Peter Jackson Quotes

The wonderful thing about 48 fps is the integration of live action and CG elements; that is something I learned from 'The Hobbit.' We are so used to 24 fps and the romance of celluloid... but at 48 fps, you cannot deny the existence of these CG creations in the same time frame and space and environment as the live action.

Technology continues to bring us wondrous advances in filmmaking to improve how we view movies.

The nature of motion capture is only going to work for certain films. It's not going to put any other type of movies out of business.

I have no opinion on 48 frames a second at all. I'd be completely unsuitable to talk about that.

The quality of CGI, audiences are now so used to it. They don't know what is CGI and what is real.

Big, big movies are in 3D, but we haven't reached a point yet where that's just what a movie is.

I've seen some of James Cameron's work, and I've got to go 3D.

I can't wait for them to convert old movies to 3D. I am 100% confident I want them to convert 'Terminator 2' to 3D more than I want anything in the world.

I think 'Avatar' is much more appropriate to high frame rates because it's like a ride, and it's futuristic, and vividness and sharp edges and clarity would be an asset.

You always learn something about movies. Directing or acting, there's always something new. It's the technological thing; there's always something to learn.

Technology will need to make many more huge leaps before one can ever view films with the level of picture and sound quality many film lovers demand without having to slide a disc into a player, especially with the technical requirements of today's 3D movies.

James Cameron has always been way ahead of the curve in terms of the use of technology in his movies.

There are many applications for which film is going to be better, for a very long time.

I've always been into visual effects. It was something I took keen interest in before films happened. Ironically, I am a part of 'Raaz 3,' a film that is shot entirely on 3D. It has encouraged me to pursue my dream. Hopefully, if time permits, I will travel to the United States and attend a crash course in visual graphics and animation.

The learning curve is 'The Hobbit' is being shot in 3D.

The visceral experience of seeing a movie in three dimensions, coming at you in the theater, is obviously here to stay, because it is a unique experience. I think that kind of format is only appropriate for some genres, but I'm all for it.

I am fortunate enough to have worked on, and continue to work on, evolutionary movies in all formats from just simple good story telling, which still matters most of all, to CG movies to tent-pole size 3D movies, and genre 3D movies like 'Piranha 3D.'

Obviously, CGI in the last ten years has gone through such leaps and bounds that today, people are looking for these kinds of movies to wow audiences with technology.

You gotta understand, when moving images first started, people wanted sound, color, big screen and depth.

For 'Star Wars' I had to develop a whole new idea about special effects to give it the kind of kinetic energy I was looking for. I did it with motion-control photography.

I love 3-D, and for certain movies it can be really great, and for certain movies it can be poison.

I have nothing against 3-D in theory. But I've also never run to the movies because something's in 3-D.

Working in Hollywood, it's clear the more money you have, the more technology you can get. So you can build a whole Japanese set. Only in Hollywood!

3-D movies can make me nauseous.

I feel a lot of films that are shot digitally, even low-budget independent films, they look super slick now. Because the technology is so good that they look too good.