Speculation Will they shoot Episode VII in 48 fps?

Obviously most of us will have to wait a couple of weeks to see what The Hobbit is like in 48 fps, but having seen one of the trailers for the Hobbit playing while I was in Costco, it definitely looks....weird.

More of a documentary or soap opera style.

Peter Jackson is convinced this is the way to go in terms of clarity, special effects, et cetera, but the footage they screened in April got mixed reviews.

Do you think they'll shoot Episode VII in 48 fps?

Good question? Wasn't AOTC the first feature to be shot digitally? i seem to recall that or something tothat affect.

Anyway, I haven't seen the Hobbit clips yet to really give a great opinion. But I would say that if it looks more doc or soap style I don't think that would serve Star Wars well.

I thnk Peter Jackson is saying the quality and clarity of FX is one of the big reasons he's into it, so for a FX-heavy film lke SW, thought they might consider it.

I guess it really depends if they feel it's a "new" trend like 3D or not.

One of the first, yes. IIRC the first one to be shot entirely digitally was the French film Vidocq, with Gerard Depardieu.

Lucasfilm and GL always pushed the limits of techology with SW films. 1st to play in stereo 1st with THX sound 1st fully digital movie during filming/editing 1st fully IMAX feature film So I would expect the trend to continue with higher fps, resolution, and 3D to boot

Don't you mean years? This isn't a swift roll out, for most film venues.

That's funny, PJ making a decision that negatively impacts the storytelling, but makes effects better. I'm sure people are going to get onto him about that...

Depends if disney want to go that way but the probably should .

It will probably depend on the director, but the chances are stronger in favor of digital.

I'd put a lot of money on the fact that they will shoot in Ultra High Definition (known around the place as 4K).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution

I really hope so. I know it's a youngish medium but I want to see more. I don't think it's a "trend" I think it's the future. The only reason 24 fps is the standard now is sound dictated the speed the film was shown. We don't rely on that tech except for in old dollar house and theaters who can't upgrade to digital. We already watch TV in 60i(which is about 30 fps), why not upgrade our movie going experience?

Why?

An entire generation complained about the CGI in the prequels (or what they assumed was CGI) "not feeling right," but THIS is a good idea?

I'm willing to suspend disbelief until we get reports on the entire Hobbit film in 48 fps, but the early reports are awful.

I doubt anyone outside of Cameron will shoot 48fps after the debacle with The Hobbit.

Could you refer me to the afformentioned ""debacle""?

That bad? What is this based on? I'm asking because I know almost nothing about the Hobbit except that it has Martin Freeman and Ian McKellan, oh, and Gollum.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/24/2972858/48fps-preview-the-hobbit-reaction

Thanks Lando,
Hmmmm "Mixed Review" = "Debacle"???

I wonder how hollywood survived the "filmed in color" debacle?
or the "talkies" debacle?

I agree that The Hobbit will be the deciding factor. If people like it then it's a fair bet LFL will go that way. If not....

Did PJ direct? Because I thought he was giving that up to someone else?

There have been several reviews of the preview clips in 48 fps that described the footage as looking like home video or soap opera quality, which is exactly what you don't want for a fantasy movie. To be fair, some of the reviews conceded that the helicopter footage of Middle Earth/New Zealand looked quite lovely at that frame rate. The reason the "mixed" is bad is that none of this contributes to storytelling, and only seems to diminish the ability of the viewer's ability to be immersed in a fantasy story. It becomes more realistic, which distracts the brain from accepting what they're seeing as anything but actors on a set.

It is difficult to describe, but as Garth Maul suggested, if you see the similar effect that some TVs have now, it is quite distracting.

i wouldn't mind seeing them shoot in IMAX. seriously could you imagine a space battle in IMAX? it would be cool.

No I understand, my brother in law was showing me some scenes from 'Patton' on blu-ray, and I thought it looked WEIRD, and at first, I didnt really like it. But thats not stopping Blu-ray,
and it wont stop 48+fps.

He did direct. He came back on board when Del Toro backed out.

We'll see. The one good factor is that theaters aren't charging more for 48fps. But without a 3D bump, what is the appeal for the studios or theater chains of pushing a format that hasn't recieved anything but "meh" reactions?

This chart is quite hilarious to me for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that using the 4k rubric in terms of captured detail is an irrelevent metric as it's simply a measure of output resolution. This is how the Red cameras get away with claiming all sorts of amazing things while being a lousy camera.

Also, if they shoot in 48fps, they better hide, because I'll be coming for them.