Peter Jackson asks fans to judge The Hobbit for themselves
Apr. 30, 2012
You would think the film world would trust the vision of certain directors based on their prior output. Many didn't trust James Cameron leading up to the release of TITANIC or AVATAR and both films changed movies in dramatic ways. Now, Peter Jackson did usher in the modern fantasy epic with THE LORD OF THE RINGS, but he may have burnt many bridges after both KING KONG and THE LOVELY BONES did not meet the majority of expectations. Add his involvement with THE ADVENTURES OF TINTIN and you find a director who unnecessarily needs to prove himself once again.
With the recent onslaught of negativity regarding his new 48fps filming on THE HOBBIT, Peter Jackson has actually made a statement to defend his film and vision of the future of movies.
“At first it’s unusual because you’ve never seen a movie like this before. It’s literally a new experience, but you know, that doesn’t last the entire experience of the film–not by any stretch, [just] 10 minutes or so,” Jackson tells Entertainment Weekly. “That’s a different experience than if you see a fast-cutting montage at a technical presentation.”
So what does he say to people who just decide they don’t like the glossy new look of the format he’s using?
“I can’t say anything,” Jackson acknowledges. “Just like I can’t say anything to someone who doesn’t like fish. You can’t explain why fish tastes great and why they should enjoy it.”
It does need to be said that the film will also be shown in theaters in the standard format which will remove the "live TV" feel that those at CinemaCon experienced. Much like when AVATAR was released, many theaters may not be equipped to show the film in the 48fps. But, look at how fast 3D sprang up everywhere after that film was released. Many are still decrying the release of 3D films, but they keep getting released and people continue to buy tickets. Who knows what will happen with this higher frame rate. Does it mean filmmakers are going to switch to all digital? Probably not. Many, like Christopher Nolan, are experimenting with other formats like IMAX, which has been around forever and has never been utilized in quite the same way as Nolan is now.
The times, they are a-changin'. It is time to buck up or shut up. Insert cliche here.
| Extra Tidbit: | MEET THE FEEBLES, HEAVENLY CREATURES, and DEAD-ALIVE. There are three reasons why I will trust Peter Jackson no matter what he decides to do. |
|---|
| Source: | Entertainment Weekly |
|---|
We'll see...
However... seeing as how those films were not shot at 48 fps, they were never intended to be viewed as such... So MAYBE this will look great after you adjust. Though because of the many reviews about it looking like a
However... seeing as how those films were not shot at 48 fps, they were never intended to be viewed as such... So MAYBE this will look great after you adjust. Though because of the many reviews about it looking like a soap opera or cheap made for TV movie, I'm not getting my hopes up... But hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised.
On the subject of the way he's filmed "The Hobbit" I'm gonna have to land on the side of
On the subject of the way he's filmed "The Hobbit" I'm gonna have to land on the side of giving him the benefit of the doubt. He's a crazy talented filmmaker and I'm sure that he knows what he's doing. That's it. Mini rant over.
maybe im the exception...
And yeah, King Kong sucked gorilla dong...
...in Hong Kong. Where he played ping pong.
And yeah, King Kong sucked gorilla dong...
...in Hong Kong. Where he played ping pong.
Let me sum it up for you. Your entire life, 99.9% of any movie you've seen has been 24fps. 99.9% of any TV show you've seen has been at 30fps. (assuming you live in the US) Herein lies the problem. Watching a movie at anything higher than 24fps is going to make you feel like you're watching a TV
Let me sum it up for you. Your entire life, 99.9% of any movie you've seen has been 24fps. 99.9% of any TV show you've seen has been at 30fps. (assuming you live in the US) Herein lies the problem. Watching a movie at anything higher than 24fps is going to make you feel like you're watching a TV show, and thus make it feel cheaper and less cinematic. But only because that's what you're used to, whether consciously or subconsciously.
And yes, it's actually almost exactly like the 120hz feature on the new TV's. Same concept.
48 FPS
I don't think he would do something like this just because he wants to, or doing it while still having doubts of its effectiveness or how much it will put us off.
Even though I haven't seen it, I can assure you it has nothing to do with that
I don't think he would do something like this just because he wants to, or doing it while still having doubts of its effectiveness or how much it will put us off.
Even though I haven't seen it, I can assure you it has nothing to do with that stupid function of modern tvs called motion flow, since the whole method of recording and then processing and projecting the image is totally different.
So please, give it a shot first and THEN if you don't like it, complain all you want.
Hell, most possibly you won't have a 48fps theatre near you anyway.
saw it at ComicCon
What does Tintin have to do with this?
More on topic, I'll wait to see it in motion, and decide how it looks then.
More on topic, I'll wait to see it in motion, and decide how it looks then.
no thanks...
Just need to clear one thing...
As for tidbit, aside for LOTR, there's only one other reason for me: THE FRIGHTENERS. Boom! I for one am going to put the blindfold of trust on me now and will only remove it before actually watching the damn movie.
As for tidbit, aside for LOTR, there's only one other reason for me: THE FRIGHTENERS. Boom! I for one am going to put the blindfold of trust on me now and will only remove it before actually watching the damn movie.
I don't know what to think yet
However, this is 48fps from the get-go - with no alteration from the original source - so I'm not sure how it'll turn out. I hope it doesn't suck, but I probably won't see it in the theaters anyway.
However, this is 48fps from the get-go - with no alteration from the original source - so I'm not sure how it'll turn out. I hope it doesn't suck, but I probably won't see it in the theaters anyway.
I don't want the film to be "incredibly clear", I want it to look like another realm of reality or fantasy. A window into a different world. The higher frame-rate is pretty much killing that.
I don't want the film to be "incredibly clear", I want it to look like another realm of reality or fantasy. A window into a different world. The higher frame-rate is pretty much killing that.
What is funny is that for the past decade video cameras have been fighting against this look. Now suddenly, we are going backwards, back to the soap opera look of video?
What is funny is that for the past decade video cameras have been fighting against this look. Now suddenly, we are going backwards, back to the soap opera look of video?
Still excited for the movie, though.
Still excited for the movie, though.
I trust Peter Jackson. The Lord of the Rings films were a big part of shaping me into the film geek that I am today (I was barely 11 when the first one came out). He has my trust based on that alone.
I trust Peter Jackson. The Lord of the Rings films were a big part of shaping me into the film geek that I am today (I was barely 11 when the first one came out). He has my trust based on that alone.
Just sounds awful.
i remember hearing the same stuff when some screens switched to digital. it'll pass. jackson is a great filmmaker and i will judge the film based on that.
i remember hearing the same stuff when some screens switched to digital. it'll pass. jackson is a great filmmaker and i will judge the film based on that.