Critics slam "Hobbit" 48 FPS feel...

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12 December 2012   #31
Originally Posted by PerryDS: I'm not too sure how they managed to turn a fairly thin book into multiple movies. Maybe lots of wandering around in the mountains, and gratuitous beauty shots.


If you read the critics' reviews, they lament the fact that the pace of the movie is slow, and that almost nothing noteworthy happens in the first installment of The Hobbit...

Apparently the first Hobbit film covers only the first 130 pages of the book anyway.

I guess that is how you inflate 1 book into a 3 movies.

You stretch everything out as far as you can, lengthwise...
 
Old 12 December 2012   #32
Originally Posted by danmarell: Having seen it twice now in a theatre I can say that it's definitely not as bad as the 'critics' are making out. It is definitely different. It is also a tremendous advantage in scenes of fast panning. I have never enjoyed motion interpolation on modern tvs and always switch it off. But this is a little bit different than that. It still looks filmic because of the way its been lit.

I'm still not decided but I definitely dont hate it. I think the main thing we have to consider is that our brains have never experienced this before so you are giving it new information. After the sensory information has been seen lots, I think the discussion will die down. 48 works really well at times in this movie and you forget about it. Sometimes you do notice it but its all down to personal preference. Dont be so easy to jump on the bandwagon. make your own decision. Anyway, it's not being shown in most places in 48, you have to seek out where and actively go see it. Most people will see it in 24fps 3D because most theatres globally will be showing it that way.



Thanks for your insight Daniel, I am quite curious to see how 3D HFR plays out. Going to see The Hobbit in less than two hours. Some people perceive the indoor scenes to feel like watching a theater play? Would you agree?

I wonder if HFR 3D would be better suited than other technologies in capturing and selling Theater/Opera/Concert acts, always felt them extremely flat on HDTV. Also Red Bull is going to have a field day withe their extreme sport stuff, I presume, especially their Snowboard stuff must look great with this technology.
__________________
C u r r e n t W I P

The stone had skidded arc'd and bloomed into islands
Kamau Brathwaite
 
Old 12 December 2012   #33
I'm curious about the animation process for a 48FPS movie, is there anyone here with experience with this?

I'm mainly wondering do they set say their Maya scenes to 48 FPS and then set twice as many keys or do they just animate at 24FPS as normal and then the subframes get rendered at render time?

Cheers,
Brian
 
Old 12 December 2012   #34
Originally Posted by DePaint: I guess that is how you inflate 1 book into a 3 movies.

You stretch everything out as far as you can, lengthwise...


The appropriate wording is: 'thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread.'

Oh the tragic irony.
__________________
"Even the Christmas vacation will be darkened by New Zealand scripts…"
~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter 34
 
Old 12 December 2012   #35
In my memory, the Hobbit was a rather short book anyway (it's been a long time) so 3 movies of 3 hours is probably more than what it takes to read it...
 
Old 12 December 2012   #36
I've watched The Hobbit 3 times now, and I like it very very much, the more I see it the more I enjoy it.
Loves the 48fps, I can see the details and color much clearly, in fact, this is the first 3D movie that didn't give me headache.
Oh, yeah, I like LOTR too, I think they are perfect.
Of course, this is my opinion.
 
Old 12 December 2012   #37
Originally Posted by EricM: In my memory, the Hobbit was a rather short book anyway (it's been a long time) so 3 movies of 3 hours is probably more than what it takes to read it...


They'll probably also release "Extended collector's editions" featuring additional 45 minutes of previously unseen footage, to get all the nerds to buy it twice. As well as including hours upon hours of PJ and his cronies nattering on about important it was for them to "stay faithful to the books".
__________________
"Even the Christmas vacation will be darkened by New Zealand scripts…"
~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter 34
 
Old 12 December 2012   #38
For the last year, I've been working on 48 fps and quickly got used to it and really like the fluidity it gives. Now working again on 24 fps the difference is like night and day. It's only a matter of time before higher frame rates become mainstream.
I have also seen The Hobbit 3 times and loved it each time. The high frame rate is amazing to watch in the sweeping shots, particularly at the start of the film, not to give anything away.

@Dutch - Lol, did PJ wrong you in another life or something? Practically every Hobbit related comment of yours is nothing but blatant bashing of a movie you have not seen yet. It's always fun to jump on the bandwagon isn't it.
By the way, "Of mice and Men" is a tiny book, much shorter than the section of Hobbit featured in this movie. Don't hear anyone comparing that movie to "butter scraped over too much bread".
 
Old 12 December 2012   #39
The padding in King Kong was ridiculicious.

.
 
Old 12 December 2012   #40
The LOTR films were so long because literally every other shot was in super slow-motion. It's kind of ridiculous once you pay attention to it.
 
Old 12 December 2012   #41
Just saw it. Wow. Loved it, the audience was also giving their ovations at the end of my screening. I feared I wouldn't like HFR 3D, but the opposite held true for me. I wouldn't want to go back to normal 3D, definitely had less strain to the eyes then normal, I wasn't bothered much by the BBC Effect others were describing (I wouldn't even agree to label it BBC effect), maybe a result from being accustomed to European TV shows, that don't feature the cinema look so much that you tend to see with US TV shows?

Slow pace in the beginning, I can see how this might be a problem, if you expect action to kick in sooner, but at the end I think it comes down to a matter of taste, the nearly three hours flew by for me. 48fps believer here.

PS: Great visual work.
__________________
C u r r e n t W I P

The stone had skidded arc'd and bloomed into islands
Kamau Brathwaite

Last edited by Solothores : 12 December 2012 at 11:13 PM.
 
Old 12 December 2012   #42
sooo, watched the movie in 3d with 48 frames and i think its a good example AGAINST 48 frames for realfilm. it looks like a video production and you can clearly see the stages as stages, like theater. that is a big problem because you have this monumental sequences and then the actors are falling or going to the next shot which is filmed on a stage and you have this extrem cut in visual perception. like going from star wars battle sequence to a lars van trier movie theater set. it could work good for cg only movies, but realfilm is not that good. shots in which they run over mountains reminds me on a bbc documentary, but with running dwarfs in it.
i cant understand why jackson choose this, he did testscreeings, pretty sure about it, so dont know. would be great to hear from him why 48 was choosen with all the problems. because 3d is not better with it, fast moving cams for example.


the movie itself is a bit to long i think. cg wise its amazing. gollum is great but my favourites are the two ork bosses, great facial expressions, animation in general. also the wood in which the magician lives looks great.
 
Old 12 December 2012   #43
Originally Posted by pap87: @Dutch - Lol, did PJ wrong you in another life or something? Practically every Hobbit related comment of yours is nothing but blatant bashing of a movie you have not seen yet.


Who can say.
He sure is doing Tolkien no favours. A man who's work I greatly admire. And as such, I loathe what Jackson, Walsh and particularly Boyens are doing to his legacy.

As for not having seen the movie, you're right, I haven't. Nonetheless, between the things I saw when I was working at the 'Big House', and the Hobbit production videos, (as well as the LotR movie adaptation legacy) I've seen all I needed to see. I'm more than happy being in the minority here though.


Originally Posted by pap87: By the way, "Of mice and Men" is a tiny book, much shorter than the section of Hobbit featured in this movie.


It's one thing to turn one book into one <2 hour movie. It's an entirely different thing to turn one book into three 2.5-3 hour long movies.

Originally Posted by pap87: Don't hear anyone comparing that movie to "butter scraped over too much bread".


Woosh.
__________________
"Even the Christmas vacation will be darkened by New Zealand scripts…"
~ J.R.R. Tolkien, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter 34
 
Old 12 December 2012   #44
Is it only the 3D version that's at 48fps?
 
Old 12 December 2012   #45
Quote: Just saw it. Wow. Loved it


Quote: I've watched The Hobbit 3 times now, and I like it very very much, the more I see it the more I enjoy it


Good! I doubt I'll be able to see it in 48fps being in Osaka but I'll be the first in theater on the 14.
Slow paced is all good for me. I could watch a full tv series of hobbits just being hobbits. What I am afraid of is the overdone stuff. For exemple the wolf we see in the 6min clips... all muscular like on steroids. In my book, a skinny hungy looking wolf is a lot creepier. A lot more realistic too. Cant say anything before I see it though. I hope it's good.

By the way, the book is not so short. I've listened the audiobook earlier this year and it's not that short at all. A lot of stuff happen after Smaug too.
__________________
So long and thanks for all the fish
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.