Pssst….Keep A Secret?
With the 1952 opening of This Is Cinerama!, the first film in history to be presented in the three-strip Cinerama process, ads boasted that audiences would see something bold and revolutionary. When The Robe opened in 1953, 20th Century Fox announced it was the first film shot in CinemaScope. And when a film today is presented in IMAX or IMAX 3D, ads always explain that. So why is Warner Bros. hiding the fact that Peter Jackson‘s The Hobbit is the first pic in history to be shot and shown in the historic 48 frame-per-second process?
The Hobbit billboard sitting on Sunset above Book Soup — Saturday, 10.27, 11:45 am.
One man stood alone…
Jeff, you can hardly call 48 fps “historic” given than a nary few have seen it, the studio has back peddled and the majority who have experienced are largely unimpressed. It may end up being about as historic as the Edsel.
They’re not hiding it, it’s just not on your poster.
http://www.getthebigpicture.net/blog/2012/10/27/new-hobbit-trailer-advertises-48-fps-for-the-price-of-24.html
A mention of 48 fps is just not on my poster? This is a shot of a billboard on LA’s Sunset Blvd. near Holloway — you can’t get much more central or prominent than this location. You’d think that they’d at least mention 48 fps in small print at the bottom of the billboard along with ReadD and IMAX 3D. Naaahhh.
Wells to Tapley: And what are YOU doing, Kris? Cluck-clucking and hanging back with the 1920s technology crowd that wants to stay with good old 24 fps? How bold and daring of you.
Yeah, Kris. You phoney. GET HEP. Get with the 48fps “in” crowd.
They might be aiming for a “reason to see it the second time” marketing campaign for week two and three after the totally-obvious huge opening occurs.
And, at that point, they can selectively edit real moviegoers who sought out the 48FPS from the get-go and use their testimony in commercials for the repeat viewings.
“So why is Warner Bros. hiding the fact that Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit is the first pic in history to be shot and shown in the historic 48 frame-per-second process?”
BECAUSE NO ONE CARES.
Apparently they’re saving it for major markets where people can appreciate differences in visual quality.
As much as the love the Rings, what’s Jackson gonna do adter The Hobbit? Lovely Bones was a disappointment, he probably won’t make anything like Heavenly Creatures again. Hobbit fan fiction?
Yeah, honestly, here in PA. I could probably only find a handful of people who know the difference between film and digital let alone 48 fps.
As a complete OUTSIDER, what’s with other movie critics logging in here and just constantly going for Jeff’s balls?
Is Wells doing it to them on their blogs?
Some kind of industry schtick?
What am I missing?
Any info about the 3D HFR edition international distribution? There is a strong suspect the HFR will be a USA only affair
That no one (or at least relatively few) presently doesn’t care about feature films being shown in 48fps is not a true marker for whether they really should. Many may not care about 48fps, but few have actually seen it, and only a handfull or two have gotten used to seeing larger portions of high frame rate footage – something that appears to be absolutely necessary to be able to really assess the true potential of 48fps, or even higher frame rates.
What it seems to boil down to is a majority of people – in what is the “visible” discussion on this subject – lamenting on the prospect of 48fps based mostly on what a few others (all of whom weren’t in agreement, it should be added) have reported back on after seeing short segments of high frame rate footage, and trying to be able to navigate in this discussion and further assess ones own oppinion, and indeed form a more generalized oppinion on the potential of 48fps, only gets you so far.
Obviously one has to see this for oneself – whole 48fps features, that is – and in the meantime for the high frame rate format to eventually land as a prototype “medium” I’d appreciate the road by which it passes being paved or cleared so that we can actually assess the potential of the format through a variety of films, and not only The Hobbit. Right now it’s therefore disheartening to hear so many bitch about 48fps when so few, or rather none of them have true, whole-feature 48fps experience to go by. This herd-behavior of “48fps stinks” really rubs me the wrong way, needless to say.
I find it’s commendable that Mr. Wells has honed in on assessing the potential of 48fps as a future viable format. More people should as well.
Obviously I didn’t mean “no one” cares about 48fps – that was meant as a counter-comment to poster arispil.
@Kris Tapley: Are you implying that everyone has given up on 48fps?
Correction:
Meant to say “That no one (…) cares about…“
Jeff is 100% correct on this, and Gazer said it well above.
Will The Hobbit force every filmmaker to shoot at 48fps from now on? No.
The idea that “no one cares” is ludicrous. How can anyone care if you don’t TELL THEM they SHOULD care. It’s a little something called “marketing” or “advertising”. You can’t be made to care based on a dismissive internet forum posting, or even Jeff’s enthusiastic write-up from a few months ago- though at least that was based on actually seeing part of the film.
You (meaning the artist responsible) have to shout it from the rooftops, with P.T. Barnum-like enthusiasm, the way James Cameron marketed the hell out of Avatar needing to be seen in 3D. You need to have the confidence in what you’ve done to do whatever is necessary to get people into the theater, convinced that once they see it for themselves for a full length film, they will be mesmerized and hooked.
What you don’t do is turn tail and pretend it was all just a misunderstanding. Again, with the Avatar comparisons, when the early looks at Avatar footage were greeted with typical internet snark and cynicism, did Cameron suddenly pretend that Avatar was always intended to be seen in 2D only, in black and white, at 12fps?
No, I don’t think so. Because he knew what he had.
And that’s why this whole thing comes across as disappointing and simultaneously pathetic.
A) Stick to you guns. Trust your instincts.
B) Put your tail between your legs and acknowledge that some overweight, basement dwelling internet fanboys are your daddy.
They chose “B”.
Pathetic.
Well said, Padre.
Wells to Padre de la Tiempo: Well said, sir. Thank you.
Jeff is right. This is historic. Remember that Doug Trumbull as far back as “Brainstorm” was trying to create a sharper and more flicker-free projection system with Showscan. This is his long-overdue validation. Studios are by nature conservative and with the well-intentioned but premature decision to show unfinished HFR footage, they’re now gunshy about saying anything that will be followed by a recap of that event. It may not be as dramatic as the jump from 2D to 3D, but I trust it will look and play better, not to mention one day down the pike it will look incredible on 4K televisions.
Cheap beats by dre
Beats by dre for cheap
Beats by dre cheap
seo expert services india