I thought the same thing about HD when it first came out. Everything looked like a daytime soap opera. Especially if you were watching HD format on an SD screen.
48fps does look a lot like a soap opera because that's how soaps are filmed. Basically soap operas ruined the technology for everyone because they're so ####ty and low budget, so that frame rate is inherently associated with "####ty and low budget". As a result people aren't able to suspend their disbelief, it's jarring. I guess what I'm saying is if you didn't like the 48fps thing, blame Days of our Lives.
I saw it in 24 so I wouldn't be distracted by the technology, may see in 48 and 3d later. Although it only sort of worked because there were a lot of points where you'd go "well that shot is clearly there just to show off the 3d."
In the films it happens 3 times - Gwaihir saves Gandalf from Saruman, a bunch of eagles save the hobbit crew from the wargs, and Gwaihir rescues Frodo. Thing is, the first one, where he saves Gandalf, isn't supposed to happen that way Gandalf doesn't send a moth to fetch a giant eagle, Gwaihir was supposed to meet Gandalf at Chez Saruman to give him an update on what he'd found out about the Nazgul. He found Gandalf imprisoned. More of a coincidence than anything. So it's not the deus ex machina that Peter Jackson makes it seem like, you don't just say the word and there they are to save your ass.
Though they are used in the war (i.e. after Gandalf fights the Balrog, Galadriel asks Gwaihir to go find him, which he does). But what do you expect, they're useful for that sort of thing.
The Following User Says Thank You to AR_Six For This Useful Post:
48fps does look a lot like a soap opera because that's how soaps are filmed. Basically soap operas ruined the technology for everyone because they're so ####ty and low budget, so that frame rate is inherently associated with "####ty and low budget". As a result people aren't able to suspend their disbelief, it's jarring. I guess what I'm saying is if you didn't like the 48fps thing, blame Days of our Lives.
I saw it in 24 so I wouldn't be distracted by the technology, may see in 48 and 3d later. Although it only sort of worked because there were a lot of points where you'd go "well that shot is clearly there just to show off the 3d."
Not sure you can blame soap operas. It isn't like everyone who is complaining about 48 FPS watches soap operas and automatically thinks about them.
Not once while watching the Hobbit did my mind think about soaps, it just looked cheap and fake because the technology sucks.
The first time I saw HD was a totally different feeling. That looked crisp, clear and amazing. This looked fast forwarded, cheap and jarring.
That's exactly why 48fps we think looks fake, because we're conditioned to feel 24fps is "movie" and clearer images and higher frame rates (which provides more and better information to the eyes) are fake based on a lifetime of experience.
Things look "fast" because we're programmed to anticipate things looking slow in movies due to all the blur in fast moving sequences by watching 24fps movies for a lifetime.
They look fast because we're clearly seeing what's happening instead of a blurry mess.
So people think it looks like other things in their experience that have a high framerate.. soap operas and video game cutscenes.
Video game makers do the exact opposite, they introduce artificial motion blur to make the games look closer to a 24fps movie rather than a 60fps game, so our brain will associate it with that.
I'm not convinced that it's actually an "uncanny valley" situation, but maybe.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
I saw the movie at the IMAX theatre last night. I loved it.
I would consider myself a pretty big fan of the last series of movies and also the books. The LOTR movies contained some disappointments because of the omissions and changes Jackson et al took liberties with, but I felt the Hobbit was just so on point. The look and feel, the story, it was all bang on, I felt.
But even with the light-heartedness of the Hobbit, there was that underlying sense of dread that leads to the events of the LOTR. Like, the things that are happening in this movie are bad, but it's nothing compared to what it all points towards ....
As for the frame rate thing, it was weird. It felt like watching a cartoon a lot of the time. Definitely took a while to get used to. Simple things like sparks flying out of a chimney just didn't seem real. I think I might enjoy this movie more at the normal frame rate. Not to crap on the concept though... I feel it is a legit filming technique that just needs to get its legs under it. Film makers need that experience and trial and errors to begin to develop best practices and techniques with this technology to make it effective. As a canary in the coalmine, I feel the Hobbit did extremely well with it. Perhaps in a way, Jackson WANTED it to seem cartoony though... it sort of adds to the kids story theme of the Hobbit.
That's exactly why 48fps we think looks fake, because we're conditioned to feel 24fps is "movie" and clearer images and higher frame rates (which provides more and better information to the eyes) are fake based on a lifetime of experience.
Things look "fast" because we're programmed to anticipate things looking slow in movies due to all the blur in fast moving sequences by watching 24fps movies for a lifetime.
They look fast because we're clearly seeing what's happening instead of a blurry mess.
So people think it looks like other things in their experience that have a high framerate.. soap operas and video game cutscenes.
Video game makers do the exact opposite, they introduce artificial motion blur to make the games look closer to a 24fps movie rather than a 60fps game, so our brain will associate it with that.
I'm not convinced that it's actually an "uncanny valley" situation, but maybe.
i prefer the 48fps movies (or 240hz refresh rate TV's) for this reason, i've grown up playing videogames in 60+ FPS, and always disable motion blur. i notice a big divide among my friends who are PC gamers like me and those who stick to consoles. the PC gamers prefer the higher FPS, while the console gamers don't
i prefer the 48fps movies (or 240hz refresh rate TV's) for this reason, i've grown up playing videogames in 60+ FPS, and always disable motion blur. i notice a big divide among my friends who are PC gamers like me and those who stick to consoles. the PC gamers prefer the higher FPS, while the console gamers don't
I dunno, I always try to get the highest FPS possible on my PC games, but when it comes to TV/movies, I can't stand these high refresh rate TV settings or the 48fps stuff. There's a clear difference between the two for me: Games need to be high FPS, movies do not.
Sorry if this has already been discussed, but where is the best place to watch 3D HFR in Calgary. I know there are only the three theatres that do the HFR, but I've heard RealD 3D is the best quality compared to say the IMAX 3D.
Now, is this just FUD or should I be going to see this movie at a certain theatre?
Thank you.
I thought the movie was a ton of fun, definately brought back the memories of watching LOTR... thanks for the explaination of why they just didn't use the eagles as a mode of transport (would be so much faster)... I didn't like the FPS either... can't wait for the next Hobbit movie.
__________________
"With a coach and a player, sometimes there's just so much respect there that it's boils over"
-Taylor Hall
Just thought I'd share that I just sacrificed sex with my gf who loves LOTR to NOT watch this movie that's how badly I despise this stuff...
I didn't know where else to post this, but I felt that I needed to share.
I'm trying to figure this out, so your GF was like "Let's go see The Hobbit" and you said no. So she countered with "no sex for you" to which you obliged?
I'm trying to figure this out, so your GF was like "Let's go see The Hobbit" and you said no. So she countered with "no sex for you" to which you obliged?
That is almost word for word.
Replace "no sex for you" with "then I'm not sleeping over"
I think I have my priorities straight.
Although I'm sure that me withholding will be even less effective when Django comes out...
