Why the art of film is on an irretrievable course of decline

[leafshimmer]

I seem to be making a specialty of depressing lunchtime reading this week. Today's star attraction was a lengthy study of film projection in the Boston area. Even though I almost never go out to films any longer, I do want to know that if I decide to spend TEN DOLLARS for two hours of my own time, I'm going to see something along the lines of

Comments

[danthered]

Sorry, I have to disagree-very strenuously.

Mind, I've no beef with your opinions and preferences, but the fatuous, tiny-fisted temper tantrum on display in the linked article is little different to the jeremiads and screeds we had to endure when the LP's day was over, and when digital photography supplanted chemical photography, when scribes were supplanted by printing presses, the automatic transmission became more popular than the stick-shift, and people started cooking bacon in µwave ovens instead of skillets. Gnashing of teeth, rending of garments, tearing of hair-alas! Lackaday!-wailing and bitching and moaning and dismissively trashing the concept-blah blah not like in the good old days blahbitty blah blah-when in fact a good implementation (of anything) is most always better overall than a bad implementation (of anything). Doggedly insisting that digital "sucks", is a "giant, complete, total crock", a "lie", a "scam", "garbage", etc. is the kind of stuck-up intellectual laze that provides fertile ground for noxious weeds

[aeristilheartly]

"When you talk about quality and digital in the same sentence it's almost laughable to me You can't