The hyperrealism created by the 48 frames-per-second shoot of "The Hobbit" is nothing if not distinctive, but I don't really get how it would make you sick — a complaint Warner Brothers was compelled to address Wednesday. Neither does David Cohen of Variety, whose latest column addresses the issue. It includes comments from "Hobbit" director Peter Jackson.
A couple of excerpts from Cohen's piece:
... Early reactions to high frame rate 3D among press and pros I've spoken to are mixed. Some liked it or mostly liked it. (I mostly liked it.) Some liked it only when there was a lot of motion in the frame, and some didn't like it at all.
Among the negative reactions, I'm hearing some misinformation and stuff that's just bizarre. Two people have asked me if it made me sick. There's no reason HFR should make anyone sick, though the vertiginous virtual camera moves of some of "The Hobbit's" action sequences could do that, I suppose. (I dislike extreme virtual camera moves the way some people dislike 3D.)
There's going to be a lot of talk about "The Hobbit" HFR 3D, and people are groping for language to describe it. So I'd like to try to provide a framework for that conversation. ...
... The bottom line, I think, is that some of what people are reacting to in "The Hobbit" is the look of the picture, not something inherent in the HFR. Other directors will use it differently. And don't forget: It's new, and everyone -- including Jackson himself -- is still learning how to use it.
So I encourage everyone to keep an open mind. "The Hobbit" isn't the be-all and end-all of HFR. In time, it'll become a refined and accepted tool, and other directors will use it differently. And in the meantime, let's put down the rocks, get out of the killing circle and give this new thing a chance.
Previously on The Vote: 'The Hobbit' engages in lengthy first stage