Explore our other sites
  • kotaku
  • quartz
  • theroot
  • theinventory
    yahoo-cey2xqnqhjd6qbsykgyyqydckq--disqus
    S
    yahoo-cey2xqnqhjd6qbsykgyyqydckq--disqus

    I imagine because it's not OMGFABULOUS.  'Cause anything that isn't broken MUST be "fixed", as often as possible.

    "Somehow"?  Funny, everyone I've seen make those arguments had very specific reasons for making them, and said so.  I guess cherry-picking must be a pretty convenient talent.

    Is it going to be released in 24 fps?  THAT I'll go see.  This, they can keep.

    This is not the effect you get when you clean up an old film to pristine condition.  This is far BEYOND what film does, which is why people are complaining about it.  You simply cannot get this kind of thing with film, and what Jackson and Cameron and all the other tech-head fanboys don't get is THAT IS THE POINT. 

    Yep, just what I thought.  Not only are they going to lock out MILLIONS of people who can't watch 3D, their slavering pursuit of The Next Big Thing is going to ruin the cinematic experience.  *sigh*  WHY couldn't Jackson have had his little circle-jerk with some other movie, and not this one?