It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
To me it's more like a novelty; I'd probably prefer to watch these films in 24.
It certainly doesn't do well in daylight scenes, but what about dimly lit or black and white?
Not every shot in Gemini gave off a terrible feeling, when does it work and when not.
There are situations where it is used to great effect. Broadcast of live events is one, for sure. I'd say documentaries are another example. There, you want the reality of the subject to be really stressed.
When it comes to cinema, I don't necessarily want the most realistic feeling to it. A heightened reality is what I want; the feeling of being transported somewhere. The ever so slight motion blur is a small but vital part of that feeling for me. It's what makes movies special.
It seems like it works by synthetically creating a frame in between each frame or something?
Anyways, yeah, turn it off.
EDIT: @j_w_pepper I agree with you about resolutions too. I've seen no need to upgrade past 1080p, really, unless the TV is like 80" or something and you're way too close to it. At a certain point, the human eye can't distinguish between these microscopic pixels anyways.
At least with things like The Hobbit and Gemini Man, you're seeing the film as it was intended to be displayed - even if I find it a lesser experience regardless.
You are right, for some reason I prefer the interpolated (when there are no artefacts) over the as intended.
I do feel some of the new more generic shows/films would benefit from it.
I can imagine it enhancing SF, SP and NTTD too.
Like I said though, I've not seen anything that I feel benefits from it. At worst you get into a bit of an uncanny valley situation with it in the sense that it looks too 'real'.
I have no idea. I will say that I don't necessarily think such innovations in visual media are necessarily tied to what's most 'realistic' per say but what's most immersive. Even stuff like motion capture suffered from that uncanny valley effect I talked about when trying to too closely replicate the human face (just look at Polar Express from 2004).
I guess it's just about how these things are used. I'm not really sure what 60fps can add to a film, even with something like documentaries which can be very cinematic.
I got mine in 2012 and I'm pleasantly surprised it's still going to be honest! :)
Will live action also look much more palatable in 60fps if you add plenty extra motion blur?