Written December 16, 2012
I like the HFR technology for what it's going to bring to the cinema, but the execution has to be right. There was an obvious difference in what was animated and what was real. There is whole new level of realism that just didn't seem combined correctly. I liked the movie itself and think the whole experience may have been different in 24fps.
Written April 30, 2016
I enjoyed the movie. Several actors from the Ring Trilogy appeared in their character roles in this movie. The cinematography and scenery were pretty spectacular. This may have been enhanced by the HFR. The 3D gave a certain depth to the visual experience. There were many story threads woven in the movie to set up background and future events. Seems like this trilogy will be richer than the original story and will be better tied into the Ring Trilogy. The movie might not be suitable for young children, so parents be careful. the movie left me wanting the next installment right away.
Written November 29, 2015
What a way to:
A. Make use of 3D!
B. Welcome the world into a new era of filmmaking!
The film is quite slow for the first forty-five minutes, but is fantastic therein. I can't recommend "The Hobbit" enough, both for its technology and its storytelling!
Written April 29, 2016
saw the HFR 3D edition. i've read all the reports about how it looks "fake" and destroys your "suspension of disbelief", or that it looks like a bad 70's soap opera or that the lighting was bad or you could see the makeup and whatnot. but you know what? i have NO idea what they're talking about. i'm actually in the SPFX biz (for 25 years now) and see every blockbuster movie and i gotta say, HFR is SO awesome! NOT jarring, NOT fake looking, just pure, smooth, clear, clean motion. i just don't know what the critics are talking about.
granted, i've had time to get used to it, because a couple years ago i got an HFR TV, a 65" that uses motion estimation auto-up-sample the frame rate to 120 fps. i admit that when i first got my TV, *everything* looked fake to me. but then i got used to it, now i don't notice it at all, and everything just looks *better*. WAY better.
Written December 15, 2012
I took in the premier of The Hobbit in HFR 3D. I couldn't decide which enticed me more; the film itself or the visually distinct HFR presentation. In hindsight, I would suggest viewing the film first in traditional 24 FPS in order to focus on the vastness of Tolkien's tale and the beauty of Jackson's vision. The High Frame Rate version adds a completely new and fascinating dynamic to the experience. Still, because of how obviously different the visual aesthetic is from the three previous 24 FPS Tolkien/Jackson films, I was partially taken out of the film at the beginning as I sought to reconcile the visuals with those I had come to associate with prior film depictions of Middle Earth. I can't wait to see the film again in the traditional 24 FPS presentation, not because I feel this will be a better experience but rather as an opportunity to connect this new film with the aesthetics of its predecessors and to compare the visions of what I saw (or saw more of) in last night's 48 FPS