Use of 48fps in “The Hobbit” creates skepticism among film-goers

About Sam Goldner

Staff Writer. Sam Goldner is a junior Advertising and Political Science major and also works as the Music Director for Radio 1190. He has written for Tastemakers Magazine, hosted a radio show at WRBB in Boston, and interned at the Fox Theatre. In his free time, he enjoys watching movies, Super Smash Bros., playing guitar, riding his bike, and scouring for music.


 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

 

2 Comments

  1. I have caught the midnight viewing of “The Hobbit; An Unexpected Journey”. And I viewed the regular viewing, not the 3D. Let me tell you that any skepticism you are hearing about 48 frames per second is load of hogwash. It was great. Very rich detail for the eye candy. It did not diminish the movie in any way, shape, or form. I am a cinephile, and let me tell you 48 fps more then passed the eye test. And, again, this is for the regular viewing, not even 3D. Any controversy about the 48 fps is wannabe-film pundits just making noise for noise’s sake.

  2. Cameron says:

    You make it sound like aversion to the 3D process was a passing thing, something to be dismissed, but I assure you many of us get violently nauseated by it, and I for one haven’t gotten used to it. I refuse to see a film that way. I sense I may be affected the same way by 48fps, though I don’t know for sure. But the issues of 3D and its negative qualities are very much there.

Post a Comment


 
*