In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff

We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.

Try Advanced Search

  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...

Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette

Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Joanne Jacobs
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes

Redwood Dragon
The Invisible Hand
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz


Our Last 50 Referrers

« Another Movie-List Game | Main | Formerly Writely »

October 11, 2006

Digital-Movie Future

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

Interesting thoughts about the digital-movie future from George Lucas and Matt Hanson. Time to get used to the term "Cinema 2.0," I guess.



posted by Michael at October 11, 2006


Blech. I am thoroughly tired of "Things 2.0." They never are, you know...

Posted by: A. Horbal on October 11, 2006 3:57 PM

'"I think the secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said'
... Yeah, well, as we all know, it sure ain't "quality."

We have a cinema that shows old movies in Boston. I saw 'Night of the Iguana' there last week, an old print with splices and audio pops all the way through. Absolutely delightful. He can shove his digital movie revolution up his Death star as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: stephenesque on October 11, 2006 4:39 PM

The technological "revolution" I'm more prone to care about is the greatly decreased cost of personal recording and editing tools that, after skilled critics help wade through the immense dreck, promises to give us maybe a dozen more "Blair Witch" projects.

Posted by: J. Goard on October 11, 2006 5:57 PM

Cinema 2.0 was the feature-length film, introduced 1912, Cabiria.

3.0 was the talking picture, 1927, The Jazz Singer.

4.0 was full color, 1935, Becky Sharp.

5.0 was widescreen, 1953, The Robe.

6.0 was handheld camera and portable sound, maybe with Primary, 1960.

7.0 was wire-frame computer graphics, let's say 1982, Tron.

So this is Cinema 8.0.

It sounds terrible!

Posted by: Brian on October 11, 2006 9:04 PM

Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember your info?