HFR advantage compared

Rating: 8/10 (27 December 2012)

Having seen both the 3D and HFR-3D versions of the Hobbit, I can tell you that the HFR is much more fun.
Compared to HFR, the non-HFR 3D Hobbit is like most 3D movies. At times during the non-HFR Hobbit, the 3D is more noticeable than others. The effect is more like a gimmick which wore out for me as the movie progressed.
As with a few other non-HFR 3D flicks, I got a headache about half way through. I closed one eye for a few minutes and it went away.
HFR on the other hand is like watching real people in real places. The depth starts in front of the screen. Every kind of motion is lifelike. Details in the image are sustained during motion. Objects tossed about are smooth, water flowing is like watching a natural waterfall in nature. The camera moves like your eyes would, and the panning of scenes is beyond breathtaking. The realism continues through the whole movie, and there are no gimmicks in the ending credits to remind you it was 3D.
In non-HFR, there are occasional things that jump out of the screen, and you feel you could touch them for a moment. In the Hobbit HFR, characters were standing right next to me to the point where I really thought someone had sat in the seat next to me for a moment, though it was in the movie.
There was no headache at all. I could watch HFR all day and love it.
With this realism, character development was stronger, and the soundtrack seemed a notch better, though I didn't see the HFR at an "XD" theater (not this first time anyway).
Though I have a great 3D home system, this HFR is not happening at home theaters any time soon, and will surely be missed. I will see The Hobbit in HFR again at the theater, which is a rare event for me these days.
8/10 since for the story and 10/10 for the introduction of HFR 3D. How did we put up with 24fps for so long?