I don't have much to add to the discussion except to say that I don't think the cd vs vinyl debate that we had in the 90s is a good comparison for the current c

I don't have much to add to the discussion except to say that I don't think the cd vs vinyl debate that we had in the 90s is a good comparison for the current controversy with 48FPS. Even if you accept that the first cds really did sound more accurate than their vinyl counterparts -- and some posters are contesting this -- the underlying points of contention are different for 48FPS vs 24FPS. Cds, in theory, brought you closer to the ideal situation which would be listening to the music in its purest form, unadulterated (perhaps, live?). But this is not what 48FPS does. Although 48FPS brings you closer to reality, it is the wrong reality. As pointed out in the article and by others, 48FPS makes you more aware of the artificial contrivances of the set -- the extra makeup, harsh lighting and the fake props. This is not what movies are supposed to do! The thing to strive for in movies is the fantasy realm that you're trying to depict. 48FPS puts a much greater burden on the filmmaker to live up to this fantasy expectation and when he or she falls short, as many are claiming PJ did, you have people complaining.