|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Paramount kills off 35mm in the US
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 01-29-2014 09:06 AM
quote: Brad Miller
That's just stupid. By the time November comes around, any 35mm theaters left running without digital capability will be the super crappy ones with deplorable presentations.
I'll bet they change their mind come November and it doesn't actually happen. (After all I predicted a couple of years ago that in January 2014 the first studio would drop 35mm and I pegged that right down to the month.)
+1.
This press release translates as:
"In order to appease the odd prima donna director who has the ability to make headlines in the highbrow press, and in order to avoid being flamed by the "film forever" brigade, we're not saying formally that we're shutting the door on any possibility of any future 35mm releases. But what these Kool-Aid drinkers don't know won't hurt them, i.e. as far as we're concerned, as soon as we see the back of the stuff, the better."
Rewind to 1929-1930, and it was being confidently predicted by a vocal minority of critics that there would always be some silent movies made, because silent movies were a wonderful art form and should not be allowed to die. Rewind to 1966-67 (when the major US TV networks made the joint decision that new movies purchased for mainstream broadcast had to be in color), and the next generation of those critics were asserting that there would always be some black-and-white movies made, because black-and-white movies were a wonderful art form and should not be allowed to die. Now we're being told that film will survive forever, because it's a wonderful art form (and long-term preservation medium) and should not be allowed to die.
How many silent or b/w movies have been made and achieved anything close to a mainstream release since these predictions? A tiny handful of essentially exprimental films (e.g. Baraka, The Artist, Schindler's List, Manhattan). However, what distinguishes silent and b/w movies from those originated photochemically as distinct from digitally is that the technology needed to make and show them remained in commercial production long after it stopped being used in those ways. Everything we know about cost, complexity and the economies of scale of film manufacturing (plus the infrastructure needed to process the stuff) at the very least brings the assumption that the same thing will apply here into question.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 13 pages: 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic