SCREEN-L Archives

May 2002, Week 4


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 22 May 2002 15:33:54 +0800
text/plain (41 lines)
on 5/22/02 7:13 AM, "James Monaco <[log in to unmask]>" wrote:

> This has been a very interesting thread. I was wondering how long it
> would take someone to google maxivision.

You ought to. If I remember correctly, you're the one who introduced me to
it a few years ago =).

> There is no doubt in my mind that Ebert is right and that in x years
> Maxivision will be the format of choice for anyone serious about
> film--both filmmakers and filmgoers.

I like the idea of the format, my measly little simulations show some
impressive improvements all by themselves. I was pretty sold on the idea
even without seeing the demo. The promise of it being 'simple' has proven to
be a wee bit false, tho'.

> The question is the value of x.

I think digital really will take over film one day. But not today. And if
they really do want to spend zillions on a newfangled format, then they
ought to point themselves at 70mm instead. It's got that 'new' sound to it.
Just add the word 'digital'.

> Right now there is one prototype projector in San Luis Obispo and
> inventor Dean Goodhill has had trouble raising cash. He's been
> overwhelmed by the digital wave.

Right now, the only visible backers of it are Scorcese and Ebert. If that
could be demo'd to some other more powerful shakers, it might take off. I
really wish it would.

> James Monaco


For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives: