it's dead because
1) no-one goes to the cinema 2) physical medium film is dead 3) lack of auteurs 4) us cinema increasingly targetted on (global) youth market 5) lack of enthusiasm 'out there' 6) kidnapping of avant-garde film by the art world
i've mixed up qualitative with quantitative things.
1 people not going to the cinema is happening and it is affecting the way films look, but exhibition conditions have always done that. the notion of the 'cinematic' (ie bigness) mostly comes from the 1950s-60s when film was trying to compete with television.
2 film the physical thing being on the way out is hard to argue with.
3 is slightly qualitative, slightly quantitative, in a number of senses. exhibition/distribution is more of an issue for me than individual eurauteurs.
4 doesn't make too much difference. i would feel worse about the decline of indie cinema if it was something i'd cared about
5 i think older critics just don't approve the kind of enthusiasm there is for, say, 'anchorman'.
6 thrown in for provocation
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:44 (5 years ago) Permalink
LOL box office figures are considerably up this year in the UK.
― Mark C, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:46 (5 years ago) Permalink
Yes I'm not sure about 1. Was 6 thrown in by you or "them"?
― Tom D., Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:46 (5 years ago) Permalink
yeah cinema attendances should be down but they are not.
likewise the BPI reported record-breaking album sales for British music earlier this year.
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:48 (5 years ago) Permalink
i looked at Facebook London network's favourite films - Anchorman is extraordinarily high up (like 4th behind Shawshank etc.)
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:49 (5 years ago) Permalink
As long as we've got Danny Dyer, the UK film industry will be fine.
― Dom Passantino, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:50 (5 years ago) Permalink
He's the new Stanley Holloway
― Tom D., Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:51 (5 years ago) Permalink
6 is mine.
1 is more a matter of long-term decline, and is linked to 2: shoddiness of the physical space 'cinema'. i don't so much agree with that -- or at least just think you could say cinemas became boring when they had to sack live musicians, or when they abandoned having short programmes, or the b-feature, or continuous play...
xpost
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:52 (5 years ago) Permalink
The death of the physical medium is probably true but I doubt that it matters that much to anyone other than a handful of cineastes. The way cgi, digital colour correction etc is being used by most filmakers now , mourning the loss of celluloid will seem as quaint as mourning the loss of wax cylinders. To paraphrase Hitchock, it's not how it's filmed, it's what's on the screen that counts.
― Billy Dods, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:52 (5 years ago) Permalink
1) no-one goes to the cinema - people go the cinema but it may be that tastes have narrowed so there's less range of films on offer?
2) physical medium film is dead - is this relevant? doesn't stop more and moer films being made - the opposite in fact
3) lack of auteurs - and in such politically fraught times too - what gives?
4) us cinema increasingly targetted on (global) youth market - ban apatow
5) lack of enthusiasm 'out there' - by studios? like record companies they lose controld daily. among the public? not sure why this would be (see pop again).
6) kidnapping of avant-garde film by the art world - BY the art world? wha?
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:53 (5 years ago) Permalink
truth is the golden age of european art cinema (ie: wide distribution of european cinema) coincided with/was maybe part product of the collapse of cinema as a mass medium in the '50s. that pattern went forever before most of the nostalgists were even born. and things were worse in the '80s than now, numbers-wise.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:56 (5 years ago) Permalink
i don't remember there being multiplexes in the 80s. came over here at the very end maybe.
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:57 (5 years ago) Permalink
2 is very weak -- the argument runs that the celluloid strip is sort of like an actual physical impression of the world, that it takes a bit of the world into it. it's pretty mad but i think that's what they think. they need to see 'miami vice' for real.
yeah i was wondering if multiplexes were brought in to solve the problem of declining audiences. they are part of the 'white flight' phenomenon in america, perhaps -- obviously cinemas were first built in city centres; the multiplexes on ringroads.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 12:59 (5 years ago) Permalink
Given yr poopooing of masterpiece-hunters, how the fuck do you measure aesthetic advances then, quitit? Most avant-garde films I've seen recently are, as usual, fucking empty.
I'm trying to make a list of the best films of the decade thus far, and I'm hard-pressed to find more than 6 or 7 I consider 'excellent,' let alone great. I think the even SOMEWHAT trad narrative feature... well, almost everything's been done. Even more than ever.
And speaking of the D.O.C., see M Dargis column in TIFF thread.
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:12 (5 years ago) Permalink
Run Fatboy Run is the no 1 film in the UK this week.
― acrobat, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:16 (5 years ago) Permalink
srsly, it beat 'atonement'?! lol.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:17 (5 years ago) Permalink
Run Fatboy Run vs. Act Thingirl Act
― Tom D., Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:18 (5 years ago) Permalink
Pegg's Fatboy tops UK box office Pegg (r) won rave reviews for zombie comedy Shaun of the Dead British comedy Run, Fatboy, Run has sprinted to the top of the UK box office in its opening week. The film, directed by former Friends star David Schwimmer, took more than £2m at the box office beating Oscar hopeful Atonement into second place.
Starring Simon Pegg and Thandie Newton, the low-budget film outshone Hollywood heavyweights including The Bourne Ultimatum and US comedy Knocked Up.
Stephen King thriller 1408, starring John Cusack, rounded out the top five.
Pegg co-wrote Run, Fatboy, Run, which sees him playing an overweight security guard trying to win back the girlfriend he abandoned at the altar five years before.
UK BOX OFFICE 1. Run, Fatboy, Run - £2.01m 2. Atonement - £1.63m 3. The Bourne Ultimatum - £1.09m 4. Knocked Up - £756,339 5. 1408 - £550,538 Source: Screen International
The comedy, which marks Schwimmer's directorial debut on the big screen, also features Simpsons star Hank Azaria and comedian Dylan Moran.
Atonement, based on the best-selling book by Booker nominee Ian McEwan, entered the charts at number two, with box office takings of £1.6m.
Both films open in the US later in the year.
Meanwhile Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, remains in the top 10 - at number eight - nearly two months after it first opened.
The success of the fifth instalment has seen the Potter film series become the most successful in box office history, beating James Bond and Star Wars.
― acrobat, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:19 (5 years ago) Permalink
This thread died quickly
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:21 (5 years ago) Permalink
faster than cinema is, anyway
What makes a film empty?
― Noodle Vague, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:25 (5 years ago) Permalink
you kind of answer yourself there. what aesthetic advances do you see in art-house cinema? i sort of think it's hard to separate technological from aesthetic questions, personally, though that can lead to hyping sheer novelty.
the avant-garde i'm thinking of is bunuel, franju, marker, that kind of tradition. not empty at all. but not really thriving now either.
i don't understand this impulse, to treat cinema like this. why can't it be as ephemeral as music or theatre or literature?
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:25 (5 years ago) Permalink
because ephemeral = worthless.
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:27 (5 years ago) Permalink
no it isn't.
to shakespeare's audiences, his plays were ephemeral. they changed through the run and were then forgotten, except by the performers.
why is that a bad model for other media?
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:28 (5 years ago) Permalink
Film has always had a difficulty straddling the importance it desires academically, and the cold hard fact that it is run as a business AND HAS TO RUN AS A BUSINESS cos it costs a lot of money to make.
Why cinema isn't dead. Because it no longer costs quite as much money to make. This is still in its infancy though of being exploited because the word cinema also means exhibition IN THE CINEMA. But as the study of cinema likes to think of its subject preserved in aspic (Celluloid, or if a bit modern DVD), they miss out on the importance of the ephemeral. Same as it ever was.
Same Sight & Sound has a terrific suggestion on how the multiplex could be used to the casual viewers advantage as exhibition costs go massively down. Get fifty friends, or (fifty facebook people - social networking possibly being the cornerstone of this idea) who want to see a film, any film avilible for digital projection, go see the film in a cinema. Hopefully a clever inner city cinema (with a good bar) will toy with this suggestion, as it strikes me that there is plenty of money in them thar hills (particularly money over the bar which is pretty much pure profit in a good cinema).
― Pete, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:43 (5 years ago) Permalink
I think I've said it before and I'll say it again: Inland Empire saved my cinephilia for the time being. I'm not even positive it was a great movie, but it did that much.
― Eric H., Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:46 (5 years ago) Permalink
I don't think of Bunuel as being avant-garde
― Tom D., Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:48 (5 years ago) Permalink
(x-post) That's ed, I'm still trying to work myself away from the sort of cinephilia that ebbs and flows with the whole "summer movies/Oscar season" calendar.
― Eric H., Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:48 (5 years ago) Permalink
re the Shakespearean model, because cinema is an inherently repeatable experience now. And we have indoor plumbing.
IE did something similar on a smaller scale for me, even moreso (maybe) The Joy of Life.
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:49 (5 years ago) Permalink
'chien andalou' and 'l'age d'or' are sorta avant-garde, tom.
i can take or leave his other stuff.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:49 (5 years ago) Permalink
The E in the R is HBO as the new studio system, 8 pages on the Sopranos in the NYRB, hi-def tvs larger than many minor multiplex screens etc etc etc.
Apatow is just fine, but he's never going to be involved in anything as good as 'Freaks & Geeks' unless he goes back to telly...
― Stevie T, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:50 (5 years ago) Permalink
But those are more about the art world than cinema! To use your phrases.
― Tom D., Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:51 (5 years ago) Permalink
the golden age of TV is over.
― s1ocki, Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:57 (5 years ago) Permalink
otm
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:02 (5 years ago) Permalink
R.I.P. Maude
― Eric H., Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:04 (5 years ago) Permalink
tom -- no way, not when they came out. they played in cinemas, not art galleries.
-- Stevie T, Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:50 PM (12 minutes ago) Bookmark Link
for the true believers multiplex screens and tv screens just don't compare with the big screen. they also have a thing for the communal experience, etc.
it isn't just about quality of transferable "content."
but the ending of 'the sopranos' and 'the wire' within 12 months of each other is a bit of a marker too.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:06 (5 years ago) Permalink
Oh, Enrique, btw, you still haven't explained to me why Repulsion isn't shit.
― Just got offed, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:07 (5 years ago) Permalink
try explaining to us why it IS, goofus.
― s1ocki, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:08 (5 years ago) Permalink
I don't believe "the big screen communal experience" is coming back as anything other than charming nostalgia outdoor summer screenings etc.
― Stevie T, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:11 (5 years ago) Permalink
except more people are going to the cinema than ever before. so what exactly do you base that on
― s1ocki, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:12 (5 years ago) Permalink
no, i agree. but that's one reason why people think the thing is dying.
s1ocki that's not true. or, not within the west. people went to the cinema habitually once or twice a week up to the '40s.
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:13 (5 years ago) Permalink
more people are going to the cinema and acting like they're in their living room than ever before.
re the Dargis article in the TIFF thread, the problem of cinephilia gaining sustenance from the likes of Inland Empire is that it's marginalized. Culturally discerning [sic?] 25-year-olds who would've seen and discussed every Godard film in the mid '60s now reserve their passion for Knocked Up.
― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:14 (5 years ago) Permalink
ya but that's because they all worked there. xp
― s1ocki, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:14 (5 years ago) Permalink
-- Dr Morbius, Thursday, September 13, 2007 2:14 PM (21 seconds ago) Bookmark Link
what is the evidence for this exactly
― s1ocki, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:15 (5 years ago) Permalink
I did, on that London movies thread.
― Just got offed, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:15 (5 years ago) Permalink
Get fifty friends, or (fifty facebook people - social networking possibly being the cornerstone of this idea) who want to see a film, any film avilible for digital projection, go see the film in a cinema. Hopefully a clever inner city cinema (with a good bar) will toy with this suggestion, as it strikes me that there is plenty of money in them thar hills (particularly money over the bar which is pretty much pure profit in a good cinema).
had a similar idea a while back but more based around small indie cinemas AND a range of viewable material not constrained to films (think TV, live sport/events).
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:16 (5 years ago) Permalink
Why not just invited your mates round to your house and bring yr own booze?!
― Stevie T, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:19 (5 years ago) Permalink
but morbs those godard fans were also the first-gen auteurists, going to hawks and hitchcock retrospectives. i don't see that as any more mature or whatever than digging on 'knocked up' (a far more mature, if less formally interesting, film than anything lunatic maoist godard has done).
― That one guy that hit it and quit it, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:19 (5 years ago) Permalink
houses and screens/systems in houses are not as big. not so much '50 friends' anyway but '50 people who want to see this', as it is now. essentially what has already been happening for years with some bars showing a film in the back room.
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:22 (5 years ago) Permalink
i saw Vanilla Sky in some bar in Brighton with about 20 people. it was a cool experience.
― blueski, Thursday, 13 September 2007 14:24 (5 years ago) Permalink
Getting ready to make up crazy facts about film projection for the grandkids.
― a la bouquet marmoset (Austerity Ponies), Monday, 7 May 2012 14:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
So, everyone saw Hugo in digital projection, right?
― jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Monday, 7 May 2012 14:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
caught a glimpse of what looked like a windows 98 desktop for a split second after I saw the raid: redemption yesterday, lol
― (⊙_⊙?) (Alan N), Monday, 7 May 2012 15:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
in a chain theater
David Bordwell on James Cameron's presumptive agenda:
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2012/04/22/its-good-to-be-the-king-of-the-world/
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 19:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
Off topic, but this quote:
Second, if these guys are so passionately committed to quality, why don’t they make better movies?
― a la bouquet marmoset (Austerity Ponies), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 19:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
― (⊙_⊙?) (Alan N), Monday, May 7, 2012 11:22 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark
ive seen that a few times. also when i saw A Separation, the first 5 minutes or so played without subtitles because the projectionist forgot to turn them on - like when you're watching a DVD.
― these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 19:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah for some reason i thought that bordwell article had been posted. its good, but i still cant muster any sympathy for the conscience-free big chain exhibitors who have been bilking theatergoers ever since the multiplex era began. i mean at fucking cinemacon this year the big chains were batting around ideas about allowing texting during movies to lure in teenage customers. there is no low they won't stoop to in the name of profits. of course, independent theaters are getting shafted by cameron's 'all stick' approach too...
― these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 20:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
Chris Nolan, defender of celluloid:
http://www.laweekly.com/2012-04-12/film-tv/35-mm-film-digital-Hollywood/
― polyphonic, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 18:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
third time's the charm
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 18:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
haha, sorry, didn't see it until I showed the hidden posts. mea culpa
― polyphonic, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 18:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
THE MOVIE VANISHES
http://youtu.be/EL_g0tyaIeE
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 14:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://www.quora.com/Pixar-Animation-Studios/Did-Pixar-accidentally-delete-Toy-Story-2-during-production/answer/Oren-Jacob
They almost lost 2 months worth of work, but then they redid everything anyway so it wouldn't have mattered. Still scary.
― the acquisition and practice of music is unfavourable to the health of (abanana), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
i should also point out that it incredible that
rm -rf *
― the acquisition and practice of music is unfavourable to the health of (abanana), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
it's
― the acquisition and practice of music is unfavourable to the health of (abanana), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 00:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
it's not a problem, it's a valid operation - you can't remove the ability to delete stuff, or change how it works.
decent permissions will stop anyone being able to delete anything but their own files (yeah, ok, that can be catastrophic enough).
― koogs, Wednesday, 16 May 2012 08:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
tbf Orson Welles lost two whole reels of footage when he ran out of desk space and set them on top of the trash can and the janitor threw them out
― mh, Wednesday, 16 May 2012 13:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
I think he actually misplaced them in a pizza box
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 14:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
I think he actually ate them
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 17:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rm_(Unix)
A command so dangerous shouldn't be so easy to use. This page has a bunch of different solutions, which most linux distributions don't use.
― the acquisition and practice of music is unfavourable to the health of (abanana), Wednesday, 16 May 2012 20:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
most of those (3) solutions won't work with the above because of the fact that it explicitly used -f to force removal. and the Protection of the filesystem root doesn't apply because it's not necessarily /
(ubuntu enforces -i by default, i think. but that's dangerous as it just leads to people typing -f by rote, to bypass all the y y y y y y y y that needs doing if you're deleting more than one file)
backups.
― koogs, Thursday, 17 May 2012 07:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
tbf Windows has the same issue, it's just that no one uses the command line
I have, in the past, had the charming habit of holding down shift while deleting in Windows to do a real delete all the time, though.
Backups!
― mh, Thursday, 17 May 2012 14:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh, a digital troubleshooting thread! let's kill cinema now.
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 17 May 2012 14:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
decent source control is probably the first step though. more difficult with large binary files (textures) but...
― koogs, Thursday, 17 May 2012 14:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
=D
― mh, Thursday, 17 May 2012 14:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
so there's a new doc opening in a few cities and playing on VOD where Keanu interviews filmmakers about the digital changeover! Plenty for Lucas- and Cameron-haters to chew on.
http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/side-by-side/6454
― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Monday, 13 August 2012 21:08 (9 months ago) Permalink
I'm interested in seeing that, actually. Do you know when it's available on VOD?
― Legendary General Cypher Raige (Gukbe), Monday, 13 August 2012 21:27 (9 months ago) Permalink
week from Wednesday.
http://sidebysidethemovie.com/
It covers a lot of the issues discussed above, esp re archiving toward the end, but often in "It's like this / No it's not" fashion.
― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Monday, 13 August 2012 21:40 (9 months ago) Permalink
morbs did you read david bordwell's 'pandora's digital book,' its great
― Author ~ Coach ~ Goddess (s1ocki), Monday, 13 August 2012 22:40 (9 months ago) Permalink
dude, the last 'serious' book I read was Nixonland and it took me a year.
― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Monday, 13 August 2012 23:35 (9 months ago) Permalink
it's a quick read!
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2012/05/17/pandoras-digital-book/
and i guarantee more insight than keanu reeves' documentary.
― Author ~ Coach ~ Goddess (s1ocki), Tuesday, 14 August 2012 00:39 (9 months ago) Permalink
some outtakes from that doc here
http://www.tribecafilm.com/videos/?sortBy=-startDate&11963=1030576
― Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 15 August 2012 17:45 (9 months ago) Permalink
Neil Young: "Once there was a friend of mine/who died a thousand deaths." (Haven't read this yet, haven't decided if I will.)
http://www.salon.com/2012/09/28/is_movie_culture_dead/
― clemenza, Friday, 28 September 2012 22:43 (7 months ago) Permalink
"there's a lot of handwringing about the death of cinema so here is an article where i handwring about the death of the cinema."
really it's just a blender of TV IS MORE DISSCUSSED and that NYFF doesn't matter anymore and the cultural elites don't dictate the wider discussion
― Legendary General Cypher Raige (Gukbe), Friday, 28 September 2012 22:54 (7 months ago) Permalink
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-hungry-hungry-hippos-action-man-monopoly-movie-20121004,0,4066248.story
― let's keep this board about feet, please. (latebloomer), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:37 (7 months ago) Permalink
Just noticed that our Landmark franchise here--which resides in perhaps Houston's last movie palace that actually still shows movies--has gone all digital for new releases.
― 50 Shades of Greil (C. Grisso/McCain), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:55 (7 months ago) Permalink
Hungry Hungry Hippos, which debuted in 1978, is a game in which players compete with plastic hippos to swallow marbles off of a board.
shit i've been playing it wrong
― thread lock holiday (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:55 (7 months ago) Permalink
ha
― Number None, Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:56 (7 months ago) Permalink
My twitter feed these days has basically become a daily report of digital/DLP critics' screenings gone awry.
― Ham Lushbaugh (Eric H.), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:57 (7 months ago) Permalink
do tell!
― stop swearing and start windmilling (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:58 (7 months ago) Permalink
Every day, digital/DLP critics' screenings go awry.
― Ham Lushbaugh (Eric H.), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 19:58 (7 months ago) Permalink
haha
― there is no dana, only (goole), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 20:07 (7 months ago) Permalink
great story
― stop swearing and start windmilling (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 20:10 (7 months ago) Permalink
It's even better in yfrog form.
― Ham Lushbaugh (Eric H.), Wednesday, 10 October 2012 20:12 (7 months ago) Permalink
"Old" movies to look like video forevermore....
In June, director Martin Scorsese tried to show his 1993 film The Age of Innocence at the Museum of the Moving Image in Queens. Thelma Schoonmaker, Scorsese's editor for the past 40 years and a three-time Oscar winner, called Grover Crisp, the senior VP of asset management at Sony, for a 35mm print. But Sony not only didn't have a print, it couldn't even make one.
"He told me that they can't print it anymore because Technicolor in Los Angeles no longer prints film," Schoonmaker recalled. "Which means a film we made 20 years ago can no longer be printed, unless we move it to another lab—one of the few labs still making prints."
..."I was used to hearing, oh well, maybe films made in the '40s or '50s, but our film?" Schoonmaker said, referring to titles that have become unavailable. "And it's not the only one of our films that is in this situation. What really worries me are the lesser-known movies."
And film buffs are worried not just about the lack of digitized titles, but how they are being converted. Schoonmaker for one has been appalled by some of the digital "restorations" she's screened.
"I saw a digitized version of a film that David Lean made during World War II, and it looked just like a TV commercial that was shot yesterday," she said. "It was wrong, the balance was completely off. Originally it had a slightly muted look, and now here were all these insanely bright blues."
Schoonmaker believes that the colorists who have been trained in the last 10 or 15 years "have no idea what these movies should look like anymore."
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/11/with-35mm-film-dead-will-classic-movies-ever-look-the-same-again/265184/
― saltwater incursion (Dr Morbius), Monday, 26 November 2012 16:00 (5 months ago) Permalink
I don't want the endless stream of those articles over the years to get me down, but boy do they get me down.
― Gukbe, Monday, 26 November 2012 16:11 (5 months ago) Permalink
Countdown to the death of "the death of Cinema" articles.
― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Monday, 26 November 2012 16:20 (5 months ago) Permalink