All praise to Christopher Nolan. He hates 3-D and hasn't bought the kool-aid about the ripoff and sham that is Digital. 35MM film will live as long as folks like Nolan still have pull. http://www.thewrap.com/christopher-nolan-great-gatsby-worked-3d-isnt/

what about the fact that 35mm will be projected with multiple defects such as scratches, skips and the inevitable mechanical jam which leads to on screen incineration. digital eliminates these at some cost. it's a trade off. and i have faith that the defects in digital can be circumvented. perhaps a neuro implant to process the visual information.

Of course you are buying in the lie line of the digital apolgists enthusiasts that digital is 'perfect'. Guess you've never seen a digitally projected image freeze up or become so pixillated that it looks like hell. Or one where a "mechanical" or digital flaw in the DCP doesn't allow for the movie to even be shown AT ALL (I've been to two such where they had to cancel the screening). And, just yesterday I attended a digital screening where the projector keep flashing throughout the full two hours.

So much for the alleged 'perfection'.


kirok wrote on Jun 9^th, 2014 at 10:09am:

i didn't say digital was perfect. i said let's not ignore the flaws of analog. there is a tradeoff


L.A. Connection wrote on Jun 9^th, 2014 at 8:08pm:

I think I'll just leave this link to director William Friedkin talking about 35mm film here and head for the shelter.

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/william-friedkin-says-studios-make-great-filmmak...

If I may, perhaps we should also consider that on the wider scale of motion picture presentation, digital projection is still in its infancy. Of course it isn't perfect, and it never will be. No format, including 35mm, is and ever could be. There will always be mistakes and limitations.

However, film projection grew and evolved over time in many ways that enhanced the movie-viewing experience; the inclusion of soundtracks to film prints, the development of color, the adoption of cinemascope, the innovations of 70mm and IMAX.

Who's to say digital can't follow the same route? Perhaps over time, those problems involving black levels and sharpness can be resolved. We've certainly seen advances in digital cameras allowing the look of digitally-shot productions to approach the high level of quality we associate with film. We may look back on this period in the far future and be stunned at advances that digital projection has made over film projection.

It's also worth noting the opportunities that digital shooting, and as a consequence, digital projection offer independent filmmakers today. Twenty years ago, an aspiring director hoping to get a movie shown at a festival for distribution wouldn't get anywhere unless he or she had the cash to have a print made for exhibition. Now, there are fewer barriers between the filmmaker and the chance to have their movie shown on a proper movie screen.

I certainly worry over the end of film for the sake of movies that probably won't get the kind of digital restoration necessary for theatrical exhibition, the kind of movies that so often get shown at the 'Thon. For the sake of those titles, film projection will probably be the only way many will get screened and I hope there's always a place for it.

But for those movies yet to be shot, perhaps we should be a bit patient with the technology. Transitions are always painful, particularly for those whose livelihood is bound up in the old model but it does no one any good to curse the future while it's still forming. After all, if we never made room for new innovations, we'd still be watching silent movies.