Speculation Episode VII Could Be Filmed @60FPS And In 3D !

Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by Blue_Jedi33, Dec 13, 2012.

  1. Blue_Jedi33 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 2003
    star 5
    It's pure speculation of coarse, there is no source is saying this. But visually Star Wars has always been cutting edge, as a fan I don't see that changing. I don't see Lucasfilms with Disney getting outdone by other movies in 2015, movies like Avatar 2, Cameron and 20th Century Fox want to up the stakes for the next movie. And 2015 is shaping up to be one of the biggest block buster years ever, there is going to be intense competition on the high end of the scale. This is why it should come as no surprise that this will come to be a reality.
    That means the next Star Wars movie will look significantly different from the last, in feel, smoothness and overall crispness. Here is quote on this technology.....
    So those of us that go in see the Hobbit in 48 FPS and in 3D, will be able to report back to how it looks and feels and what it will mean for the next Star Wars movie.

    So this isn't about the plot but more about the complete presentation.
    Last edited by Blue_Jedi33, Dec 13, 2012
  2. mattman8907 Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 17, 2012
    star 3
    2015 will definitely be a war of franchises year.
  3. chris hayes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2012
    star 4
    I saw the Hobbit in 48fps & it's awesome - crystal clear , clean movement makes the cgi look incredible....However 48fps is brand new & only James Cameron briefly mentioned 60fps & then said Avatar 2 would be 48fps & no other film has mentioned 48fps yet so I highly doubt EP7 would go for 60fps .
  4. Blue_Jedi33 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 12, 2003
    star 5
    Anybody else see the Hobbit in it's premium format ?
  5. lord_eidolon Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2004
    star 3
    It will stay at 24fps to maintain consistency with the other films.
    bergstrom and Alexrd like this.
  6. TheManFromMortis Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 19, 2012
    star 2
    This wouldn't surprise me. However, it reminds me of last night's Review Show on BBC2 here in the UK. They were reviewing ''The Hobbit'' and a couple of the commentators mentioned that the make-up and prosthetics on the dwarves were really obvious on the big screen because it was filmed at 48fps. I think that's something that Lucasfilm/Disney need to keep in mind. We don't want the alien characters in Star Wars looking like something from some sort of naff B-movie flick from the 50s. I realise that was, somehow, part of the charm of the cantina scene in ANH, but we can do better than that now.

    With regard to 3D, I'm not too bothered really. I'm still not convinced that it really adds much. Best films I've seen for the 3D were ''Hugo'' and ''Prometheus'' but I can take it or leave it. Concentrate on getting the story right first.
  7. KED12345 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 10, 2012
    star 4
    The 48fps thing is not a big deal with the Hobbit. Honestly, I just came back from watching it in 2D and there's no noticeable difference from 24fps. That's how I will be watching Episode 7 regardless.

    It's your fault if you're getting suckered into the 3D thing though, really just a fad.
    Echo-07 likes this.
  8. yggdrasil311 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 7, 2004
    star 2
    Just saw The Hobbit in 48 fps. Looked really amazing. Its surreal how lifelike the movement was. Very fluid.





    Oh wait. I would have said that. If I got to watch it. Being that one half 3d projector died in the opening credits. Riots. People were screaming and yelling. Got our money back. Drive two hours to see it and nothing. They had no one on site to fix the cam. Lititz, PA.

    All on my birthday too. But whatever. What I saw looked really great in 48 fps
  9. bergstrom Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 26, 2004
    star 2
    I hate 3D, I don't want it and many people think it is dead and yet studios are still dumb enough to still film in 3D! Release a 3D version of the film on DVD if you want, seperate from a NORMAL DVD release and see how many you sell, (damn all), but don't FORCE people to go to a film with ONLY the option of a 3D theatrical release. And as for 60 fps, if studios have not learned from the mistake of the Hobbit being shot @ 48fps and receiving a thumbs down, then only a fool would make it worse by jumping aother 12 frames. Seriously, shoot @ 24fps like the rest of the saga.
  10. bergstrom Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 26, 2004
    star 2
    It's a pity the Hobbis a let down, judging my many reviers. Making a trilogy from 200 pages of marrative is really stretching it!
  11. LawJedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 11, 2009
    star 4
    I'll repeat what I put online earlier:



    I wanted to punch 48fps in the face.
    Artoo-Dion likes this.
  12. Han Shot First Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 29, 2012
    star 2
    Some people were saying that it makes it look like a documentary and is not cinematic at all!
  13. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Film it in 4D. Holographic sets and characters.
  14. chris hayes Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 13, 2012
    star 4
    Well that's very strange becuase I saw a copy of the Hobbit book today & it was 384 pages ! plus the other material Jackson is working with & The Hobbit is far from a let down & is better than some Star Wars moives .
    benknobi1 likes this.
  15. Alderaan Luke Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2012
    star 1
    I think it would be better to stick to 24fps for the moment. I mean, let other movies experiment in 48fps. Why take a risky decision with a top movie? BTW, as someone said....as difficult to undestand to some peolple is: better/newer technology is not always better/desired. Just because exists newer technology you don't have to use it!

    A lot of reviewers have said that 48fps are too clear/sharp and that you can see the sets as SETS, and the make-up as make-up!! That's no good. Some say: then, they have to improve the quality of the make-up.....Listen, make-up quality is already improved, it would be very costly and time-consuming to improve it even more. There's no point really. Leave it at 24fps, and focuse on the a good plot, good characters, good dialogue and forget about the damn technology, PLEASEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!
  16. aguywithabiggun Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 27, 1999
    star 4
    Despite all the negative reviews on 48fps it's really amazing to see. Like a TV movie. But It's a huge change. I think folks are gonna need time to adjust.
  17. LawJedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 11, 2009
    star 4
    It was an experience. There are undeniable upsides. It's great spectacle tech. It makes some effect shots look beyond realistic. Others were downright cringeworthy. The Goblin King looked amazing. A certain flashback battle in Moria just looked like a drug induced nightmare hallucination, with bad green screen inserts. It just looked wrong. But a 3D IMAX documentary with this tech would be extraordinary.

    They're going to have to figure out how to light it. In dark scenes, I wasn't distracted. Then the lights would come up, and the cringing returned. They're going to have to work out the weird Benny Hill motion side effects.

    The tech really took me out of the performances and story. I kept thinking "I bet this Martin Freeman scene plays really well in the actual movie." :D I still feel like I need to go back and see the Hobbit because I... don't feel like I've seen the Hobbit. I feel like I saw a 3 hour behind the scenes featurette.

    On a completely different note, the movie has a noticable amount of... let's just call them prequel-isms, and I'm amazed that people are giving that a free pass.
    Artoo-Dion likes this.
  18. Artoo-Dion Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 9, 2009
    star 4
    As in...?
  19. Grand_Moff_Jawa Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 31, 2001
    star 5
    They are lying. It looked amazing to me. I didn't see it in 3D though. I saw it in a digital projection theater at 48fps. Amazing.
  20. Alderaan Luke Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2012
    star 1
    So, sets looked too obviously like sets, or not? And could you see the make-ups too easily or not?

    Thanks.
  21. Grand_Moff_Jawa Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 31, 2001
    star 5

    Nothing jumped out at me as fake-looking. Make-up was fine too. I don't see what the fuss over 48fps is all about. It looked smoother, especially with high-speed scenes. Much less motion blur.
  22. General Immodet Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2012
    star 4
    Indeed! 3D is horrible!
    You have to pay more if you go to see a movie in 3D, plus the effects aren't that good.

    I think if they shoot the Sequel Trilogy in 3D, a lot of longtime SW fans (who have been fans since the release of A New Hope) will not like it at all.

    Personally, I don't get why all movies suddenly have to be shot in 3D... A movie is supposed to be 2D. What's next? Movies in Hologram?
  23. LawJedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 11, 2009
    star 4
    May I ask where you saw a HFR showing that wasn't 3D? I was under the impression that the release only included 2D/3D/HFR3D. Honestly, I would love to see this tech without the BS, distracting filter of 3D.
  24. LawJedi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 11, 2009
    star 4
    Throw a rock at any of the RLM complaints about the prequels:

    -tons and tons and tons (and tons) of scatological humor and slapstick that Lucas would have been lynched for.
    -entire scenes based on unnecessary, nostalgic callbacks
    -CGI overload (particularly of creatures and settings that weren't previously CG in the LOTR film series)
    -shoddy dialogue
    -lack of characterization for all but the most central characters.
    -a lack of tension, based on the knowledge of who survives and who doesn't (yes, I understand that its an 80 yr old book, but it has to play on its own merits as a film in a series).
    -too little story stretched over three movies
    -demystifying elements like the Witch King by portraying them in a literal, almost Scooby-Doo manner (this literal approach was a problem in LOTR as well: Sauron is literally an anthropomorphized lighthouse casting his glance over Mordor)

    I think a lot of the geek intelligentsia gave this movie a free pass because they just enjoyed being in Middle Earth. I do like that PJ let Bilbo keep his balls. It always bugged me that he took away all of Frodo's hero moments in Fellowship.
  25. I Are The Internets Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 20, 2012
    star 7
    Nothing was distracting to me when I saw The Hobbit, but I didn't see it in 3D.