Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk 4K UHD 60p/3D (2016)

[rroeder]

nevermind

[scooter12]

When I watch all my other 4k blu rays on my 4k TV it shows that I have hdr on my TV, however not this movie. Does anyone else have this issue?

PS. I am using an ubp x 800 sony 4k blu ray player which has 2 options for 4k bd in regards to hdr and that is auto and off. I obviously have it set to auto.

[HeatEquation]

Originally Posted by scooter12

When I watch all my other 4k blu rays on my 4k TV it shows that I have hdr on my TV, however not this movie. Does anyone else have this issue?

PS. I am using an ubp x 800 sony 4k blu ray player which has 2 options for 4k bd in regards to hdr and that is auto and off. I obviously have it set to auto.

What HDMI cable are you using?

[bruceames]

Of course this movie doesn't look like "film". But that doesn't mean it can't look like a "movie". The problem is that everyone is "used to" 24fps, just like everyone was used to B&W back in the day. But 24fps wasn't chosen for artistic intent, it was chosen because it was the standard, however limited that standard is.

In a way, it's like the HDR vs. SDR argument. It will be interesting to see to what extent it takes hold in the motion picture industry. Personally although the PQ was fantastic, I wasn't used to the 60fps and it did take me out of the movie somewhat. It felt like I was watching some video or doc instead. But that's because I wasn't used to it. Not because it's something I won't like or won't thing it ever looks movie-like. I'm sure it will if I watch enough of it and no doubt I'll appreciate it more because ultimately it looks better. Just like HDR looks better than SDR, or 4K looks better than 1080p.

[legends of beyond]

I think HFR has a future, but at the same time, it won't be used in every movie. It is a tool that we don't know how to use, so expect some experimentation.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Of course this movie doesn't look like "film". But that doesn't mean it can't look like a "movie". The problem is that everyone is "used to" 24fps, just like everyone was used to B&W back in the day. But 24fps wasn't chosen for artistic intent, it was chosen because it was the standard, however limited that standard is.

In a way, it's like the HDR vs. SDR argument. It will be interesting to see to what extent it takes hold in the motion picture industry. Personally although the PQ was fantastic, I wasn't used to the 60fps and it did take me out of the movie somewhat. It felt like I was watching some video or doc instead. But that's because I wasn't used to it. Not because it's something I won't like or won't thing it ever looks movie-like. I'm sure it will if I watch enough of it and no doubt I'll appreciate it more because ultimately it looks better. Just like HDR looks better than SDR, or 4K looks better than 1080p.

Admitting of not being used to 60fps is a much more mature response than saying that movies ought to be in 24fps or else they wouldn't be movies at all

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Not the most grown up of responses Rocky.

Childish reply to a childish post

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by legends of beyond

I think HFR has a future, but at the same time, it won't be used in every movie. It is a tool that we don't know how to use, so expect some experimentation.

How are directors going to experiment when the majority is so against it due to their preconceived notions?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

How are directors going to experiment when the majority is so against it due to their preconceived notions?

In the days of Social media, words gets around fast. Studios won't want to receive negative reactions and risk losing money in the first week. It will probably be less risky material for a long while. If someone takes their family to a movie and that movie is ruined because the HFR is so jarring, that's a lot of money wasted. That same family probably won't go back either.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

Childish reply to a childish post

What was childish about it?

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

What was childish about it?

All of it

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

In the days of Social media, words gets around fast. Studios won't want to receive negative reactions and risk losing money in the first week. It will probably be less risky material for a long while. If someone takes their family to a movie and that movie is ruined because the HFR is so jarring, that's a lot of money wasted. That same family probably won't go back either.

That is why directors-even those who are sick and tired of 24fps-will keep 24fps in place...But of course the 24fps groupies will go on record saying taht the reason why 24fps is the standard is because "It just looks more movie-like"

[monstermidget]

Originally Posted by bruceames

But 24fps wasn't chosen for artistic intent, it was chosen because it was the standard, however limited that standard is.

Very true, for better or worse 24fps has become the standard by default...
though you could argue that directors staying with 24fps (and all its flaws) imply some artistic intent or at the very least an attachment to the qualities of the medium that captured their imaginations; similar to the way certain directs chose to continue to shoot on film rather than digital.

Originally Posted by bruceames

In a way, it's like the HDR vs. SDR argument.

HDR if applied properly should be about enabling us to see all the attributes captured on the negative without clipping etc, giving a more balanced nuanced picture vs SDR (and if we are being cynical a lot of it could be seen as gimmickry used to sustain the commercial television manufacturing industry) but for me personally that's not exactly the same argument as 24fps vs 60fps because altering of frame rate has a much more significant effect and is a much greater challenge to an audience's notion of what feature film looks like.

For me I fell in love with the look of projected film; all its pluses and minuses, including the inherent judder of 24fps, or by the way for example, panning shots filmed within those limitations give film a particular motion and look and feel. Cinephiles spent years waiting to get proper 24fps motion in the home, to capture that real cinema feel(and get away from the dreaded pal speedup and the like).

Again I have not seen this feature but of any film footage I have seen shot in 60fps it has a video type look to it, that I don't associate with film (and I'm not talking about celluloid here I'm talking about the medium of film). I just don't find HFR used in films beneficial, it pulls me out of the experience and that's okay, for a lot of other people it does the same, but that shouldn't take anything away from those who love it OR their enjoyment of it.
Personally my main interest in HFR is for sports and documentaries; a good nature doc in UHD HDR with HFR would look astounding I'm sure.

Perhaps in the future younger audiences less exposed to 24p will embrace HFR and that will become the industry wide standard, and 24fps will go the way of the silent picture but I think we are safe enough yet.
Anyway I'm bleating on more about technology than the actual film this thread denotes so I'll leave it there.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by monstermidget

For me I fell in love with the look of projected film; all its pluses and minuses, including the inherent judder of 24fps, or by the way for example, panning shots filmed within those limitations give film a particular motion and look and feel..

I can totally respect that. Good post!

[joenostalgia23]

Originally Posted by monstermidget

Again I have not seen this feature but of any film footage I have seen shot in 60fps it has a video type look to it, that I don't associate with film (and I'm not talking about celluloid here I'm talking about the medium of film). I just don't find HFR used in films beneficial, it pulls me out of the experience and that's okay, for a lot of other people it does the same, but that shouldn't take anything away from those who love it OR their enjoyment of it.
Personally my main interest in HFR is for sports and documentaries; a good nature doc in UHD HDR with HFR would look astounding I'm sure.

Perhaps in the future younger audiences less exposed to 24p will embrace HFR and that will become the industry wide standard, and 24fps will go the way of the silent picture but I think we are safe enough yet.
Anyway I'm bleating on more about technology than the actual film this thread denotes so I'll leave it there.

I love the look of 24 fps. I think sometimes we need a bit of sensory deprivation to enjoy things more. Like eating food in a dimly lit restaurant, maybe we shouldn't see too much. I hope 24 stays the standard, but there are stories that can benefit from HFR. Sports and documentaries obviously.

When you say HFR pulls you out, that's how I felt while watching Billy Lynn. But I thought that enhanced the story. The main character comes back from war to America, and the experience makes him feel detached. And we feel detached too. People try to romanticize his life, but it's all fake and the reality that people try to conceal is much more depressing. And we can feel that when we are on the halftime stage with him. The choreographed dancing and fireworks, the giant neon American flags, in HFR we see how surreal reality is.

I wonder how the Avatar sequels will fare with HFR, but right now I think it benefits stark realism so well, and with The Hobbit it actually took away from the fantasy. I don't think HFR can catch on as the new standard, like BW/color or 2D/3D, it'll be a tool that can be used selectively.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

I love the look of 24 fps. I think sometimes we need a bit of sensory deprivation to enjoy things more. Like eating food in a dimly lit restaurant, maybe we shouldn't see too much. I hope 24 stays the standard, but there are stories that can benefit from HFR. Sports and documentaries obviously.

When you say HFR pulls you out, that's how I felt while watching Billy Lynn. But I thought that enhanced the story. The main character comes back from war to America, and the experience makes him feel detached. And we feel detached too. People try to romanticize his life, but it's all fake and the reality that people try to conceal is much more depressing. And we can feel that when we are on the halftime stage with him. The choreographed dancing and fireworks, the giant neon American flags, in HFR we see how surreal reality is.

I wonder how the Avatar sequels will fare with HFR, but right now I think it benefits stark realism so well, and with The Hobbit it actually took away from the fantasy. I don't think HFR can catch on as the new standard, like BW/color or 2D/3D, it'll be a tool that can be used selectively.

You will hate Avatar then

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

I wonder how the Avatar sequels will fare with HFR, but right now I think it benefits stark realism so well, and with The Hobbit it actually took away from the fantasy. I don't think HFR can catch on as the new standard, like BW/color or 2D/3D, it'll be a tool that can be used selectively.

Cameron himself said the following to Empire magazine a couple of years ago:

Originally Posted by Geoff D

"I also think I might use it a little differently than Peter [Jackson]. I don't think I'll apply it to the entire film any more than I would put music all the way through the film. I'll use it where I need to use it. If I have panning shots like that I'll use it on those shots, but I won't use it on everything. And I actually think there's a slight negative impact at times, where things look a little too hyper-real and you no longer feel like you're watching a movie, but you feel like you're watching reality. And that reality is that you're on a soundstage with a bunch of people in make-up. Peter and I have talked about this and we have our theories. I'm going to try mine out and see if that works, and if that doesn't work, then it'll probably all fade away."

He was also talking about "plugging in" to the existing 48fps theatrical framework at that time but he'll probably go for 60fps at the minimum. Personally I can't wait to see what the new Avatarses will look like in HFR, so by the time I start collecting my pension in about 30 years the next one will hopefully be out by then.

[RockyIII]

If we had a group of people exposed ONLY to movies in HFR from birth all the way to adult age, and then one day we exposed them to movies in 24fps, do you think they would say that those movies in 24fps looked more like movies than the movies they were used to watch in HFR all their lives?

[roguejp]

Originally Posted by RockyIII

If we had a group of people exposed ONLY to movies in HFR from birth all the way to adult age, and then one day we exposed them to movies in 24fps, do you think they would say that those movies in 24fps looked more like movies than the movies they were used to watch in HFR all their lives?

Sorry, but that's really an unfair (and I'm using a nice word here..) comparison ?

You've seen people's opinion on the subject; you're not going to chance the ones who are against it, how many, many more times you post your opinion on the subject. Stop clogging up the thread every time and spend your time on other things; by now we know how you think about it.

[tkdkid717]

all of this HFR nonsense aside, what did you guys think of the movie? I'm trying to decide if its worth a blind buy.