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
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of frames as "kitch" and "fake", but Jackson is adamant filmmaking has to move forward to prevent movies from looking outdated.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.
65Comments
Dec 12, 2012 9:05AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:59AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:55AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:52AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:49AM
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
Dec 12, 2012 8:27AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:16AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:15AM
Dec 12, 2012 8:10AM
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 8:00AM
Dec 12, 2012 7:59AM
Dec 12, 2012 7:54AM
Dec 12, 2012 7:47AM
Dec 12, 2012 7:30AM
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 7:11AM
Dec 12, 2012 6:58AM
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.
Dec 12, 2012 6:57AM
Dec 12, 2012 6:53AM
Dec 12, 2012 6:36AM
Report
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
movie news
- Tom Cruise no longer the 'Man from U.N.C.L.E.'
- Rare Superman comic found in house insulation
- 'Great Gatsby' becomes first Baz Luhrmann film to cross $100M in domestic box office
- Amanda Bynes: In Court, Post-Arrest
- Cannes: Jerry Lewis skewered for sexist remarks
- Steven Soderbergh clarifies 'retirement' plans: He's just moving to TV
- J.C. Chandor gains a Cannes hit with 'All Is Lost'
- Takei says Cho good choice for latest 'Star Trek'
- Actress Bynes accused of bong toss out NYC window
- Cannes auction of space trip with DiCaprio raises 1.2 million euros for charity
