Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Page 8<br />
James Cameron was a fan of early demos of the 48 fps system, and Peter<br />
Jackson shot The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in the process. When that came out, I<br />
went and saw it projected at Warner Bros, in their carefully-calibrated screening<br />
room designed to best showcase the films that they release. I was not a fan, to put it<br />
mildly. One of the things that immediately felt wrong to me was that the more<br />
fantastic elements of the film looked more fake in 48 fps. There were several scenes<br />
where the make-up on the actors and the wigs and the costuming all suffer because<br />
they are captured in hypervivid detail. Designers just aren’t used to having their work<br />
photographed this way. It feels like we’re standing at the edge of what could be a big<br />
leap in a new direction, or at a point where we push back and simply refuse to<br />
support the process financially, and we haven’t figured it out yet as an audience<br />
because we haven’t seen enough of it yet.<br />
Did you know that X-Men: Days Of Future Past was shot in 48 fps, but not<br />
released in the format because Fox got understandably cold feet after the reaction to<br />
Jackson’s Hobbit release? That must have been a massively expensive decision at the<br />
time, but it underlined just how risky it is for the major studios right now. They have<br />
to convince audiences to leave their houses to go see movies, and they are drowning<br />
in an ocean of choices these days all vying for that same amount of attention. They’re<br />
excited to do something like 48 fps but only if they can figure out how to get the<br />
audience to jump past that period of acclimation.<br />
So if doubling the frame rate provides the experience that Peter Jackson<br />
presented to audiences with The Hobbit is possible, then imagine how much different<br />
120 fps must feel. I’m not sure I can even fully describe it now that I’ve seen it, but<br />
I’ll try in case you haven’t seen it. And if you have, I’d be curious to see if you<br />
remember more than I do or if you can offer up details I can’t.<br />
First, the film itself. It’s okay. I haven’t read the novel it was based on, so I’m<br />
not sure how good it is as an adaption. The film is very earnest and it’s trying very<br />
hard to show how PTSD begins and how it gets its claws into a soldier and how hard<br />
it is to step away from that. There are plenty of famous faces popping up in smaller<br />
roles, some of them doing solid work with what they’re given, and some of them<br />
barely registering.
Change language