Jackson's Mistake
It's ironic that Jackson, the director who was most trying to stake a claim as an ambitious maverick by shooting 2012's The Hobbit at a frame rate of 48 frames per second as opposed to the industry standard of 24fps, something only realistically achievable on digital cameras, ended up being incredibly conservative in his filmmaking style. He has been surpassed as a visionary by the guy who directed 30 Minutes or Less. The Hobbit was, as far as technology goes, unlike any movie ever made. But it was also, as far as every other element of production goes, EXACTLY like every other movie ever made. Simply put, Peter Jackson failed to adapt the movie to the new technology. He lit scenes as if it was a normal 24fps movie. He had his SFX teams design and render the special effects as if it was a normal 24fps movie. Photographer Vincent Laforet
elaborates on these why those are problematic and extensively details the other technical failures of The Hobbit. My problems with Jackson's treatment of the movie are more conceptual. To me, Peter Jackson revealed himself to be ignorant to the things a director should be most aware of. He doesn't seem to understand how every decision he makes affects his movie. He acts as if choosing between 48 and 24fps is like choosing between red or blue car, when it's really more like choosing between engine sizes. It's not just changing how the movie LOOKS, it's changing what the movie IS. In the year leading up to the release of The Hobbit Jackson went on and on about how the HFR is more "immersive." The problem is that immersiveness (immersivity? immersivosity?) is not an inherently positive quality. I love The Lord of the Rings movies. I truly do. Fellowship of the Ring is an all-time favorite. But those movies are escapism. Emotionally involving escapism, sure, but escapism nonetheless. The world, characters and situations are highly fantastical. Not real. So what makes sense about trying to make a movie in that style more immersive? What advantage is there to the application of HFR to The Hobbit? Does Jackson want me to feel like The Hobbit is happening to me? He knows that no matter how smooth the frame rate is and how realistic the photography is, I'll never think that The Hobbit is real, right? Does he want it to be like a theme park ride, where it's real but also not real? I'm not sure I could ever get emotionally involved with a theme park ride or care enough about it to ride for three hours. And if The Hobbit was a theme park ride, would there be enough room for me,
Mike, and Jay to share a car?
For Jackson's application of 48fps to work in favor of the movie, he would have had to change the movie's style fundamentally (remember style?). And it could totally work, too. He would have to emphasize the realness of his subject matter to suit his selected shooting style. The movie would have had to be some kind of weird realistic treatment of fairy tale material. Hmm, sounds like Pan's Labyrinth... hey, maybe it was a bad idea for Guillermo del Toro to resign from directing The Hobbit after all! This all ties into the main problem I had with Jackson's treatment of The Hobbit, problems I would have had if I had seen the movie in 24fps: it tries to have its cake and eat it too. Jackson wanted to make a faithful adaptation of The Hobbit book but he also wanted to make a pure sequel to The Lord of the Rings movies. Anybody who has read the novels understands that The Hobbit is tonally nothing like The Lord of the Rings. Since Jackson made the LotR movies very much in the spirit of the book, it made sense that he would do the same for The Hobbit. But he didn't do that, and what he ended up with was a horribly awkward mishmash of fairy-tale silliness (goofy cave trolls, sad porcupines, and a dishwashing scene straight out of the part of Enchanted where cartoon animals help Amy Adams clean an apartment) and the serious tone of the LotR movies.
Not only was Jackson indecisive with how we wanted to treat his material, but he almost seemed unaware that there were decisions to make. Just like he apparently couldn't make up his mind about what kind of tone he wanted his movie to have, Jackson also couldn't decide whether he wanted his movie to be escapist or immersive, so he made a fantasy movie that he apparently wanted people to think was real. Peter, look up "escapist" and "immersive" in the dictionary. Unless you were going for an intentionally incoherent post-modern style, which you clearly were not, you can't have both. Click "next" to continue.