tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6654162646301256777.post3076458157044277889..comments2023-12-14T05:31:08.422-05:00Comments on TolkienBritta.com: Peter Jackson Defends 48fps ‘Hobbit’ FootageBritta Siemenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08416519823032365698noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6654162646301256777.post-74598209015076958112012-05-04T15:20:39.254-04:002012-05-04T15:20:39.254-04:00I agree. I've only seen a few 3D films, and a)...I agree. I've only seen a few 3D films, and a) I never liked wearing those glasses, and b) it never really bettered the experience for me. It might be cool to see something like a nature programme or first-person POV cliff jumping in 3D (there you actually get the sensation of being a part of it), but to watch a film in that format is very different. I think it's great that Jackson is looking to the future rather than taking the safe route and sticking to what we know; but where 3D is still relatively new, who's to say if that's such a good idea?Brittahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11727418710904313638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6654162646301256777.post-74081847488645011212012-04-30T12:31:21.194-04:002012-04-30T12:31:21.194-04:00My concern is more about 3D than 48fps... but both...My concern is more about 3D than 48fps... but both are based on the same issue that is, as mentioned by PJ himself, the marketing frenzy needed by the film industry to catch the attention of the public. I don't like 3D, call me old school, but to me is more like a distraction, an eye candy thing for people to feel something different. If the movie is great, if the story is great it can be told with anything. If 48fps is the next thing because the images are more clear, neat, real... that's fine. I guess we will know by the end of the year :)Ramirohttp://ramiro.quasarcr.comnoreply@blogger.com