[Just let me say at the outset, nearly every time I post a good piece of writing, I am instructed by various schoolmarms here to write my own. So bring it on!]
First, though, a Cinematheque host welcomed the audience -- the 425-seat house was full -- and asked how many people had ever seen the film [2001]projected. Fewer than half raised their hands.
He didn't mean projected in 70mm as opposed to 35mm, but projected at all, as opposed to displayed on a TV. The audience response suggested how far the movie medium has strayed from the eye-popping, soul-filling images that used to be its stock-in-trade. For most of these moviegoers, Kubrick's universe had been shrunk to fit the dinky dimensions of a home appliance.
Shrunk to fit the dinky dimensions of a home appliance.
And there you have it.
clark
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - "Taking In the Big Picture" -- Fine article on 70mm in the Journal - clarkjohnsen 10:48:45 06/01/08 (10)
- People don't want QUALITY... - grhughes 11:12:37 06/03/08 (5)
- Last of the hold outs for quality... - mpathus 19:33:55 06/04/08 (0)
- What the heck was the justification for using *optical*?! nt - clarkjohnsen 11:28:36 06/03/08 (3)
- All types of excuses; - grhughes 13:31:54 06/04/08 (2)
- You mean, the heads can be disengaged even when the film's running through the projector?! nt - clarkjohnsen 08:16:01 06/05/08 (1)
- Yes,..... - grhughes 09:18:14 06/05/08 (0)
- RE: "Taking In the Big Picture" -- Fine article on 70mm in the Journal - Cosmic Closet 20:26:02 06/01/08 (1)
- "The Golden Gauge." That's a good one too! nt - clarkjohnsen 08:13:28 06/02/08 (0)
- RE: "Taking In the Big Picture" -- Fine article on 70mm in the Journal - Rich Jura 14:36:04 06/01/08 (1)
- Oh, excellent quote. Excellent! nt - clarkjohnsen 08:11:44 06/02/08 (0)