Top critical review
3 people found this helpful
A timely documentary, but flawed
on December 10, 2012
Good in many ways, but it really is one sided concerning the digital cameras. One small example: at one point one of the cinematographers talks about film emulsion being fluid and never the same, while the digital sensor is a precise grid. The film makes it sound as if this were a virtue, but as anyone can tell you who has shot both film and digital video, that's really a limitation. Having a fixed rigid grid of sensor to capture every image with is the leading cause of moire in digital images. That never occurs in film images.
They need more A-list directors other than Christopher Nolan to tell why they prefer film over digital (most feature films as of 2012 are still shot on film, BTW; see [...]). That would provide an actual side-by-side neutral review of the current state of production.
But even, taking what I wrote above into account, the future is clear: the time of photochemical film is coming to an end. The digital is going to replace it. But it will probably take another 10 years for it to replace film in almost every area.