hobbit 48 fps

With the recent release of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, lots of people are talking about his choice to use the new 48 fps format in filming.  Some are complaining that motion sickness is the chief effect of the new frame rate.  Others say that the whole thing looks strange and artificial.  Still others love it, praising it for being clear and crisp and for its superiority at conveying the special effects.  But despite some naysayers, Jackson is still endorsing the 48 fps, pushing it as the next big thing in film.

In a recent interview, Jackson had a few things to say about the way people are talking bad about his fancy filming:

I’m fascinated by reactions. I’m tending to see that anyone under the age of 20 or so doesn’t really care and thinks it looks cool, and doesn’t really understand it. They often just say the 3D looks cool. I think 3D at 24 frames is interesting, but it’s the 48 that actually allows 3D to come to almost like achieve a potential that it can achieve, because it’s less eye strain and you have a sharper picture, which creates more of a three-dimensional world.

He further goes on to talk about why exactly the new 48 fps is better than the old way of doing things:

With 3D your left and right eye, both of your eyes are seeing a different picture, because the two cameras are filming different pictures, you’re stetting strobing and motion blur and the artifacts of 24 frames. Your brain is trying to fit this stuff together, and the more artifacts in the capture, like when you’re panning and things are moving or strobing, your brain is struggling to resolve these two pictures. 48 reduces the artifacts, so it does make for a smoother experience.

And then goes even further by comparing the new method to past technological advancements and talking about why people are having a hard time accepting it as better:

I’m a Beatles fan and I remember in the mid-1980s when CDs first came out, there was a sound of vinyl that people loved and suddenly CDs were threatening the sound of vinyl, the sound of the needle. I remember reading something saying that the Beatles would never have their albums on CD, because it was too clear, and all the bum notes they were playing would be exposed and they would never be happy with that, so you’re never going to hear a Beatles tune on CD. There was all this hysteria. It’s just that as humans we don’t like change.

I haven’t seen The Hobbit yet myself, so I can’t say whether the 48 fps is really worth the trouble.  Anyone out there in NerdReader land have an opinion on whether Jackson is right?  Or is he just hung up on the new format because it’s a brand new toy for him to play with?


Thanks to CinemaBlend for the heads-up.

“And after we gorge ourselves, it’s off to the vomitorium!”

People all over the world are waiting around to see Peter Jackson’s much-anticipated Lord of the Rings “prequel”, The Hobbit.  A whole country full of lucky wankers – namely New Zealand – gets to see the thing early.  And while we should all be jealous, we should also all heed the warning that some New Zealander’s are sending:

People watching The Hobbit are becoming physically ill.

And before you ask, no it’s not the quality of the movie that’s doing it.  It is, in fact, Jackson’s experimental, crazy-ass, high-tech 48 frames per second format that he decided to shoot the thing in.  One might think that the more frame rate the better the movie, but that just doesn’t appear to be the case.  In addition to complaining about sick stomachs, people are also saying that the flick looks unnatural and that the higher frame rate is unnerving.

Normally, we human beings watch movies at 24 fps.  The new 48 fps format is still in its early stages and The Hobbit is the first film to bring its marvel to a world-wide audience.  Unfortunately, it just doesn’t seem to be working out.

Luckily, the 48 fps is only in select theaters, so you can just avoid it entirely and stick with the 24 fps if you fear for your stomach’s health.  Otherwise, you might want to bring a barf bag, just in case.

Me, I’ll pass on the new technology.  I never liked being used as a guinea pig anyways and I’m there for the story, not the fancy camera tech.  What do the folks in Internet land think?  Want to see this new frame rate or could care less?


Thanks to blastr for the heads-up.