I've just seen Captain America: Civil War and one thing that struck me was how choppy a lot of the action looks.
I'm aware that filmmakers often play with frame-rates to get various effects. Action is often shot at 22fps and played back at 24fps, for example. I guess that's what's happening here, but there seem to be some caveats.
If you look at the famous intro sequence from Saving Private Ryan, one trick Spielberg used was to shoot it as 12fps to imitate the cameras which actually caught battle footage in WW2. This contributes to the frenetic tone of the scene, but the images still seem "smooth" in a way that CA:CW does not.
I think the issue might be that CA:CW is lacking motion blur, as if it was shot at 60fps and 2/3rds of the frames were thrown away, or something like that. If I imagine the calculations that would be involved in adjusting motion blur in digital images by combining and splitting frames, it strikes me that it might not be possible without an exact reference frame for the background. Also, a mechanical shutter on a traditional camera could capture frames of any time length with correct results, but perhaps digital sensors are compelled to have "shutter" times which cannot be controlled.
Is this what's causing the choppy visual effect? Is it avoidable? Was this choppiness an artistic decision or a side-effect of the technology used?