Netflix Instant has put everything from Criterion's best new releases to the schlock like "Masters of Horror: Dario Argento's Jenifer" at my fingertips. (Yes, I watched the latter yesterday and am still lamenting those 50 minutes of my life that ticked away.) But as convenient as it is, there's no denying that it doesn't live up to the experience of watching these movies on DVD or, more obviously, in a theater. Since so much of the NI quality depends on the speed of your Internet connection, it doesn't even always look as crisp as the fabulous old films I've been dutifully recording from AMC. I can expect this from my own home viewing experience, but shouldn't films shown at arguably the most famous festival in the world look better?

Manohla Dargis wrote this weekend about seeing Olivier Assayas's film Carlos at Cannes which was shot in 35 mm, but whose "thin visual quality of the images and occasional tell-tale splotches of yellow in white images strongly suggested that we were looking at a movie that had been shot in digital, perhaps with the RED [camera]."

Dargis wrote, "I haven't yet talked with the filmmakers of Carlos about the film's image quality. As it turns out, however, it was projected digitally, as are an increasing number of films at the festival. For most people, even movie critics, this probably doesn't seem like an especially urgent issue. It is. For most of its history, moving image entertainment has been created with film processes from start to finish... Film was part of why we loved the movies. And now that it's disappearing we have to ask what remains." She later added that most of the time, theaters are projecting what amounts to "a Blu-ray disc."
categories Movies, Cinematical