Josh,

"Bullet Time" in "The Matrix" was shot on film, though. I think that the whole series was shot on film!

As for some movies looking "flawless"...again, it could be that people in charge of video mastering are making movies "too clean" to the point of making it look like DV instead of film.

Eddie

P.S. By the way, getting a Master's in Film Studies or in Film Production won't really teach you about film grain/video/etc. This information is actually floating around the Internet and in industry magazines like "American Cinematographer", and all you have to do is apply what you learn in real life to what you see in movies. :)

I dunno, it all looks pretty real to me--especially during that battle arena scene during "Star Wars 2".

:D

Good question, Nacht, and the answer probably lies in how differing people react to the situation. But does an automobile mechanic's knowing the intricacies of a car engine spoil his driving experience? Does a stage makeup artist applying makeup to actors' faces diminish his or her enjoyment of watching a play? Does analyzing a movie detract from one's appreciation of the movie? I doubt it. Most of the actors I've known enjoy watching performances, no matter how much behind-the-scenes knowledge they have. We all suspend our disbelief, to one degree or another.

John

I don't know, it seems the more I know about the technology, and secrets to "the magic" it tends to detract from it. I guess that comes back to the old addage "ignorance is bliss". I worked for a video game company for a couple of years (we also did some SFX for movies), and got to see a lot of "how it all works". In a lot of ways it sort of ruined movie watching for me. Where I used to think "how'd they do that?" now I can see a lot (if not all) of the flaws when it comes to CG. I've often wondered that about directors, actors, or anyone else working intricately within movies, if it ruins watching movies for them now.

Whoa! Just mentioning Jimmy's name starts the DV debate all over again!

Now for my two cents on the subject:
Hologram is better! Case closed.

Sean (I feel like Pavlov's dog at the sound of the ringing bell!) ;)

It's kind of funny to me to think that a director watching a movie might be sitting in the theater thinking to himself... "I would have shot that at an entirely different angle", or "what kind of crap shot was that?!"

- Josh

This could help get "The Hobbit" off the ground (faster than an eagle)
According to Yahoo! news......
"With Sony apparently unable to construct a final offer for MGM, it's looking increasingly likely that Time Warner will swoop in and grab the prize."
- EXTERNAL LINK -

So, Warner, who "owns" New line, could end up with MGM. Since New Line and MGM both own certain rights to "The Hobbit", this deal would make the making of "The Hobbit" much more likely. 8)

8).............................................................................8)..............................................................8)

i dont think this will come even close to the lotr trilogy. when i read the books, i always felt like the hobbit was more of a kid-oriented story. it doesn't have much action, and is very short. it actually seemed more along the lines of an extremely long bedtime story, or an animated disney movie to me(. And besides, without peter jackson, whats the point? i think this is just company executives trying to make a quick buck by riding right on the coat tails of the lotr trilogy.

PJ could still do it.8)
8)