[XenoRaven]

Man, I called it. Just exactly as I feared.

You called that some people might be put off by seeing something they're not used to?

[Marty Chinn]

You called that some people might be put off by seeing something they're not used to?

No, I called what it was going to look like and the initial impressions have confirmed that fear.

[Spiffy_1st]

That's the best way to make sure it is never accepted.

Not a really obscure film, just not my precious Hobbit.

Something like Skyfall maybe.

[THE-Pink-Dagger]

I hope these mofos do a public preview or release a 48fps trailer or something. I really want to see what this looks like. Pre-judgement is already beginning.

Except that watching this on a computer could never do it justice. The reactions clearly say that you have to see it for yourself, I posted some comments on the video reaction on Slashfilm with Alex Billington, Peter Sciretta and Frosty, very interesting to watch.

[Crunched]

It certainly doesn't impact your enjoyment as much as it does in gaming, but I honestly don't think I'd be miss it. I can only imagine 48fps would be a complete improvement. There are SO many examples where I've watched a film and the framerate has taken me out of the moment. I'll take that being fixed over a huge leap in CGI or something.

I think it depends on the film. Depends on the content and direction. It's not a "one size fits all" solution. 60fps may technically be superior, for example, but it doesn't often give that cinema kick.

I look at it like I look at fiction vs nonfiction -- in film, books, whatever. One gives a better representation of reality, but that doesn't always make it more interesting to watch or read.

[Foliorum Viridum]

Wonder if the same thing happened with the shift from black&white to color?

Some people preferred black and white, but generally colour was well received.

The thing is, that's hugely noticeable. Go in to any gaming thread and you'll see people who don't recognise the difference between 60fps or 15fps.

Hell, I know people who swear SD doesn't look any better than HD, too.

They're more subtle changes (though still huge - no excuses for people not noticing).

[Draconian]

No, I called what it was going to look like and the initial impressions have confirmed that fear.

So the one negative impression overrides the two or three positive ones? You came into this thread looking to have your opinion validated.

[JGS]

Yes, I can't wait for movies to look like someone's backyard home videos. I hope this trend dies even faster than 3D.

If someone's backyard looks like they have Smaug as a pet, I can't wait.

I hope both mediums exists.

[WillyFive]

Not a really obscure film, just not my precious Hobbit. Something like Skyfall maybe.

The best way to get things mainstream is for a big movie to use it. Digital filmmaking replacing film became accepted in part because the Star Wars Prequels all used it and demanded digital projectors to be installed on theaters. Same for 3D and Avatar.

[Clayton Bigsby]

So the one negative impression overrides the two or three positive ones? You came into this thread looking to have your opinion validated.

There has been more than one negative impression. The OP only posted one.

[Marty Chinn]

So the one negative impression overrides the two or three positive ones? You came into this thread looking to have your opinion validated.

What? Read the quotes. At least three of them are confirming my feelings on 48 fps movies.

[PhoenixPause]

Many people knew it would look like a daytime soap the minute the 48fps news came out, so I'm not surprised at this at all.

It's a shame a filmmaker of Jackson's caliber has fallen for the Cameron-ization of film trend, which is more focused on making tech demos than good films.

[THE-Pink-Dagger]

The most realistic reactions talk of the fact that it needs some getting used to, and that it looks so real, like you're there, I'm pretty sure that once people are used to it, they won't look back. Getting rid of that fu cking 24 fps motion blur and strobing effect will be a godsend, enough of those blurry pans.

[Fixed1979]

Many people knew it would look like a daytime soap the minute the 48fps news came out, so I'm not surprised at this at all. It's a shame a filmmaker of Jackson's caliber has fallen for the Cameron-ization of film trend, which is more focused on making tech demos than good films.

WTF?

[THE-Pink-Dagger]

Many people knew it would look like a daytime soap the minute the 48fps news came out, so I'm not surprised at this at all. It's a shame a filmmaker of Jackson's caliber has fallen for the Cameron-ization of film trend, which is more focused on making tech demos than good films.

See it before you judge it, that's all I'll say and don't bother pulling off some smart comment, you're not giving it a chance smart-ass.

[Team Klimt]

Bravo OP for leading with the only wholly negative comment.

From reading the rest, it seems that the new style is far more compelling. Call me crazy, but I like to take the professional opinions of guys like Peter Jackson and James Cameron over a few internet film "critics."

[ThatCrazyGuy]

No, I called what it was going to look like and the initial impressions have confirmed that fear.

You seem to have a preconceived notion and looking to have it proved by someone's else's opinion?

There was some positive opinions you know? Do theirs count?

This is raw footage as well, you know.

I have an open mind about this. I want to see the finished product in the theater and judge there.

[Sir Fragula]

The most realistic reactions talk of the fact that it needs some getting used to, and that it looks so real, like you're there, I'm pretty sure that once people are used to it, they won't look back. Getting rid of that fu cking 24 fps motion blur and strobing effect will be a godsend, enough of those blurry pans.

Exactly. Cinema has been held back for decades with 24fps. Time to move on.

[Grakl]

I'll believe it's for the best when I see it. I can't wait. Viva la revolution!

[Gattsu25]

24p per eye for 3D if I am correct.

Shutter glasses?

Ugh

[Nerfgun]

It is a really fascinating psychological phenomenon, why we tend to "prefer" 24fps for cinematic presentation.

[Draconian]

Many people knew it would look like a daytime soap the minute the 48fps news came out, so I'm not surprised at this at all. It's a shame a filmmaker of Jackson's caliber has fallen for the Cameron-ization of film trend, which is more focused on making tech demos than good films.

So you've seen it then? The entire film? Please do tell us how it was.

[a Master Ninja]

Many people knew it would look like a daytime soap the minute the 48fps news came out, so I'm not surprised at this at all. It's a shame a filmmaker of Jackson's caliber has fallen for the Cameron-ization of film trend, which is more focused on making tech demos than good films.

Blurry action scenes and judders during camera pans are needed for good filmmaking?

I understand the technical issues with 24fps, but at the same time, I don't want everything looking like a live broadcast. We don't need to wait for the future, we can see it now on TV. Not everything should look like 60 hz that we watch on TV. Think of the shows you watch now, the ones that are 60 hz and the ones that aren't, and do you honestly prefer that every show you watch should be 60 hz?

Why would lower fidelity in anything be preferable?

[Branduil]

WTF?

It's PhoenixDark.

[Baraka in the White House]

It is a really fascinating psychological phenomenon, why we tend to "prefer" 24fps for cinematic presentation.

.

[Grakl]

Many people knew it would look like a daytime soap the minute the 48fps news came out, so I'm not surprised at this at all. It's a shame a filmmaker of Jackson's caliber has fallen for the Cameron-ization of film trend, which is more focused on making tech demos than good films.

hehe

exactly like a daytime soap, yes

[Marty Chinn]

The most realistic reactions talk of the fact that it needs some getting used to, and that it looks so real, like you're there, I'm pretty sure that once people are used to it, they won't look back. Getting rid of that fu cking 24 fps motion blur and strobing effect will be a godsend, enough of those blurry pans.

I understand the technical issues with 24fps, but at the same time, I don't want everything looking like a live broadcast. We don't need to wait for the future, we can see it now on TV. Not everything should look like 60 hz that we watch on TV. Think of the shows you watch now, the ones that are 60 hz and the ones that aren't, and do you honestly prefer that every show you watch should be 60 hz?

[DonasaurusRex]

will this help 3d movies look...better less blurry / annoying?

[Grakl]

will this help 3d movies look...better less blurry / annoying?

Yes. Especially less blurry and hard on the eyes.

[Igo]

Will 3D at 48fps fix the strobing and jitteriness that has plagued almost every 3D film i've seen to date? The only exception has been The Lion King 3D, and while it's the best 3D experience i've had, it wasn't perfect either.

I do really enjoy 3D when all the factors align perfectly, so i'm really hoping the higher fps will address the issues I have.

[soldat7]

I'm pretty sure I won't dig 48fps. We'll see...

[Fixed1979]

It is a really fascinating psychological phenomenon, why we tend to "prefer" 24fps for cinematic presentation.

Is there much more to it then becoming accustomed to it? I would think that if there was some reverse world where 48fps was the norm and then someone suddenly said fuck it were going to 24fps there would be similar reactions of "it doesn't look right".

[cutmeamango]

It always pains and entertains me to read that "soap opera" effect is due framerate.
Crude lighting set/design and camera framing (editing too and even set quality sometimes) are responsible for it.

[MTMBStudios]

I love that quote from some dude who sounds like he is having an out of body spiritual experience. Been rocking 60+ FPS in PC gaming forever, welcome to the party Hollywood.

[JetBlackPanda]

I cant fucking wait to put this movie into my Ocular stems! I want my mind to have a hard time telling me if what I am seeing is real or a film.

[Foliorum Viridum]

I wonder what would happen if you asked a general audience about it after seeing it if they didn't know it was filmed at 48fps. I'd bet the majority wouldn't notice any difference.

[Branduil]

Will 3D at 48fps fix the strobing and jitteriness that has plagued almost every 3D film i've seen to date? The only exception has been The Lion King 3D, and while it's the best 3D experience i've had, it wasn't perfect either. I do really enjoy 3D when all the factors align perfectly, so i'm really hoping the higher fps will address the issues I have.

It should.

[Grakl]

I wonder what would happen if you asked a general audience about it after seeing it if they didn't know it was filmed at 48fps. I'd bet the majority wouldn't notice any difference.

It's a significant difference. People would notice.

[Allard]

24p per eye for 3D if I am correct.

Its 48 Frames Per eye. Cinema 3D doesn't work that way :P (For most theaters at least).

[Marty Chinn]

It always pains and entertains me to read that "soap opera" effect is due framerate. Crude lighting set/design and camera framing (editing too and even set quality sometimes) are responsible for it.

Why do we assume it's the crude lighting, set design, and camera framing that people are referring to? I'm talking about the same look that is applied to games, soap operas, live news, live events, sports, some sitcoms and so forth.

It's a significant difference. People would notice.

I'm not sure if that's true or not. Some people can't tell the difference between 30 and 60hz in games.

[Zona]

I look forward to seeing the movie and judging it for myself. I'm not nearly as invested in movies as a medium as some people are so I don't really have any attachment to 24fps as "Cinematic".


*Edit* I'm also a bit perplexed about the absolute judgements being made without having seen it for ones self.

[SquiddyCracker]

I can't wait to see this.
I hope I am young enough to be wowed by this rather than old enough to consider it too real :p

[RukusProvider]

3D needs to go away. Give me 4k+ resolution screens with perfect blacks, color accuracy, gamma, off axis viewing, no DSE, no dithering, no reflections and AR coating. Still a long way to go on 2D PQ.

[Wiggum2007]

Blurry action scenes and judders during camera pans are needed for good filmmaking? Why would lower fidelity in anything be preferable?

But it's art!

[jett]

Wow at those impressions not nearly as positive as I imagined.

3 really positive impressions and 1 negative.

eh?

[mclaren777]

I'm anti-48fps so I'm really hoping this movie doesn't piss me off.

[itsgreen]

I probably go to the cinema and ask my money back...

I hate that soap opera look...

[Crunched]

It's a significant difference. People would notice.

You say that, but consider the amount of people even on GAF who can't tell the difference between 30 and 60fps in gaming, where it directly affects their input. I think I've even seen people say it's tough to tell the difference between SD and HD resolutions.

[RiccochetJ]

I have no idea what to expect. What's something comparable that this could look like?

[Muffdraul]

There's no denying it seems odd at first. Once you adjust to it you'll wonder how in the hell people were satisfied with 24 fps for so long.