The Hobbit 48fps/ HIGH FRAME RATE discussion thread.

[crows]

I don't understand how people liked HFR....I mean, so, those people liked:

Unnatural fast hand and body movements
Liked the tv quality to it
the over saturated looking daytime scenes

Yeah, theres a lot to 'love'

I just hope that it doesn't become a trend. Hopefully the negativity this is getting might make people realize it is not well received and they should not do any other movies that way.

 

[Sithlord1975]

If you guys want to see what 48 frames looks like... check out the example videos here.

https://www.48fpsmovies.com/high-frame-rate-example-videos/

I personally LOVE it!... it takes some getting used to, so I suggest you give it more than one watch.

I don't seem to mind it either. Then again, I like those BBC style movies and shows shot like this anyway.
I'm never fully "in" a movie anyway. I always know I'm watching a movie. Doesn't matter what the frame rate is.

I think people are just overreacting, and it's something new and we're not used to, so of course they aren't going to like it.
It's different and change. Nobody likes change lol

 

[intothevoid]

Nah this not about not accepting change

Sometimes change takes the wrong direction - this is about making sure that doesn't happen

 

[CelticPredator]

I don't seem to mind it either. Then again, I like those BBC style movies and shows shot like this anyway.
I'm never fully "in" a movie anyway. I always know I'm watching a movie. Doesn't matter what the frame rate is.

I think people are just overreacting, and it's something new and we're not used to, so of course they aren't going to like it.
It's different and change. Nobody likes change lol

If you can't get into a movie, watching it and feeling emotions while watching it...then eh...it seems kind of pointless to do so... you know?

I'll feel like that when i watch Transformers, it's a soulless experience. I can't imagine watching all movies like that.


Also, BBC looks like dump. I'm sorry. But, their writing, I hear, makes up for their hideous visual style.

 

[K07]

Nah this not about not accepting change

Sometimes change takes the wrong direction - this is about making sure that doesn't happen

And this post to me is so great because Void was all about seeing this the way the director intended and wasn't bashing the idea before he saw it. At least I don't remember him bashing it. He agreed with me it's a good thing to focus on changing technical aspects of movies sometimes but this post sums it up. Sometimes the change is in the wrong direction!

This could work for 3D films (wasn't that the point of this experiment?), animation, and documentaries but I don't want to see it in other movies!

Also, BBC looks like dump. I'm sorry. But, their writing, I hear, makes up for their hideous visual style.

BBC's Sherlock is the perfect example of it. It was hard to get used to that first episode. The opening scenes of Watson's wartime nightmares were abysmally awful I turned it off the first time I tried to watch it. But now it's a part of the charm for that show. It could work. But for a sci-fi/fantasy/adventure/action Hollywood blockbuster? No thank you!

 

[CelticPredator]

Oh I know you can get used too it. But it will forever bug me.

 

[Oscar_the_Gungan]

I've thought since Tron 3 has been discussed as of late it would be an interesting experiment to show the "real world" stuff in 24 fps without the 3D and then the digital world stuff in 48fps 3D. It would make for an interesting contrast. Some of the complaints about HFR in relation to the Hobbit may look cool depicting a world like Tron.

 

[CelticPredator]

Legacy did a better job with the 3D using that idea. I couldn't stand watching another film in that format. Tron, or anywhere. It just makes everything look cheap.

 

[Oscar_the_Gungan]

I remember when the Star Wars: Magic of Myth exhibit toured museum around the U.S. I visited it in San Diego and was amazed at how cheap some of the props and costumes looked when you could get a good look at it yourself in person with your own eyes. It made me understand a bit better how easily things can be fudged with lighting and camera work. If HFR is to be used in the future its going to put so much more pressure on costume designers, prop and set builders and make up artists. I think the strength of HFR is increased clarity, but in exchange the warts and flaws of everything else become more and more apparent. For me the jury is still out on the format. I think this is totally a work in progress. As long as they give audiences a choice so they aren't forced to watch it this way, I'm all for seeing what can and what shouldn't be done with it.

 

[intothevoid]

And this post to me is so great because Void was all about seeing this the way the director intended and wasn't bashing the idea before he saw it. At least I don't remember him bashing it. He agreed with me it's a good thing to focus on changing technical aspects of movies sometimes but this post sums it up. Sometimes the change is in the wrong direction!

This could work for 3D films (wasn't that the point of this experiment?), animation, and documentaries but I don't want to see it in other movies!



BBC's Sherlock is the perfect example of it. It was hard to get used to that first episode. The opening scenes of Watson's wartime nightmares were abysmally awful I turned it off the first time I tried to watch it. But now it's a part of the charm for that show. It could work. But for a sci-fi/fantasy/adventure/action Hollywood blockbuster? No thank you!

To be fair I did say that I was unlikely to like the format before going in, but I DID want to watch it as the director intended (as I aim to watch most films), and I did want to give it a fair chance.

And I could never have expected to fail as spectacularly as it did for me.

 

[steveo]

I haven't seen it yet, but plan to. I'd like to see how it is perceived. As a filmmaker myself, I'm always trying to strive for the "film look", so I have a feeling that I will not like it.

I think the filmmakers will be the ultimate judge and jury on this HFR as to if it stays. If they like it and use it, the zombies will still come out to see their movie and not care how it is "filmed" or "projected", so the money is still made.

 

[CelticPredator]

https://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey/

As usual, Mike and Jay tell it like it is, and show you all why HFR is the worst thing ever made by a human.

Go to the middleish mark. When they're wearing glasses.

 

[Adolfo]

https://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey/

As usual, Mike and Jay tell it like it is, and show you all why HFR is the worst thing ever made by a human.

Go to the middleish mark. When they're wearing glasses.

These guys bashed the film for 90% of that review but then say but we really enjoyed the film and liked it... Beetches they are...Ive never seen so much bashing of a film as so many of these recent hobbit reviews had, then saying they liked/enjoyed/I dont hate it comments come out

 

[Kuzeh]

Well, I for one embrace this new technology!
I think it adds so much depth to the experience, and everything looks so amazing!
I really hope we see more movies like this! !

Just to be clear, I agree that sometimes certain technologies don't really improve the experience, ahem*D-Box*ahem... but I can honestly say 48fps does. I felt I was IN Middle Earth the whole time!

It will take time to get used to it, but I do think this is the way of the future!
I mentioned in the Hobbit thread that this debate is similar to the "Talkies" or "Technicolor" movies from back in the day...

I love film and I think this won't work for all movies, like 3D, but I for one would like to see more movies like this! Star Wars for starters!! !

 

[The Ween]

https://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey/

As usual, Mike and Jay tell it like it is, and show you all why HFR is the worst thing ever made by a human.

Go to the middleish mark. When they're wearing glasses.

I won't bother watching that simply because of the idiotic comments that people are leaving. If they draw that kind of crowd, I can't take them too seriously.

 

[intothevoid]

Well I agree with everything they said about 48fps and 3D

 

[CelticPredator]

These guys bashed the film for 90% of that review but then say but we really enjoyed the film and liked it... Beetches they are...Ive never seen so much bashing of a film as so many of these recent hobbit reviews had, then saying they liked/enjoyed/I dont hate it comments come out

You can enjoy a movie while still pointing out what's flawed with it. They go both sides. Best critics on the internet. Easily.

I won't bother watching that simply because of the idiotic comments that people are leaving. If they draw that kind of crowd, I can't take them too seriously.

Not their fault. They had 3 bashing reviews of the Star Wars prequels, which go into more detail then "IT SUCKS", and their dumb, outside of the forum, fans expect them to tear everything a new *******. And they don't. They find out either what made the film work, or didn't. Without going
IT SUCKS **** YOU.

They enjoyed the film, but shared the same issues many of us felt. It's too long, too much filler. And a trilogy that isn't needed. Hell, I love their Prometheus review. It's spot on. They don't hate it. They don't love it. They see the faults, and the good stuff, all while going after the people who took the hate to a beyond asinine level.

 

[intothevoid]

Best critic on the internet for me is Mark Kermode

 

[CelticPredator]

he's up there for sure. I agree with him most of the time. Sometimes I don't. It happens. I don't always agree with RLM or Spill.com. But hey.

Plus, Plinkett's ****-sys of Titanic was one of the most spot on things I' ve seen in a while. Really good ****.

 

[K07]

Love Plinkett's reviews. I watched them all. And I love Generations and First Contact.