James Cameron to amp up Avatar frame rate
Promises 'really stunning' sequels at 48 or 60 fps
James Cameron has said he's decided to up the frame rate on Avatar 2 and 3 to give the movies an "added sense of reality".
Speaking at CinemaCon in Las Vegas, the director suggested that he'd crank up the movies from 24 fps to 48 or 60 fps. He explained: "When you author and project a movie at 48 or 60, it becomes a different movie. The 3D shows you a window into reality; the higher frame rate takes the glass out of the window. In fact, it is just reality. It is really stunning."
Cameron's production partner Jon Landau reckons the higher frame rate will make "a big difference to the audience experience - not just for 3D movies, but for all movies".
Landau said that it removes a strobing effect caused by a 3D "artefact". Furthermore, since the shutter is "closed for less time", the result is a brighter image. The Hollywood Reporter says this is "particularly noteworthy in 3D, as the glasses can reduce the amount of light that the viewer sees".
Landau noted that the higher frame rates are already available in digital cameras, "but they always utilize it for slow motion".
He added: "They will record something at 48 or 60 frames per second, but when they play it back at 24, they are doing slow motion. Now we want to do it, but play it back at those same rates."
Cameron was joined at CinemaCon by DreamWorks animation CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg and George Lucas. The trio were "championing the digital 3D movie revolution", and the Hollywood Reporter has more on their plans to "wow moviegoers" right here. ®
COMMENTS
THE STORY!!!
WORK ON THE F*&(ING SCREENPLAY!
stop pissing about with the technical stuff and realise that great films start with the screenplay.
This clown is a long way from the 80's Cameron who wrote/ directed Terminator, Aliens/Abyss - films with ideas.
Honestly, you and George Lucas should be ashamed.
How about
they run the original Avatar at 60 fps
That way we won't have to sit there for so bloody long
"added sense of reality"
It's too bloody real already for some.
The only real 'blue people' are not the Smurfs, not the Naavi but the Nac McFeegles.
Re: RE: Every movie is not expected to be Memento
It's not about some single ideal - there are so many different types of film and you cannot expect them all to conform to one standard. That would be weird, and all films would be the same and it would be extremely dull, and you'd go on the internet to complain about it.
Some films fail and some succeed on a creative level - it's a matter of what they set out to be and how fully they realise that. Zombieland is one of the best films I've seen in recent years - it's just a little comedy, nothing groundbreaking or thought-provoking or moving, but it's so complete and has so clearly fulfilled its own brief that it's massively satisfying. There's more than one kind of 'good'.
RE: Every movie is not expected to be Memento
Why not? Would demanding a higher level of originality and intelligence in our films be a bad thing? Personally I would rather Hollywood's output dropped off by 80-90% if we saw an equivalent rise in quality.
Who knows, maybe if more films were actually worth seeing, more people might actually pay to go watch them. Radical, I know.
