MSN Movies Blog

Peter Jackson defends filming techniques used in 'The Hobbit'

Director addresses new frame-rate critics

By Parallel Universe on MSN Dec 11, 2012 12:33PM
'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey'/Warner Bros.Director Peter Jackson has defended the new filming techniques he uses in "The Hobbit" trilogy after critics slammed the format following early previews.

Jackson has shot the movies using 48 frames per second, rather than the usual 24 frames per second, which has been the standard rate of images projected since 1927. Critics who have reviewed the film have dismissed the increased number of frames as "kitch" and "fake", but Jackson is adamant filmmaking has to move forward to prevent movies from looking outdated.

Bing: More about 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' | More about Peter Jackson

He tells the BBC, "24 frames is jarring to me now. It looks primitive. Change is good, it takes people some time to get used to it. Ultimately, it's not critics who are going to decide if this (the new format) is going to be adopted or not, it's the audience. (There will always be) people who have a particular strong feeling that film should be unchanged and that we got it right in 1927, just like there are people who play vinyl records still, whereas most of the world has moved to CDs and we got used to that."

Related: Who's who in 'The Hobbit' | 'Hobbit' 101

Only a small proportion of cinemas carrying the first installment in the trilogy, "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," will be able to use the 48 frames version, which is designed to improve picture quality.

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" is out in theaters Friday, Dec. 14.
64Comments
Dec 12, 2012 9:05AM
avatar
Well, I'll have to wait until I actually see 48 frames per second, but I hate 3D movies.  So I hope it is in a regular format, otherwise, I'm not going to go see it.  That would be a shame, because I really enjoyed JRR Tolkien's books and the Lord of the Rings movies.
Dec 12, 2012 8:59AM
avatar
People say the same thing about 3D yet when I watch a new 3D TV it's amazing. People are just resistant to change even if it's for the better. The shots I've seen look amazing.
Dec 12, 2012 8:55AM
avatar
Too many animals killed making this movie.  I will not watch it and I pray others will not watch it either.
Dec 12, 2012 8:52AM
avatar
srry about the "lifeunfair" downer screen name....i usually reserve commentary for crybaby/whiners responses...ill work on a change...ehehhe
Dec 12, 2012 8:49AM
avatar
First off...the people ie. actors/directors/writers are artists.(the lucky artists that get to make a living for what they do and love). They love Tolkein aswell . I can only imagine that Peter J. knows that he has to make investors money to earn credit. That credit gives him the latitude to choose alot  of what goes into these projects. I believe that he takes advantage of this to deliver a great experience to Tolkien noobs and Tolkein veterans alike. I also am older and know from experience that the new video formats can distract me from the story immersion. I also know that I wont care much in the end.(The end of course never comes, I will probly see it twice in the theatre and 10+ times on blue-ray on an L.E.D 120 hz HD TV......and i will love it more every time.)
Dec 12, 2012 8:30AM
avatar

I'm sure there are other reasons as well. Tv's that are 120ghz, 240ghz, ,400ghz etc. even 4k now.
so with this 48 frames plus in Imax, sure he is going for he best picture even long after The Hobbit as left theaters. (my opinion)

Dec 12, 2012 8:27AM
avatar
Why not 60 FPS?  Blu-Ray players and most TVs can handle that today.  Anyway, glad to hear him take a stand against the so-called "critics".  Some folks just don't like change, no matter how good it is.
Dec 12, 2012 8:16AM
avatar
Since the movie will be shown in both formats where's the beef?
Dec 12, 2012 8:15AM
avatar
Always gotta be changing something. Just when we were getting used to color movies. Whats next?
Dec 12, 2012 8:10AM
avatar
Critics are wrong so often it makes you wonder why we have critics, until you remember there's an even larger group of wrongheaded knuckleheads---they call them the audience. You can bet there were thousands of movie goers who came out of "Ishtar" and said, "Wow! What a great movie. It'll win best picture!" The bad critics are the price we pay for the good critics, and the good critics are necessary because audience reviews are like eye witness descriptions, which are highly subjective and generally completely worthless to law enforcement.Rotten Tomatoes gives you a broad enough spectrum of reviews that, more often than not, you get some indication if the film is worth seeing. Why does anybody care what a critic thinks of the film AFTER you've already seen it, anyway?
Dec 12, 2012 7:59AM
avatar
I agree with Jackson. Move past the arhaic ways.
Dec 12, 2012 7:54AM
avatar
Just like when Edison tried to make the world DC powered and Tesla kicked his butt. Try to force a standard on an industry and an another industrialist will improve it and take all of your profit.

By the way, how is that 3D television thing working out? Not the standard? I thought so..
Dec 12, 2012 7:47AM
avatar

With my eyesight, it make no difference to me.  I'm still gonna LOVE it!

Went to the 14 hour LOTR Marathon last Sat to get ready...I'll be there at 12:01am Friday for this film.

avatar
Who cares what other people think about how Peter Jackson makes his movies. The man is a genius when it comes to making great movies that will keep people coming. I have been looking forward to this set of 3 movies and now they are here. There is no doubt in my mind that they will be just as good as the first 3 l.o.t.r. movies.
Dec 12, 2012 6:58AM
avatar

Saw it last night in 3D/48 fps at an advanced screening in Maryland. I knew about the complaints going in, but still wanted to try it. I found it to be very distracting, and I didn't get used to it as I thought I would. As reported, the visual style is a lot like that of a soap opera -- sort of like videotape. Many of the action sequences were strongly reminescent of videogame cut scenes, both due to the subject matter and to the higher frame rates.  I did like the film, but the visuals kept pulling me out of the story because of how jarring they looked.

 

I think 48 fps will be perfect for nature documentaries, but I think audiences will reject it for mainstream films in the near term. Maybe once Google Glasses/"virtual reality" headsets start appearing over the next couple of years, 48 fps will become more acceptable as companies experiment with newer "you are there" films.

avatar
I can respect PJ's point but I'll have to see for myself if this one doesn't annoy me.   The whole franchise got a bit stale after the first one as far as Im concerned.   I'll be grateful if this one doesnt just irritate me.
Dec 12, 2012 6:53AM
avatar
I am a long time fan of Tolkeins books. I hope this one does a better job with the story.
Dec 12, 2012 6:36AM
avatar
It will be in the theaters for a few weeks and then a few months later it will be on DVD...by then, who the hell cares?
Dec 12, 2012 6:24AM
avatar

 Critics are like "professional winers".  They also think they are able to to tell us what we would enjoy.  How is it that people can get paid for being so irrelavent and so wrong so often; even the weathermen are more accurate!

Report
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
Categories
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
showtimes & tickets
Search by location, title, or genre: