See it in

A decent 48fps tech demo and a good movie.

By clwnfrt
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.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Did you?

The Hobbit 3D HFR

By Dewey Dykstra
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.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Did you?

Best 3D Movie I've Ever Seen

By ManInTheChair
Written September 29, 2016
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!
11 out of 19 found this helpful. Did you?

Too drawn out, not worth the extra $ for HFR 3D

By muppertje
Written July 25, 2016
I'm never a big fan of 3D movies, but I saw this one in 3D in order to see the HFR version. I have to say, it wasn't worth the extra money for the tickets. It certainly did not add to the experience, if anything it was distracting. While it helped smooth out the CGI, the real actors, costumes, props and sets were all so clear that it was painfully obvious that they were actors, costumes, props and sets. In the first scene I could clearly see Bilbo's makeup and hair cream, and later on I could see Gandalf's contact lenses. Rather than making the action sequences appear more 'real', the HFR just made every scene look like an over-lit British sitcom. As for the movie itself, as others said it was obviously drawn out excessively for fiscal purposes. It felt too long, and many scenes were superfluously extended. Others were changed from the book for no apparent reason, which confused the story more rather than adding to it (like the rock giants battling instead of playing football).
11 out of 17 found this helpful. Did you?

HFR is totally awesome

By davecotter
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.
11 out of 12 found this helpful. Did you?