|
that after seeing the preview a few weeks ago, I was not a big fan of the new film style they were using. It's 48 fps (frames per second) instead of the standard 24 fps film has used forever. It might just be that the change takes some getting used to, but it almost looks "too clear" to me. It's almost like 3D without the 3D glasses, I think because the back ground has such clarity as well as the characters in the foreground. It's a depth perception that we are not used to after watching Hollywood movies made one way for decades.
The argument isn't merely that 48 fps makes things more realistic, it's that it makes it more ordinary. At 28 fps, movies have a feel of being more painted, more flowing, and more of an idealized version of reality -- more like a dream or fantasy, which is the way most people are used to experiencing movies: as something larger-than-life, or even better-than-life. At 48 fps, the moving image more closely resembles something like video. The comparisons I've heard have been to soap operas, "making of" behind-the-scenes movies, and Best Buy display TVs that need to have their settings tweaked. (I've accidentally left my TV on its default "TruVision" mode, and it's funny how it makes even old movies like "Nosferatu" or "Metropolis" look like they were shot with video on a soundstage just last week.)
If the movie ends up looking more like really artfully produced high-def video, then perhaps the pluses will outweigh the minuses. The verdict is out until I see the movie, but the negative reaction to the 10-minute sample reel back in April was pretty scathing, and seemed to be a majority opinion among the attendees. I am curious if there will be some post-production tweaking to address some of the downsides to the new technology. The upsides are supposedly pretty important to getting the best 3-D visuals, so maybe the problems in 2-D will not be such problems in 3-D. Apparently the 48 fps format makes action scenes much, much crisper in 3-D. I've also read that 48 fps looks far better for displaying slow-motion action. James Cameron is going to shoot the "Avatar" sequels in 48 fps too, which is a pretty strong endorsement considering he's one of the most tech-savvy directors in the business, along with one of the most financially successful.
I also wonder if the 10 minutes of the sample reel just weren't long enough of an adjustment period to get used to the different look/feel. When I watch movies with subtitles, usually the first few minutes are a little annoying to me because I'm not used to having to constantly scan the bottom of the screen to understand what's being said. But after about 5-10 minutes I am doing it unconsciously and start to enjoy the movie normally. Maybe that's what it will be like for people watching "The Hobbit." ************************************************************
Chris Bosh is the pussy in the miami threesome (c) me
A bra is really just a titty hammock (c) me
http://americanflipper.wordpress.com/
|
