Who’s ready for a big, heaping pile of hyperbole? Strap on your galoshes because it’s about to get thick in here.
There is a war raging in Hollywood…
OH NO! Is it between Aaron Seltzer and Jason Friedberg? Have we come to a crossroads of the impending civil war of comedy sparked by the men who have most contributed to its demise? Perhaps this is a war between moviegoers and studios, as we stand strong against their neverending barrage of remakes and reboots. Tell us, Los Angeles Weekly – what war do you speak of?
… a war between formats.
BORING! Oh sorry, there’s more.
In one corner, standing with [Christopher] Nolan, are defenders of 35 mm film. Elegant in its economy, for more than 100 years film has been the dominant medium with which movies are shot, edited and viewed.
In the other corner are backers of digital technology — a cheaper, faster, democratizing medium, a boon to both creator and distributor.
Basically, Chris Nolan gathered the industry’s best directors a few months ago under the guise that he was debuting 6 minutes of exclusive footage from The Dark Knight Rises. What he actually brought them together for was to raise awareness of the coming death of the 35mm format because it costs 10 times as much as digital to distribute. Industry experts predict that by 2015, celluloid will be as rare as a virgin NFL quarterback.
This year, for the first time in history, celluloid ceases to be the world’s prevailing movie-projector technology. By the end of 2012, according to IHS Screen Digest Cinema Intelligence Service, the majority of theaters will be showing movies digitally. By 2013, film will slip to niche status, shown in only a third of theaters. By 2015, used in a paltry 17 percent of global cinemas, venerable old 35 mm film will be mostly gone.
Satire aside, the entire read is interesting and informative, as it details the demise of the vintage theater and especially art houses. Basically, in order to save a few million dollars and spare a little embarrassment for when their John Carters flop, execs are ready to bend the little guys over and iron fist them into oblivion. An over-the-top and horrifying image, sure, but at least it’s crystal clear.
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/1110/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/rumor-chris-nolan-to-produce-justice-league-with-christian-bale-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/movie-supercut-video-everything-wrong-with-dark-knight-rises-in-3-min-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/video-honest-trailer-for-the-dark-knight-rises-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/your-mid-week-guide-to-dvd-and-streaming-the-dark-knight-rises-and-hope-springs-eternal-filmdrunk-150x150.jpg)
Yay! Hyperbole!
I’m sorry, what? I was looking at Kate’s as…pect ratio.
Hyperbole is the greatest thing in the entire world.
God I hope there never is a war between Seltzer and Friedberg. Can you imagine the kind of travesties they’d produce separately? We’d get double the Selter-Friedbergian film abortionpocalypse.
One would release a movie called Comedy and the other one would release one called Movie.
The crimes against humanity would be staggering.
Meanwhile, Brett Ratner sided with digital film. “Celluloid is for fatties,” he explained between mouthfuls of nachos.
Film degrades. YouTube videos of me dancing under blacklight to Duck Sauce will in all likelihood outlive Inception… which saddens me. And should terrify you.
That’s your best effort with the photoshop yet, Boss.
Wait, will Kate Upton like me if I use film or digital? What is the point here!?!?
I’d give it to her digitally or with all of my 35mm, her choice.
Iron Fist reference?
The only person Danny Rand is bending over the Kingpin.
So, are those supposed to be negatives of a black version of Kate Upton?
The linked article doesn’t really give a good reason to keep 35mm on merit alone. Most of the article focuses on the art houses but doesn’t mention why ’35mm prints are increasingly being kept in the vault …’ and not loaned out. I don’t see a correlation between that and digital. I think the fact is arthouses themselves are in a slump, and have been for a decade. It has nothing to do with digital.
“Hug a projectionist.” Rrrrr, digital projectors are still projectors. They don’t run themselves. That whole section about ‘the old days’ of projectionists does nothing to create a feeling of romance about it. More like misery. Diversify. Stop being a projectionist and be one of the guys that fixes the projectors that apparently are made of paper mache.
Not to sound too crass, but things just go obsolete. I’m not going to shed too many tears because the network of couriers that deliver antiquated technology by hand instead of living in the 21st century goes out of business. It’s not a very persuasive argument. What do you do here? I go to the printer and pick up the TPS reports …
Technicolor is doing a lot of digital work these days, they are not going bankrupt.
Not buying the Pixar story one bit. Not even a little.
I’m not buying that the Fort Knox of film preservation they describe is cheaper than a couple of backup tapes. Would be nice if they provided some numbers and rationale to the statement that digital storage is more expensive than physical print storage.
Inception had a lot of digitally filmed scenes, and it turned out right. Plus, you know all those credits for ‘digital intermediate’ you see on films? Including The Dark Knight and Inception? That means that at least it was color corrected digitally (film to digital back to film.) And likely was edited digitally, which has been the norm for 20 years. Nobody actually physically ‘cuts’ a film any more, not even Chris Nolan.
I’m not buying that film projection is better than digitally shot and projected movies. It depends on who’s hands it’s in. Any Fincher you’ve seen since Benjamin Button was shot digitally. Check out Winter’s Bone. Digital and it looks great. Prometheus looks great in trailer form. Blue Valentine. Che. All shot digitally, all look great on the big screen.
I live in a city with a very famous art house (Hey, Vince!) and sure I go see The Sound of Music and The Wizard of Oz there when they come around, but the reason art houses are dying is because nobody alive cares to see Truffaut on the big screen any more. Half the experience is experiencing it with other people, and it’s no fun watching a classic movie with three people in the theater. I don’t like it but no amount of blowhardery is going to change it. Time marches on. It’s the message, not the medium.
So that’s my incongruous rant for the year. Screw this English, tea-drinking, pinky-out jagoff.
Oh man, how awesome would it be for Nolan to screen 2 hours of a “Save the 35mm” campaign on opening weekend instead of Dark Knight Rises?
Mo’ formats, mo’ problems. The thing is that old formats won’t die if they have both some viability and certain characteristic that is endearing. Look at vinyl records. Its the same everywhere. Video games, movies, music, books, etc.
Even talking about preservation, the problem isn’t the medium, its relative newness and the fact that proper safeguards haven’t been made yet are the real issues.
Prediction: 35mm won’t die due to niche quality and the fact that we have directors who extoll its virtue. You’ll get new film makers who want to harken back to the old days henceforth getting a “filmed with film” movie.
Except that nobody will be making 35mm film. Vinyl persists because audiophiles will pay $50 for a release in vinyl. Nobody is going to pay $50 to see Casablanca on the big screen. Nobody is going to pay a “$35mm premium” on contemporary films to offset the extra cost.
Film is dead. Long live film.
I don’t get the problem….How is the loss of an old, expensive format a problem for anyone?