Mixed Reviews For ‘The Hobbit’ After 10 Minutes Of Movie Debut – Frame Rate Questioned
There's been quite the anticipation for the prequel to the Lord of the Rings movies, The Hobbit. A two part series that brought back director/producer Peter Jackson. He debuted 10 minutes of the movie, in which some loved it, and others...not so much. The mixed reviews come after Jackson shot the 3D movie in 48 fps (frames per second) instead of the industry standard 24 fps. See what some folks had to say, both good and bad, about the footage, and especially it's frame rate.
Apparently James Cameron is planning on doing this for the next Avatar movies as well.
The footage turned About.com's Rebecca Murray into a true believer:
It was, simply put, mind-blowing to see in 48 frames per second. It's literally like being on the set next to the actors as they're performing ... You can not get a more genuine, realistic viewing experience than this unless you are watching a performance live.
Badass Digest's Devin Faraci was alarmed by how the new approach seems to have cheapened Jackson's movie:
Here's what The Hobbit looked like to me: a hi-def version of the 1970s I, Claudius. It is drenched in a TV-like — specifically 70s era BBC — video look. People on Twitter have asked if it has that soap opera look you get from badly calibrated TVs at Best Buy, and the answer is an emphatic YES. The 48fps footage I saw looked terrible. It looked completely non-cinematic. The sets looked like sets. I've been on sets of movies on the scale of The Hobbit, and sets don't even look like sets when you're on them live ... but these looked like sets. The other comparison I kept coming to, as I was watching the footage, was that it all looked like behind the scenes video. The magical illusion of cinema is stripped away completely.
Hmmmm...what do you guys think???