Mania Editorial: The Hobbit in 48fps HFR Comments -


Showing items 11 - 20 of 65
<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  >>  
ddiaz28 12/18/2012 6:51:26 AM

I'm still trying to decide if I want to see this in HFR or IMAX first since I know I'll see it more than once.  So many opposing views of the HFR is really makign it hard.  Guess I'll just have to pick one and decide for myself.

ElBaz13 12/18/2012 7:08:56 AM

And I was hoping the 3D era would go away....


jedibanner 12/18/2012 7:12:30 AM

To be fair Wiseguy, I like PJ's too...

wish 12/18/2012 7:42:48 AM

48fps or HFR is here to stay folks!  And like HD 720pand 1080p did, it'll force filmakers and fx people to get better and better at thier crafts in order to better fool the audience into thinking that what they are seeing is real.  I watch so many old films that assumed you'd never watch them at your house in hi-def and the stuntmen and fx reveals are so obvious its clear they relied on the lack of resolution to hide some of the flaws.

I saw it in 48fps and I will be one of the ones to say I thought it was a superior way to watch a film, it'll get better and better from here and I for one hope it'll become the standard.  Our home tv's will adopt this format too and when you watch things that are shot at HFR, it'll be hard to believe it's NOT real, and that's what I want!!  I'll read a book when I feel the desire to fill in the blanks with my imagination, that's not what I want to do for a movie!

ElBaz13 12/18/2012 8:02:10 AM

Ok, but can we have 48fps without 3D?

I'm 3D blind so this does not benefit me. But I could still see crystal clear HD. My 1080p plasma is gorgeous.

You do have to give credit for PJ as he is stepping up to the plate to be one of the first 4k home video releases. I'm sure when the 4k TVs and players invade people's homes, PJ and the Hobbit will have the one step ahead of everyone studio and not have to worry about reconverting a movie to the new format like a lot of studios are doing now to 1080p with older catalogue titles.


monkeyfoot 12/18/2012 8:30:36 AM

I still haven't seen the Hobbit in any format so I'm kind of inappropriatley commenting on something I haven't experienced. But there are two things I still feel I can discuss.

1) The main point of the Joel's article is that 48 HFR just doesn't work. But how would anybody ever know if nobody tried? PJ is being criticized for daring to think forward, strive for something new, and attempting to bring a richer cinematic experience to people. Joel are you and other crtitics saying, "DON'T! Just don't even try to do something new and different. Just do the same thing that's always been done. We don't like change."  Then we wouldn't have narrative storylines in movies, or sound in picture, or color, or widescreen, or stereo sound. In each of those cases I'm sure alot of people didn't like them and said it was bad, but we can see they are all now mainstays. Maybe 48fps ultimately won't work but you don't want anybody to try? 

It's like the lyrics of an old Harry Chapin song,

Flowers are red young man
Green leaves are green
There's no need to see flowers any other way
Than they way they always have been seen

2) My second point is the editorial We. Genre commentary on blogs, webistes and the comments added by their readers is riff with the "We know (fill in the blank) sucks! Everybody knows this!" They express so many attitudes about movies, TV, books, etc. with an all encompassing "We" saying everybody on earth has decided that this or that thing is objectively true, no ifs, ands, or buts.

This comes out in negative comments with the main genre targets being the Star Wars prequels, The Matrix sequels, the Transformers movies, X3, SM3 and others. Whatever the commenter's attitude is is as objectively true as the speed of light in a vacuum or 2 2=4. Your article takes the same attitude in your opinion of HFR 3D.

But these are subjective opinions on all of these and the opinion only works for you. I have never liked writng that decides to speak for everyone on the face of the planet on a subject. It's one of my pet peeves. Everyone is entitled to form their own opinion and each is as good as any other on artisitic expressions. I don't think the world needs anymore  "Guys, we’ve already been there, and we didn’t like it."


The above is only my opinion and is only good within the confines of my mind.

jedibanner 12/18/2012 8:47:10 AM

But Monkeyfoot, if a strong majority says we don't like it, do we really need to established that a minority will always see it the opposite?

Whatever it is, there will always be 2 sides to something...sometimes one of them has a stronger, louder and more vocal view and opinion then others and in those lines, that's where I see the ''We'' terms being used since the strong majority gets the voice of the speaker.

Some people like 3D...some people like racism too...but is it fair to say we as human aren't racist? Of course...even knowing some people are but if the huge majority feels the opposite way, I don't see any issues with the term.

joelr 12/18/2012 8:51:40 AM

A few things Guys and Gals:

For the record, my article is about the HFR, not the narrative. I actually really enjoyed the film, and can't wait to see it in 24fps

@Wish 720P/1080P is not the same change as 48fps. The HD takeover gave us a higher resolution picture that is much closer in fidelity to a 35mm image, and even more so when you go to 4K, 8K etc. 48fps changes the movement and feel of the film, which is completely different.

PJ and Co. are not moving "forward" or evolving, HFR has been around since forever, but, as I stated in the article- It's not what we have accepted as our "cinema".

If you liked the HFR, then good for you, I'm not saying your "wrong", but personally I truly dislike the format, and have for a very long time. As I said in the article- it breaks the illusion. I go to movies to escape, not for them to be "real". I think HFR can be used for some kind of experience, particularly gaming (which it already is), but I believe film is more akin to a painting or a photograph, not a total immersion experience.

joelr 12/18/2012 9:01:50 AM

Also, the use of "We" works in the context of my article. "We" have all accepted 24fps as our version of cinema for our entire lives. It has been the standard for almost a century, which is older than anyone on this thread I would wager. Therefore, "we" is appropriate since it's used in conjunction to a truth whether you are aware of it or not. Unless you've been watching movies in HFR all your life, which I know is not the case.

P.S. Relax.

Wiseguy 12/18/2012 9:30:13 AM

That ain't what you said. "We don’t want our film watching experiences to be “real”, we want them to be an illusion, an escape, one that requires us to sit in a darkened theater and use the most powerful tool in all of filmmaking- imagination." And your we sure as hell doesn't apply. Maybe you should stick to novels, that's where your imagination has to work

jedibanner stop talking non-sense dude. Humans are racist. And where's this majority you're talking about, the film just came out so the verdict is far from rendered. With the exception of critics who are trying to make-up people's mind most of the response has been fairly even and that doesn't include the clowns that give  opinions based on others' opinion. You know, the ones   talking out of their asses that without seeing the product. I'm sure you know what I mean

<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  >>  


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.