The original MORTAL KOMBAT movie in 60 fps is big uncanny valley vibes

Originally published at: The original MORTAL KOMBAT movie in 60 fps is big uncanny valley vibes | Boing Boing

1 Like

Looks better.

That isn’t uncanny valley.

That’s your entire life associating 24fps “jerky” video with “cinema quality” and smoother video with “made for TV schlock”.

If I feed you a diet of pure 60fps high quality films for a month, you’d scream in laughter at how bad the 24fps stuff looked to you.


I hate frame interpolation. It always looks wrong because it’s smearing out those movements. We’re not getting extra frame like say with the Hobbit films which were shot at 40 FPS IIRC which doesn’t suffer as much from the effect of interpolation. None the less, more FPS is fine when done right, but frame interpolation should always be disabled on all TVs.


I honestly couldn’t tell the difference :sweat_smile:


You’d have to watch the clips on a much better setup than I have to see any significant difference.

i checked on my phone and on my laptop and no difference. I could try on my desktop, that has a better monitor but i can’t be bothered to do so at the moment.

Good explanation. Frame interpolation makes this look like bad trashy 80’s filmed-on-video, but current films with high frame rates in super high def don’t suffer from this effect.


At that point in time, merging effects and film footage wasn’t really very good, it was just better than it had been before. The interpolation process definitely exaggerates the differences in texture and color, and usually over sharpens it too. Your interpretation of Uncanny Valley is a product of garbage-in-garbage-out. If we had the original isolated source components, interpolated them individually, and then merged them with today’s tech, you’d be stunned.

1 Like

To present a video that contains both 24 fps and 60 fps, I assume you have to encode the video at 60 fps and telecine the 24-fps content, which would make the 24-fps bits jerkier than if it were presented at its natural frame rate.

I don’t think frame interpolation can accurately capture what it would have looked like had it been shot at the higher frame rate, because the original frames have a slower shutter speed and thus the original motion blur that includes information that would have been recorded in subsequent frames.


The video is playing at 30 fps, so the only difference in the clips is the frame interpolation of the video encoding.


This is what I love about high definition and high refresh rate TV’s with the content to really make use of it.

All that technology, and they just accomplish making everything look like a soap opera.

The movie is awesome regardless.


It depends on what you’re watching i suppose, i don’t think i’ve watched anything with higher frame rates besides The Hobbit but sports is typically the best use case for it from what i hear.But i think a better way to do it would be to do variable frame rates, keep it at the standard frame rate but put out higher frames when a scene with a lot of movement calls for it. I’ve seen in some movies in the theater where there was a lot of heavy action and it was so blurry it hurt my eyes

1 Like

Remember the Bourne trilogy fight scenes? God those were sometimes hard to track. So much blurriness from the frantic fighting.

1 Like

I think this is because it is what we are used to. I know some TV shows that would go from film to video and had a higher frame rate also looked weird.

Also, just re-watch Highlander. The Lambert “heh heh heh” laugh is a classic.


That was down to the shooting and editing. No amount of frames is going to save whatever they were going for with 30 cuts in 8 seconds.

Looking at this - seems the special effects are much more artificial-looking in 60FPS.
Is this why there was a such a big to-do about The Hobbit? Making VFX/motion look natural/cinematic in 60FPS?

I used that technique to make the XMen movie into the sitcom The Facts of Life … just because:


I find this hilarious -nice work!