It's an interesting theory about panning being the crux of the issue for 3DHFR.

On a more "creative" level, the way I've put it -- and I'm basing this off my experience with higher frame-rates only, not 3DHFR directly though it seems applicable, because I haven't seen Hobbit yet -- is that the fluidity and "realness" of it ends up putting the film into a Theater-Film hyrbid zone...it's basically a new medium.

This has to be accounted for in all aspects of the production to work properly -- from the writing to the directing to the cinematography to the editing room. You can't just change the formatting on a script and put on a play with it. You can't merely film a play from multiple angles, throw in some SFX, and make a great movie. They are simply different mediums and need to be treated differently.

I feel like that's the case with 3DHFR. Panning, as a technical aspect, would certainly fall into that category, as you are correct that it's not something our eyes/mind do in real life.

I actually think older movies would be better "designed" for 3DHDR. Before cameras had much mobility -- blocking and movement within the frame were vastly more important and given more attention. Metropolis would be amazing, especially the sections with loads of extras...it would feel like an epic play that could simply never be performed in real life.

Metropolis. City Lights. Nosferatu. Citizen Kane. Watch some clips and see how the scenes could be seen as theater-ish. Likely because filmmakers were facing a combination of film being a new medium and cameras being huge/heavy and having limited movement capabilities. The most modern examples I can think of...Clerks I think would work well. Moon, at least mostly. Again, films that were written/designed with a bit more of theater "feel" to them.

That's not to say grand action-y movies CAN'T work. I just think it's not just a new brand of film, it's a new medium entirely...and it's going to take a bit before writers/filmmakers get a handle on that medium. Maybe in time they'll design action sequences to be more "within the frame", sticking to cuts and zooms, keeping pans for more intimate scenes. Maybe use a bit of Japanese Kung-Fu movie style, where they tend to stay wide in fight scenes rather than Bourne style close-up & cuts.

3DHFR seems like watching a play through a window. Until they take that into account, I think it'll continue to polarize people.

What about the idea of filming in multiple frame rates? Record some shots like pans in 24, and others in 48. Then project it in 48.

Or would switching back and forth make things even worse? I'd be interested to see how it would look.

I just saw The Hobbit a couple of days ago in IMAX 3D HFR.  I really didn't have that much of a problem with it in that format, but as I haven't seen it in any other format, I really have no comparison.  My main complaints are those that have already been mentioned like the too long fight scenes and Gandalf's appearing/reappearing to save the day.  Overall, though I really enjoyed the movie.  I actually loved both songs and thought they fit in very well.  I also loved the casting for all the characters.  I first saw Richard Armitage as Guy of Gisborne on the BBC series Robin Hood, and my appreciation for his acting has only grown, especially after seeing him as Thorin in The Hobbit.  I have seen critiques of him as not being regal enough, but I disagree.  I thought he was very regal when it was called for.  And of course all the returning characters from LOTR.  I guess I can only agree with previous comments that despite the problems, I didn't want the movie to end.  I am looking forward to seeing how the next two movies go.

Interesting observations about the panning. Just watching the regular 2D version, I noticed some blurring in a couple of the epic scope scenes the camera was panning across. I actually thought to myself 'ooh, I can't see anything there'. It's something I remember from LOTR - specifically the tracking shots of the Rohirrim camp where Theoden and the heroes arrived. I wonder if it's a problem that lies with the way Jackson and Lesnie shoot it?

Oh my god, thank you for giving thoughts of Jason Momoa as Azog. That would have been amazing!

And absolutely agree about him btw. Easily the worst creature. Most of the other orcs I could pretty much buy. Although the entire Goblin town sequence was just so fucking balls to the wall ridiculous I can't even remember if the render/comp was decent on them...cause I know for sure the design work sure as hell wasn't gettin it.