John Scalzi:

On the technology side I thought the 48 frames worked as advertised: The images were clearer and sharper, the movement and action more fluid and engaging, and the 3D far smoother and rather less headache inducing.

And his last paragraph:

By the way, the hardest thing about writing this review? Not using the word “film” to refer to The Hobbit. It’s a movie, yes. A film? Nope.

He wasn’t talking about the content—that he gave a “B” grade.

It’s clear Scalzi liked the presentation. And doesn’t mourn the end of the film aesthetic. Props to him being forward thinking. Then again, he does write speculative fiction so he’s supposed to do that.

I haven’t seen “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” yet. I hope High Frame Rate projection in a theater is better than what television manufacturers have been doing in recent years.

My wife and I just bought another big-ass TV with a 240 Hz LED screen. It was delivered with all sorts of motion interpolation enhancements on by default. Everything we watched on it looked like a broadcast of “Days of our Lives”—which means not good. There’s a reason any real or perceived increase in frame rates is called the “soap opera effect.” We soon disabled those features with extreme prejudice.