be a kids book.
My point is, forget FPS -- if the acting is shit, nothing will help.
Re: The Hobbit: Why 48FPS Makes Film Less Magical
#80At the risk of drawing this thread off-topic, I saw it in 24FPS and didn't think much of it. No amount of HD or FPS can make up for a mediocre film, in the same way that fantastic graphics don't make a good game. (Spoilers ahead.) Bilbo and the dwarves were caricatures - overdoing their roles as a surprised hobbit and a fat, funny disney character with a single personality. (Seriously - there's a fat one, a stupid on…
The portrayal of the dwarves is consistent with their characterization in the book.