what is digital presentation movie theater

How Digital Cinema Works

Share Content on Facebook
Share Content on LinkedIn
Share Content on Flipboard
Share Content on Reddit
Share Content via Email

what is digital presentation movie theater

To the audience, the most important aspect of digital cinema is the projection system. This is the final piece of technology that controls how the movie actually looks at the end of the line.

Pretty much everybody agrees that a good film projector loaded with a pristine film print produces a fantastic, vibrant picture. The problem is, every time you play the movie, the film quality drops a little. When you go to a movie that's been playing for a few weeks, you'll probably see hundreds of scratches and bits of dirt.

Many critics hold that a projected digital movie is inferior to a pristine film print, but they recognize that while a film print gradually degrades, a digital movie looks the same every time you show it. Think of a CD as compared to an audio tape. Every time you play an audio tape, the sound gets a little warped. A CD's digital information sounds exactly the same every time you listen to it (unless it gets scratched).

Today, there are two major digital cinema projector technologies: Micromirror projectors and LCD projectors.

Micromirror projectors , like Texas Instruments' Digital Light Processing (DLP) line, form images with an array of microscopic mirrors . In this system, a high-power lamp shines light through a prism . The prism splits the light into the component colors red, green and blue. Each color beam hits a different Digital Micromirror Device (DMD) -- a semiconductor chip that is covered in more than a million hinged mirrors.

Based on the information encoded in the video signal, the DMD turns over the tiny mirrors to reflect the colored light. Collectively, the tiny dots of reflected light form a monochromatic image. To see how this works, imagine a crowd of people on the ground at night, each holding a square-foot mirror. A helicopter flies overhead and shines a light down on the crowd. Depending on which people held their mirrors up, you would see a different reflected image. If everybody worked together, they could spell out words or form images. If you had more than a million people, pressed shoulder to shoulder, you could make highly detailed pictures.

In actuality, most of the individual mirrors are flipped from "on" (reflecting light) to "off" (not reflecting light) and back again thousands of times per second. A mirror that is flipped on a greater proportion of the time will reflect more light and so will form a brighter pixel than a mirror that is not flipped on for as long. This is how the DMD creates a gradation between light and dark. The mirrors that are flipping rapidly from on to off create varying shades of gray (or varying shades of red, green and blue, in this case).

Each micromirror chip reflects the monochromatic image back to the prism, which recombines the colors. The red, green and blue rejoin to form a full color image, which is projected on the screen.

LCD projectors , such as JVC's Digital Image Light Amplifier (D-ILA) line, work on a slightly different system. These projectors reflect high-intensity light off of a stationary mirror covered with a liquid crystal display (LCD). Based on the digital signal, the projector directs some of the liquid crystals to let reflected light through and others to block it. In this way, the LCD modifies the high-intensity light beam to create an image.

There is a flip-side to digital projector technology. In both projector designs, individual pixels may break from time to time. When this happens, it degrades the image quality of every single movie shown on that projector. In contrast, if a film print gets scratched, it's only that particular movie that's damaged -- the next print looks fine.

Please copy/paste the following text to properly cite this HowStuffWorks.com article:

Skip to main content
Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Step inside a movie projection booth to see what's changed since film

Bob Mondello

Before digital projectors in movie theaters, projectionists had to quickly move from one film reel to the next. NPR looks at what has changed since the days of film in our series, "Backstage Pass."

ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

Before he became a film critic, NPR's Bob Mondello worked for a chain of movie theaters. He spent a lot of time in projection booths back then, and it had been a while since Bob climbed those stairs. But on a return visit, the first thing he discovered is that things sound different.

BOB MONDELLO, BYLINE: This is the sound I remember.

(SOUNDBITE OF PROJECTOR PURRING)

MONDELLO: The purr of a celluloid film strip running through a projector, a purr that is actually 24 clicks per second - one each time the shutter closes so that another frame of film can advance. Each frame has to stop briefly in front of the light source, or all you'd see when you look at the screen is a blur. This is how film was first projected by the Lumiere brothers in 1895 and how everyone saw film for the next 104 years. It's been the subject of movies from a silent comedy where Buster Keaton plays a projectionist who dreams himself up onto the screen to the Oscar-winning "Cinema Paradiso," where a little boy falls in love with movies in the projection booth.

(SOUNDBITE OF FILM, "CINEMA PARADISO")

SALVATORE CASCIO: (As Salvatore Di Vita) (Non-English language spoken).

MONDELLO: I could identify. When I was working at Roth Theaters in the 1970s, the sound of the projector starting up seemed to me like an overture at a musical. But it's a sound that mostly doesn't exist anymore at the multiplex. In fact, to record the bit I used at the beginning, I had to ask the American Film Institute to bring projectionist Keith Madden to its Silver Theater from a museum to thread the film and show me how.

KEITH MADDEN: Do you want me to talk and thread at the same time? I can do that. There are sprocket holes on the film that align with sprocket teeth here, and you get them on there. You have to align them perfectly.

MONDELLO: Madden, who is now with the Smithsonian's Museum of African American History and Culture, got his first job as a projectionist in the 1970s, when film was still being played on 20-minute reels. That meant alternating between two side-by-side projectors three times an hour.

MADDEN: If you do it right, you go seamlessly from the last frame of the outgoing reel to the first frame of the incoming reel.

MONDELLO: Doing it right was tricky, though, involving a cue mark on screen and quick reflexes.

MADDEN: You had to just completely get into the Zen of it. You had to stare at the screen. The cue marks were 1/6 of a second in the upper right-hand corner. A sixth of a second is about the time it takes you to do kind of a normal blink. So if you had a normal blink, you could have - oh, did I just miss that? And until you learn the film, you wouldn't know. And one of the worst things for a projectionist was to get emotionally involved in the content. In a horror movie, that used to happen to me. Somebody would jump out with an axe, and, oh, you'd miss the cue mark.

MONDELLO: Later, they developed a platter system, where a whole film could be strung together on one big reel, which was better. But the actual revolution came in 1999, when a few movie theaters started trying out digital projectors. Cinematographer Harris Savides told NPR back then about seeing one work for the first time.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED NPR BROADCAST)

HARRIS SAVIDES: I felt like we're using horses, and we just saw the first car go by and kind of don't know what it is or what it's going to do for us. But it just seems interesting, better, different.

MONDELLO: That was a minority view at the time. Nobody much liked digital at first. The image wasn't sharp. It was like early TV. Some scenes even looked pixelated. But the projectors got better and smaller. And by 2011, the National Association of Theater Owners estimated that 41% of U.S. movie theaters had converted to digital. Today, it's very close to 100%, says Keith Madden.

MADDEN: Now, if you go to a typical multiplex, in the booth in the back corner of a lot of these places, you'll see piles of rusted metal parts of film projectors.

MONDELLO: Let's go instead to an atypical multiplex - Landmark's eight-screen E Street Theater in downtown Washington, D.C. In what is otherwise a state-of-the-art digital projection booth, it still has one working film projector.

TOM BEDDOW: We barely ever use this anymore. We maybe play two, three 35-millimeter prints a year.

MONDELLO: Tom Beddow, formerly of Landmark Theater, said this while standing in a booth that connects seven of the eight theaters in the complex, a hallway with digital projectors spaced along it and noisy fans blowing the heat away from the powerful xenon bulbs that are needed to light up movie screens the size of tennis courts. The only moving part in a digital projector is the fan. It's otherwise just a light source and a computer.

BEDDOW: Every projector has a little touch-screen interface here. It basically shows the playlist of what you're going to play. It has the ads, the trailers and the film, so all I would have to do to play this film right now is hit the play button. The lights will come down, the sound will turn on, and then at the end of the playlist, the lights come up, it goes back to house music - so literally one button.

MONDELLO: Show me how you thread up one of these digital projectors.

BEDDOW: One of these digital projectors? So we don't thread anything up. We get the movies in these little gray boxes - big, silver hard drives.

MONDELLO: Trailers come on this too?

BEDDOW: Yes. So every week, Deluxe will send what's called a trail mix drive, and...

MONDELLO: In the old days, even with platters, you needed a couple of projectionists to run this place - eight screens, staggered showtimes, cleaning sprocket teeth with a toothbrush between showings, focusing, dealing with bulky projectors.

BEDDOW: It would usually be two full-time projectionists and then two or three part-time projectionists.

MONDELLO: What do you got now?

BEDDOW: (Laughter) We have - everything's automated, so you basically only need to have projectionists there on Thursdays, which is the day that we do the changeover, and everything will start automatically for the whole week.

MONDELLO: For the week?

BEDDOW: Yeah.

MONDELLO: Not every day they have to push a button?

BEDDOW: A manager has to come up here and turn everything on.

MONDELLO: And that would be just as true if this were a 26-plex. Miraculous in its way, the new normal in thousands of theaters around the world is state-of-the-art, efficient, a 21st century technological marvel. So just one more question.

If somebody came up here and wanted to be amazed by something, what would you show them?

BEDDOW: (Laughter) I'd probably thread up the 35-millimeter projector.

MONDELLO: Of course he would.

I'm Bob Mondello.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Festival Reports
Book Reviews
Great Directors
Great Actors
Special Dossiers
Past Issues
Support us on Patreon

Subscribe to Senses of Cinema to receive news of our latest cinema journal. Enter your email address below:

Thank you to our Patrons
Style Guide
Advertisers
Call for Contributions

What Happened? The Digital Shift in Cinema

To understand what the last ten years of cinema have been about, one has to start at the turn of the last century – the year 2000 – when Hollywood decided that it was time to get rid of film itself, and make the shift entirely to digital. With incredible rapidity, 35mm production and projection became obsolete, as did film itself, forcing Eastman Kodak into bankruptcy (from which they have since emerged) – something unthinkable only a decade earlier. Everything about the business changed seemingly overnight. Where before the end product of a feature film was a 35mm print, a poster, a trailer, some lobby cards and the usual press junket for journalists, now films were shot and edited entirely using digital technology, and the theatrical experience began to fall away. Films were no longer located in one place only – movie theatres – then shown much later on television, cut to ribbons and interspersed with commercials. Movies in the 21 st century became available on laptops, cellphones, as streaming video replaced conventional distribution patterns. Movies were now everywhere, all the time, endlessly and effortlessly available.

Needless to say, there was much lost in the shift to digital, which was the most momentous retooling of the cinematic apparatus since the invention of the medium itself. When all movies were shot, edited, and screened in 35mm, theatrical presentation was a necessity, and every film, no matter how high or low the budget, had to open in a theater to make its money back. Thus, exploitation films from American International Pictures shot in 6 days on budgets of $100,000 or less competed on the same playing field with Hollywood blockbusters from the major studios. Foreign films, subtitled or dubbed, also had to find theater space to recoup their investment, creating an informal chain of art house theaters not only in the United States, but also around the world. The movie business was in a way more egalitarian during the filmic era; everyone was angling for theatrical play dates, because it was the only place one could see a film when it first opened.

Those days are gone forever. Now, only the most expensive films get theatrical screenings – the franchise films, the DC and Marvel Universe films, the Bond films, Harry Potter, Star Wars and their ilk – while the rest are relegated to the relative limbo of unpublicised streaming releases, since DVDs have become an obsolete format, just as CDs have been replaced by streaming services for music. It makes perfect sense; the most expensive films are the biggest bets, so the studios throw all their ad dollars behind them, because they simply have to make their money back. With budgets now routinely hovering in the $200 to 300 million dollar range, this simply makes economic sense; why throw advertising dollars behind an interesting indie film, or a foreign import, when the latest Marvel film needs all the exposure it can get to recoup its cost?

But there’s another factor; without the theatrical “real estate” of a wide-break release, how can a film gain traction with an audience? Literally thousands of remarkable films are made each year on a worldwide basis that never get a theatrical release, and now, in the age of streaming, there’s no longer a video store where the clerk can suggest titles, and you can browse through various genres – it’s all online. One could argue that one can browse just as well on Amazon or Netflix, but it’s not the same; both services rely on rather clumsy algorithms to guess what you might be interested in next based in your last choice. These algorithms assume that if you like one horror film, then you’re going to like nothing but other horror films; stream a foreign film, and you’ll be inundated with more of the same.

There’s an upside to all of this, of course; it’s now cheaper than ever to make an independent film, and special effects that required a visit to an optical house can now be executed with the push of a button. Independent distribution platforms, such as YouTube, Mubi, Hulu, Kanopy, and others too numerous to mention offer instantaneous access to thousands of titles, and if you know what you’re looking for, you can probably find it online, legally or illegally. Sites like Vimeo specialise in making HD video distribution accessible to even the most impoverished cineaste; as a viewer, you can watch nearly all of the films on Vimeo for free, without even logging in. As a filmmaker, you can join Vimeo (at the lowest level) for free, and thus reach a wider audience than most experimental or independent films ever experience.

But the downside to all of this is the ineluctable march towards the teen and pre-teen market, as serious films become the province of micro cinemas, and adults are more or less marginalised in mainstream cinema. While there are some exceptions, the vast majority of what is either seen in theaters or on streaming services are either franchise films or comic book movies, with everything else pushed to the side. Teen cinema dominates. As I write this, for example, the box office is dominated by such films as Spider-Man: Far From Home, Toy Story 4, Yesterday, Aladdin, Annabelle Comes Home, John Wick 3: Parabellum – all remakes, sequels, or franchise films. Yet also available for screening right now, but not in mainstream theaters, are such interesting films as The Biggest Little Farm, Her Smell, High Life, Non-Fiction, Red Joan, The Wind, The Souvenir, The Fall of The American Empire, The Last Black Man in San Francisco, Wild Rose, Echo in the Canyon – films that will never reach more than a few viewers because they have no advertising campaign behind them, and only the most dedicated viewers will ever even learn of their existence and seek them out.

Then, too, the relentless march of franchise and comic book films has dumbed down audiences to a remarkable degree; as someone who has taught university film courses for many years, I’ve witnessed the radical shift from earnest discussions of more difficult films in class, to the overwhelming influence of Comic-Con fandom, as cosplay replaces thoughtful analysis. There isn’t enough room here to go into the deleterious consequences of this shift, but as Quentin Tarantino becomes an “old school master” and Blumhouse keeps cranking out one horror movie after another in seemingly endless succession, it’s clear that the entire cinematic landscape has shifted into a new paradigm of pure escapist cinema, rather than offering mainstream films that provoke a more informed response.

Her Smell (Alex Ross Perry, 2019)

The shift to digital has made filmmaking cheaper and more available, but at the same time, even though streaming channels proliferate, getting noticed on them is more and more difficult, as the pace of film production hits a record level, and new players, such as Amazon Studios and Netflix, join the majors as significant production entities. Then, too, corporate consolidations, such as Disney’s recent acquisition of 21 st Century Fox (another addition to the Disney empire, which now embraces everything from amusement parks to television networks) will drive the mass media mentality of contemporary cinema even further towards the safe, the formulaic, with a plethora of remakes in the wings, rather than creating original content. Corporations only care about the bottom line, not individual visions.

And it isn’t over yet – not by a long shot. As the coming decades roll by, I predict that the comic book / franchise cinema juggernaut will show no signs of slowing down, driven both by economic circumstances (bigger budgets, saturation bookings on worldwide basis to recoup investments, with more interference from producers and focus groups and less input from directors) and the increasing audience need to escape a world that is more costly, more fragmented, and more inequitable than ever. Mainstream movies have become like Big Macs, seemingly filling but actually lacking in nutrition or cultural value. For the rest of us, the more thoughtful films will continue to be flung into the void. And mainstream audiences will never know, or care, that they even exist.

So, what happened? Digital took over, film is dead (except as a production medium for a handful of directors who still insist upon it), but everything winds up either as a DCP (Digital Cinema Package) for theatres, or goes straight to streaming. Audiences now, in a very fractured world, want safety, assurance, more of the same. They don’t want surprises. The new movie trailers spell out nearly every plot twist of the films they advertise, and audiences like it that way. They want to be led. They want to see something that’s just like what they just saw, only different. And clearly, from the box office numbers, the strategy seems to be working. The technology is not the problem – it offers great promise.

But instead, it has been used by the studios to reach out to the widest possible audience with the most carefully engineered and pretested product, designed to offend no one, and appeal to the greatest number of viewers. In short, I would argue that the cinema we knew has been replaced by a new sort of synthetic cinema, driven by CGI visual effects, simplistic plots, razor thin characters, and endless repetition of successful formulas. As the films of the 20 th century recede into the past, they will largely be forgotten – indeed, this is already happening – and we will be left with a perfect, flawless, digital world in which little that is human remains.

General Information

Help documents.

Show Your Support!
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy

Business Information

Services for Movie Theaters
Contact Form
BigScreen Featured Theaters
Description of Major Features
Digital Sound - Formats Explained
Digital Sound on Film - Why Does It Matter?
Gift Cards/Certificates - Where to Get Them
How to Navigate this Site
I'm having problems printing, help!
Is BigScreen a complete movie database?
Linking to The BigScreen Cinema Guide
What do the ratings (G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17) mean?
What is 3D+ in HFR?
What is Barco Auro 11.1 and Why Does it Matter?
What is Digital Cinema Projection?
What is Dolby Atmos and Why Does it Matter?
What is DTS:X and Why Does it Matter?
What is IMAX with Laser?
What is Stadium Seating?
What is THX?
What's New - New Features, Revisions to this Site

The BigScreen Cinema Guide makes a point of highlighting movies showing with digital sound presentations, such as Digital Sound , Digital Sound 7.1 (for 7.1 channel presentations), Dolby Surround 7.1 (the Dolby-branded version), and Dolby Atmos , as well as the film-based formats of DTS Digital , Dolby Digital , and SDDS Sony Digital . These digital sound presentations are indicated by the use of the logos at the right throughout the schedule listings.

Note: As film-based presentations largely have given way to Digital Cinema Projection systems , the SDDS, DTS, and Dolby-branded formats (except for Dolby Surround 7.1 and Dolby Atmos) will disappear with them. When a theater does provide a film-based presentation with a digital sound format, we will provide that information when it is provided to us.

What About THX?

THX is not a digital sound format, but rather a certification for movie theaters that dictates the quality of the construction, the components used, and a calibration of the sound system that is repeated on a yearly basis. THX makes digital sound better!

For more information about THX, please see What is THX?

What Does A Digital Projector Do

Technology & Innovation
Virtual & Augmented Reality

Introduction

Welcome to the world of digital projectors, where movie nights, presentations, and immersive gaming experiences come to life. Gone are the days of bulky, cumbersome projectors that required complicated setups. The advent of digital technology has revolutionized the way we view and share content, and digital projectors have quickly become a staple in both professional and personal settings.

Whether you’re a business professional looking to deliver impactful presentations, an educator seeking to engage students in a dynamic learning environment, or a movie enthusiast in pursuit of a cinematic experience at home, a digital projector can fulfill your needs.

In this article, we will delve into the ins and outs of digital projectors, shedding light on what they are, how they work, the different types available, and key features to consider when purchasing one. We’ll also provide tips on setting up and using a digital projector for optimal performance, as well as guidance on maintenance and care to prolong its lifespan.

So, if you’re curious about the wonders a digital projector can offer, whether for personal or professional use, grab some popcorn, get comfortable, and let’s dive into the fascinating world of digital projectors.

What is a Digital Projector?

A digital projector, also known as a data projector or multimedia projector, is a device that takes an input signal, typically in the form of digital content, and projects it onto a screen or surface for viewing. It allows you to display images, videos, presentations, and other multimedia content on a larger scale, providing a more immersive and visually stunning experience.

Unlike traditional projectors that use analog technology, digital projectors utilize advanced digital imaging techniques to produce high-quality images with vibrant colors, sharp details, and enhanced clarity. They are capable of supporting various resolutions, including standard definition (SD), high definition (HD), and even ultra-high definition (UHD) or 4K resolutions, depending on the model.

One of the key advantages of digital projectors is their versatility. They can be connected to a wide range of devices, such as laptops, computers, smartphones, gaming consoles, and DVD players, through HDMI, VGA, or USB ports. This allows you to access and project content from different sources, making them suitable for a variety of applications, including business presentations, classroom teaching, home theater setups, and entertainment events.

Furthermore, digital projectors offer flexibility in terms of screen size. Depending on the model and the distance between the projector and the screen, you can adjust the image size to suit your needs, ranging from smaller projections for intimate settings to larger displays for audiences in auditoriums or outdoor venues.

Overall, digital projectors have become an indispensable tool for professionals, educators, and entertainment enthusiasts alike. They have revolutionized the way we share information, tell stories, and consume media, adding a new dimension to visual experiences and engaging audiences in captivating ways.

How Does a Digital Projector Work?

To understand how a digital projector works, let’s take a closer look at its fundamental components and the process involved in projecting images onto a screen.

At the core of a digital projector is a light source, typically a high-intensity lamp or LED, which emits a powerful beam of light. This light is directed towards an optical system consisting of lenses and mirrors that help focus and shape the light beam.

The next important component is the digital imaging device, which is responsible for converting the input signal into an image that can be projected. There are different types of imaging devices used in digital projectors, including liquid crystal display (LCD), digital light processing (DLP), and liquid crystal on silicon (LCOS).

In LCD projectors, the image is created by passing light through a series of tiny liquid crystal panels, each representing a pixel. These panels can selectively block or allow light to pass through, creating the desired image. DLP projectors utilize an array of mirrors that tilt in response to the input signal, reflecting light to create the image. LCOS projectors combine both LCD and DLP technologies to produce high-quality images.

Once the image is formed, it is passed through a color filter system that adds color to the image. This system typically uses red, green, and blue filters, which combine to produce a wide range of colors. The colored image then passes through another set of lenses that further refine the projection and adjust the focus.

Finally, the projected image is displayed on a screen or surface for viewing. The quality of the projection depends on factors such as the resolution of the imaging device, the brightness and contrast of the light source, and the quality of the optics used in the projector.

In addition to these main components, digital projectors often include other features to enhance performance and connectivity. These may include built-in speakers, keystone correction to adjust image distortion, zoom capabilities to adjust the image size without physically moving the projector, and various input ports for connecting external devices.

Overall, the process of a digital projector involves rendering the input signal into an image, applying color and focus adjustments, and projecting the image onto a surface, delivering a captivating visual experience for the audience.

The Components of a Digital Projector

A digital projector is composed of several crucial components that work together to create and project images onto a screen. Understanding these components can help you make informed decisions when choosing a projector that meets your specific needs and preferences.

1. Light Source: The light source is responsible for emitting a strong beam of light that illuminates the image being projected. Traditional projectors typically use high-intensity lamps, while newer models may use light-emitting diodes (LEDs) for improved energy efficiency and longevity.

2. Imaging Device: The imaging device plays a critical role in creating the image that will be projected. There are three primary types of imaging devices used in digital projectors:

Liquid Crystal Display (LCD): LCD projectors use small liquid crystal panels to selectively block or allow light to pass through, creating the image pixel by pixel. They offer excellent color reproduction and sharp detail.
Digital Light Processing (DLP): DLP projectors rely on an array of tiny mirrors that tilt to either reflect or not reflect light, effectively creating the image. DLP projectors are known for their high contrast ratios and smooth video playback.
Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCOS): LCOS projectors combine the best of LCD and DLP technologies, delivering high-quality images with exceptional color accuracy, contrast, and detail.

3. Optical System: The optical system consists of lenses and mirrors that help focus and shape the light beam produced by the light source. This system ensures that the projected image is clear, sharp, and properly aligned.

4. Color Filter System: The color filter system adds color to the image by using red, green, and blue filters. These three primary colors are combined in various combinations to produce a full spectrum of colors, resulting in vibrant and realistic images.

5. Lens System: The lens system is responsible for projecting the image onto the screen and determining the size and focus of the projection. The quality and type of lenses used can impact the sharpness, brightness, and clarity of the projected image.

6. Signal Processing: Digital projectors include signal processing capabilities to handle the input signal and convert it into a format suitable for projection. This processing ensures that the image is properly scaled, optimized, and adjusted to match the capabilities of the projector.

7. Connectivity and Control Interfaces: Projectors offer various input ports such as HDMI, VGA, and USB, allowing you to connect different devices like computers, laptops, gaming consoles, and media players. Additionally, projectors may include built-in Wi-Fi or Ethernet connectivity for seamless wireless presentations and remote control options.

By understanding the components of a digital projector, you can evaluate and compare different models to find the one that best suits your specific requirements, whether it’s for professional presentations, home theater setups, or educational purposes.

Types of Digital Projectors

When it comes to digital projectors, there are several types available, each with its own unique features, strengths, and applications. Understanding the different types can help you choose the one that best suits your specific needs and preferences. Let’s explore some of the most common types of digital projectors:

Portable Projectors: As the name suggests, portable projectors are lightweight and compact, making them highly convenient for on-the-go use. These projectors are typically smaller in size and offer lower brightness levels compared to larger models. They are commonly used for impromptu presentations, movie nights, and classrooms where mobility and flexibility are important.
Business Projectors: Business projectors are designed specifically for professional settings and presentations. They offer high brightness levels, sharp image quality, and advanced connectivity options to accommodate various business needs. Features like keystone correction, multiple input ports, and wireless connectivity make these projectors ideal for boardrooms, conference rooms, and corporate events.
Home Theater Projectors: Home theater projectors are built to provide a cinematic experience in the comfort of your own home. These projectors offer high resolution, vibrant color reproduction, and wide aspect ratios to deliver immersive images. They are often used in dedicated home theater rooms or living rooms to project movies, TV shows, and sporting events on a large screen.
Short-Throw and Ultra-Short-Throw Projectors: Short-throw and ultra-short-throw projectors are designed to project large images from a short distance. These projectors eliminate the need for extensive space between the projector and the screen, making them ideal for smaller rooms and spaces where a traditional projector setup would not be feasible. They are commonly used in classrooms, small offices, and home entertainment setups.
Gaming Projectors: Gaming projectors are specifically optimized for gaming enthusiasts who want larger-than-life gaming experiences. These projectors offer fast response times, high refresh rates, and low input lag to ensure smooth and immersive gameplay. They often come with gaming-specific features such as Game Mode settings and enhanced color accuracy for a dynamic and captivating gaming experience.
Interactive Projectors: Interactive projectors are equipped with touch-sensitive capabilities, allowing users to interact directly with the projected image using touch or gestures. These projectors are commonly used in classrooms, training sessions, and collaborative environments, enabling interactive learning, brainstorming, and engagement.

When choosing a digital projector, consider the intended use, lighting conditions, required image quality, and available space to determine the most suitable type. It is important to carefully assess the features and specifications of each type to find the projector that perfectly aligns with your specific requirements.

Key Features to Consider

When selecting a digital projector, it’s essential to consider certain key features that can greatly impact your overall viewing experience and usability. These features will help you find a projector that meets your specific needs and delivers optimal performance. Here are some crucial features to consider:

Resolution: The resolution of the projector determines the level of detail and clarity in the projected image. Common resolutions include HD (1280×720 pixels), Full HD (1920×1080 pixels), and 4K UHD (3840×2160 pixels). Choose a resolution that matches your content and desired image quality.
Brightness: The brightness of a projector is measured in lumens and determines how well the image will be visible in various lighting conditions. Consider the ambient light in your environment and the size of the projected image when choosing the appropriate brightness level. Higher lumens are recommended for brighter spaces or larger screens.
Contrast Ratio: The contrast ratio refers to the difference between the darkest and brightest parts of an image. A higher contrast ratio produces more lifelike and vibrant images with better color accuracy. Look for projectors with a high contrast ratio for improved image quality.
Connectivity: Check the available connectivity options on the projector to ensure compatibility with your devices. HDMI, VGA, and USB ports are commonly used for connecting laptops, computers, gaming consoles, and media players. Some projectors also offer wireless connectivity for convenient streaming and screen mirroring.
Throw Distance: The throw distance is the distance between the projector and the screen required to achieve a specific image size. Consider the available space and the desired screen size when choosing a projector with the appropriate throw distance capabilities.
Noise Level: Projectors contain cooling fans and other internal components that can produce noise. If you plan to use the projector in a quiet environment, look for models with lower noise levels or consider investing in a projector enclosure or soundproofing options to mitigate the noise.
Zoom and Lens Shift: Zoom and lens shift features provide flexibility in adjusting the image size and positioning without physically moving the projector. This allows for easier setup and adaptation to different screen sizes and room configurations.
Aspect Ratio: The aspect ratio refers to the width-to-height ratio of the projected image. Common aspect ratios include 16:9 (widescreen) and 4:3 (standard). Choose the aspect ratio that best suits your content, whether it’s for movies, presentations, or gaming.
Available Accessories: Consider the availability of additional accessories such as ceiling mounts, projector screens, and carrying bags. These accessories can enhance the usability and convenience of your projector setup.

By carefully considering these key features, you can select a digital projector that delivers the image quality, connectivity options, and overall functionality that align with your specific needs and preferences. Take the time to research and compare different models to find the perfect fit for your intended use and budget.

Choosing the Right Digital Projector for Your Needs

Choosing the right digital projector can greatly enhance your viewing experience, whether for business presentations, home theater setups, or educational purposes. To ensure you select the projector that best suits your needs, consider the following factors:

Intended Use: Determine the primary purpose of the projector. Are you using it for professional presentations, movie nights, gaming, or educational use? This will help you identify the features and specifications required for your specific use case.
Budget: Set a budget for your projector purchase. Determine the price range that aligns with your needs and explore options within that range. Balance your budget with the features and quality you require.
Room Size and Ambient Lighting: Consider the size of the room and the lighting conditions. For larger rooms or spaces with significant ambient light, look for a projector with higher brightness levels and a higher contrast ratio to ensure clear and vibrant images.
Image Quality: Evaluate the resolution, contrast ratio, and color accuracy of the projector. Higher resolutions and contrast ratios, along with accurate color reproduction, can elevate your viewing experience and make the content more engaging and immersive.
Connectivity Options: Check the connectivity options offered by the projector. Ensure it has the necessary input ports to connect your devices, such as HDMI, VGA, or USB. Wireless connectivity can also be a useful feature for seamless streaming and screen mirroring.
Portability: Consider whether you need a portable projector that can be easily moved and set up in different locations. Portable projectors are lightweight and compact, making them convenient for business professionals, educators, or anyone on the go.
User-Friendly Interface: Look for a projector with an intuitive and easy-to-use interface. A user-friendly interface will simplify the setup and navigation process, ensuring a smoother and more enjoyable experience.
Reviews and Recommendations: Read customer reviews and seek recommendations from trusted sources. Consider the experiences of others who have used the projector you’re interested in to gain insights into its performance, reliability, and overall value.
Warranty and Customer Support: Check the warranty and customer support options provided with the projector. A reputable brand that offers reliable warranty coverage and responsive customer support can provide peace of mind and assistance if any issues arise.

By considering these factors, you can make an informed decision when choosing the right digital projector for your specific needs. Remember to prioritize features that are important for your intended use, while staying within your budget, and select a projector from a reputable brand with positive reviews and reliable customer support.

Setting up and Using a Digital Projector

Setting up and using a digital projector may seem daunting at first, but with a few simple steps, you can easily enjoy the benefits of a larger screen and immersive viewing experience. Here’s a guide to help you set up and effectively use your digital projector:

Choose the Right Location: Select a suitable location where you will set up your projector. Consider factors such as distance from the screen or wall, availability of power outlets, and ambient lighting conditions.
Positioning the Projector: Place the projector on a stable surface or mount it securely if using a ceiling mount. Ensure that the projector is aligned with the center of the screen and perpendicular to it for optimal image quality.
Connect Your Devices: Connect your devices, such as a laptop or media player, to the projector using the appropriate cables or wireless connectivity options. Make sure the projector is powered on and set to the correct input source to receive the signal from your device.
Adjusting the Image: Adjust the zoom, focus, and keystone correction settings on the projector to obtain a clear and properly aligned image. Some projectors may have automatic adjustment features to simplify this process.
Screen Selection: If you have a dedicated projection screen, ensure it is clean and properly mounted. Alternatively, you can use a blank wall or a white screen surface to project the image. Avoid textured or colored walls, as they may affect the image quality.
Test and Fine-Tune: Once the setup is complete, test the projected image for clarity, brightness, and color accuracy. Make any necessary adjustments to achieve the desired picture quality.
Audio Setup: If the projector has built-in speakers, ensure they are enabled and adjust the volume as needed. For a more immersive audio experience, consider connecting external speakers or a sound system to enhance the sound quality.
Remote Control: Familiarize yourself with the functions and controls on the projector’s remote control. This will allow you to easily adjust settings, switch input sources, and navigate through menus without needing to use the physical buttons on the projector.
Proper Shutdown: When you are finished using the projector, shut it down using the proper procedure outlined in the manual. Allow the projector to cool down before moving or storing it to avoid any damage.
Maintenance: Regularly clean the projector lens and air vents to prevent dust buildup, which can affect image quality and cause overheating. Refer to the manufacturer’s instructions for specific cleaning guidelines.

By following these steps and taking proper care of your digital projector, you can enjoy seamless setup and optimal performance for a variety of applications. Remember to consult the user manual provided by the manufacturer for detailed instructions specific to your projector model.

Tips for Maximizing the Performance of Your Digital Projector

A digital projector can provide you with stunning visuals and an immersive viewing experience. To ensure you get the most out of your projector and optimize its performance, consider the following tips:

Ensure Proper Ventilation: Make sure your projector has adequate space around it for airflow. Avoid placing it in enclosed spaces or near other heat-generating devices as it can lead to overheating and reduced performance.
Regularly Clean the Lens: Dust and smudges on the lens can affect image quality. Clean the lens periodically with a soft, lint-free cloth to maintain optimal clarity and sharpness.
Use the Correct Aspect Ratio: Set the correct aspect ratio on your projector to match the content you are viewing. This ensures that the image is displayed in the correct proportions without distortion.
Manage Ambient Light: Minimize ambient light in the viewing area to enhance image clarity and contrast. Use curtains or blinds to block out external light sources and create a darker environment for better viewing conditions.
Adjust Brightness and Contrast: Optimize the brightness and contrast settings based on the lighting conditions in the room. You can increase brightness in well-lit areas and adjust contrast to enhance the details in darker scenes.
Calibrate Colors: Use the color calibration settings on your projector to adjust color accuracy and ensure vibrant and true-to-life visuals. Some projectors also offer pre-set color modes for different types of content.
Avoid Image Distortion: Make sure the projector is positioned at the correct angle and distance to avoid keystone distortion. Adjust the keystone correction settings on the projector or use a mount to maintain a square image.
Optimize Audio Setup: If the projector has built-in speakers, consider using external speakers or a sound system for better audio quality. Position the speakers appropriately to achieve a balanced and immersive sound experience.
Control Ambient Noise: Minimize any unnecessary noise in the viewing area, as it can detract from the overall viewing experience. Close windows, turn off fans or other appliances, and choose a quieter projection location if possible.
Update Firmware and Software: Check for firmware and software updates regularly from the manufacturer’s website. Keeping your projector’s software up to date ensures you have access to the latest features and bug fixes.

By implementing these tips, you can optimize the performance of your digital projector and fully enjoy your viewing experience. Experiment with various settings and adjustments to find the perfect balance for your specific environment and content.

Maintenance and Care for a Digital Projector

To ensure the longevity and optimal performance of your digital projector, proper maintenance and care are essential. By following these maintenance tips, you can extend the lifespan of your projector and enjoy consistent image quality:

Regular Cleaning: Keep the projector clean by regularly cleaning the exterior and air vents. Use a soft, lint-free cloth to wipe away dust and smudges. Avoid using abrasive materials or liquid cleaners that may damage the surface.
Clean the Filter: If your projector has an air filter, regularly check and clean it according to the manufacturer’s instructions. A clogged or dirty filter can cause overheating and impact image quality.
Avoid Excessive Heat: Keep the projector in a well-ventilated area and avoid exposing it to direct sunlight or extreme temperatures. Excessive heat can damage the internal components and reduce the projector’s lifespan.
Proper Shutdown: Always turn off the projector using the proper shutdown procedure outlined in the user manual. This allows the projector’s internal components to cool down before it is powered off completely.
Avoid Moving the Projector While in Use: Do not move the projector while it is powered on or in use. Allow it to cool down and power off before relocating or packing it away.
Storage Guidelines: If you need to store the projector for an extended period, ensure it is stored in a clean, dry, and dust-free environment. Use the original packaging or a protective case to prevent any damage during storage.
Keep the Projector Dust-Free: Regularly clean the projector’s lens and ventilation ports to prevent dust buildup. Dust can block airflow and cause overheating, affecting the projector’s performance and image quality.
Avoid Power Surges: Protect the projector from power surges by using a surge protector or uninterruptible power supply (UPS). Power surges can damage the internal components of the projector.
Follow Lamp Replacement Guidelines: If your projector uses a replaceable lamp, follow the manufacturer’s guidelines for lamp replacement. Overused or expired lamps can result in decreased brightness and image quality.
Regularly Update Firmware: Check for firmware updates from the manufacturer’s website and update your projector’s firmware as recommended. Firmware updates can address bugs, improve performance, and introduce new features.
Read the User Manual: Familiarize yourself with the user manual to understand the specific maintenance requirements and guidelines for your projector model. The user manual provides valuable information on proper care and troubleshooting.

By implementing these maintenance and care practices, you can prolong the lifespan of your digital projector and maintain optimal performance. Regular cleaning, proper storage, and following the manufacturer’s guidelines are key to ensuring an optimal viewing experience over the projector’s lifespan.

Digital projectors have revolutionized the way we view and share content, providing us with larger-than-life visuals and immersive experiences. Whether for business presentations, educational purposes, or home entertainment setups, choosing the right digital projector can greatly enhance your viewing experience.

In this article, we explored the various aspects of digital projectors, starting with what they are and how they work. We discussed the key components of a digital projector, including the light source, imaging device, and color filter system. We also looked at different types of projectors, such as portable projectors, business projectors, home theater projectors, gaming projectors, interactive projectors, and more.

We then highlighted the key features to consider when selecting a digital projector, such as resolution, brightness, connectivity options, and throw distance. These factors play a crucial role in determining the overall performance and suitability of the projector for your specific needs.

Additionally, we provided tips on setting up and using a digital projector effectively, including proper positioning, screen selection, adjusting image settings, optimizing audio setup, and following correct shutdown procedures. We also discussed the importance of maintenance and care to prolong the lifespan of the projector, covering cleaning, avoiding excessive heat, and following manufacturer guidelines.

By considering all these aspects and implementing the recommended practices, you can maximize the performance, lifespan, and enjoyment of your digital projector. Remember to research and compare different models, read customer reviews, and seek recommendations to make an informed decision.

So, whether you’re presenting to a boardroom, hosting a movie night at home, or engaging students in a classroom setting, a digital projector can elevate your visual experiences and captivate your audience. Embrace the possibilities and bring your content to life with the magic of a digital projector.

15 Best Art Projector For 2024

13 Amazing Digital Projector For 2024

10 Best Slide Projector For Old Slides For 2024

14 Amazing Anker Projector For 2024

15 Best Nebula Projector For 2024

13 Amazing Overhead Projector For 2024

14 Amazing HDMI Projector for 2024

9 Amazing Slide Projector For 2024

Fintechs and Traditional Banks: Navigating the Future of Financial Services

AI Writing: How It’s Changing the Way We Create Content

How to Find the Best Midjourney Alternative in 2024: A Guide to AI Anime Generators

How to Know When it’s the Right Time to Buy Bitcoin

Unleashing Young Geniuses: How Lingokids Makes Learning a Blast!

How to Sell Counter-Strike 2 Skins Instantly? A Comprehensive Guide

10 Proven Ways For Online Gamers To Avoid Cyber Attacks And Scams

$10 Best AI Math Solvers for Instant Homework Solutions$

Privacy Overview
Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

POST-CINEMA

Theorizing 21st-Century Film

1.1 What is Digital Cinema?

By lev manovich.

Cinema, the Art of the Index [1]

Thus far, most discussions of cinema in the digital age have focused on the possibilities of interactive narrative. It is not hard to understand why: since the majority of viewers and critics equate cinema with storytelling, digital media is understood as something that will let cinema tell its stories in a new way. Yet as exciting as the ideas of a viewer participating in a story, choosing different paths through the narrative space, and interacting with characters may be, they only address one aspect of cinema which is neither unique nor, as many will argue, essential to it: narrative.

The challenge which digital media poses to cinema extends far beyond the issue of narrative. Digital media redefines the very identity of cinema. In a symposium that took place in Hollywood in the spring of 1996, one of the participants provocatively referred to movies as “flatties” and to human actors as “organics” and “soft fuzzies.” [2] As these terms accurately suggest, what used to be cinema’s defining characteristics have become just the default options, with many others available. When one can “enter” a virtual three-dimensional space, viewing flat images projected on the screen is hardly the only option. When, given enough time and money, almost everything can be simulated in a computer, filming physical reality is just one possibility.

This “crisis” of cinema’s identity also affects the terms and the categories used to theorize cinema’s past. French film theorist Christian Metz wrote in the 1970s that “Most films shot today, good or bad, original or not, ‘commercial’ or not, have as a common characteristic that they tell a story; in this measure they all belong to one and the same genre, which is, rather, a sort of ‘super-genre’ [‘ sur-genre ’]” (402). In identifying fictional films as a “super-genre” of 20th-century cinema, Metz did not bother to mention another characteristic of this genre because at that time it was too obvious: fictional films are live-action films, i.e. they largely consist of unmodified photographic recordings of real events which took place in real physical space. Today, in the age of computer simulation and digital compositing, invoking this characteristic becomes crucial in defining the specificity of 20th-century cinema. From the perspective of a future historian of visual culture, the differences between classical Hollywood films, European art films, and avant-garde films (apart from abstract ones) may appear less significant than this common feature: that they relied on lens-based recordings of reality. This essay is concerned with the effect of the so-called digital revolution on cinema as defined by its “super-genre” of fictional live-action film. [3]

During cinema’s history, a whole repertoire of techniques (lighting, art direction, the use of different film stocks and lenses, etc.) was developed to modify the basic record obtained by a film apparatus. And yet behind even the most stylized cinematic images we can discern the bluntness, the sterility, the banality of early 19th-century photographs. No matter how complex its stylistic innovations, the cinema has found its base in these deposits of reality, these samples obtained by a methodical and prosaic process. Cinema emerged out of the same impulse that engendered naturalism, court stenography, and wax museums. Cinema is the art of the index; it is an attempt to make art out of a footprint.

Even for Andrei Tarkovsky, film-painter par excellence, cinema’s identity lay in its ability to record reality. Once, during a public discussion in Moscow in the 1970s, he was asked the question as to whether he was interested in making abstract films. He replied that there can be no such thing. Cinema’s most basic gesture is to open the shutter and to start the film rolling, recording whatever happens to be in front of the lens. For Tarkovsky, an abstract cinema is thus impossible.

But what happens to cinema’s indexical identity if it is now possible to generate photorealistic scenes entirely in a computer using 3-D computer animation; to modify individual frames or whole scenes with the help a digital paint program; to cut, bend, stretch and stitch digitized film images into something which has perfect photographic credibility, although it was never actually filmed?

This essay will address the meaning of these changes in the filmmaking process from the point of view of the larger cultural history of the moving image. Seen in this context, the manual construction of images in digital cinema represents a return to 19th-century pre-cinematic practices, when images were hand-painted and hand-animated. At the turn of the 20th century, cinema was to delegate these manual techniques to animation and define itself as a recording medium. As cinema enters the digital age, these techniques are again becoming commonplace in the filmmaking process. Consequently, cinema can no longer be clearly distinguished from animation. It is no longer an indexical media technology but, rather, a sub-genre of painting.

This argument will be developed—in three stages. I will first follow a historical trajectory from 19th-century techniques for creating moving images to 20th-century cinema and animation. Next I will arrive at a definition of digital cinema by abstracting the common features and interface metaphors of a variety of computer software and hardware that are currently replacing traditional film technology. Seen together, these features and metaphors suggest a distinct logic of a digital moving image. This logic subordinates the photographic and the cinematic to the painterly and the graphic, destroying cinema’s identity as a media art. Finally, I will examine different production contexts that already use digital moving images—Hollywood films, music videos, CD-ROM games and artworks—in order to see if and how this logic has begun to manifest itself.

A Brief Archaeology of Moving Pictures

As signified by its original names (kinetoscope, cinematograph, moving pictures), cinema was understood, from its birth, as the art of motion, the art that finally succeeded in creating a convincing illusion of dynamic reality. If we approach cinema in this way (rather than the art of audio-visual narrative, or the art of a projected image, or the art of collective spectatorship, etc.), we can see it superseding previous techniques for creating and displaying moving images.

These earlier techniques shared a number of common characteristics. First, they all relied on hand-painted or hand-drawn images. The magic lantern slides were painted at least until the 1850s; so were the images used in the Phenakistiscope, the Thaumatrope, the Zoetrope, the Praxinoscope, the Choreutoscope and numerous other 19th-century pre-cinematic devices. Even Muybridge’s celebrated Zoopraxiscope lectures of the 1880s featured not actual photographs but colored drawings painted after the photographs (Musser 49-50).

Not only were the images created manually, they were also manually animated. In Robertson’s Phantasmagoria, which premiered in 1799, magic lantern operators moved behind the screen in order to make projected images appear to advance and withdraw (Musser 25). More often, an exhibitor used only his hands, rather than his whole body, to put the images into motion. One animation technique involved using mechanical slides consisting of a number of layers. An exhibitor would slide the layers to animate the image (Ceram 44-45). Another technique was to slowly move a long slide containing separate images in front of a magic lantern lens. 19th-century optical toys enjoyed in private homes also required manual action to create movement—twirling the strings of the Thaumatrope, rotating the Zoetrope’s cylinder, turning the Viviscope’s handle.

It was not until the last decade of the 19th century that the automatic generation of images and their automatic projection were finally combined. A mechanical eye was coupled with a mechanical heart; photography met the motor. As a result, cinema—a very particular regime of the visible—was born. Irregularity, non-uniformity, the accident and other traces of the human body, which previously inevitably accompanied moving image exhibitions, were replaced by the uniformity of machine vision. [4] A machine that, like a conveyer belt, was now spitting out images, all sharing the same appearance, all the same size, all moving at the same speed, like a line of marching soldiers.

Cinema also eliminated the discrete character of both space and movement in moving images. Before cinema, the moving element was visually separated from the static background as with a mechanical slide show or Reynaud’s Praxinoscope Theater (1892) (Robinson 12). The movement itself was limited in range and affected only a clearly defined figure rather than the whole image. Thus, typical actions would include a bouncing ball, a raised hand or eyes, a butterfly moving back and forth over the heads of fascinated children—simple vectors charted across still fields.

Cinema’s most immediate predecessors share something else. As the 19th-century obsession with movement intensified, devices that could animate more than just a few images became increasingly popular. All of them—the Zoetrope, the Phonoscope, the Tachyscope, the Kinetoscope—were based on loops, sequences of images featuring complete actions which can be played repeatedly. The Thaumatrope (1825), in which a disk with two different images painted on each face was rapidly rotated by twirling a string attached to it, was in its essence a loop in its most minimal form: two elements replacing one another in succession. In the Zoetrope (1867) and its numerous variations, approximately a dozen images were arranged around the perimeter of a circle. [5] The Mutoscope, popular in America throughout the 1890s, increased the duration of the loop by placing a larger number of images radially on an axle (Ceram 140). Even Edison’s Kinetoscope (1892-1896), the first modern cinematic machine to employ film, continued to arrange images in a loop (Musser 78). 50 feet of film translated to an approximately 20-second long presentation—a genre whose potential development was cut short when cinema adopted a much longer narrative form.

From Animation to Cinema

Once the cinema was stabilized as a technology, it cut all references to its origins in artifice. Everything which characterized moving pictures before the 20th century—the manual construction of images, loop actions, the discrete nature of space and movement—was delegated to cinema’s bastard relative, its supplement, its shadow—animation. 20th-century animation became a depository for 19th-century moving-image techniques left behind by cinema.

The opposition between the styles of animation and cinema defined the culture of the moving image in the 20th century. Animation foregrounds its artificial character, openly admitting that its images are mere representations. Its visual language is more aligned to the graphic than to the photographic. It is discrete and self-consciously discontinuous: crudely rendered characters moving against a stationary and detailed background; sparsely and irregularly sampled motion (in contrast to the uniform sampling of motion by a film camera—recall Jean-Luc Godard’s definition of cinema as “truth 24 frames per second”), and finally space constructed from separate image layers.

In contrast, cinema works hard to erase any traces of its own production process, including any indication that the images we see could have been constructed rather than recorded. It denies that the reality it shows often does not exist outside of the film image, the image which was arrived at by photographing an already impossible space, itself put together with the use of models, mirrors, and matte paintings, and which was then combined with other images through optical printing. It pretends to be a simple recording of an already existing reality—both to a viewer and to itself. [6] Cinema’s public image stressed the aura of reality “captured” on film, thus implying that cinema was about photographing what existed before the camera, rather than “creating the ‘never-was’” of special effects. [7] Rear projection and blue-screen photography, matte paintings and glass shots, mirrors and miniatures, push development, optical effects and other techniques which allowed filmmakers to construct and alter the moving images, and thus could reveal that cinema was not really different from animation, were pushed to cinema’s periphery by its practitioners, historians, and critics. [8] Today, with the shift to digital media, these marginalized techniques move to the center.

What is Digital Cinema?

A visible sign of this shift is the new role that computer-generated special effects have come to play in Hollywood industry in the last few years. Many recent blockbusters have been driven by special effects, feeding on their popularity. Hollywood has even created a new mini-genre of “The Making of” videos and books, which reveal how special effects are created.

I will use special effects from a few recent Hollywood films for illustrations of some of the possibilities of digital filmmaking. Until recently, Hollywood studios were the only ones who had the money to pay for digital tools and for the labor involved in producing digital effects. However, the shift to digital media affects not just Hollywood, but filmmaking as a whole. As traditional film technology is universally being replaced by digital technology, the logic of the filmmaking process is being redefined. What I describe below are the new principles of digital filmmaking, which are equally valid for individual or collective film productions, regardless of whether they are using the most expensive professional hardware and software or amateur equivalents. Consider, then, the following principles of digital filmmaking:

Rather than filming physical reality it is now possible to generate film-like scenes directly in a computer with the help of 3-D computer animation. Therefore, live-action footage is displaced from its role as the only possible material from which the finished film is constructed.
Once live-action footage is digitized (or directly recorded in a digital format), it loses its privileged indexical relationship to pro-filmic reality. The computer does not distinguish between an image obtained through the photographic lens, an image created in a paint program, or an image synthesized in a 3-D graphics package, since they are made from the same material—pixels. And pixels, regardless of their origin, can be easily altered, substituted one for another, and so on. Live-action footage is reduced to just another graphic, no different from images that were created manually. [9]
If live-action footage was left intact in traditional filmmaking, now it functions as raw material for further compositing, animating, and morphing. As a result, while retaining visual realism unique to the photographic process, film obtains the plasticity that was previously only possible in painting or animation. To use the suggestive title of a popular morphing software, digital filmmakers work with “elastic reality.” For example, the opening shot of Forrest Gump (Robert Zemeckis 1994; special effects by Industrial Light and Magic) tracks an unusually long and extremely intricate flight of a feather. To create the shot, the real feather was filmed against a blue background in different positions; this material was then animated and composited against shots of a landscape. [10] The result: a new kind of realism, which can be described as “something that looks as if it is intended to look exactly as if it could have happened, although it really could not.”
Previously, editing and special effects were strictly separate activities. An editor worked on ordering sequences of images together; any intervention within an image was handled by special-effects specialists. The computer collapses this distinction. The manipulation of individual images via a paint program or algorithmic image processing becomes as easy as arranging sequences of images in time. Both simply involve “cut and paste.” As this basic computer command exemplifies, modification of digital images (or other digitized data) is not sensitive to distinctions of time and space or of differences of scale. Thus, re-ordering sequences of images in time, compositing them together in space, modifying parts of an individual image, and changing individual pixels become the same operation, conceptually and practically.
Given the preceding principles, we can define digital film in this way:

digital film = live action material + painting + image processing + compositing + 2-D computer animation + 3-D computer animation

Live-action material can be recorded either on film or video or directly in a digital format. [11] Painting, image processing, and computer animation refer to the processes of modifying already existent images as well as creating new ones. In fact, the very distinction between creation and modification, so clear in film-based media (shooting versus darkroom processes in photography, production versus post-production in cinema) no longer applies to digital cinema, since each image, regardless of its origin, goes through a number of programs before making it to the final film. [12]

Let us summarize the principles discussed thus far. Live action footage is now only raw material to be manipulated by hand: animated, combined with 3-D computer-generated scenes, and painted over. The final images are constructed manually from different elements, and all the elements are either created entirely from scratch or modified by hand.

We can finally answer the question “What is digital cinema?” Digital cinema is a particular case of animation that uses live-action footage as one of its many elements.

This can be re-read in view of the history of the moving image sketched earlier. Manual construction and animation of images gave birth to cinema and slipped into the margins, only to re-appear as the foundation of digital cinema. The history of the moving image thus comes full circle. Born from animation, cinema pushed animation to its boundary, only to become one particular case of animation in the end .

The relationship between “normal” filmmaking and special effects is similarly reversed. Special effects, which involved human intervention into machine-recorded footage and which were therefore delegated to cinema’s periphery throughout its history, become the norm of digital filmmaking.

The same applies for the relationship between production and post-production. Cinema traditionally involved arranging physical reality to be filmed though the use of sets, models, art direction, cinematography, etc. Occasional manipulation of recorded film (for instance, through optical printing) was negligible compared to the extensive manipulation of reality in front of a camera. In digital filmmaking, shot footage is no longer the final point but just raw material to be manipulated in a computer where the real construction of a scene will take place. In short, the production becomes just the first stage of post-production.

The following examples illustrate this shift from re-arranging reality to re-arranging its images. From the analog era: for a scene in Zabriskie Point (1970), Michelangelo Antonioni, trying to achieve a particularly saturated color, ordered a field of grass to be painted. From the digital era: to create the launch sequence in Apollo 13 (Ron Howard 1995; special effects by Digital Domain), the crew shot footage at the original location of the launch at Cape Canaveral. The artists at Digital Domain scanned the film and altered it on computer workstations, removing recent building construction, adding grass to the launch pad and painting the skies to make them more dramatic. This altered film was then mapped onto 3-D planes to create a virtual set that was animated to match a 180-degree dolly movement of a camera following a rising rocket (see Robertson 20).

The last example brings us to yet another conceptualization of digital cinema—as painting. In his book-length study of digital photography, William J.T. Mitchell focuses our attention on what he calls the inherent mutability of a digital image:

The essential characteristic of digital information is that it can be manipulated easily and very rapidly by computer. It is simply a matter of substituting new digits for old. . . . Computational tools for transforming, combining, altering, and analyzing images are as essential to the digital artist as brushes and pigments to a painter. (7)

As Mitchell points out, this inherent mutability erases the difference between a photograph and a painting. Since a film is a series of photographs, it is appropriate to extend Mitchell’s argument to digital film. With an artist being able to easily manipulate digitized footage either as a whole or frame by frame, a film in a general sense becomes a series of paintings. [13]

Hand-painting digitized film frames, made possible by a computer, is probably the most dramatic example of the new status of cinema. No longer strictly locked in the photographic, it opens itself towards the painterly. It is also the most obvious example of the return of cinema to its 19th-century origins—in this case, to hand-crafted images of magic lantern slides, the Phenakistiscope, the Zoetrope.

We usually think of computerization as automation, but here the result is the reverse: what was previously automatically recorded by a camera now has to be painted one frame at a time. But not just a dozen images, as in the 19th century, but thousands and thousands. We can draw another parallel with the practice, common in the early days of silent cinema, of manually tinting film frames in different colors according to a scene’s mood (see Robinson 165). Today, some of the most visually sophisticated digital effects are often achieved using the same simple method: painstakingly altering by hand thousands of frames. The frames are painted over either to create mattes (hand-drawn matte extraction) or to directly change the images, as in Forrest Gump , where President Kennedy was made to speak new sentences by altering the shape of his lips, one frame at a time. [14] In principle, given enough time and money, one can create what will be the ultimate digital film: 90 minutes, i.e. 129,600 frames, completely painted by hand from scratch, but indistinguishable in appearance from live photography. [15]

Multimedia as “Primitive” Digital Cinema

3-D animation, compositing, mapping, paint retouching: in commercial cinema, these radical new techniques are mostly used to solve technical problems while traditional cinematic language is preserved unchanged. Frames are hand-painted to remove wires that supported an actor during shooting; a flock of birds is added to a landscape; a city street is filled with crowds of simulated extras. Although most Hollywood releases now involve digitally manipulated scenes, the use of computers is always carefully hidden. [16]

Commercial narrative cinema still continues to hold on to the classical realist style where images function as unretouched photographic records of events that took place in front of the camera. [17] Cinema refuses to give up its unique cinema effect, an effect which, according to Metz’s penetrating analysis made in the 1970s, depends upon narrative form, the reality effect, and cinema’s architectural arrangement all working together.

Towards the end of his essay, Metz wonders whether in the future non-narrative films may become more numerous; if this happens, he suggests that cinema will no longer need to manufacture its reality effect. Electronic and digital media have already brought about this transformation. Beginning in the 1980s, new cinematic forms have emerged that are not linear narratives, that are exhibited on a television or a computer screen, rather than in a movie theater—and that simultaneously give up cinematic realism.

What are these forms? First of all, there is the music video. Probably not by accident, the genre of music video came into existence exactly at the time when electronic video effects devices were entering editing studios. Importantly, just as music videos often incorporate narratives within them, but are not linear narratives from start to finish, they rely on film (or video) images, but change them beyond the norms of traditional cinematic realism. The manipulation of images through hand-painting and image processing, hidden in Hollywood cinema, is brought into the open on a television screen. Similarly, the construction of an image from heterogeneous sources is not subordinated to the goal of photorealism but functions as an aesthetic strategy. The genre of music video has been a laboratory for exploring numerous new possibilities of manipulating photographic images made possible by computers—the numerous points which exist in the space between the 2-D and the 3-D, cinematography and painting, photographic realism and collage. In short, it is a living and constantly expanding textbook for digital cinema (see Shaviro, “ Splitting the Atom ” in this volume).

A detailed analysis of the evolution of music video imagery (or, more generally, broadcast graphics in the electronic age) deserves a separate treatment, and I will not try to take it up here. Instead, I will discuss another new cinematic non-narrative form, CD-ROM games, which, in contrast to music video, relied on the computer for storage and distribution from the very beginning. And, unlike music video designers who were consciously pushing traditional film or video images into something new, the designers of CD-ROMs arrived at a new visual language unintentionally while attempting to emulate traditional cinema.

In the late 1980s, Apple began to promote the concept of computer multimedia; and in 1991 it released QuickTime software to enable an ordinary personal computer to play movies. However, for the next few years the computer did not perform its new role very well. First, CD-ROMs could not hold anything close to the length of a standard theatrical film. Secondly, the computer would not smoothly play a movie larger than the size of a stamp. Finally, the movies had to be compressed, degrading their visual appearance. Only in the case of still images was the computer able to display photographic-type detail at full screen size.

Because of these particular hardware limitations, the designers of CD-ROMs had to invent a different kind of cinematic language in which a range of strategies, such as discrete motion, loops, and superimposition, previously used in 19th-century moving-image presentations, in 20th-century animation, and in the avant-garde tradition of graphic cinema, were applied to photographic or synthetic images. This language synthesized cinematic illusionism and the aesthetics of graphic collage, with its characteristic heterogeneity and discontinuity. The photographic and the graphic, divorced when cinema and animation went their separate ways, met again on a computer screen.

The graphic also met the cinematic. The designers of CD-ROMs were aware of the techniques of 20th-century cinematography and film editing, but they had to adopt these techniques both to an interactive format and to hardware limitations. As a result, the techniques of modern cinema and of 19th-century moving images have merged in a new hybrid language.

We can trace the development of this language by analyzing a few well-known CD-ROM titles. The bestselling game Myst (Broderbund, 1993) unfolds its narrative strictly through still images, a practice which takes us back to magic lantern shows (and to Chris Marker’s La Jetée ). [18] But in other ways Myst relies on the techniques of 20th-century cinema. For instance, the CD-ROM uses simulated camera turns to switch from one image to the next. It also employs the basic technique of film editing to subjectively speed up or slow down time. In the course of the game, the user moves around a fictional island by clicking on a mouse. Each click advances a virtual camera forward, revealing a new view of a 3-D environment. When the user begins to descend into the underground chambers, the spatial distance between the points of view of each two consecutive views decreases sharply. If earlier the user was able to cross a whole island with just a few clicks, now it takes a dozen clicks to get to the bottom of the stairs! In other words, just as in traditional cinema, Myst slows down time to create suspense and tension.

In Myst , miniature animations are sometimes embedded within the still images. In the next bestselling CD-ROM 7th Guest (Virgin Games, 1993), the user is presented with video clips of live actors superimposed over static backgrounds created with 3-D computer graphics. The clips are looped, and the moving human figures clearly stand out against the backgrounds. Both of these features connect the visual language of 7th Guest to 19th-century pre-cinematic devices and 20th-century cartoons rather than to cinematic verisimilitude. But like Myst , 7th Guest also evokes distinctly modern cinematic codes. The environment where all action takes place (an interior of a house) is rendered using a wide-angle lens; to move from one view to the next, a camera follows a complex curve, as though mounted on a virtual dolly.

Next, consider the CD-ROM Johnny Mnemonic (Sony Imagesoft, 1995). Produced to complement the fiction film of the same title, marketed not as a “game” but as an “interactive movie,” and featuring full-screen video throughout, it comes closer to cinematic realism than the previous CD-ROMs—yet it is still quite distinct from it. With all action shot against a green screen and then composited with graphic backgrounds, its visual style exists within a space between cinema and collage.

It would not be entirely inappropriate to read this short history of the digital moving image as a teleological development which replays the emergence of cinema a hundred years earlier. Indeed, as computers’ speed keeps increasing, the CD-ROM designers have been able to go from a slide show format to the superimposition of small moving elements over static backgrounds and finally to full-frame moving images. This evolution repeats the 19th-century progression: from sequences of still images (magic lantern slide presentations) to moving characters over static backgrounds (for instance, in Reynaud’s Praxinoscope Theater) to full motion (the Lumières’ cinematograph). Moreover, the introduction of QuickTime in 1991 can be compared to the introduction of the Kinetoscope in 1892: both were used to present short loops, both featured the images approximately two by three inches in size, both called for private viewing rather than collective exhibition. Finally, the Lumières’ first film screenings of 1895, which shocked their audiences with huge moving images, found their parallel in CD-ROM titles of 1995, where the moving image finally fills the entire computer screen. Thus, exactly a hundred years after cinema was officially “born,” it was reinvented on a computer screen.

But this is only one reading. We no longer think of the history of cinema as a linear march towards only one possible language, or as a progression towards more and more accurate verisimilitude. Rather, we have come to see its history as a succession of distinct and equally expressive languages, each with its own aesthetic variables, each new language closing off some of the possibilities of the previous one—a cultural logic not dissimilar to Kuhn’s analysis of scientific paradigms. Similarly, instead of dismissing visual strategies of early multimedia titles as a result of technological limitations, we may want to think of them as an alternative to traditional cinematic illusionism, as a beginning of digital cinema’s new language.

For the computer/entertainment industry, these strategies represent only a temporary limitation, an annoying drawback that needs to be overcome. This is one important difference between the situation at the end of the nineteenth and the end of the twentieth centuries: if cinema was developing towards the still open horizon of many possibilities, the development of commercial multimedia, and of corresponding computer hardware (compression boards, storage formats such as Digital Video Disk), is driven by a clearly defined goal: the exact duplication of cinematic realism. So if a computer screen, more and more, emulates a cinema screen, this not an accident but a result of conscious planning.

The Loop and Spatial Montage

A number of artists, however, have approached these strategies not as limitations but as a source of new cinematic possibilities. As an example, I will discuss the use of the loop and of montage in Jean-Louis Boissier’s Flora petrinsularis (1993) and in my own Little Movies (1994-). [19]

As already mentioned, all 19th-century pre-cinematic devices, up to Edison’s Kinetoscope, were based on short loops. As “the seventh art” began to mature, it banished the loop to the low-art realms of the instructional film, the pornographic peep-show, and the animated cartoon. In contrast, narrative cinema has avoided repetitions; like modern Western fictional forms in general, it put forward a notion of human existence as a linear progression through numerous unique events.

Cinema’s birth from a loop form was reenacted at least once during its history. In one of the sequences of the revolutionary Soviet montage film, A Man with a Movie Camera (1929), Dziga Vertov shows us a cameraman standing in the back of a moving automobile. As he is being carried forward by an automobile, he cranks the handle of his camera. A loop, a repetition, created by the circular movement of the handle, gives birth to a progression of events—a very basic narrative which is also quintessentially modern: a camera moving through space recording whatever is in its way. In what seems to be a reference to cinema’s primal scene, these shots are intercut with the shots of a moving train. Vertov even re-stages the terror which the Lumières’ film supposedly provoked in its audience; he positions his camera right along the train track so the train runs over our point of view a number of times, crushing us again and again.

Early digital movies share the same limitations of storage as 19th-century pre-cinematic devices. This is probably why the loop playback function was built into the QuickTime interface, thus giving it the same weight as the VCR-style “play forward” function. So, in contrast to films and videotapes, QuickTime movies are supposed to be played forward, backward, or looped.

Can the loop be a new narrative form appropriate for the computer age? It is relevant to recall that the loop gave birth not only to cinema but also to computer programming. Programming involves altering the linear flow of data through control structures, such as “if/then” and “repeat/while”; the loop is the most elementary of these control structures. If we strip the computer from its usual interface and follow the execution of a typical computer program, the computer will reveal itself to be another version of Ford’s factory, with a loop as its conveyer belt.

Flora petrinsularis realizes some of the possibilities contained in the loop form, suggesting a new temporal aesthetics for digital cinema. The CD-ROM, which is based on Rousseau’s Confessions , opens with a white screen, containing a numbered list. Clicking on each item leads us to a screen containing two frames, positioned side by side. Both frames show the same video loop but are slightly offset from each other in time. Thus, the images appearing in the left frame reappear in a moment on the right and vice versa, as though an invisible wave is running through the screen. This wave soon becomes materialized: when we click on one of the frames we are taken to a new screen showing a loop of a rhythmically vibrating water surface. As each mouse click reveals another loop, the viewer becomes an editor, but not in a traditional sense. Rather than constructing a singular narrative sequence and discarding material which is not used, here the viewer brings to the forefront, one by one, numerous layers of looped actions which seem to be taking place all at once, a multitude of separate but co-existing temporalities. The viewer is not cutting but re-shuffling. In a reversal of Vertov’s sequence where a loop generated a narrative, the viewer’s attempt to create a story in Flora petrinsularis leads to a loop.

The loop that structures Flora petrinsularis on a number of levels becomes a metaphor for human desire that can never achieve resolution. It can be also read as a comment on cinematic realism. What are the minimal conditions necessary to create the impression of reality? As Boissier demonstrates, in the case of a field of grass, a close-up of a plant or a stream, just a few looped frames become sufficient to produce the illusion of life and of linear time.

Stephen Neale describes how early film demonstrated its authenticity by representing moving nature: “What was lacking [in photographs] was the wind, the very index of real, natural movement. Hence the obsessive contemporary fascination, not just with movement, not just with scale, but also with waves and sea spray, with smoke and spray” (52). What for early cinema was its biggest pride and achievement—a faithful documentation of nature’s movement—becomes for Boissier a subject of ironic and melancholic simulation. As the few frames are looped over and over, we see blades of grass shifting slightly back and forth, rhythmically responding to the blow of non-existent wind that is almost approximated by the noise of a computer reading data from a CD-ROM.

Something else is being simulated here as well, perhaps unintentionally. As you watch the CD-ROM, the computer periodically staggers, unable to maintain a consistent data rate. As a result, the images on the screen move in uneven bursts, slowing and speeding up with human-like irregularity. It is as though they are brought to life not by a digital machine but by a human operator, cranking the handle of the Zoetrope a century and a half ago.

Little Movies is my own project about the aesthetics of digital cinema, and a eulogy to its earliest form—QuickTime. Beginning with the well-known supposition that every new medium relies on the content of previous media, Little Movies features key moments in the history of cinema as its logical subject.

As the time passes, the medium becomes the message, that is, the “look” more than the content of any media technology of the past is what lingers on. Little Movies reads digital media of the 1990s from a hypothetical future, foregrounding its basic properties: the pixel, the computer screen, the scanlines. As described earlier, in the early 1890s the public patronized Kinetoscope parlors where peep-hole machines presented them with the latest marvel—tiny moving photographs arranged in short loops. And exactly a hundred years later, we are equally fascinated with tiny QuickTime movies—the precursor of digital cinema still to come. Drawing a parallel between these two historical moments, Little Movies are explicitly modeled after Kinetoscope films: they are also short loops.

Like Boissier, I am also interested in exploring alternatives to cinematic montage, in my case replacing its traditional sequential mode with a spatial one. Ford’s assembly line relied on the separation of the production process into a set of repetitive, sequential, and simple activities. The same principle made computer programming possible: a computer program breaks a task into a series of elemental operations to be executed one at a time. Cinema followed this principle as well: it replaced all other modes of narration with a sequential narrative, an assembly line of shots that appear on the screen one at a time. A sequential narrative turned out to be particularly incompatible with a spatialized narrative, which played a prominent role in European visual culture for centuries. From Giotto’s fresco cycle at Cappella degli Scrovegni in Padua to Courbet’s A Burial at Ornans , artists presented a multitude of separate events (which were sometimes even separated by time) within a single composition. In contrast to cinema’s narratives, here all the “shots” were accessible to a viewer at one.

Cinema has elaborated complex techniques of montage between different images replacing each other in time; but the possibility of what can be called “spatial montage” between simultaneously co-existing images was not explored. In Little Movies I begin to explore this direction in order to open up again the tradition of spatialized narrative suppressed by cinema. In one of the movies I develop the narrative through a number of short video clips, all much smaller in size than the computer screen. This allows me to place a number of clips on the screen at once. Sometimes all the clips are paused, and only one clip is playing; at other times two or three different clips play at once. As the narrative activates different parts of the screen, montage in time gives way to montage in space. Or rather, we can say that montage acquires a new spatial dimension. In addition to montage dimensions already explored by cinema (differences in images’ content, composition, movement) we now have a new dimension: the position of the images in space in relation to each other. In addition, since images do not replace each other (as in cinema) but remain on the screen throughout the movie, each new image is juxtaposed not just with one image which preceded it, but with all the other images present on the screen.

The logic of replacement, characteristic of cinema, gives way to the logic of addition and co-existence. Time becomes spatialized, distributed over the surface of the screen. Nothing is forgotten, nothing is erased. Just as we use computers to accumulate endless texts, messages, notes, and data (and just as a person, going through life, accumulates more and more memories, with the past slowly acquiring more weight than the future), “spatial montage” accumulates events and images as it progresses through its narrative. In contrast to cinema’s screen, which primarily functioned as a record of perception, here the computer screen functions as a record of memory.

By making images different in size and by having them appear and disappear in different parts of the screen without any obvious order, I want to present the computer screen as a space of endless possibilities. Rather than being a surface that passively accepts projected images of reality recorded by a camera, the computer screen becomes an active generator of moving-image events. It already contains numerous images and numerous narrative paths; all that remains is to reveal some of them.

Conclusion: From Kino-Eye to Kino-Brush

In the 20th century, cinema has played two roles at once. As a media technology, cinema’s role was to capture and to store visible reality. The difficulty of modifying images once they were recorded was exactly what gave cinema its value as a document, assuring its authenticity. The same rigidity of the film image has defined the limits of cinema as I defined it earlier, i.e. the super-genre of live action narrative. Although it includes within itself a variety of styles—the result of the efforts of many directors, designers, and cinematographers—these styles share a strong family resemblance. They are all children of the recording process that uses lenses, regular sampling of time, and photographic media. They are all children of a machine vision.

The mutability of digital data impairs the value of cinematic recordings as documents of reality. In retrospect, we can see that 20th-century cinema’s regime of visual realism, the result of automatically recording visual reality, was only an exception, an isolated accident in the history of visual representation which has always involved, and now again involves, the manual construction of images. Cinema becomes a particular branch of painting—painting in time. No longer a kino-eye, but a kino-brush. [20]

The privileged role played by the manual construction of images in digital cinema is one example of a larger trend: the return of pre-cinematic moving images techniques. Marginalized by the 20th-century institution of live-action narrative cinema that relegated them to the realms of animation and special effects, these techniques reemerge as the foundation of digital filmmaking. What was supplemental to cinema becomes its norm; what was at its boundaries comes into the center. Digital media return to us the repressed of the cinema.

As the examples discussed in this essay suggest, the directions that were closed off at the turn of the century, when cinema came to dominate the modern moving-image culture, are now again beginning to be explored. Moving-image culture is being redefined once again; cinematic realism is being displaced from being its dominant mode to become only one option among many.

Works Cited

Artintact 1 . Karlsruhe: ZKM/Center for Art and Media, 1994. CD-ROM.

Aumont, Jacques, Alain Bergala, Michel Marie, and Marc Vernet. Aesthetics of Film . Trans. Richard Neupert. Austin: U of Texas P, 1992. Print.

Billups, Scott. “Casting from Forest Lawn (Future of Performers).” Annual Artists Rights Digital Technology Symposium. Directors Guild of America, Los Angeles. 16 Feb. 1996. Address.

Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art: An Introduction . 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993. Print.

Bukatman, Scott. “The Artificial Infinite: On Special Effects and the Sublime.” Visual Display: Culture Beyond Appearances . Eds. Lynne Cooke and Peter Wollen. Seattle: Bay P, 1995. 255-89. Print.

Ceram, C.W. Archaeology of the Cinema . New York: Harcourt, 1965. Print.

Huhtamo, Erkki. “Encapsulated Bodies in Motion: Simulators and the Quest for Total Immersion.” Critical Issues in Electronic Media . Ed. Simon Penny. Albany: SUNY P, 1995. 159-86. Print.

Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions . 2nd. ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1970. Print.

Leish, Kenneth W. Cinema . New York: Newsweek Books, 1974. Print.

Lunenfeld, Peter. “Art Post-History: Digital Photography and Electronic Semiotics.” Photography after Photography: Memory and Representation in the Digital Age . Eds. Hubertus von Amelunxen, Stefan Inglhaut, and Florian Rötzer. Sydney: G+B Arts, 1996. Print.

Manovich, Lev. “Cinema and Digital Media.” Perspektiven der Medienkunst/Media Art Perspectives . Eds. Jeffrey Shaw and Hans Peter Schwarz. Ostfildern: Cantz, 1996. Print.

—. “Engineering Vision: from Constructivism to the Computer.” Diss. U of Rochester, 1993. Web. <https://www.academia.edu/2800644/The_Engineering_of_Vision_from_Constructivism_to_Computers>.

—. “To Lie and to Act: Potemkin’s Villages, Cinema and Telepresence.” Mythos Information—Welcome to the Wired World: Ars Electronica 95 . Eds. Karl Gebel and Peter Weibel. Vienna: Springer, 1995. 343-48. Print.

—. “What is Digital Cinema?” Telepolis , 21 May 1996. Web. <http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/6/6110/1.html>. Rpt. in The Digital Dialectic: New Essays on New Media . Ed. Peter Lunenfeld. Cambridge: MIT P, 2000. 173-92. Rpt. in Visual Culture: Critical Concepts in Media and Cultural Studies . Eds. Joanne Morra and Marquard Smith. New York: Routledge, 2006. 221-38.

Marker, Chris. La Jetée: Ciné-roman . New York: Zone, 1992. Print.

Metz, Christian. “The Fiction Film and its Spectator: A Metapsychological Study.” Apparatus: Cinematographic Apparatus—Selected Writings . Ed. Theresa Hak Kyung Cha. New York: Tanam P, 1980. 373-409. Print.

Mitchell, William J. T. The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era . Cambridge: MIT P, 1992. Print.

Monaco, James. How to Read a Film . Rev. ed. New York: Oxford UP, 1981. Print.

Musser, Charles. The Emergence of Cinema: The American Screen to 1907 . Berkeley: U of California P, 1990. Print.

Neale, Stephen. Cinema and Technology . Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1985. Print.

Perisi, Paula. “The New Hollywood Silicon Stars.” Wired Dec. 1995: 142+. Print.

Petrovich, Lucy, et al., eds. SIGGRAPH ‘94 Visual Proceedings . New York: ACM SIGGRAPH, 1994. Print.

Robertson, Barbara. “Digital Magic: Apollo 13.” Computer Graphics World Aug. 1995: 20. Print.

Robinson, David. From Peep Show to Palace: the Birth of American Film . New York: Columbia UP, 1996. Print.

Russett, Robert, and Cecile Starr. Experimental Animation . New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1976. Print.

Samuelson, David. Motion Picture Camera Techniques . London: Focal P, 1978. Print.

Sitney, P. Adams. Visionary Film: The American Avant-Garde, 1943-1978 . 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1979. Print.

Sobchack, Vivian. Screening Space: The American Science Fiction Film , 2nd ed. New York: Ungar, 1987. Print.

Vertov, Dziga. “Artistic Drama and Kino-Eye.” 1924. Kino-Eye: The Writings of Dziga Vertov . Ed. Annette Michelson. Trans. Kevin O’Brien. Berkeley: U of California P, 1984. 47-49. Print.

This essay was first published in 1996, in the German online magazine Telepolis , and has been reprinted, in modified form, in two book publications (see works cited). The version reprinted here, however, has appeared only on Manovich’s website.

[1] This is the third in a series of essays on digital cinema. See my “Cinema and Digital Media” and “To Lie and to Act: Potemkin’s Villages, Cinema and Telepresence.” This essay has greatly benefited from the suggestions and criticisms of Natalie Bookchin, Peter Lunenfeld, Norman Klein, and Vivian Sobchack. I also would like to acknowledge the pioneering work of Erkki Huhtamo on the connections between early cinema and digital media which stimulated my own interest in this topic. See, for instance, his “Encapsulated Bodies in Motion.”

[2] The remarks were made by Scott Billups, a major figure in bringing Hollywood and Silicon Valley together by way of the American Film Institute’s Apple Laboratory and Advanced Technologies Programs in the late 1980s and early 1990s (see Billups; also Perisi).

[3] Cinema as defined by its “super-genre” of fictional live action film belongs to media arts, which, in contrast to traditional arts, rely on recordings of reality as their basis. Another term which is not as popular as “media arts” but is perhaps more precise is “recording arts.” For the use of this term, see Monaco 7.

[4] The birth of cinema in the 1890s is accompanied by an interesting transformation: while the body as the generator of moving pictures disappears, it simultaneously becomes their new subject. Indeed, one of the key themes of early films produced by Edison is a human body in motion: a man sneezing, the famous bodybuilder Sandow flexing his muscles, an athlete performing somersaults, a woman dancing. Films of boxing matches play a key role in the commercial development of the Kinetoscope. See Musser 72-79; Robinson 44-48.

[5] This arrangement was previously used in magic lantern projections; it is described in the second edition of Althanasius Kircher’s Ars magna (1671). See Musser 21-22.

[6] The extent of this lie is made clear by the films of Andy Warhol from the first part of the 1960s—perhaps the only real attempt to create cinema without a language.

[7] I have borrowed this definition of special effects from Samuelson.

[8] The following examples illustrate this disavowal of special effects; other examples can be easily found. The first example is from popular discourse on cinema. A section entitled “Making the Movies” in Leish’s Cinema contains short stories from the history of the movie industry. The heroes of these stories are actors, directors, and producers; special effects artists are mentioned only once. The second example is from an academic source: the authors of the authoritative Aesthetics of Film state that “[t]he goal of our book is to summarize from a synthetic and didactic perspective the diverse theoretical attempts at examining these empirical notions [terms from the lexicon of film technicians], including ideas like frame vs. shot, terms from production crews’ vocabularies, the notion of identification produced by critical vocabulary, etc.” (Aumont et al. 7). The fact that the text never mentions special effects techniques reflects the general lack of any historical or theoretical interest in the topic by film scholars. Bordwell and Thompson’s Film Art: An Introduction , which is used as a standard textbook in undergraduate film classes is a little better as it devotes three of its five hundred pages to special effects. Finally, a relevant piece of statistics: a library at the University of California, San Diego contains 4273 titles catalogued under the subject “motion pictures” and only 16 tiles under “special effects cinematography.” For the few important works addressing the larger cultural significance of special effects by film theoreticians see Sobchack; Bukatman. Norman Klein is currently working on a history of special effects environments.

[9] For a discussion of the subsumption of the photographic to the graphic, see Lunenfeld.

[10] For a complete list of people at ILM who worked on this film, see the SIGGRAPH ‘94 Visual Proceedings (Petrovich et al. 19).

[11] In this respect 1995 can be called the last year of digital media. At the 1995 National Association of Broadcasters convention Avid showed a working model of a digital video camera which records not on a video cassette but directly onto a hard drive. Once digital cameras become widely used, we will no longer have any reason to talk about digital media since the process of digitization will be eliminated.

[12] Here is another, even more radical definition: digital film = f (x, y, t). This definition would be greeted with joy by the proponents of abstract animation. Since the computer breaks down every frame into pixels, a complete film can be defined as a function which, given the horizontal, vertical, and time location of each pixel, returns its color. This is actually how a computer represents a film, a representation which has a surprising affinity with a certain well-known avant-garde vision of cinema! For a computer, a film is an abstract arrangement of colors changing in time, rather than something structured by “shots,” “narrative,” “actors,” and so on.

[13] The full advantage of mapping time into 2-D space, already present in Edison’s first cinema apparatus, is now realized: one can modify events in time by literally painting on a sequence of frames, treating them as a single image.

[14] See “Industrial Light & Magic alters history with MATADOR,” promotional material by Parallax Software, SIGGRAPH ‘95 Conference, Los Angeles, August 1995.

[15] The reader who followed my analysis of the new possibilities of digital cinema may wonder why I have stressed the parallels between digital cinema and the pre-cinematic techniques of the 19th century but did not mention 20th-century avant-garde filmmaking. Did not the avant-garde filmmakers already explore many of these new possibilities? To take the notion of cinema as painting, Len Lye, one of the pioneers of abstract animation, was painting directly on film as early as 1935; he was followed by Norman McLaren and Stan Brakhage, the latter extensively covering shot footage with dots, scratches, splattered paint, smears, and lines in an attempt to turn his films into equivalents of Abstract Expressionist painting. More generally, one of the major impulses in all of avant-garde filmmaking, from Léger to Godard, was to combine the cinematic, the painterly, and the graphic—by using live-action footage and animation within one film or even a single frame, by altering this footage in a variety of ways, or by juxtaposing printed texts and filmed images.

I explore the notion that the avant-garde anticipated digital aesthetics in my “Engineering Vision: from Constructivism to the Computer”; here I would like to bring up one point particularly relevant for this essay. When the avant-garde filmmakers collaged multiple images within a single frame, or painted and scratched film, or revolted against the indexical identity of cinema in other ways, they were working against “normal” filmmaking procedures and the intended uses of film technology. (Film stock was not designed to be painted on.) Thus they operated on the periphery of commercial cinema not only aesthetically but also technically.

One general effect of the digital revolution is that avant-garde aesthetic strategies became embedded in the commands and interface metaphors of computer software. In short, the avant-garde became materialized in a computer. Digital cinema technology is a case in point. The avant-garde strategy of collage reemerged as a “cut and paste” command, the most basic operation one can perform on digital data. The idea of painting on film became embedded in paint functions of film-editing software. The avant-garde move to combine animation, printed texts, and live-action footage is repeated in the convergence of animation, title generation, paint, compositing, and editing systems into single all-in-one packages. Finally, another move to combine a number of film images together within one frame (for instance, in Léger’s 1924 Ballet Mécanique or in Vertov’s 1929 A Man with a Movie Camera ) also become legitimized by technology, since all editing software, including Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects, Flame, and Cineon, by default assumes that a digital image consists of a number of separate image layers. All in all, what used to be exceptions for traditional cinema became the normal, intended techniques of digital filmmaking, embedded in technology design itself. For the experiments in painting on film by Lye, McLaren, and Brakhage, see Russett and Starr 65-71; 117-128; also Sitney 230; 136-227.

[16] Reporting in the December 1995 issue of Wired , Paula Perisi writes: “A decade ago, only an intrepid few, led by George Lucas’s Industrial Light and Magic, were doing high-quality digital work. Now computer imaging is considered an indispensable production tool for all films, from the smallest drama to the largest visual extravaganza” (144).

[17] Therefore, one way in which the fantastic is justified in contemporary Hollywood cinema is through the introduction of various non-human characters such as aliens, mutants, and robots. We never notice the pure arbitrariness of their colorful and mutating bodies, the beams of energy emulating from their eyes, the whirlpools of particles emulating from their wings, because they are made perceptually consistent with the set, i.e. they look like something which could have existed in a three-dimensional space and therefore could have been photographed.

[18] This 28-minute film, made in 1962, is composed of still frames narrativized in time, and concludes with a very short live action sequence. For documentation, see Marker.

[19] Flora petrinsularis is included in the compilation CD-ROM Artintact 1 . Little Movies are available online at < http://jupiter.ucsd.edu/~manovich/little-movies >.

[20] It was Dziga Vertov who coined the term “kino-eye” in the 1920s to describe the cinematic apparatus’s ability “to record and organize the individual characteristics of life’s phenomena into a whole, an essence, a conclusion” (47). For Vertov, the presentation of film “facts,” based as they were on materialist evidence, defined the very nature of the cinema.

Lev Manovich is the author of seven books including Software Takes Command (Bloomsbury Academic, 2013), Soft Cinema: Navigating the Database (The MIT Press, 2005), and The Language of New Media (The MIT Press, 2001), which was described as “the most suggestive and broad ranging media history since Marshall McLuhan.” Manovich is a Professor at The Graduate Center, CUNY, and a Director of the Software Studies Initiative that works on the analysis and visualization of big visual cultural data. In 2013 he appeared on the list of “25 People Shaping the Future of Design.” In 2014 he was included in the list of “50 Most Interesting People Building the Future” ( The Verge ).

Lev Manovich, “What is Digital Cinema?” in Denson and Leyda (eds), Post-Cinema: Theorizing 21st-Century Film (Falmer: REFRAME Books, 2016). Web. < https://reframe.sussex.ac.uk/post-cinema/1-1-manovich/ >. ISBN 978-0-9931996-2-2 (online)

Electronics
Home theater

The Best Projectors

Our two picks for best home projector for a living room, side by side with a vertical stack of DVDs in between.

By Adrienne Maxwell

Adrienne Maxwell is an editor covering AV gear. Her specialty is video projectors, so she spends a lot of time alone in dark rooms.

Different projectors are designed for different uses, and they can range in price from a couple hundred dollars to well into the five-figure range. Choosing the right model for your needs can be a daunting task, and we’re here to help.

Below is an overview of the top picks from our various projector guides. We have recommendations for premium 4K movie projectors, bright living-room projectors, budget home theater projectors, and more.

What you need to know

When shopping for projectors, don’t rely on the specs—especially the claimed brightness, which is often exaggerated.

If you want a big screen, you need a bright projector. Tiny projectors are not bright enough to deliver a big-screen, cinema-like experience.

Projectors, like TVs, are rarely set up to look their best right out of the box. Look for a picture mode called Cinema, Movie, or Natural.

We have projector recommendations for home theaters, living rooms, small spaces, outdoors, and portable use.

If you’re not sure where to begin your projector search, we recommend reading about how to pick the right projector for your viewing needs . In summary, you have three important questions to ask at the start: What do you plan to use the projector for? What type of room will you use it in? How big of a screen do you want?

There’s a huge difference in price and performance between a 4K projector designed for a big-screen home theater and a portable mini projector designed to be an everyday TV replacement. Some projectors excel with movies in a completely dark room, while others are better for sports or gaming in a room with some ambient light.

Generally, the bigger the screen you want, the brighter your projector must be to produce a satisfyingly rich image. Once you have a general idea of the projector’s intended use, it’s easier to zero in on a specific choice.

The research

Best 4k projector for a home theater, best budget projector for a home theater, best living-room projector, best portable mini projector for indoor and outdoor use, best short-throw projector (for small spaces), why we don’t recommend ultra-short-throw projectors for most people, what you’ll need to complete your projector setup, frequently asked questions.

Epson Home Cinema LS11000

The best 4k projector under $5,000.

The LS11000 is a great 4K laser projector that can deliver a big, bright, beautiful image, and it has almost all the features you need—except 3D support.

Buying Options

If you want to set up a high-performance home theater in a basement or spare room and need a 4K projector that can handle high dynamic range video and wide-color-gamut material, choose the Epson Home Cinema LS11000 . This LCD laser projector offers a combination of performance and features that you won’t find in any other projector priced lower than $5,000. It’s an excellent 4K movie projector, but it also looks great with games, sports, and HDTV when some room lights are on.

Why we like it

The LS11000 has great detail, is bright enough to produce satisfying high dynamic range (HDR) video, and has wonderfully accurate color in the Natural picture mode.
This LCD projector uses a laser light source that should see you through the next decade (or longer), with no need to pay for replacement bulbs.
It's one of only a few 120-hertz projectors right now that has high-bandwidth HDMI 2.1 inputs to work with the most advanced 4K gaming consoles and any future 8K sources that might emerge.
A motorized lens with generous zoom and lens-shifting capabilities makes this projector easier to set up than many others.

The Epson Home Cinema LS11000, our pick for best 4K projector.

Flaws but not dealbreakers

The LS11000 doesn’t support 3D video playback, so people who have a large collection of 3D discs may want to look elsewhere.
Projectors aren’t bright enough to show HDR video at its full brightness, so they have to adjust the HDR signal to show it in the brightness range they’re capable of. The LS11000 does not do this automatically; you have to manually adjust the HDR brightness setting.

Read more about the Epson LS11000 in our guide to the best 4K projector .

BenQ HT2060

The best budget projector around $1,000.

This projector produces a bright, rich-looking image with more accurate color than most competitors can offer. It’s easy to set up and quiet in operation, but it lacks features like Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.

If you want to create a big-screen movie experience at home on a modest budget, the BenQ HT2060 is the best performer in the $1,000-and-under price range.

It offers great image contrast and color accuracy.
It’s bright enough to pair it with a large screen for a more immersive home theater experience.
Out of the box this projector can produce a good image with very little adjustment, which means it’s good for people new to projectors.
It’s easy to set up and quiet in operation.

The HT2060 produced some digital noise in mid to dark grays during our tests.
It lacks features like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and built-in streaming apps.
Because it uses DLP projection technology, some people might see the rainbow effect .

Read more about this pick and others in our guide to the best budget projector for a home theater .

Epson Home Cinema 3800

The best projector for a living room.

This projector combines high brightness with accurate color, great contrast, and good setup tools to fit in a variety of rooms.

The Epson Home Cinema 3800 projector offers a clear step up in picture quality over budget 1080p projectors, and its native contrast ratio—the difference between the darkest and brightest parts of an image—is much higher than that of most projectors around the same price. It can’t compete with the best 4K home theater projector in overall performance, but its high brightness makes it a better choice for use in a living room or family room where you can’t block out all the light.

The Home Cinema 3800 is extremely bright, so the image will pop even in a room with a good amount of light.
The Home Cinema 3800 also has accurate colors, producing lifelike greens, blues, reds, and everything in between.
The high zoom (1.6x) and good lens shifting give you increased placement flexibility, which may matter more in a living room than in a dedicated theater room.

The Epson Home Cinema 3800, our pick for best home projector for a living room.

The image isn’t technically 4K and doesn’t look quite as sharp as what you can see from some competitors, but it’s still highly detailed.
The lamp life isn’t as long as that of some projectors we tested, but a replacement bulb costs less.

You can read more about this projector and other bright-room options in our full guide to 4K projectors .

Nebula Mars 3 Air

Best portable mini projector.

This compact, 1080p projector offers good image brightness and contrast, above-average sound, easy setup, and a built-in battery. But mounting it on a tripod may prove tricky.

If you need a small, compact projector that you can easily move around your home or take outside, the Nebula Mars 3 Air offers almost everything we could ask for in this type of projector. The Mars 3 Air is an LED projector that has a 1080p resolution and supports HDR video in the HDR10 format (though it isn’t bright enough to show off what HDR can do). It also includes a built-in battery, built-in Google TV and speakers, automatic focus and image shaping, and support for Bluetooth audio.

The Nebula Mars 3 Air offers good brightness and contrast, rich color, and a 1080p resolution.
Its internal speaker system delivers good sound. You can also connect an external speaker via Bluetooth.
The projector automatically focuses and shapes the image so that it’s always optimized for your desired throw distance and angle, no matter where you place it.
Its Google TV operating system gives you direct access to streaming apps such as those for Amazon Prime Video, Disney+, Hulu, and Netflix.
The built-in battery, compact form, and carrying handle make it a great choice to take outside for the occasional backyard movie night. If you want something even brighter and more rugged for outdoor use, consider the step-up Mars 3 .

Our pick for best portable mini projector overall, the Nebula Mars 3 Air, in front of a yellow background.

The Mars 3 Air’s shallow tripod socket and ridged underside make it incompatible with some mounts and tripods.
This model doesn’t have a USB-C port, so you might need an HDMI adapter cable to connect a mobile device.
The black level, brightness, and color accuracy are lacking in comparison with a traditional home theater projector, so it isn’t an ideal choice for big-screen movie watching or gaming.

You can read more about this projector and others in our full guide to portable mini projectors .

BenQ HT2150ST

A short-throw pick.

If you’re short on space, the BenQ HT2150ST can produce a larger image from a shorter distance.

In order to create a large image most projectors need to be positioned far from the screen. This distance is called the throw distance, and can be anywhere from 8 to 15 feet, depending on the projector and desired image size. Short-throw projectors are convenient for small rooms or other situations where space is limited. The BenQ HT2150ST can sit much closer to the screen than a standard projector, and is bright enough to use in a room with some ambient light.

It works in spaces other projectors can’t, producing a 100-inch image with only a couple feet of space.
It produces a bright image that can work in a room that gets some ambient light.
Its integrated speaker and small size make it easy to store when not being used.

The BenQ HT2150ST projector sits on a white background.

The short-throw lens can cause some fringing artifacts that you might notice.
It’s bright, but the colors aren’t as accurate as those of the non-short-throw HT2060 .
This projector has a 1080p resolution. If you're willing to pay more for a 4K short-throw projector, check out the ViewSonic X2-4K in our guide to the best 4K projector .

You can read more about this projector in our guide to the best budget projector for a home theater .

Ultra-short-throw (UST) projectors are often marketed as TV replacements because they can deliver a massive image from a very short distance and have a footprint smaller than any TV. But the truth is, these are still projectors, and expensive ones at that. We tested four UST projectors at varying prices and performance levels and concluded that the vast majority of people are better off getting either a large TV or a traditional projector. You’ll either get better performance or spend less—oftentimes both. You can read more about this in our piece Is an Ultra-Short-Throw Projector a Good Substitute for a Big-Screen TV?

A great screen

Silver Ticket STR Series (White Material, 100-Inch)

Our favorite projector screen.

This inexpensive screen offers performance comparable to that of others costing much more, plus it’s easy to install.

If you have a projector, you should get a screen. Most modern projectors are bright enough to throw a decent image on just about any close-enough-to-white surface, but you won’t get accurate colors without a proper screen. A screen has less texture than a wall, plus it will add pop to the image, because paint almost always has less gain (that is, it reflects less light) than a screen, meaning the image will appear dimmer than is ideal. The Silver Ticket STR Series performs as well as screens costing thousands of dollars. You can read about screen materials and our testing methods in our full guide to the best projector screen .

If you’re putting together a backyard theater, consider one of our outdoor screen recommendations .

A projector mount

Peerless-AV PRGS-UNV Projector Mount

A good projector mount.

This is the closest thing to the perfect projector mount we’ve used.

If you want to get your projector up and out of the way, you need a mount. The Peerless-AV PRGS-UNV Projector Mount is one of our favorites due to its flexibility and how easy it is to set up correctly. The mounting arms are highly adjustable and removable, so it can handle anything from a tiny DLP projector to the gigantic JVC D-ILA projectors that most mounts cannot fit. The dials let you easily make small adjustments to the projector to get it level with the screen and produce the best-quality image without much work. After years of using this mount and going through dozens of tested projectors, we have yet to find one that the Peerless-AV cannot handle.

Other AV gear

You’ll probably need some speakers, AV sources, and other accessories. Check out our recommendations in “ The Best Gear for a Home Theater System .”

How many lumens is good for a projector?

For a home theater projector that you will use mostly in a dark room, we recommend at least 1,000 ANSI lumens for a 100-inch screen. If you plan to use the projector in a room with more ambient light, you’ll want to go brighter: at least 1,500 ANSI lumens (ideally 2,000 or more). The larger the screen size you want, the brighter the projector needs to be to produce a satisfying image. Manufacturers’ claimed brightness specifications are usually exaggerated, so it’s best to rely on actual measured results from trusted reviewers. Some manufacturers use LEDs instead of traditional bulbs as the light source in their projectors, and they list the brightness rating in “LED lumens” instead of ANSI lumens to give a higher number.

How far away should you sit from a projection screen?

This depends on how much you want the projected image to fill your field of view. Some people like to sit closer in the movie theater so it feels more immersive, while others prefer to sit farther back. It’s the same at home. Experts generally recommend a viewing distance that fills between 30 and 36 degrees of your field of view, and you can use this calculator to help find a good seating distance for your screen size.

Is a 4K projector worth it?

If you watch a lot of 4K content and want the most detailed image you can get, a 4K projector is the way to go. The step up in resolution from 1080p to 4K can be more obvious on a projector than it is on most TVs, due to the larger screen size. However, native 4K projectors are very expensive and usually reserved for the most ardent home theater fans. Most affordable “4K” projectors use some type of pixel-shifting technology to reproduce a 4K image, which can be very effective and really is good enough for most people. Also, once you get past a certain seating distance, your eyes may not be able to see the difference between 4K and 1080p. Most 4K projectors also support high dynamic range video, but we think this feature is less important on projectors, since none of them are bright enough to do HDR properly.

Meet your guide

Adrienne Maxwell

Adrienne Maxwell is the supervising editor of Wirecutter's audio/video team, covering everything from headphones to TVs. She has been a writer, editor, and reviewer in the consumer electronics industry for 20 years, and previously served as the executive editor of Home Theater Magazine and the managing editor of HomeTheaterReview.com.

The Best Portable Mini Projector

by Adrienne Maxwell

A portable mini projector doesn’t perform as well as a good TV or home-theater projector, but the Nebula Mars 3 Air ably blends performance and convenience.

The Epson Home Cinema LS11000, our pick for best 4K projector, along with DVD's and a remote control.

The Best 4K Projector

The Epson LS11000 4K laser projector delivers a big, beautiful image, works well in a variety of lighting conditions, and has most of the features you need.

A movie projector with a bowl of popcorn next to it.

The Best Budget Projector for a Home Theater

The BenQ HT2060 ’s good contrast, bright output, and impressive color accuracy make it our pick for the best budget home theater projector.

Two ultra-short-throw (UST) projectors, (from left to right) the Epson LS500 and the Vava VA-LT002.

Is an Ultra-Short-Throw Projector a Good Substitute for a Big-Screen TV?

by Geoffrey Morrison

Ultra-short-throw projectors can deliver a big, bright image in your living room, but for most people a big-screen TV is a better choice.

Filed under:

Oppenheimer launched a new debate about ‘true IMAX’ — but does the format matter?

What is true IMAX? Where can you see Oppenheimer in true IMAX? Is fake IMAX obvious? We explain

Oppenheimer plays on a giant format screen for an audience in a dark theater, the projector casting a faint light over the crowd

If you buy something from a Polygon link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement .

Share this story

Share this on Facebook
Share this on Reddit
Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: Oppenheimer launched a new debate about ‘true IMAX’ — but does the format matter?

Christopher Nolan said it himself: Watching his movie Oppenheimer will basically ruin your life , and might even make you feel like you’re being blown up . If Nolan fans really want that kind of overwhelming experience, they likely want to watch the film in Nolan’s preferred format. His biopic about J. Robert Oppenheimer, the man who spearheaded the development of the atomic bomb, asks the audience to stare the destroyer of worlds right in the face, and Nolan thinks the best way to do that is in 70mm IMAX film — or as some die-hards call it, “true IMAX.”

The director calls IMAX film “ the Gold Standard of motion picture photography ” and suggests that it’s the best way to see his movies. The IMAX website promotes 30 screens across the world that are showing the explosive film in IMAX 70mm for a limited time. (For contrast, there are roughly 39,000 screens in America .) But 15 years after Nolan’s The Dark Knight introduced Hollywood to the format , which was previously used primarily for science, education, and showcase movies, it seems as though it’s getting harder and harder to parse what “true IMAX” really means.

There are three aspects to the label. IMAX is a mode of presentation: the specific proprietary projection and sound systems that the IMAX company uses to display a film. As Nolan states, it’s also a mode of motion picture photography — specific types of cameras and film stock typically used to capture spectacular imagery. And finally, IMAX is a brand — a corporation that has changed its self-definition over time, whether through the digital medium’s takeover of cinema or as IMAX has expanded across the world, engaging in the grand capitalist tradition of offering an increasingly diluted product in exchange for an increasing amount of money.

So as the Nolan nihilists settle into their late-night dungeons, or as the egalitarians embark on their Barbenheimer double-bill weekend extravaganzas — at one of those 30 IMAX screens or at any number of other IMAX screens across the world — what are they getting themselves into?

What is true IMAX?

Let’s get it out of the way: Fans can experience Oppenheimer in “true IMAX” on those listed 30 screens and nowhere else. “True IMAX” doesn’t have an official definition, but it’s commonly understood to mean a movie that was shot on IMAX film and is being projected on IMAX film, in a theater that’s a stadiumlike venue with a giant, squarish screen with an aspect ratio of 1.43:1. Oppenheimer checks all of those boxes — but only on those 30 screens.

IMAX film, which runs horizontally through the projector instead of unspooling vertically like other types of celluloid, is gigantic — roughly nine times the size of 35mm film . One approximation says IMAX film displays something between 12K and 18K resolution .

But that only holds for movies using an IMAX film projector on a traditional IMAX screen. Those screens are massive, with many coming in around five to seven stories tall . The IMAX theater in Melbourne, Australia, currently has the largest traditional IMAX screen in the world , measuring 32 meters wide by 23 meters tall. (A theater in Leonberg, Germany, features the world’s largest permanent IMAX screen , but it doesn’t have the typical 1.43:1 proportions.) Melbourne’s IMAX screen has a surface area of roughly 7,922 square feet. If the average movie screen is around 50 feet by 20 feet, its 1,000-square-foot surface area would mean Melbourne’s IMAX screen is nearly eight times larger. And the IMAX film footage fills the entirety of such screens, transfixing first-time viewers in ways they never even imagined.

Christopher Nolan has used IMAX in every film he’s made since The Dark Knight except for Inception . The opening IMAX shot of The Dark Knight was the first time many people across the world saw a real IMAX frame, and it elicited gasps — and earned applause at the 10-year anniversary screening at AMC Universal CityWalk. Nolan calls it “ 3D without the glasses .”

When is a movie not true IMAX?

An exterior view of the TCL Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, with a banner announcing the new Christopher Nolan film Oppenheimer in IMAX 70mm

If a presentation doesn’t meet the above standards — shot at least in part with IMAX film cameras and presented in IMAX film on a 1.43:1 screen — it isn’t “true IMAX,” at least colloquially speaking.

If the movie is projected digitally? Not true IMAX. If it was shot entirely with digital cameras? Not true IMAX. It isn’t possible, or at least not ideal, to project IMAX 70mm’s 1.43:1 aspect ratio on a screen that isn’t suited for it. (For instance, the IMAX screen at Hollywood’s TCL Chinese Theatre, which is listed as an IMAX 70mm venue, measures 94 feet by 46 feet — so the theater needs to mask the sides of the screen, reducing the overall square footage, to achieve the format’s full aspect ratio.)

This is where things get tricky. Very often, a film being presented as an IMAX release fulfills none of these requirements. Take Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny — it was shot digitally and projected digitally , and it has a 2.39:1 aspect ratio. Other films meet none of the base requirements, but at least offer a larger aspect ratio in IMAX; Avengers: Endgame was shot on the Arri Alexa 65 digital camera , which allowed it to open up to 1.9:1 for the entirety of its IMAX run time. (1.9:1 is 26% more image than standard, while 1.43:1 is 40% more image.)

A number of films fulfill one of the requirements, but not the others. In 2016, Disney released IMAX 70mm prints of Rogue One: A Star Wars Story . The film was presented in traditional IMAX venues, like AMC Universal CityWalk. But it wasn’t true IMAX, because the movie was shot digitally . With film projection becoming a greater and greater rarity, it’s hard to imagine an IMAX 70mm conversion of a digitally shot movie happening again.

In 2018, Damien Chazelle’s First Man drew interest in the IMAX fan community because cinematographer Linus Sandgren used IMAX film cameras for the lunar sequences. Many expected an IMAX 70mm release, especially since director Damien Chazelle was inspired by Nolan and had already shot La La Land on 35mm film . But First Man never got an IMAX 70mm release. The same thing happened in 2021 with Daniel Craig’s final James Bond installment, No Time to Die , also shot by Sandgren, and in 2022 with Jordan Peele’s Nope , shot by Nolan’s usual director of photography, Hoyte van Hoytema. Even though both movies were shot partly with IMAX film cameras, neither of them could be experienced in true IMAX.

There are a couple of rare instances where some parts of the formula are missing, but the viewing experience might still be considered true IMAX. J.J. Abrams shot parts of 2013’s Star Trek Into Darkness on IMAX film. The movie was released in IMAX film on traditional IMAX screens , but was converted into 3D and had a 1.66:1 aspect ratio. 2017’s Star Wars: The Last Jedi , which used IMAX film cameras , received an IMAX 70mm release on traditional IMAX screens, but was framed in the 2.39:1 aspect ratio. The deciding factor on whether these were true IMAX releases comes down to the aspect ratio.

What’s the difference between true IMAX and filmed for IMAX?

James P. Bagian, STS-29 mission specialist, stands behind an IMAX camera while preparing for a flight on the Space Shuttle Discovery in 1988

Mere weeks after No Time to Die , Denis Villeneuve’s Dune roared into IMAX screens around the world. Many viewers who traveled to traditional IMAX venues for the film saw it in grand 1.43:1 aspect ratio. Surely this is what everyone means when they talk about true IMAX, right? Even IMAX’s website says that the movie was “ filmed for IMAX .”

Except Dune was shot and projected digitally . The “filmed for IMAX” label is a new wrinkle : a program the company introduced in 2020 that certifies high-resolution digital cameras that weren’t made by IMAX, and that allow digitally shot films to be captured and presented in aspect ratios of 1.43:1 or 1.9:1.

Alongside Dune , Top Gun: Maverick was one of the first releases via this program, shot with the IMAX-certified Sony Venice and expanding to a 1.9:1 aspect ratio for some scenes in IMAX. And in spite of reports that Dune: Part Two was shot entirely in IMAX, the trailer ends with that same tag: “ filmed for IMAX .” The reports likely indicate the movie will be presented entirely in 1.43:1, not that it was shot with the IMAX film cameras Christopher Nolan uses.

On top of the 30 screens that IMAX lists for Oppenheimer , there are many other traditional IMAX screens across the world. The only reason that they aren’t all presenting the film in true IMAX is because a whole swath of them got rid of their IMAX film projectors in favor of a digital version called IMAX with Laser .

Just over 10 years ago, IMAX 70mm prints of Nolan’s The Dark Knight Rises hit at least 83 screens in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Some of those venues — like Chicago’s Navy Pier theater — have since closed down. Many of them still present films in 1.43:1, but with digital projection, capped out at 4K. And this may present dilemmas for certain folks.

Audiences in Georgia can see Oppenheimer in IMAX 70mm at the Regal Mall of Georgia theater in Buford. But about four hours away in Pooler, they can catch the film in IMAX with Laser on the “world’s tallest IMAX screen,” coming in at 76 feet, 2 inches tall, with a width of 101 feet. (Its square footage comes in just under the size of Melbourne’s IMAX screen.) If you choose to go to Pooler, you still get the 1.43:1 aspect ratio, and you get more screen. But you sacrifice on image quality and the other intangibles of film projection. It’s a hell of a Sophie’s choice.

What is the future of true IMAX?

A masked woman rides an escalator up in an AMC theater, with a giant IMAX sign and a series of backlit movie posters behind her, and reflected in a mirrored wall next to her

Hollywood had to choose between Oppenheimer and Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One for summer IMAX dominance. The seventh Mission: Impossible film ( which has a 2.39:1 aspect ratio and was shot with the Sony Venice ) left IMAX screens after only a week. Tom Cruise reportedly called around to ask for more premium large format (PLF) screens for the film, pointing to Top Gun: Maverick ’s cinema-saving box office performance, particularly on PLF screens. But Nolan is the IMAX king around town. His name is nearly synonymous with the phrase “true IMAX,” and Oppenheimer is scheduled to hold a firm grip on IMAX screens for a rare extended run .

That may be important. Like film in general, IMAX 70mm is facing a greater and greater threat of extinction. As long as Nolan keeps championing the format, IMAX film will likely continue to exist. In fact, IMAX is developing four new film cameras to be available starting at the end of 2023. But as seen with First Man , No Time to Die , and Nope , it’s now an incredible hurdle to secure IMAX 70mm presentation even for movies that were shot with IMAX film cameras.

Oppenheimer ’s box-office success (including many sold-out IMAX showings) might help convince a now-PLF-inclined moviegoing audience that true IMAX is worth their time, studios might see the economics in it. Not only that, but Oppenheimer is the first film to ever shoot with black-and-white IMAX film — a type of celluloid literally invented for this movie at the request of Nolan and his cinematographer. There’s a historical importance to Oppenheime r’s IMAX film presentation that Dead Reckoning Part One just can’t compete with. (Sorry, Tom Cruise.)

Why does it matter whether a movie is true IMAX?

A blank screen in an empty IMAX theater, distorted into an angular shape by being shot at a sharp angle

With everything said, it simply has to be acknowledged that true IMAX is outrageously exclusive. Thirty out of 39,000 movie theater screens is virtually nothing. It’s hard to say that IMAX film itself is elitist, but the Hollywood powers that be, the ones that have made it so rare, have turned the true IMAX label into a form of social currency, something film buffs can weaponize against people who saw a movie any other way. Not everyone can afford to drive hours to one of those 30 screens, let alone afford the $20-plus price of a ticket. That simply isn’t fair.

Some viewers won’t even notice when an IMAX film shifts between aspect ratios, with the movie taking up varying portions of the screen. Others notice it too acutely, to the point where they find it annoying. To those who appreciate it, the picture quality of true IMAX is unparalleled. There’s something operatic about seeing 50-foot-tall faces, which feeds into the grandeur of narratives like The Dark Knight and Oppenheimer . That might be the one intangible advantage of true IMAX — the way the giant screen and razor-sharp detail enhance a film’s themes. But that’s also frequently accounted for in other versions of a film — such as Dune , where the filmmakers did not crop the frames of 29 IMAX shots, but rather expanded their sides to get a 2.39:1 aspect ratio for standard versions.

True IMAX is an event worth some hype, but it certainly shouldn’t be weaponized to the detriment or degradation of other experiences. Dune showed that a “filmed for IMAX” digital presentation can feel groundbreaking and transportive, and can even reach 1.43:1 heights. And some experts have suggested that viewers can’t even perceive 18K .

Even without a 1.43:1 aspect ratio, big movies can be outstanding and immersive in IMAX. Tom Cruise’s latest run of Top Gun: Maverick and Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One proves it. But some unexpected films also benefit from IMAX. Films like Bradley Cooper’s A Star Is Born and the Oscar-winning documentary Free Solo — seemingly fit for better sound and bigger image, respectively — received a limited IMAX release.

And during the 2018 festival circuit, Barry Jenkins, director of 2016 Best Picture Oscar winner Moonlight , screened his follow-up, If Beale Street Could Talk , on an IMAX screen a couple of times and was ecstatic about the results. Martin Scorsese’s epic drama Killers of the Flower Moon is set for an IMAX release as well .

IMAX also offers a great way to see old classics in grand fashion. In 2022, Jaws and E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial were screened in IMAX, the latter for its 40th anniversary. And in 2018, 2001: A Space Odyssey received a limited IMAX release , including in IMAX 70mm.

Are any movies entirely in true IMAX?

Banners for The Dark Knight on display at the exterior of the IMAX theater in Chicago

In 1970, a few years after the company was formed, the first IMAX film was released: Tiger Child , a short documentary described as “ a travelogue of the human spirit .” For decades, this is the kind of film that made it to IMAX, often on gigantic IMAX screens in science centers, museums, and similar institutions. Many were fully shot and presented in true IMAX during their time.

As far as Hollywood movies go, however, none of them have been shot entirely on IMAX film. (Only a handful of films outside of Nolan’s, like Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice , have used the cameras at all.) The Dark Knight features about 28 minutes of IMAX film footage out of its 152-minute run time. The Dark Knight Rises has 72 minutes; The Hunger Games: Catching Fire , roughly 50 minutes. Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol has about 30 minutes; Dunkirk , nearly 80 minutes.

The remaining minutes of those movies feature other types of footage, whether that be various film stocks (such as 35mm) or digital video, which is converted to IMAX film for an IMAX 70mm presentation. The true IMAX sequences are interspersed within, but the other footage usually doesn’t have the native capture quality or 1.43:1 size of IMAX 70mm.

How do you tell if a movie is true IMAX?

Christopher Nolan stands in front of a dark screen projecting the title of his movie Interstellar at the film’s premiere at the IMAX theater in Hollywood

The technical specifications section of a film’s IMDb page is one of the easiest ways to check its true IMAX status. IMDb isn’t always right, but in that section, you can usually find a number of details that will lead you in the right direction. The aspect ratio, clearly, needs to be 1.43:1 for some scenes. Under “camera,” you’re looking for the IMAX MSM , the IMAX MKIV , or the IMAX MKIII . But the key point is the “printed film format,” where it needs to say “70mm (horizontal)” or “70mm (also horizontal)” — indicating an IMAX 70mm release. If a movie checks all of those boxes, you’ve got true IMAX.

When a film has an IMAX 70mm release, it’ll also usually receive an official IMAX website promotion detailing the theaters that will screen the film in the format. However, taking Rogue One into account, you’ll also want to make sure that you see “shot with IMAX film cameras” somewhere in the article, on posters, or in trailers.

Not everyone has the time to pore over the details, and all these promotional slogans sound extremely similar. In fact, IMAX confusion is a tried-and-true profession by now, with the conversations and debates dating back more than a decade. The company seems intent on muddying its own specialties to the point where IMAX doesn’t really mean anything consistent from one screening to the next — especially in the era of “LieMAX,” where some venues are calling their presentations IMAX showings even if they’re screening stretched-out 2K films on significantly smaller screens .

Maybe confusion is the point. The company has obviously never stated why it takes this approach. It seems plausible, though, that building true IMAX screens en masse across the entire globe would be incredibly expensive, especially if each one was a traditional 1.43:1 screen. So why strictly define the origins when the mass product will be something else? Retain the ability to sell “true IMAX” to those who care, and then cater to the rest.

At this point, all viewers can do is go see Oppenheimer in “true IMAX” if they can and want to. If they can’t, going to the movies at all to support things like the medium of film ( Oppenheimer is being projected in 70mm and 35mm at select locations) — to support real actors, to support real writers, and to support theater workers — seems just as important right now.

Loading comments...

What is Digital Cinema?

Jul 09, 2014

370 likes | 1.72k Views

What is Digital Cinema?. By Lee Manovich Presented by Tyler Chatz. Cinema, the Art of the Index. Digital Media: Something that lets cinema tell its stories in a new way Has redefined identity of cinema Movies = “flatties” Human actors = “organics” and “soft fuzzies” Digital Cinema:

Share Presentation

cinematic forms
computer animation
automatic generation
phantasmagoria
digitized film frames

Presentation Transcript

What is Digital Cinema? By Lee Manovich Presented by Tyler Chatz

Cinema, the Art of the Index • Digital Media: • Something that lets cinema tell its stories in a new way • Has redefined identity of cinema • Movies = “flatties” • Human actors = “organics” and “soft fuzzies” • Digital Cinema: • Represents a return to 19th Century cinematic practices • Images were hand painted and hand animated • New digital cinema uses these practices

History of Moving Pictures • Cinema = art of motion • 19th century pro-cinematic devices: • Thaumatrope • Zootrope • Praxinoscope • Choreutoscope • Robertson’s Phantasmagoria • Magic lantern operators moved behind the screen in order to make projected images appear to advance and withdraw

History of Moving Pictures (cont.) • How cinema was born: • In the last decade of the 19th century, automatic generation of images and their automatic projection were combined • Photography met the motor • Pro Cinematic Devices became more popular • Devices that were based on loops (Kinetoscope) • Loops: Sequences of images featuring complete actions which can be played repeatedly • Edison’s Kinetoscope: • 1st modern cinematic machine to employ film • 50 feet of film = 20 second long presentation

Animation to Cinema • Animation = Cinema’s bastard relative • Animation and cinema had complete opposite styles • 20th Century animation was a holdover from 19th century moving images techniques left behind by cinema • Animation: Openly admits its images are mere representations, can see development • Cinema: Works hard to erase any traces of its own production process, wants you to believe what you see is actually happening

What is Digital Cinema • Principles of Digital Filmmaking • With the help of the computer, it is now possible to generate film scenes without acting filming • Once digitized, live action footage is reduced to be just another graphic • Live action footage, left intact for traditional filmmaking, is now more prone to be edited, animated and morphed • Example: Forrest Gump https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ2SWXwoYwQ • (Start at :50) • Combination of editing and special effects

What is Digital Cinema (cont.) • With the help of the 4 principles… • Live action material + painting + image processing + compositing + 2-D computer Animation + 3-D computer animation = DIGITAL FILM • Now lets us answer… • What is Digital Cinema? • A particular case of animation which uses live action footage as one of its many elements

Re-arranging Reality to Re-arranging its Images • Shot footage is not the final point of production • The production (shot footage), now, becomes the first stage of post-production • Analog Example: Zabriskie Point • Trying to achieve a saturated color, the director ordered a field of grass to be painted • Digital Example: Apollo 13 • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgHYGw9OL7c • (Start at 1:55)

Digital Cinema’s Return to the 19th Century • New status of cinema = Hand painted digitized film frames made possible by a computer • 19th Century Status of Cinema = Hand crafted images of magic lantern slides (The Phenakistiscope, the Zootrope) • Today, the most visually sophisticated digital effects are made the same way as the 19th Century • Altering by hand, thousands of frames • Frames are painted over to either create mattes or… • To directly change the images • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSEdBNslGOk

Multimedia as “Primitive” Digital Cinema • Beginning in the 1980’s new cinematic forms have emerged as non-linear narratives, which are shown on the television or a computer screen, not in a movie theater • The Music Video • Non linear narratives from start to finish, rely on film or video images • CD-ROM Games • Rely on the computer for storage and distribution from the very beginning

Multimedia as “Primitive” Digital Cinema (cont.) • CD-ROM Games and Apple QuickTime • Late 1980’s Apple released QuickTime Software to enable computers to play movies • Next few years software did not perform successfully • CD-ROMs could not hold the length of a standard theatrical film • Computer could not smoothly play the movie • Movies had to be compressed, affecting the visual appearance

A New Cinematic Language • Because of the limitations of the QuickTime software, the designers of CD-ROMs had to invent a new kind of cinematic language • Language was a range of strategies such as discrete motion, loops, and superimposition, all used previously in the 19th Century • When cinema and animation divided, the photographic and the graphic met again on the computer screen • Ultimately, the techniques of modern cinema and 19th Century moving images have merged into this new language

A New Cinematic Language (cont.) • Development of the new cinematic language is evident in well known CD-ROM games • Myst • Relies on the techniques of 20th Century Cinema • Uses film editing to speed up or slow down time, simulated camera turns • 7th Guest • Uses similar camera techniques • Johnny Mnemonic • Made to complement the film • Not marketed as a game but as a “interactive movie” • All action shot against a green screen • Connection between QuickTime/CD-ROMs and 19th century • Invention of QuickTime is often compared to the invention of the Kinetoscope • Lumieres’ First film (1895) and CD-ROMs • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nj0vEO4Q6s

The Loop • All 19th century pro-cinematic devices up to Edison’s Kinetoscope were based on short loops • As cinema progressed the loop began to appear less and less • Was used in instructional films, pornographic peep shows and animated cartoons • A Man with a Movie Camera highlights the loop in its origin • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh3y5czjx1U • Start at (19:15) • The Loop in film sense and in telling a story has been reinvigorated with Vine • 19th Century Techniques are being used across all types of media, this time with digitalization being added.

More by User

What is Digital Art?

What is Digital Art?. Warren Sack Associate Professor, Film & Digital Media Department affiliated faculty, Computer Science Department affiliated faculty, History of Art & Visual Cultural Department faculty, Digital Art & New Media Graduate Program University of California, Santa Cruz.

966 views • 37 slides

What Is Digital Radiography?

278 views • 9 slides

Digital Cinema Destinations Corporation

Digital Cinema Destinations Corporation. Transforming Movie Theaters into Digital Entertainment Centers. NasdaqCM : DCIN www.digiplexdest.com. About Digital Cinema Destinations Corporation.

137 views • 1 slides

DIGITAL CINEMA January 2006

A Presentation to UNIC. DIGITAL CINEMA January 2006. Introduction. Technicolor Digital Cinema (TDC) Digital Rollout Overview Common Exhibitor Questions - Answered Screen Advertising’s Role Summary. Technicolor Digital Cinema. Technicolor Digital Cinema.

343 views • 9 slides

Digital Cinema

Digital Cinema. [digital_cinema.pdf]. Digital Cinema. In March 2002, seven studios—Disney, Fox, MGM, Paramount, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Universal, and Warner Brothers Studios—established Digital Cinema Initiatives , in Los Angeles, to create a specification for digital

389 views • 7 slides

What is Digital Applications?

What is Digital Applications?. By Steve Fleishman. Your Digital Future. You live in a digital world. Your Digital Future. You can find whatever you want to find. Your Digital Future. You can create whatever you can imagine. Your Digital Future. You can be whatever you want to be.

577 views • 24 slides

What is Digital Citizenship?

Digital Citizenship- Using Technology Appropriately Presented By: Natara James ED 505-Technology in Education. What is Digital Citizenship?. Definition of Digital Citizenship. 9 areas of behavior involving Digital Citizenship. Etiquette Communication Education Access Commerce

403 views • 10 slides

What is Digital Storytelling?

What is Digital Storytelling?.

141 views • 4 slides

Digital Cinema Packaging Primer

Digital Cinema Packaging Primer. Kevin Wines Secretary, DC28.0. About DC28. SMPTE Committee Organized to Create Standards for Digital Cinema Chair – Wendy Aylsworth DC28.10 Mastering ; Image, Audio, Sub picture, Compression Chair – Jerry Pierce

826 views • 63 slides

Digital Cinema. From Motion JPEG to Film projection A presentation by: Maxime Cassan Florent Rioult Neil Sinclair December 2008. Introduction. Very recent technology Bits and bytes Use of digital technology for:. Production. Distribution. Projection.

390 views • 19 slides

Digital Cinema Standards

THOMSON Broadcast & Media Solutions. Digital Cinema Standards. Dave Bancroft Thomson Broadcast & Media Solutions IBC 2003. Digital Cinema Standards. Questions deserving answers What is “digital cinema”? Why are standards needed? Who are the players in the game and what are they up to?.

709 views • 37 slides

What is Digital Curation ?

Engaging. Monitoring. Finding. Selecting. Sharing. Creating. Arranging. What is Digital Curation ?. Editing. Why you should be doing content curation. Dealing with an overwhelming abundance of digital content increasing diversity of content and types of media

434 views • 17 slides

What is Digital Commonwealth ?

What is Digital Commonwealth ?. A web portal allowing researchers a single entry into the rich world of Massachusetts’ digital collections. What does DigiCom do?. Promotes creation of digital library resources by Massachusetts institutions.

359 views • 22 slides

What is Digital Media…

What is Digital Media…. Good question. Lets ask some fellow students what they think Digital Media is all about…. Identifying News Value. With: Mr. Robison. Where do we get our news?. The DM Register CNN Fox News USA Today NBC ABC KCCI. JCSD Parents Friends Teachers TV?

305 views • 20 slides

What is digital diversity???

What is digital diversity???. It has taken an entire semester to uncover the definition… lets see what it has come to…. Digital diversity refers to the various forms of technology that is used. .. And how they are used.

400 views • 21 slides

What is Digital Signature

What is Digital Signature.

653 views • 25 slides

Digital Cinema Revolution

Digital Cinema Revolution. Presented by Ken Dozier USC Viterbi School of Engineering Western Research Application Center July 27 th , 2006. Digital Cinema Resolutions. “HD Video ”. Old vs. New. “Roadwarrior” connected to Internet and to a projector is a cinema

392 views • 17 slides

What is Digital Marketing

Digital Marketing Tools, Strategy, SEO Submission List, Seo Updated Site Lists, SMO Site List, Web 2.0 Sites, SEM Strategy

134 views • 9 slides

What is Digital Marketing?

Our digital marketing services are designed and tailored to send targeted and high traffic to your website to grow your business and generate leads.

62 views • 1 slides

The basic of digital marketing is explained in a beautiful way. There are different digital marketing strategies and techniques. Some of them are SEO, social media marketing and content marketing. Know more at http://virtualtrigger.com.

213 views • 13 slides

What is digital marketing.

Digital Marketing is a technological makeover of marketing to reach internet savvy generation, and It's changed the way business or Organisations promote & build their brands by helping business to reach internet savvy audience through the various digital channels such as Search, Social, Display, Video, etc.

42 views • 1 slides

What is Digital marketing ?

Learn more about Digital marketing PPC, SMM, SEO etc.

109 views • 9 slides

Newsletters

Filed under:

Film vs. digital: the most contentious debate in the film world, explained

Why knowing how a movie was shot is so important before you go to the theater.

Share this story

Share this on Facebook
Share this on Twitter
Share this on Reddit
Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: Film vs. digital: the most contentious debate in the film world, explained

Jennifer Jason Leigh stars in The Hateful Eight, which has become the current center of a long-running debate over the virtues of shooting on film versus shooting on digital.

"I don’t know, it looks weird. It’s the picture on the TV; it just looks … too real."

Picture a TV that appears to be displaying a cheap, unnatural-looking image, even though it's just come out of the box. We, or someone we know, have said something similar to the above when faced with just this situation. You may not be able to place a name on what’s happening, but you still instantly recognize the distracting, crisp falseness of the image. You know that’s not how TV’s supposed to look.

But there's an easy explanation for this. It's a result of what’s called "motion smoothing," also often called the "soap opera effect," a process that artificially increases the frame rate of a program by interpolating images between the 24 frames that televisions usually run every second. To many of you, that will sound like gibberish, but don’t worry. That feature is easily turned off — and we're here to explain what all of the above means.

The disconnect between the unfamiliarity most people have with the process that produces this image and the instant familiarity these same folks have with its effects — that weird-looking image — is both paradoxical and entirely typical of matters concerning motion picture format.

And this is a discussion that's only heating up. Quentin Tarantino's The Hateful Eight is filmed in a mostly extinct format , and much of the film's press has been centered on that fact. And Canadian director Xavier Dolan has gone after Netflix UK for displaying his movie in the wrong format.

@NetflixUK @metrodomegroup @eOnefilms @LesFilmsSeville pic.twitter.com/U7MvgUtlcf — Xavier Dolan (@XDolan) January 4, 2016

We have the innate ability to recognize differences in image, but few of us ever learn what causes those variations. You know this stuff — you just don't know you know it. The general public might not be able to define what 35mm film or the Academy ratio is, but they instantly recognize both from years of movie watching.

So let's start simple.

What is film? What is digital?

"If I can't shoot on film I'll stop making movies," Tarantino said on Los Angeles radio station KCRW's show The Treatment . He added, "If we're acquiescing to digital projection, we've already ceded too much ground to the barbarians. The fight is lost if all we have is digital, DCP presentations. To me, that's just television in public."

Just what is Tarantino talking about here? When someone pushes his glasses high up on his nose, raises a finger, and creaks, "Actually, film is…" chances are he’s about to explain the difference between analog and digital filmmaking.

Once upon a time, all movies were shot using machines that would take 24 photographs or "frames" every second and instantaneously leave a negative of those images on a filmstrip. It would then be treated with chemicals and displayed for showings by running the reels containing these strips of pictures through a projector. (Some cameras can also take more than 24 frames per second — see motion smoothing, above — but this generally produces an image that looks too real to our used-to-24-fps eyes.)

If that sounds like a long, laborious process with tons of room for mechanical and human error, that’s because it is. The advent of videotape and the handheld video camera made physical media somewhat easier to work with, but all it takes is one afternoon spent carefully respooling the magnetic tape on a VHS cassette (or one VCR chewing up a bunch of that tape) to realize how easily ruined it all is.

Instead of these potentially error-ridden physical procedures, many cameras now save these images as data to a digital bank, which can then be accessed like any other file. Digital video doesn’t really exist in the same way that MP3s don’t exist. As such, transportation, preservation, and even tinkering with the look of the finished product are now simpler than ever before. Recent technological advances have streamlined this process beyond what the filmmakers of bygone eras could have even imagined.

So digital is the solution, right? Not so fast. Though digital photography may be more practical, film has aesthetic merits that aren’t as easily pinpointed. Those with the spider senses to discern such things have a habit of claiming film "just looks better," much in the same way audiophiles can tell that vinyl "just sounds better," but these both circle back to the inherently vague "know it when I see it" phenomenon.

Filmstrips are a living thing — they degrade and expand and contract and mutate and warp over time based on the conditions they’re left in. As such, they have a lived-in look. A filmstrip saved from 1979 and shown again today has clearly seen some shit. Little imperfections such as scratches or so-called "cigarette burns" ( take it away, Ed Norton ) appear on the strip, and quiet crackles and pops develop on the audio track.

But, in many ways, these imperfections are an argument in film's favor . Though good ol’ film stock may represent an inferior experience in terms of pure empirical quality, it has the soft-around-the-edges look that we associate with old movies. Film is transportive; it inspires nostalgia, especially among film buffs. Compared with that, digital video can look antiseptic and polished. (This is some of what Tarantino means when he calls digital projection "television in public." Television, too, can look antiseptic and polished.)

These technical distinctions dictate the daily push and pull of the film industry, but for the garden-variety viewer, digital and analog are no more than two visual modes for a film to work in, each with its own individual vibe. Neither is better than the other, only more well-suited to the story the filmmaker has chosen to tell.

Director Danny Boyle , for instance, used various film formats to subtly communicate the passage of time in his recent film Steve Jobs , which takes place at three product launches in three different years. Boyle shot the scenes at Jobs’s first launch in 1984 on 16mm film, captured the scenes around the 1988 launch on 35mm film, and switched to digital to evince a polished modernity for the third product launch in 1998. And if you know to look for it, the switch in formats in each time period is easy to spot.

Wait, why are there suddenly different types of film?

Manufacturers produce filmstrips in four different sizes — called gauges — each with its own properties and applications.

The measure of a gauge refers to the width of a filmstrip, with wider stock providing sharper definition and more detail in the projected image. Most major releases shot on film — including the current number one film in the world, Star Wars: The Force Awakens — are printed on 35mm stock; a lot of movie theaters use digital projectors but might bust out a 35mm rig for special occasions, often meant to court cinephiles.

The next rung down is 16mm, a cost-effective alternative intended for low-budget student productions or amateur use. There was a time when use of 16mm was in common in the realm of TV. For instance, observe the world of difference between the look of Buffy the Vampire Slayer 's first two seasons (shot on 16mm) and those that followed it (shot on 35mm, once the series' budget grew).

The lowest gauge of film stock is 8mm, which was cheap enough to produce that it was mainly reserved for home movies and experimental projects. You might remember the J.J. Abrams film Super 8 , into which low-grade home movies figure prominently — its title comes from the name of a specific brand of 8mm film.

That only leaves 70mm, the largest gauge and a recent subject of minor kerfuffles within the film world. Still an enfant terrible at 52, Tarantino made waves with his announcement that his latest feature The Hateful Eight would play in glorious 70mm at various "roadshow" locations around the country, complete with additional footage exclusive to the 70mm version.

Tarantino fashioned his newest effort as a capital-E Event in the tradition of the spectacle films of yore; the 70mm format and its dazzlingly rich colors, lush sound, and ravishingly detailed image were originally used to lift epics such as Ben-Hur and Lawrence of Arabia to godly proportions.

Seeing a film on 70mm is a transcendent experience for the senses, but the expenses and scarcity of equipment required for projection have been prohibitive for most theaters that would like to give it a whirl. Tarantino’s Hateful Eight roadshow is a massive undertaking, notable not only for the scope of its architect’s ambition but for what this could signify if the distributors, the Weinstein Company, have what it takes to pull off such a massive undertaking.

It’ll be a considerable feat if America’s projectors can screen the prints without a hitch, but if it works, it could open the floodgates for more major releases to dabble in the breathtaking visual 70 mm aesthetic. For the most part, America's projectionists seem to be handling this well — though there have been problems .

Film comes in different "shapes," as well

The other dimension of what a movie looks like by the time it springs onto the silver screen is its aspect ratio , the measurement expressing the height and width of a film image. Some films are projected as rectangles, some are projected as longer rectangles, and some are projected as squares. But all of this can be manipulated digitally with modern technology.

Most real-deal movies screen in a width-to-height ratio of either 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 in theater, which amounts to a large rectangle. But every month seems to produce new exceptions to the rule. The 2014 French-Canadian drama Mommy (the movie Netflix UK was displaying improperly above) stood out from the pack due to its unorthodox 1:1 ratio that mimicked an Instagram photo until one exhilarating sequence expanded to wider proportions. Wes Anderson’s The Grand Budapest Hotel leaped across multiple timelines and nimbly switched between 2.35, 1.85, and 1.37:1 (the so-called "Academy ratio," which was in popular use during the earlier days of Hollywood up until 1952).

Another way to understand this is in the difference between old, box-like standard-definition televisions, which had an aspect ratio of 4:3, and modern, high-definition TVs, which have an aspect ratio of 16:9. Standard definition was closer to a square than our current widescreens.

In a perfect world, projectionists would be able to field diverse proportions of film, but Anderson knew he’d have to send out specific instructions for those running Grand Budapest Hotel , because there is no shortage of opportunities to foul it up.

That, however, is not nearly as hazardous as home exhibition can be, where TV sets are liable to cut off, distend, or otherwise spoil the image. Usually a Blu-ray or DVD case will dictate the proper television settings for viewing the complete image, but the instinct to make use of the full TV screen can still result in an omission of important visual information.

Why do I need to know all of this, anyway?

Having this information not only creates the satisfaction of assigning a name to recognizable parts of the film experience, but it also equips you to maximize the quality of the same. Knowing how to identify the aspect ratio of a screening of West Side Story on 70mm won’t make the horns blare more brassily or the outfits pop with brighter color, but it could make the difference between fully viewing a movie's picture and getting a fraction of the whole in the comfort of your own home.

Today, when American cinema’s most popular auteur is singlehandedly pioneering a revival of old-fashioned film technology, remarking on specifics of film image is no longer solely a die-hard film geek thing. The right to a moving picture, in its most apropos and complete form, is one of those unalienable rights of moviegoers, like the right to whip unpopped popcorn kernels at the heads of people using cellphones.

Thus, a ticket purchased is a vote cast, a tacit sign of support behind a specific film, a specific theater, and specific mode of exhibition. The least moviegoers can do before casting that vote of crucial importance is arm themselves with knowledge.

Will you support Vox today?

We believe that everyone deserves to understand the world that they live in. That kind of knowledge helps create better citizens, neighbors, friends, parents, and stewards of this planet. Producing deeply researched, explanatory journalism takes resources. You can support this mission by making a financial gift to Vox today. Will you join us?

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Next Up In Culture

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

Thanks for signing up!

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

A mass of people wearing red and holding signs and Canadian flags flood a city street.

Can Canada stave off populism?

The hand of a young supportive man consoling someone with post-traumatic syndrome caused by a dramatic life event.

Compassion is making a comeback in America

Ukraine aid and a potential TikTok ban: What’s in the House’s new $95 billion bill

The Supreme Court doesn’t seem eager to get involved with homelessness policy

Drake vs. everyone, explained

An illustration of a neighborhood of row houses bordered by a grass, flowering bushes, and a sandy path. Community members enjoy the surroundings, walking on the path, reading on a bench, watering plants, and using binoculars to look at the trees. One person pushes another person in a wheelchair.

On Earth Day, Vox Releases Home Planet, A Project Highlighting the Personal Dimensions of Climate Change in our Daily Lives

What Does AMC Digital Mean? Clearing the Confusion

Over the last decade plus, digital cinema has made traditional 35 mm film nearly obsolete. Rather than a reel of film, movies are now stored on a hard drive that can be played digitally.

However, the digital age has also brought with it some confusing terminology. Instead of a movie being either 35mm or 70mm, a trip to AMC theaters now forces you to decide between Dolby Cinema, IMAX, PRIME, RealD 3D, BigD, and a host of other screen and theater types .

Further complicating the matter is that AMC also sells tickets that are labeled simply “DIGITAL” for the screen type. This has led many users to ask what AMC Digital means, and how it differs from the other options.

Continue reading and we will clear your confusion. As moviegoing continues to get more expensive, you want to be sure that you are getting a good value for your hard earned dollar.

Quick Answer: What Does AMC Digital Mean? What Does Digital Mean in Movies?

The easiest way to explain the meaning of AMC Digital is that it refers to a standard AMC screen without advanced features like IMAX, Dolby Cinema , etc.

Because 35mm film is nearly extinct, it seems redundant for AMC to refer to their theaters as “DIGITAL,” but I suppose it sounds better than saying “basic” or “original.”

Further Detail

Digital cinema has made 35mm (and 70mm) “traditional” film almost obsolete. So, if you walk into an AMC, Regal, Cinemark, or any other modern theater, you can expect that the movie will be played in the digital cinema (rather than film reel) format.

Digital cinema basically means that the movie is stored on a hard drive rather than a 35 mm film reel. This format provides many benefits.

First, a digital film is much easier and cheaper to ship, compared to a bulky and heavy film reel.

Next, the digital format means that a movie can be played nearly an infinite amount of times without wearing out or degrading. With traditional film, degradation of the film over time is inevitable.

Additionally, digital cinema won’t have the audible projector sounds that an old school projector would. For those of us that are nostalgic about Americana of years past, this is a downside. But objectively, eliminating this background noise is a beneficial thing.

Do movie theaters still have 35mm film?

There are still a handful of theaters that use 35mm film projectors. This has become a niche experience for purists, and can be found at arthouse style cinemas.

But largely, 35mm film has become obsolete.

However, there are a few exceptions to this rule.

In recent years, a couple of the world’s finest directors have chosen old-school film rather than modern, digital technologies.

Christopher Nolan produced Interstellar in 2014 using 35mm film in addition to 70mm IMAX photography. The film was a masterpiece of cinematography, and it approached $700 million at the box office. Nolan also used 70mm IMAX for his 2017 film Dunkirk.

In 2015, Quentin Tarantino released The Hateful Eight on 70mm film. After a limited 70mm release (not many theaters still have this technology, remember!), the movie played worldwide in digital formats. Tarantino has been an outspoken opponent of the digitization of movies, even famously calling digital projection “the death of cinema.”

Why don’t more directors still make movies using 35mm or 70mm film? Well, there are just so many logistical problems. With digital cinema, lighting deficiencies can be corrected digitally, rather than old-school film which demands that set lighting is perfect. It is just quicker, easier, and more efficient to do things digitally, even if it draws the ire of film industry purists.

And importantly, even if you are able to make a movie in 35mm film, distribution provides a whole new set of challenges. Most theaters don’t have the projectors necessary to play this film. And each film reel is bulky, heavy, and expensive to produce and ship.

With digital film, you can create thousands of copies of a movie for a minimal cost.

What is AMC Digital vs. IMAX?

Again, “AMC Digital” is just a fancy name for AMC’s standard screen. IMAX is an upgraded screen that is more vivid and larger.

However, the IMAX name has morphed into a number of different formats in recent years.

Previously, IMAX referred to a very high quality digital experience and was the gold standard of theaters. Now, theater chains (such as AMC) have cashed in on the IMAX name by marketing smaller, less technically-impressive screens as “IMAX Experience.”

Even though the IMAX name isn’t as meaningful as it once was, it is still a better digital experience than AMC Digital, which is a basic and standard format.

Final Thoughts

No movie theater chain is more confusing than AMC . In addition to PRIME, IMAX, Dolby, RealD, and BigD, AMC markets their basic screen as AMC Digital. In truth, this is just a basic, garden variety movie theater without added bells and whistles.

If AMC had called it a standard screen, there would be no confusion. Instead, they chose to call their basic offering “AMC Digital” as if all movie theaters aren’t now playing digital cinema.

The bottom line here is that AMC Digital is a basic offering, so if you want an upgraded experience you should consider IMAX, Prime, or especially Dolby Cinema .

What Does Digital Movie Theater Mean?

Movie theater | theater.

Digital movie theaters have revolutionized the way people watch films. In the past, viewers had to travel to a physical theater to watch a movie on the big screen. But now, with digital theaters, viewers can watch movies right from their own homes. This means that they don’t have to leave their house or even get dressed up for the occasion.

Digital theaters offer viewers a much higher quality of sound and picture than traditional theaters do. The digital format used by these theaters is capable of displaying images in resolutions far beyond what was possible in the past. This results in sharper and clearer visuals that are more immersive and realistic than ever before. Digital theaters also feature advanced sound systems that provide viewers with an incredibly lifelike audio experience.

Another benefit of digital theaters is that they often come equipped with additional features such as 3D viewing and interactive elements. This allows viewers to have an even more immersive experience with their films. Additionally, many digital theater systems are compatible with various streaming services such as Netflix and Hulu, so viewers can watch their favorite films at any time without having to leave their homes.

Overall, digital movie theaters provide a much more convenient and enjoyable experience for film enthusiasts than traditional ones do. They offer far superior visuals and audio quality, as well as additional features like 3D viewing and streaming options that make watching films even more enjoyable.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, digital movie theaters represent a major advancement in how people watch films today. They provide far better visuals and audio quality than traditional movie theaters do, as well as additional features like 3D viewing and streaming options for an even more immersive experience. As technology continues to evolve, we can expect these digital experiences to become even more commonplace in the future.

9 Related Question Answers Found

What does digital mean at the movie theater, what does digital mean for movie theater, what does digital mean in the movie theater, what does digital mean in a movie theater, what does it mean digital at a movie theater, what does digital mean movie theater, what does digital presentation mean at a movie theater, what is digital at movie theater, what is a digital theater movie, art museum - digital art - art history - pixel art - pop art - modern art - musical theater - greek theater - movie theater - home theater - ballet - ballet shoes.

International edition
Australia edition
Europe edition

At least 115 killed and scores wounded in Moscow concert hall attack

Islamic State claims responsibility after gunmen in combat gear opened fire and reportedly set off explosives at Crocus City Hall

Moscow attack – latest updates
Moscow concert hall attack: what we know so far

At least 115 people have been killed and 145 wounded in Russia’s worst terror attack in years, as gunmen in combat fatigues opened fire and detonated explosives in a major concert hall on the outskirts of Moscow.

Russian media say authorities have detained 11 people.

Three children were among the dead, Ria cited the regional healthcare ministry as saying on Saturday. Authorities had earlier said five children were among the victims and that about 60 people were in serious condition.

Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack late on Friday, in a post on Telegram in which the group claimed its gunmen had managed to escape afterwards. A US official said Washington had intelligence confirming Islamic State’s claim.

Photos showed Crocus City Hall engulfed in flames as videos emerged showing at least four gunmen opening fire with automatic weapons as panicked Russians fled for their lives.

In one clip, three men in fatigues carrying rifles fired at point-blank range into bodies strewn about the lobby of the concert hall.

The assailants also apparently detonated explosives during the attack. At least two blasts took place at the concert hall on Friday evening, news agencies reported.

Video still showing chaotic scenes at the concern hall

Video published online showed horrific scenes of some people begging for help from the roof of the concert hall as it burned behind them. Other video footage showed people screaming, crawling on their hands and knees out of the music venue or fleeing down stairwells.

One witness said he was about to settle into his seat when he heard “several machine gun bursts” and “a lot of screams”.

“I realised right away that it was automatic gunfire and understood that most likely it’s the worst: a terrorist attack,” the man, who gave his name as Alexei, told Agence-France Presse.

Another concertgoer described scenes of panic as terrified people tried to escape. “A stampede began. Everyone ran to the escalator,” he told Reuters. “Everyone was screaming; everyone was running.”

At least three emergency helicopters had been deployed to extinguish the fire. There had been a partial collapse of the roof of the Crocus City Mall, local media reported. Shortly after midnight, the emergencies ministry said the fire had been contained.

A witness told the Mash Telegram channel that there were “at least five” attackers and that they were “bearded”.

“They act like trained fighters,” the account read. “At the moment of entering the building, the guards and people standing at the door were killed. Then they blocked the main entrance.

“The terrorists are armed with [Kalashnikov] assault rifles. Some carried vests with various ammunition. At least two of the attackers are carrying backpacks, possibly with molotov cocktails.”

In his first comments on the shooting, President Vladimir Putin wished all those injured in the terrorist attack a speedy recovery. The Kremlin said he was being updated by security chiefs about the situation, including from Alexander Bortnikov, the head of the Federal Security Service (FSB).

Russian investigators published pictures of a Kalashnikov automatic weapon, vests with multiple spare magazines and bags of spent bullet casings. A grainy picture was published by some Russian media of two of the alleged attackers in a white car. Moscow mayor Sergei Sobyanin said that the Moscow government would cancel all cultural, sporting and other mass events for the weekend after the attack, as Russian railways and other major utilities said they were increasing security.

Sobyanin called the attack a “great tragedy”. At least 70 ambulances had been dispatched to the site.

Earlier this month, western countries led by the US had issued terror warnings and told their citizens not to join public gatherings in Russia.

On 8 March, the embassy wrote it was “monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and US citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours”.

Islamic State said late on Friday its fighters had attacked on the outskirts of Moscow, “killing and wounding hundreds and causing great destruction to the place before they withdrew to their bases safely.” The statement gave no further detail.

The US had intelligence confirming Islamic State’s claim of responsibility for the shooting, a US official said, adding that Washington had warned Moscow in recent weeks of the possibility of an attack.

“We did warn the Russians appropriately,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity, without providing any additional details.

Russian media reports said riot police units were sent to the area as people were being evacuated and Speznaz units of the Russian national guard began storming the building later on Friday evening.

The shootings at the concert hall were reminiscent of some of Europe’s worst terrorist incidents such as the attack on the Bataclan in Paris in November 2015. Russians are likely to recall the Nord Ost terrorist attack in Moscow in 2002, when gunmen took hostages at a theatre, ultimately leading to the deaths of 40 hostage takers and 132 hostages.

The Moscow attack was the deadliest attack in Russia since the 2004 Beslan school siege , in which 334 people, including 186 children, were killed after being held captive by militants for two days.

Vehicles of Russian emergency services are parked near the burning Crocus City Hall concert venue

The British embassy in Moscow condemned Friday’s attack. “We condemn the terrorist attack at the Moscow region’s Crocus City Hall. It’s a horrible tragedy. We offer sincere condolences to the relatives and loved ones of those hurt and killed in today’s events,” the embassy said in a statement on its Telegram channel.

The UN security council condemned what it called a “heinous and cowardly terrorist attack”.

White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said the “images of the attack were just horrible and just hard to watch”. The White House had no indication that Ukraine was involved in the attack, Kirby added. Russia is fighting a major war in Ukraine.

Yulia Navalnaya, the wife of late Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, who died in February in a Russian penal colony, described the attack as a “nightmare”, adding in a post on X: “Condolences to the families of the victims and recovery to the injured. All those involved in this crime must be found and held accountable.”

A top Ukrainian official said the country had no involvement in the attack.

“Ukraine certainly has nothing to do with the shooting/explosions in the Crocus City Hall,” Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to the Ukrainian presidential administration, wrote on X.

“It makes no sense whatsoever. Ukraine has never resorted to the use of terrorist methods.”

Dmitry Medvedev, the ex-president of Russia and now deputy chairman of its security council, wrote that “if it is established that they are terrorists of the Kyiv regime, it’s impossible to treat them and those who inspired them differently.

“They all should be found and relentlessly destroyed as terrorists. Including officials of the state that committed such an evil thing. Death for death.”

There was no evidence that Ukraine had any involvement in the attacks.

The attack took place at a sold-out concert by the Russian Soviet-era rock band Piknik. Crocus City Hall, capacity 6,200, is one of the largest and most popular music venues in the Moscow oblast.

The warnings from the western embassies came shortly after Russia said it had foiled a planned shooting by an Afghan group linked to Islamic State.

The FSB said it had foiled an attack on a Moscow synagogue by Islamic State’s affiliate in Afghanistan, known as Isis-Khorasan or Isis-K, and seeks a caliphate across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Iran.

Putin changed the course of the Syrian civil war by intervening in 2015, supporting President Bashar al-Assad against the opposition and Islamic State.

Russian authorities had also recently carried out raids against armed Islamist militants in the region of Ingushetia, leading to firefights between police and the fighters. Putin had called the March warnings from western embassies a “provocation”.

“All this resembles outright blackmail and the intention to intimidate and destabilise our society,” he said earlier this month.

Russia has not faced a large terrorist attack on its own territory since 2017, when 14 people were killed in a blast on the St Petersburg metro .

Suicide bombers killed 34 people in Volgograd in 2013 shortly before the Sochi Olympics. And in 2011, suicide bombers killed 30 people at Moscow’s Domodedovo airport.

Reuters contributed to this report

Moscow concert hall attack
Islamic State

More on this story

Moscow concert attack: fear death toll higher after reports of up to 100 missing

‘I noticed nothing strange’: suspect’s colleagues express shock at Moscow attack

Russia lauding torture was unthinkable – now it is proud to do so

Putin says radical Islamists carried out Moscow attack but maintains suggestion of Ukraine role

Putin’s lethally negligent failure can’t be covered up. The Moscow attack leaves him weaker than ever

Four suspects in Moscow concert hall terror attack appear in court

‘I fell to the floor and pretended to be dead’: survivors of Moscow attack tell of horror

Did Ukraine war lead Russian security services to neglect Islamist threat?

Moscow terror attack: Putin says all four gunmen held as death toll reaches 133

Moscow concert hall shooting: dozens killed and at least 100 wounded in attack – video report

10 Superhero Movies That Broke The Formula

Classic superhero movies operate by a formula, but groundbreaking films like Watchmen have forever changed the genre.
Chronicle and Hancock offer unique, realistic takes on superhero figures, pushing the boundaries of traditional superhero stories.
The Avengers revolutionized cinema with its team-up concept, while The Dark Knight set high standards for superhero movies as prestige cinema.

One common criticism of superhero movies is that they're far too formulaic, but time and time again, the genre has re-invented itself with movies that break the mold. There is something of a classic playbook many superhero movies operate by, especially in the modern day, dominated by the MCU's winning formula . But a great many of the most famous comic book movies have dared to try something different, forever altering the comic book adaptation landscape by allowing others to follow their lead.

Once upon a time, superhero movies were thought to be too niche, languishing in obscurity as specialty films with a limited target audience. Now, that couldn't be further from the case, with many Marvel and DC films regularly breaking records for the highest box office of all time . Beyond allowing the genre to enter new territory in terms of popularity, formula-breaking superhero films have increased the scope of tone, themes, and representation possible within a big-budget release.

The Incredibles

A four-quadrant movie with a focus on family.

By the time of The Incredibles , superhero movies were just barely beginning to prove that they were worth investigating for adult audiences, with successes like 1989's Batman and edgy trials like Ang Lee's Hulk pushing the boundaries of what was considered family friendly. In the animated space, superheroes were still somewhat squarely written off as kid's stuff, with only the quality of the DCAMU just barely breaking ground as a cartoon franchise worth taking seriously. The Incredibles proved that superheroes could find genuine success in all audiences at once, appealing to bored kids and entertainment-seeking adults alike.

The focus on family The Incredibles has is the crux of its success. In a way, the film manages to be the best Fantastic Four movie ever made, despite not existing in the Marvel universe, having a loving take on a superhero family that clearly cares for one another while still feeling realistic. Surprisingly dark while undeniably safe and still able to tell an amazing story, The Incredibles moved the medium of animation, particularly in 3D, forwards as a respectable medium through which to tell noteworthy superhero stories.

Faithfully adapted a beloved book

There aren't many superhero movies that can squarely place their inspiration on a single comic volume, but Watchmen undertook the herculean task of adapting famous graphic novelist Alan Moore's most critically-praised material. Certainly not meant for kids, Watchmen is by far the best movie directed by Zack Snyder , forever moving forward the possibilities of what a comic book adaptation could accomplish. After the film came and went, the possibilities of what a superhero movie could accomplish were forever broadened.

Not only was the film able to faithfully adapt the legendary novel, but it actually made some improvements to the plot. Rather than a random giant squid monster, the alien threat Ozymandias pits humanity against is Doctor Manhattan himself, better tying in the characters to the narrative at large. True to Moore's vision, the film explores the dangerous practice of idol worship superheroes imply, and presents a dark alternate history that explores the legacy of heroes on real-world politics, governments, and self-consciousness.

One of the most realistic takes on a superman figure yet

The trope of an evil Superman has been done to death, with figures like Homelander and Omni-Man taking over pop culture's perception of a Kryptonian powerset applied to the real world. But Hancock offered a glimpse at a more morally-ambiguous superhuman, with one of the most realistic interpretations of what such a being's life might look like in the real world. Not based off of a pre-existing comic, Hancock brought the world of superheroes down to earth in a way that hadn't been done before or since.

Rather than being a stalwart idealistic hero or a slowly-corrupted martyr, Will Smith's Hancock is painfully human. He's prone to getting angry, losing his cool, and often acts irrationally even as he tries his best to do the right thing. Beyond the presentation of the titular character, Hancock continued to break the mold by developing into a curious mystery and love story between two powered beings with intertwined fates. Even if it was ultimately detrimental to the film's narrative, Hancock 's willingness to take risks opened up new avenues for future films to explore.

Took telekinesis to the extreme

Like Hancock , Chronicle explored a far more grounded take on what having superpowers would realistically do to a human psyche, although it takes things in a far darker direction. Following the times of a trio of teen Seattlites that suddenly gain powerful telekinesis, the film's varied cast offers what such power would look like through the lens of a variety of life experiences. Beyond its thematic direction, Chronicle also broke new boundaries for the superhero genre by being the first found footage movie to exist within it.

Toeing the line of horror, Chronicle 's unhinged protagonist is utterly reprehensible, but disturbingly relatable. Misinterpreting his newfound power as a sort of divine justification for succumbing to his darkest ambitions, Andrew serves as a dangerous example in allowing oneself to believe that might is right. Between the thought-provoking tragedy of its narrative to its utterly unique presentation, Chronicle is a uniquely genre-bending venn diagram between superhero, horror, and coming-of-age movies.

Imagines Clark Kent as a disturbed child

If Chronicle flirted with the idea of being a horror movie, Brightburn fully embraced the concept of a superpowered horror villain with open arms. Unlike most evil Supermen, Brightburn imagined a Clark Kent that snaps upon getting his powers as a child, exponentially increasing the creep factor by juxtaposing the innocence of a kid with the terrifying power of a Kryptonian. Even if not an official DC story, the film wears its comic book inspiration on its bloody sleeve.

Utterly subverting the superhero genre, Brightburn pulls no punches on the terror of a set of parents forced to reconcile with the fact that their beloved adopted child isn't who he seems. Granted, Brightburn doesn't fully live up to the promise of its premise, hitting credits faster than a speeding bullet without having thoroughly mined the concept of an evil alien boy. Regardless, it's still an undoubtedly original film that has yet to be copied in concept or execution.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Made huge strides in the mcu.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier is considered one of the MCU's best movies , and for good reason. Unlike most of the more successful films in the franchise, the second Captain America installment doesn't rely heavily on cameos from other heroes of world-ending threats. Instead, it blends genres by cross-breeding with an espionage thriller, setting a more grounded tone than the vast majority of MCU fare.

The personal stakes of Captain America: The Winter Soldier makes its narrative so effective, with Steve Rogers' best friend and the organization he swore loyalty to both turning against him, turning Captain America into a fugitive in the eyes of the very government he swore to represent. It goes without saying that the film is also a master class in action choreography, boasting some of the best blocking and editing of any Marvel Studios film. From the more realistic tone to the dire straits of the plot and the first-class fight scenes, Captain America: The Winter Soldier honed Marvel's tired formula to a razor-sharp edge.

The Avengers

The first major cross-movie team up.

One of the most successful films ever made, The Avengers made history in more ways than one. Not only was it the first successful distillation in different characters from various standalone films into a single cohesive universe, but it was the first major team-up movie since 2000's X-Men . Audiences hadn't seen anything like The Avengers by the time of its release, and it forever altered the trajectory of cinema as a whole.

Not only have other superhero franchises been desperate to sow the same harvest the payoff of The Avengers represented, but the cinematic universe bug went on to bite non-comic book IPs as well. It certainly helps that the film is genuinely well-made, with a compelling villain, incredible performances, and genuine chemistry between its main cast. The Avengers not only changed the landscape of superhero movies, but Hollywood filmmaking in general.

The Dark Knight

Unequivocally proved superhero movies could be prestige cinema.

As recently as 2008, there remained those who doubted that superhero movies could ever be more than merchandising exercises preying on the nostalgia of comic book fans. Even the first entry of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, Batman Begins , wasn't compelling enough an argument to completely quell the qualms of qualified critics. But the second installment of the franchise forever proved that superhero stories were worth taking seriously as genuine prestige cinema.

For the performance of Heath Ledger's mysterious Joker alone, the film is worthy of setting new heights as to what critical achievements superhero movies could aspire to. Showing up big at the Academy Awards the year of its release, The Dark Knight was an unprecedented academic success for a superhero movie, proving that the medium could feature stories with real weight behind them. If it wasn't for the ground broken by Nolan's masterpiece, it's safe to say stories like Todd Phillip's Joker or Netflix's Daredevil would've never been told.

Deserves credit for blending comic books with hall-of-fame movies

Even if Todd Phillip's Joker might owe its existence to Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight , there's no denying that the film left its own mark on the superhero genre. More like a fascinating character study than a traditional superhero movie, Joker didn't go out of its way to follow any of the pre-existing qualifications for a superhero movie, like drawn-out fight sequences or secret identities. Instead, the film wore its cinematic influences on its sleeve.

Clearly taking inspiration from the works of Martin Scorsese, most specifically, The King of Comedy and Taxi Driver , Joker almost seemed to be on a one-movie mission to disprove the famed director's disparaging remarks about the superhero genre. Rather than idolizing its protagonist, Joker paints him in a sympathetic, yet reprehensible light, showing the low depths humanity is willing to sink to in the name of callousness. Thought-provoking and nothing like any other comic book movie, Joker entered uncharted territory for a superhero story in more ways than one.

Hit two notable firsts for superhero movies

Though the Blade films would quickly go on to run out of steam, there's no denying that the first entry in the series was a game-changing for the superhero genre. Admittedly, Blade isn't the most heady or complex film, presenting a straightforward action tale not narratively distinct from hordes of other supehero movies. But the film adapting Marvel's signature vampire killer was a smash hit despite being a pioneer in two key aspects.

Long before Black Panther , Blade dared to present the first African American superhero based on a Marvel property, with Wesley Snipe's iconic performance as the character merging fiction with reality. Secondly, the film was the first major superhero movie to be rated-R, taking full advantage of the horrific status quo of Blade's vampire-infested world, showing Blade drawing gallons of blood with his katana long before Deadpool . For these two historic firsts, Blade deserves more credit as a superhero movie that truly broke the mold.

10 Superhero Movies That Broke The Formula

Village Centre Cinemas at Eastside

Abigail (2024).

User Rating: 7.1 /10 ( 6,007 user ratings) 63 Metascore | Rank: 5

Showtimes:

Civil war (2024).

User Rating: 7.6 /10 ( 35,681 user ratings) 75 Metascore | Rank: 1

Dune: Part Two (2024)

User Rating: 8.7 /10 ( 362,167 user ratings) 79 Metascore | Rank: 2

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (2024)

User Rating: 6.5 /10 ( 37,452 user ratings) 47 Metascore | Rank: 6

Kung Fu Panda 4 (2024)

User Rating: 6.3 /10 ( 29,916 user ratings) 54 Metascore | Rank: 17

Favorite Theaters

Slasher Movie ‘Founders Day’ Comes Home to Digital Next Month

After being released exclusively in movie theaters this past January, the tricentennial-themed slasher movie Founders Day is now headed home courtesy of Dark Sky Films.

Founders Day will be released on at-home Digital on Tuesday, May 7, 2024 .

In this “bold political slasher” from the Bloomquist Brothers , a small town is shaken by a series of ominous killings in the days leading up to a heated mayoral election.

As accusations fly and the threat of a masked killer darkens every street corner, the residents must race to uncover the truth before fear consumes the town.

“We’re very happy to be partnering with the team at Dark Sky who know and love the power of genre cinema like we do,” said the Bloomquist brothers. “As the chaos of modern politics rages, The Founder is primed and ready to be unleashed on American audiences.”

Erik Bloomquist directed Founders Day , written by Erik and Carson Bloomquist .

Devin Druid ( 13 Reasons Why ), Emilia McCarthy ( SkyMed ), Amy Hargreaves ( 13 Reasons Why ), Catherine Curtin ( Stranger Things ), William Russ ( Boy Meets World ), Naomi Grace ( NCIS ), Olivia Nikkanen ( The Society ), Jayce Bartok ( When They See Us ), Andrew Stewart Jones ( Gotham ), Tyler James White ( The Villains of Valley View ), Erik Bloomquist (Weekenders ), Adam Weppler ( Long Lost ), Kate Edmonds ( The Third Saturday in October ), Dylan Slade , and Arun Cameron Storrs star.

Writer in the horror community since 2008. Editor in Chief of Bloody Disgusting. Owns Eli Roth's prop corpse from Piranha 3D. Has four awesome cats. Still plays with toys.

Do ‘Ready or Not’ and ‘Abigail’ Take Place in the Same Universe? Did You Spot This Connection?

Both extremely bloody cat-and-mouse chases through massive mansions, Radio Silence’s horror movies Ready or Not and Abigail (now playing in theaters!) are certainly cut from the same cloth, but do they actually take place within a shared universe? It was a question the filmmakers were asked, and their response suggests that the answer to that question is YES.

Collider’s Perri Nemiroff asked the question of Radio Silence filmmakers Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett , who co-directed both 2019’s Ready or Not and this year’s Abigail . As they point out, an Easter egg nestled within Abigail confirms a shared universe connection.

Bettinelli-Olpin tells Collider , “There is a portrait in the background of one of the scenes [in Abigail ] of Henry Czerny’s [character from Ready or Not ].” Gillet chimes in to clarify, “It would be a grandfather. A great, great, great, great grandfather [of Czerny’s character].”

Bettinelli-Olpin adds, “There is a little bit of a tied universe to Ready or Not within the movie.”

Actor Henry Czerny played the character Tony Le Domas in Radio Silence’s crowd-pleasing hit Ready or Not , the owner of the Le Domas Gaming Dominion and patriarch of the Le Domas family. The film centers on the Le Domas family’s deal with the devil to build their fortune, which Samara Weaving’s character Grace of course finds herself paying the price for.

If the Le Domas family exists in the world of Abigail , as the aforementioned portrait suggests, then that would indeed indicate that both films exist within the same bloody universe!

And it would seem there’s a deeper connection between the Le Domas family and the Lazar crime family introduced in Abigail . Have fun playing around with that idea. We know you will!

We’ll get you started. Is it possible that Abigail’s father is Mr. Le Bail from Ready or Not …?

In Abigail , “After a group of would-be criminals kidnap the 12-year-old ballerina daughter of a powerful underworld figure, all they have to do to collect a $50 million ransom is watch the girl overnight. In an isolated mansion, the captors start to dwindle, one by one, and they discover, to their mounting horror, that they’re locked inside with no normal little girl.”

It even has a connection!!! pic.twitter.com/kYS7oaNqh7 — Zack (@ASHorrorClub) April 23, 2024

Looking for New Episodes of “Chucky” on Peacock? Here’s What Changed

‘Mountain Man’ – Joe Manganiello Will Battle Zombies in Upcoming Horror Movie

‘The Blair Witch Project’ – Original Stars Release a Statement Asking Lionsgate for Residuals & Recognition

‘Trap’ – Official Trailer Previews a Wild New Horror Experience from M. Night Shyamalan

‘Longlegs’ – New Teaser Video for NEON Horror Movie Is Soaked in Cryptic Eeriness

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Moscow concert attack: More than 60 reported dead; ISIS claims responsibility

This live blog has ended. For the most recent updates, please click here .

What we know about the Moscow concert attack

Men in camouflage broke into a Moscow concert hall and opened fire, shooting an unknown number of people, Russia’s prosecutor general said.
The terror group ISIS has claimed responsibility but did not provide proof of the claim, which was made on ISIS-affiliated news agency Amaq on Telegram.
Russia's Investigative Committee said that more than 60 people are dead after the attack at Crocus City Hall. Officials have said more than 100 others were injured.
A fire also started inside Crocus City Hall, a large concert venue northwest of central Moscow. Firefighters have evacuated about 100 people from the basement of the building and efforts are underway to rescue people from the roof, Russian emergency officials said.
Russia officials said they were investigating the attack as a terrorist act.
A popular rock band was scheduled to play what appeared to be a sold-out show at the venue, which has a maximum capacity of more than 9,000 people.

Three children among those killed, state media reports

Chantal Da Silva

Three children were among the more than 60 people killed in yesterday's attack at Crocus City Hall, Russian news agency RIA Novosti reported, citing the Russian Ministry of Health.

Officials have warned that the death toll connected to the deadly incident may increase as the investigation continues.

Xi sends condolences to Putin

Chinese President Xi Jinping sent condolences to Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday after a deadly shooting at a concert hall near Moscow, saying China opposes all forms of terrorism and strongly condemns terrorist attacks.

China firmly supports the Russian government’s efforts to maintain national security and stability, Xi said, according to CCTV state television.

Moscow bloodshed comes two decades after some of worst attacks in Russia

Phil Helsel

The shooting attacks in Moscow are the latest in a series of deadly terror attacks in the country since the 2000s.

In 2004, militants from Chechnya and elsewhere took hostages at a school in Beslan in southern Russia.

The militants demanded a withdrawal from Chechnya. Hostages were kept in a gymnasium, and 334 died — half of them children — when gunfire and explosions erupted when it was stormed. Hostages’ families were critical of the rescue operation. Russian prosecutors later cleared authorities .

Two years prior, in 2002, Chechen separatists attacked the Dubrovka Theater in Moscow and took more than 700 people hostage. Russian forces used gas, and 129 hostages died. The attackers were killed.

More recently, in 2017 a suicide bomber from Kyrgyzstan killed 15 people as well as himself in an attack on a St. Petersburg subway. In 2013, two bombers killed a combined 34 people in attacks on a railway station and a trolleybus in Volgograd.

The group Islamic State, also known as ISIS, claimed responsibility for the attacks Friday at the Crocus City Hall venue.

Putin wishes victims well, deputy prime minister says

President Vladimir Putin is thinking of those injured in today’s attack and thanked doctors, a Russian government official said according to state media.

State media TASS reported that “Putin wished all those injured in the emergency at Crocus City Hall to recover and conveyed his gratitude to the doctors, Golikova said,” referring to Tatiana Golikova deputy prime minister for social policy, labor, health and pension provision.

More than 60 dead, and death toll could grow, Russian agency says

Russia’s Investigative Committee said Saturday that more than 60 people have died in the attack, and warned the number may increase.

“The bodies of the dead are being examined. It has been previously established that more than 60 people died as a result of the terrorist attack. Unfortunately, the number of victims may increase,” according to the Investigative Committee, which is a federal state agency.

Russia's Ministry of Internal Affairs and the security agency FSB are continuing to investigate, the committee said in a statement, and weapons and ammunition have been found.

U.S. warned Russia about planned terrorist attack in Moscow, NSC says

Monica Alba

The United States shared information about a potential terrorist attack in Moscow with Russia’s government earlier this month, a spokesperson for the National Security Council said.

The U.S. Embassy in Russia on March 7 warned U.S. citizens to avoid crowds and said it was monitoring reports that extremists might attack large gatherings in Moscow.

“Earlier this month, the U.S. Government had information about a planned terrorist attack in Moscow — potentially targeting large gatherings, to include concerts — which prompted the State Department to issue a public advisory to Americans in Russia,” NSC spokesperson Adrienne Watson said.

“The U.S. Government also shared this information with Russian authorities in accordance with its longstanding ‘duty to warn’ policy,” Watson said.

Putin recently dismissed ‘provocative’ warning about potential attacks

In remarks that aired three days ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the West of “provocative statements” about potential terror attacks in Russia, and dismissed them.

“I’ll remind you of recent, let’s say directly, provocative statements of certain official Western structures about potential terror attacks in Russia,” Putin said.

“All of this looks like obvious blackmail and an attempt to intimidate, destabilize our country,” he said before the state security agency FSB.

Putin in those remarks did not specify a country or warning. The U.S. embassy in Russia on March 7 warned U.S. citizens to avoid crowds .

“The Embassy is monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and U.S. citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours,” the U.S. embassy warned.

Guards at concert hall didn't have guns, state news says

The Associated Press

Guards at the concert hall didn’t have guns, and some could have been killed at the start of the attack, Russian media reported.

Some Russian news outlets suggested the assailants fled before special forces and riot police arrived.

Reports said police patrols were looking for several vehicles the attackers could have used to escape.

U.S. had been gathering intelligence that ISIS could attack Russia

Ken Dilanian

The U.S. had been gathering intelligence for months that ISIS could mount a mass casualty attack in Russia, two U.S. officials confirmed to NBC News.

That information led to a March 7 warning issued by the U.S. embassy in Russia about possible extremist attacks, including at concerts, urging people to stay away from large gatherings, one of the officials said.

That official said the claim of responsibility today by ISIS appears to be genuine, though no final assessment had been made about who was responsible.

Some Moscow concertgoers filmed events as they unfolded Friday night, when gunmen opened fire inside a theater and people ran to take cover in fear for their lives.

Witness says gunfire was first thought to be construction noise

A witness to today’s armed attack on Moscow’s Crocus City Hall told a state news agency that they first mistook the gunfire for sounds of an installation being dismantled.

“First, we started hearing typical loud pops, but it was impossible to understand that they were gunshots. We thought that something was falling, as exhibitions were being dismantled at that moment, and someone seemed to be dropping something large,” Mikhail Semyonov told TASS .

“Then, the bangs were getting more and more frequent. Suddenly, there was a scream, and the bangs started to be heard as bursts. Then it became clear that it was shooting,” he said.

ISIS claims responsibility for attack but does not provide proof

The terror group Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the attack in Moscow.

The group, also known as ISIS, did not provide any proof of its claim, which came from ISIS-affiliated news agency Amaq on Telegram.

The group’s members have carried out a number of terror attacks, including the 2015 attacks in Paris that killed 130 people.

Children among the victims, Russia's children commissioner says

Yuliya Talmazan

Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, Maria Lvova-Belova, said children were among the victims of tonight's attack.

"Information about their condition is regularly updated," Lvova-Belova said on Telegram. "Any additional assistance will be provided immediately."

She later told Russia 24 TV channel that at least two children had been injured, including one boy with a gunshot wound.

Earlier, Russian officials released a preliminary casualty toll of at least 40 people dead and more than 100 injured.

France, U.K., Germany condemn attack

Officials from France, the U.K. and Germany were among those who expressed their condolences to the victims of the attack at the Crocus concert hall.

"The images of the terrible attack on innocent people in Crocus City Hall near #Moscow are horrific," Germany's Foreign Office said on X . "The background must be investigated quickly. Our deepest condolences with the families of the victims."

"We condemn the terrorist attack in the Crocus City Hall near Moscow," the U.K.'s embassy in Russia said . "This is a terrible tragedy."

Meanwhile, France's foreign ministry called for "full light" to be shed on "these heinous acts."

Public events across Russia called off after attack

Several regional leaders across Russia, including in the annexed Kherson region of Ukraine, have canceled public events this weekend over security considerations after the deadly concert attack in Moscow.

Shortly after the attack, Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin canceled all sports, cultural and other public events in Moscow this weekend. State news agency TASS also quoted Russia's cultural ministry as saying that mass and entertainment events in federal cultural institutions have been canceled in the coming days.

Zelenskyy adviser speaks out about attack

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s adviser denied that Ukraine was involved in the deadly Crocus concert hall attack.

“Ukraine certainly has nothing to do with the shooting/explosions in the Crocus City Hall (Moscow Region, Russia),” Mykhailo Podolyak wrote on X. “It makes no sense whatsoever.”

No evidence has emerged to suggest Ukraine may have been involved, but Ukrainian officials may be trying to pre-empt accusations, as some Kremlin hawks have already started pointing at Kyiv.

Asked whether the shooting was at all tied to the war in Ukraine, U.S. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said: “There is no indication at this time that Ukraine, or Ukrainians, were involved in the shooting, but again, this just broke. We’re taking a look at it, but I would disabuse you at this early hour have any connection to Ukraine.”

Videos posted to social media appear to show chaos inside Moscow's Crocus City Hall during and after a terrorist attack.

Some videos include what sound like gunshots and show men with rifles, as concertgoers frantically try to exit the venue.

State Department issues warning to Americans in Moscow

Jason Abbruzzese

The State Department said that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow is aware of the terrorist attack on Crocus City Hall and that U.S. citizens should avoid the area and follow the instructions of local authorities.

"The U.S. government’s ability to provide routine or emergency services to U.S. citizens in Russia is severely limited, particularly in areas far from the U.S. embassy in Moscow, due to Russian government limitations on travel for U.S. embassy personnel and staffing, and the ongoing suspension of operations, including consular services, at U.S. consulates in Russia," the State Department said in a message posted to its website .

'What a nightmare in Crocus,' Widow of opposition leader Alexei Navalny condolences about concert attack

Yulia Navalnaya, the widow of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny who died in prison last month, expressed her condolences about the attack Friday.

"What a nightmare in Crocus," Navalnaya wrote on X. "Condolences to the families of the victims and quick recovery to the injured. Everyone involved in this crime must be found and held accountable."

320 firefighters, 3 helicopters working to put out fire

Russia's Ministry of Emergency Situations said the number of rescue crews responding to the attack is growing and now includes more than 320 firefighters, 130 emergency vehicles and three helicopters dumping water on the burning concert venue.

Moscow regional governor says 40 dead, more than 100 injured

Moscow Regional Governor Andrei Vorobyov said on Telegram that at least 40 people are dead and more than 100 injured in the terrorist attack, confirming figures previously reported by Russian state news.

Putin informed about concert venue attack 'in the first minutes,' Kremlin spokesperson says

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said President Vladimir Putin was informed about the shooting at the Crocus concert hall "in the first minutes" of the attack, Russian state news agency RIA reported.

The president is receiving information about what is happening and the measures being taken through all relevant services and is giving necessary instructions, Peskov said according to RIA.

Russian journalist was inside concert venue when gunmen entered

Russian news agency RIA Novosti said on Telegram that one of its reporters was inside the venue when gunmen entered and began shooting concertgoers.

The journalist said that at least three unmasked gunmen in camouflage entered the hall a few minutes before 8 p.m. Moscow time. They shot people point-blank and threw incendiary bombs, according to the journalist.

Russia's foreign ministry spokesperson calls incident 'bloody terrorist attack'

Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for Russia's foreign ministry, called the Friday night incident at the Crocus City Hall in Moscow a "bloody terrorist attack" as she called for "strong condemnation" from the international community.

"Now, as the Russian authorities have stated, all efforts are being devoted to saving people," Zakharova said. "The entire world community is obliged to condemn this monstrous crime!"

U.S. national security spokesperson says embassy has told Americans to avoid large gatherings in Moscow

Kyla Guilfoil

National Security Council Spokesman John Kirby addressed the attack in Moscow at a White House press briefing Friday afternoon, calling it a “terrible, terrible shooting attack.”

“The images are just horrible and just hard to watch and our thoughts obviously are going to be with the the victims,” Kirby said.

Kirby added that the U.S. embassy has notified all Americans in Moscow to avoid large gatherings, concerts, shopping malls, etc., and “stay put where they are” for their safety.

Russian media says 40 dead, more than 100 injured at concert attack

Russian law enforcement officers stand guard near the burning Crocus City Hall

TASS, Russia's state-owned news agency, and RIA Novosti are reporting that Russia's FSB security agency has put the preliminary casualty count at 40 dead and more than 100 injured by a terrorist attack on a Moscow-area concert venue.

NBC News has not confirmed those casualty numbers.

Roof of concert venue at risk of collapse, Russian media says

Russian news agency RIA Novosti said on Telegram that the roof of the building near the concert venue's stage has begun to collapse.

Video posted to Telegram by RIA Novosti showed fire continue to blaze inside the venue.

Moscow area governor says more than 70 ambluances at scene of attack

Andrei Vorobyov, Moscow's regional governor, said on Telegram that more than 70 ambulances have been dispatched to the scene of concert venue attack.

“Everything is being done at the scene to save people," he wrote in the Telegram message. "The Special Rapid Response Unit (SOBR) has been deployed. There are over 70 ambulance carriages near Crocus, doctors provide the necessary assistance to all victims."

Nigel Chiwaya

Russia’s prosecutor general office says number of victims still being determined

Russia's prosecutor general said on Telegram that officials are working to determine how many people have been killed or hurt in the concert attack.

“On behalf of Igor Krasnov, the prosecutor of the Moscow region has gone to the scene of the incident at Crocus City Hall to coordinate the actions of law enforcement agencies," the prosecutor general's Telegram account posted. "Tonight, before the start of the event in the concert hall in Krasnogorsk, unknown men in camouflage clothes broke into the building and started shooting."

"The number of victims is being determined, a fire started in the entertainment center building, and citizens are being evacuated."

Moscow's mayor cancels weekend events

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin said on Telegram that he was canceling all public events in Moscow this weekend.

"I have taken the decision to cancel all sports, cultural and other public events in Moscow this weekend," he said. "I ask of you to treat this measure with understanding."

Popular rock band was to play sold-out venue that can hold 9,500

Tim Stelloh

A popular rock band was scheduled to play what appeared to be a sold-out show at the Moscow concert hall where there were reports of gunmen in combat fatigues opening fire.

Picnic, formed in 1978, was to play at Crocus City Hall, west of central Moscow.

The multilevel facility in Krasnogorsk has a maximum capacity of 9,527 people. Booking sites show the event was sold out.

Russia's aviation agency says additional security added to Moscow airports

The Russian aviation agency Rosaviatsiya said that additional security measures are being introduced in Moscow airports

"Due to increased security measures, we ask passengers to arrive at Sheremetyevo, Domodedovo, Vnukovo and Zhukovsky airports in advance," the agency said on the Telegram messaging app.

Moscow's emergency ministry says it is working to extinguish fire

Moscow’s emegency ministry said it was working to extinguish a fire that began at the music venue.

The ministry said about 100 people were evacuated from the building, and it was working to rescue people from the roof.

Russian media says state security taking action

Russia's news outlet RIA Novosti said that the country's security agency, the FSB, is taking measures to respond to the shooting at a concert hall near Moscow.

Videos posted by Russian media show men with rifles moving through area

Extended rounds of gunfire could be heard on multiple videos posted by Russian media and Telegram channels. One showed two men with rifles moving through a concert hall. Another one showed a man inside the auditorium, saying the assailants set it on fire, with incessant gunshots ringing out in the background.

Andrei Vorobyov, the governor of the Moscow region, said he was heading to the area and set up a task force to deal with the damage. He didn’t immediately offer any further details.

Russian media reports said that riot police units were being sent to the area as people were being evacuated.

Russian news outlets report gunman opened fire at Moscow concert hall

Several gunmen in combat fatigues burst into a big concert hall in Moscow on Friday and fired automatic weapons at the crowd, injuring an unspecified number of people, Russian media said.

Russian news reports said that the assailants also used explosives, causing a massive blaze at the Crocus City Hall on the western edge of Moscow. Video posted on social media showed huge plumes of black smoke rising over the building.

Russia’s state RIA Novosti news agency reported that at least three people in combat fatigues fired weapons. The state Tass news agency also reported the shooting.

U.S. warned of imminent Moscow attack by ‘extremists,’ urges citizens to avoid crowds

Patrick Smith

U.S. citizens in Moscow had been warned to avoid large gatherings earlier this month because of heightened fears of a terrorist attack.

The U.S. Embassy in the Russian capital said it was “monitoring reports that extremists have imminent plans to target large gatherings in Moscow, to include concerts, and U.S. citizens should be advised to avoid large gatherings over the next 48 hours.”

U.S. citizens should avoid crowds, monitor local media for updates and “be aware of your surroundings,” it said in a brief online update .

Read the full story here.

Screen Rant

Where to watch boy kills world: showtimes & streaming status.

Bill Skarsgård's John Wick copycat action movie is here, and this is where to watch Boy Kills World in theaters with showtimes or on streaming.

Boy Kills World heavily inspired by John Wick, stars Bill Skarsgård, with simplistic revenge narrative.
Increased interest in movie due to involvement of Sam Raimi as producer, dynamic action sequences, and early positive reactions.
Exclusive theatrical release on April 26, 2024, with no premium formats; streaming on Starz expected in October 2024.

Boy Kills World is a new 2024 action movie heavily inspired by John Wick , and there are different options for where to watch it in theaters or on streaming. Following the popularity of Keanu Reeves' John Wick franchise, Hollywood has attempted to replicate its success with various copycat action movies. Boy Kills World is the latest entry in that subgenre, one that puts John Wick: Chapter 4 's Bill Skarsgård in the lead role. Although there are differences between the properties, the simplistic revenge narrative and action style are reminiscent of the original John Wick .

Interest in Boy Kills World has been high, thanks to various factors that have increased the desire for many to watch it. The involvement of Sam Raimi as a producer, its wild John Wick action , and the action roles for Bill Skarsgård and Jessica Rothe are among the many reasons why there is anticipation for the film. Boy Kills World 's early reactions following its premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2023 also bolstered expectations for the movie's quality. Anyone wanting to watch Boy Kills World in theaters or on streaming can determine the best option below.

Bill Skarsgård's New Movie Weirdly Copies Alexander Skarsgård's 2018 Sci-Fi (But Can Do It Better)

Boy kills world releases in theaters on april 26, 2024, its exclusively in theaters at first, boy kills world.

The first opportunity to watch Boy Kills World is in theaters thanks to Lionsgate. The studio gave the movie an exclusive theatrical release with the hope that the action film would capture the audience's attention with its pre-summer April 26, 2024, release date. Boy Kills World 's theatrical release does not come with any premium release formats like IMAX or 3D. How long it will play in theaters will depend on how busy Boy Kills World showtimes are around the world.

Find Showtimes For Boy Kills World

Theatrical showtimes from Friday, April 26 onward can be found via the links below:

AMC Theaters
Alamo Drafthouse

When Will Boy Kills World Release On Streaming?

Boy kills world will stream on starz.

It is not yet confirmed when Boy Kills World 's streaming release date will be. As a Lionsgate release, the movie is expected to stream on Starz first when the time comes. Unlike most studios, Lionsgate waits a long time between a film's theatrical and streaming releases, typically waiting a full six months to make the move. This would mean that Boy Kills World could be released on streaming in October 2024 if the trend holds. A slightly earlier release could happen if the movie does not perform well at the box office.

When Will Boy Kills World Release On Digital?

No release date has been set.

Those wanting to watch Boy Kills World at home will have the chance to do so through its digital release. However, Lionsgate has yet to announce when consumers will have this option through most major PVOD services. The studio typically waits either 21 or 32 days to release a movie digitally. This would provide the opportunity to buy or rent Boy Kills World on digital in May 2024 regardless of which option Lionsgate takes. The only way Boy Kills World 's digital release date is pushed back will be if it proves to be a surprise box office hit.

Stranger Things Season 5
Deadpool and Wolverine
The Batman 2
Spider-Man 4
Yellowstone Season 6
Fallout Season 2
Entertainment

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare review: a breezy action romp

“Guy Ritchie's latest is a slight, but immensely fun WWII thriller starring Henry Cavill.”

A charming and likable cast
A winning sense of humor
A refreshingly brisk pace from start to finish
Multiple one-dimensional characters
A few rushed action sequences
A surprising lack of tension throughout

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is a Guy Ritchie movie through and through. After bursting onto the U.K. film scene in the late ’90s with rough-and-ready, rowdy crime titles like Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch , Ritchie has spent the past decade transitioning into a more journeyman-type director. That is to say that his most recent films, including The Gentlemen, Wrath of Man , Operation Fortune : Ruse de Guerre, and The Covenant , have all lacked the verve and scrappy personality that once defined his work, but have, at the same time, been competently made and pleasingly watchable.

Decision to Leave review: An achingly romantic noir thriller
Amsterdam review: An exhausting, overlong conspiracy thriller
Vesper review: an imaginative sci-fi adventure

Once upon a time, a wide array of directors could have made those movies. Nowadays, however, the number of filmmakers working in Hollywood who possess Ritchie’s kind of old-fashioned, tried-and-true skill set is depressingly small. Few current midlevel directors know how to direct action movies that breathe and move as well as his do, and even fewer know how to make it look as easy as he does. That’s certainly true of The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare , a World War II-set action comedy that doesn’t push itself as far as it could,but does rise to meet its own, modest expectations without breaking a sweat.

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare ‘s approach to its plot is laid out in its first scene, which follows a Nazi naval officer as he boards a fishing boat seemingly occupied only by two men, Anders Lassen ( Reacher ‘s Alan Ritchson) and Gus March-Phillipps ( Henry Cavill ), who claim that they’re simply two longtime friends on vacation. When the Nazi officer tries to intimidate them, they laugh in his face, and it’s only a few seconds later that they’re easily and violently dispatching with him and all of his German soldiers on board. The scene succinctly sets up what is to come in The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare , a thriller that isn’t so much interested in challenging its characters as it is in demonstrating time and again just how good they are at their jobs.

It would be a better film if it did both, but there’s pleasure still to be found in watching its unlikely heroes expertly attempt to cripple Nazi Germany’s hold over European waters in the early 1940s by destroying a vessel carrying a large load of U-boat supplies. In order to do so, Gus and his team have to infiltrate a German-controlled port in North Africa without being noticed. It’s a mission that’s far easier said than done, which is why Cavill’s Gus recruits Anders, Freddy Alvarez (Henry Golding), Henry Hayes ( Hero Fiennes Tiffin ), and Geoffrey Appleyard (Alex Pettyfer) to help him do it. The team also has the support of Marjorie Stewart (Eiza González) and Mr. Heron (Babs Olusanmokun), a pair of undercover agents working on the ground in North Africa, as well as Brigadier Gubbins (Cary Elwes), a high-ranking British official working directly under Winston Churchill (a committed but unconvincing Rory Kinnear).

Based on a true story that was only recently declassified, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare wisely gets all the details about its characters and their primary mission out of the way within its first 10 minutes. This act of supreme efficiency, which comes courtesy of James Herbert’s concise editing and the film’s script (penned by Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson, Arash Amel, and Ritchie), allows the midsized blockbuster to dedicate the majority of its 120-minute runtime to its characters’ active efforts to pull off the most dangerous assignment of their lives. In striving to make its characters seem as cool and capable as possible at all times, the movie doesn’t always convince you that the challenges they face are as dangerous as they’re made out to be. It, nonetheless, moves through its plot at a consistent, quick pace that doesn’t just reflect, but reinforces its protagonists’ unwavering confidence.

The film refrains from developing most of its characters beyond their initial, skills-oriented descriptions. González’s Marjorie is allowed the most depth, as her attempts to con a local Nazi overseer (Til Schweiger) give The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare the chance to explore her perspective as a Jewish woman on both the war and her role in it. At times, the flatness of the movie’s other characters is noticeable — namely, when we’re expected to believe in the supposed depth of an instantaneous friendship between Gus and Kambili Kalu (Danny Sapani), a well-connected crime kingpin who agrees to help him and his team tackle their mission. Most of the time, though, the film coasts along on the charm of its performers, specifically Cavill and Ritchson, who bring a similarly pitched, much-appreciated edge of wildman energy to their characters.

Thankfully, the film they’re in has enough of a sense of fun to similarly make up for many of its shortcomings. The movie has the tendency to rush its action sequences and let its heroes move through them without meeting any kind of formidable resistance, but Ritchie’s ability to visually communicate geography and scale remains the glue that holds all of his work together. At no point is the viewer ever left confused spatially, chronologically, or narratively by what’s happening on-screen, and that constant level of directorial control keeps The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare from ever spiraling into empty-calorie nonsense. The further into his career he’s gotten, the more Ritchie has refined his unique style of muscular, yet economical filmmaking, and that’s particularly clear here.

All in all, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare fits in well alongside Ritchie’s past few films. It’s lighter than it arguably should have been, but not so weightless that it completely evaporates in its makers’ grasp. Contrary to what its title may promise, the film could have stood to get its hands dirtier and more fully embrace the darkness lurking beneath its story. Sometimes, though, all a movie really needs to do to work is get you on the same rhythm as it. The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare not only does that, but it also carries itself with enough style and enthusiasm to win you over to its side.

The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is now playing in theaters.

Editors' Recommendations

Rosaline review: Kaitlyn Dever lifts up Hulu’s Romeo and Juliet rom-com riff
Operation Seawolf review: nice Nazis? No thanks!
Tár review: Cate Blanchett soars in Todd Field’s ambitious new drama
Entergalactic review: a simple but charming animated romance
God’s Creatures review: an overly restrained Irish drama
Product Reviews

Andrew Dominik’s Blonde opens, quite fittingly, with the flashing of bulbs. In several brief, twinkling moments, we see a rush of images: cameras flashing, spotlights whirring to life, men roaring with excitement (or anger — sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference), and at the center of it all is her, Marilyn Monroe (played by Ana de Armas), striking her most iconic pose as a gust of wind blows up her white dress. It’s an opening that makes sense for a film about a fictionalized version of Monroe’s life, one that firmly roots the viewer in the world and space of a movie star. But to focus only on de Armas’ Marilyn is to miss the point of Blonde’s opening moments.

As the rest of Dominik’s bold, imperfect film proves, Blonde is not just about the recreation of iconic moments, nor is it solely about the making of Monroe’s greatest career highlights. It is, instead, about exposure and, in specific, the act of exposing yourself — for art, for fame, for love — and the ways in which the world often reacts to such raw vulnerability. In the case of Blonde, we're shown how a world of men took advantage of Monroe’s vulnerability by attempting to control her image and downplay her talent.

Meet Cute wants to be a lot of things at once. The film, which premieres exclusively on Peacock this week, is simultaneously a manic time travel adventure, playful romantic comedy, and dead-serious commentary on the messiness of romantic relationships. If that sounds like a lot for one low-budget rom-com to juggle — and within the span of 89 minutes, no less — that’s because it is. Thanks to the performance given by its game lead star, though, there are moments when Meet Cute comes close to pulling off its unique tonal gambit.

Unfortunately, the film’s attempts to blend screwball comedy with open-hearted romanticism often come across as hackneyed rather than inspired. Behind the camera, director Alex Lehmann fails to bring Meet Cute’s disparate emotional and comedic elements together, and the movie ultimately lacks the tonal control that it needs to be able to discuss serious topics like depression in the same sequence that it throws out, say, a series of slapstick costume gags. The resulting film is one that isn't memorably absurd so much as it is mildly irritating.

Pearl is a candy-coated piece of rotten fruit. The film, which is director Ti West’s prequel to this year's X, trades in the desaturated look and 1970s seediness of its parent film for a lurid, Douglas Sirk-inspired aesthetic that seems, at first, to exist incongruently with its story of intense violence and horror. But much like its titular protagonist, whose youthful beauty and Southern lilt masks the monster within, there’s a poison lurking beneath Pearl’s vibrant colors and seemingly untarnished Depression-era America setting.

Set around 60 years before X, West’s new prequel does away with the por nstars, abandoned farms, and eerie old folks that made its predecessor’s horror influences clear and replaces them with poor farmers, charming film projectionists, and young women with big dreams. Despite those differences, Pearl still feels like a natural follow-up to X. The latter film, with its use of split screens and well-placed needle drops, offered a surprisingly dark rumination on the horror of old age. Pearl, meanwhile, explores the loss of innocence and, in specific, the often terrifying truths that remain after one’s dreams have been unceremoniously ripped away from them.

IMAGES

At a movie theater. It takes a lot to bring you those digital movies!
Regal Cinemas, AMC Theaters Set New Reopening Dates For Movie Theaters
Here’s Why Movie Theaters Need Digital Signage
XD vs digital cinema
AMC and Dolby team up to make the laser-powered movie theaters of the future
Cinemark Introduces Us to Their Incredible New XD: Extreme Digital Cinema Theater [VIDEO]

VIDEO

How We Film Speakers, Keynotes, and Presentations
What Is Digital Cinema? (part 1 of 2)
Digital Presentation of the traditional and marketing ecosystem
Amc feature presentation/ AMC Theaters we make movies better
"Presenting 'Player' Film to Jury
Updated! Tutorial of our newest Ver 7.3 Digital Movie Poster app, features, and use. August 5, 2023

COMMENTS

What is Digital Cinema Projection?
Digital Cinema Projection (or Digital Cinema, for short) is a method whereby the traditional film containing the movie is replaced by an electronic copy contained on a storage device, such as a high-capacity hard drive and server. Instead of projecting light through film, digital cinema utilizes technologies such as DLP and LCOS to accomplish ...
What Does Digital Presentation Mean at a Movie Theater?
Digital Presentation at a movie theater is the new wave of cinema. Digital projection allows movies to be seen with higher quality than ever before. With the advent of digital projection, movie theaters have had the ability to provide viewers with pristine image and sound clarity. This technology has allowed theaters to offer movies in a ...
Digital Sound
Digital Sound and Digital Cinema. The movie theater industry is transitioning itself to using Digital Cinema Projection systems, which means that film has been replaced by digital files provided by a computerized server. ... All sound that you hear during a Digital Cinema presentation is stored and delivered digitally, as mentioned previously ...
How film projection got so complicated
But a movie shown in a theater isn't just a movie. It's a presentation. ... and the Future of Movies, in the year 2000 there were just 30 movie theaters set up with digital screens in the ...
Projection
To the audience, the most important aspect of digital cinema is the projection system. This is the final piece of technology that controls how the movie actually looks at the end of the line. Pretty much everybody agrees that a good film projector loaded with a pristine film print produces a fantastic, vibrant picture. The problem is, every ...
How Digital Is Changing the Nature of Movies
As the theorist David Bordwell writes, "Theaters' conversion from 35-millemeter film to digital presentation was designed by and for an industry that deals in mass output, saturation releases ...
Digital cinema
Stadium seating rows closer to digital cinema screens offer significantly more immersive experiences.. Digital cinema refers to the adoption of digital technology within the film industry to distribute or project motion pictures as opposed to the historical use of reels of motion picture film, such as 35 mm film.Whereas film reels have to be shipped to movie theaters, a digital movie can be ...
Step inside a movie projection booth to see what's changed since film
And by 2011, the National Association of Theater Owners estimated that 41% of U.S. movie theaters had converted to digital. Today, it's very close to 100%, says Keith Madden.
What Happened? The Digital Shift in Cinema
The Digital Shift in Cinema. To understand what the last ten years of cinema have been about, one has to start at the turn of the last century - the year 2000 - when Hollywood decided that it was time to get rid of film itself, and make the shift entirely to digital. With incredible rapidity, 35mm production and projection became obsolete ...
Digital Sound
The BigScreen Cinema Guide makes a point of highlighting movies showing with digital sound presentations, such as Digital Sound, Digital Sound 7.1 (for 7.1 channel presentations), Dolby Surround 7.1 (the Dolby-branded version), and Dolby Atmos, as well as the film-based formats of DTS Digital, Dolby Digital, and SDDS Sony Digital.These digital sound presentations are indicated by the use of ...
What Does A Digital Projector Do
A digital projector, also known as a data projector or multimedia projector, is a device that takes an input signal, typically in the form of digital content, and projects it onto a screen or surface for viewing. It allows you to display images, videos, presentations, and other multimedia content on a larger scale, providing a more immersive ...
1.1 What is Digital Cinema?
Cinema, the Art of the Index [1] Thus far, most discussions of cinema in the digital age have focused on the possibilities of interactive narrative. It is not hard to understand why: since the majority of viewers and critics equate cinema with storytelling, digital media is understood as something that will let cinema tell its stories in a new way.
The Best Projectors for 2024
The best 4K projector under $5,000. The LS11000 is a great 4K laser projector that can deliver a big, bright, beautiful image, and it has almost all the features you need—except 3D support ...
What is 'true IMAX'? Oppenheimer's hot debate, explained
If a presentation doesn't meet the above standards — shot at least in part with IMAX film cameras and presented in IMAX film on a 1.43:1 screen — it isn't "true IMAX," at least ...
PPT
What is Digital Cinema? By Lee Manovich Presented by Tyler Chatz. Cinema, the Art of the Index • Digital Media: • Something that lets cinema tell its stories in a new way • Has redefined identity of cinema • Movies = "flatties" • Human actors = "organics" and "soft fuzzies" • Digital Cinema: • Represents a return to ...
What Does 2D Movie Theater Mean?
Digital Presentation at a movie theater is the new wave of cinema. Digital projection allows movies to be seen with higher quality than ever before. With the advent of digital projection, movie theaters have had the ability to provide viewers with pristine image and sound clarity.
Film vs. digital: the most contentious debate in the film world ...
Most real-deal movies screen in a width-to-height ratio of either 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 in theater, which amounts to a large rectangle. But every month seems to produce new exceptions to the rule.
What Does AMC Digital Mean? Clearing the Confusion
Digital cinema basically means that the movie is stored on a hard drive rather than a 35 mm film reel. This format provides many benefits. First, a digital film is much easier and cheaper to ship, compared to a bulky and heavy film reel. Next, the digital format means that a movie can be played nearly an infinite amount of times without wearing ...
What Does Digital Movie Theater Mean?
Digital movie theaters have revolutionized the way people watch films. In the past, viewers had to travel to a physical theater to watch a movie on the big screen. But now, with digital theaters, viewers can watch movies right from their own homes. This means that they don't have to leave their house or even get dressed up for the occasion.
What is better for movies, film or digital?
The film or digital debate has drawn many of the industry's biggest names into its orbit, and each side has stated their own compelling case. ... cinema tends to throw up at least one major debate each generation. The current battleground - which has roped many of the industry's biggest names into its orbit - is the debate over film and ...
At least 115 killed and scores wounded in Moscow concert hall attack
Russians are likely to recall the Nord Ost terrorist attack in Moscow in 2002, when gunmen took hostages at a theatre, ultimately leading to the deaths of 40 hostage takers and 132 hostages.
Dune: Part Two is Officially Available to Own Digitally
Add it to your digital collection for $29.99. Can't wait for Dune: Part Two's physical release date of May 14? Well, we have good news, as you can purchase the film to own digitally right now! It ...
10 Superhero Movies That Broke The Formula
Between the thought-provoking tragedy of its narrative to its utterly unique presentation, Chronicle is a uniquely genre-bending venn diagram between superhero, horror, and coming-of-age movies.
Village Centre Cinemas at Eastside Showtimes
Village Centre Cinemas at Eastside. 1420 South Blaine Street , Moscow ID 83843 | (208) 882-6873. 0 movie playing at this theater today, April 20. Sort by. Online showtimes not available for this theater at this time. Please contact the theater for more information. Movie showtimes data provided by Webedia Entertainment and is subject to change.
What we know about the Moscow concert hall attack
CNN —. Russia has been left reeling in the wake of the nation's worst terrorist attack in decades. ISIS has claimed responsibility for the massacre, which saw armed assailants storm a popular ...
Slasher Movie 'Founders Day' Comes Home to Digital Next Month
After being released exclusively in movie theaters this past January, the tricentennial-themed slasher movie Founders Day is now headed home courtesy of Dark Sky Films. Founders Day will be ...
60 reported dead in Crocus City Hall shooting; ISIS claims responsibility
Russia's Investigative Committee said Saturday that more than 60 people have died in the attack, and warned the number may increase. Smoke rises above the burning Crocus City Hall concert venue ...
Where To Watch Boy Kills World: Showtimes & Streaming Status
Runtime. 115 Minutes. The first opportunity to watch Boy Kills World is in theaters thanks to Lionsgate. The studio gave the movie an exclusive theatrical release with the hope that the action film would capture the audience's attention with its pre-summer April 26, 2024, release date. Boy Kills World's theatrical release does not come with any ...
Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare review: a breezy thriller
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare is a Guy Ritchie movie through and through. After bursting onto the U.K. film scene in the late '90s with rough-and-ready, rowdy crime titles like Lock ...
When Is 'The Chosen' Season 4 Coming To Streaming? The ...
Season 4 debuted in theaters in February and March in three groupings "for a truly singular viewing experience," according to The Chosen's website. Episodes 1 through 3 were initially ...

How Digital Cinema Works

Step inside a movie projection booth to see what's changed since film

What Happened? The Digital Shift in Cinema

General Information

Business Information

What About THX?

What Does A Digital Projector Do

Introduction

What is a Digital Projector?

How Does a Digital Projector Work?

The Components of a Digital Projector

Types of Digital Projectors

Key Features to Consider

Choosing the Right Digital Projector for Your Needs

Setting up and Using a Digital Projector

Tips for Maximizing the Performance of Your Digital Projector

Maintenance and Care for a Digital Projector

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Related Post

15 Best Art Projector For 2024

13 Amazing Digital Projector For 2024

10 Best Slide Projector For Old Slides For 2024

14 Amazing Anker Projector For 2024

15 Best Nebula Projector For 2024

13 Amazing Overhead Projector For 2024

14 Amazing HDMI Projector for 2024

9 Amazing Slide Projector For 2024

Fintechs and Traditional Banks: Navigating the Future of Financial Services

AI Writing: How It’s Changing the Way We Create Content

How to Know When it’s the Right Time to Buy Bitcoin

How to Sell Counter-Strike 2 Skins Instantly? A Comprehensive Guide

10 Proven Ways For Online Gamers To Avoid Cyber Attacks And Scams

1.1 What is Digital Cinema?

The Best Projectors

What you need to know

The research

Epson Home Cinema LS11000

Buying Options

Why we like it

Flaws but not dealbreakers

BenQ HT2060

Epson Home Cinema 3800

Nebula Mars 3 Air

BenQ HT2150ST

A great screen

Silver Ticket STR Series (White Material, 100-Inch)

A projector mount

Peerless-AV PRGS-UNV Projector Mount

Other AV gear

How many lumens is good for a projector?

How far away should you sit from a projection screen?

Is a 4K projector worth it?

Meet your guide

Further reading

The Best Portable Mini Projector

The Best 4K Projector

The Best Budget Projector for a Home Theater

Is an Ultra-Short-Throw Projector a Good Substitute for a Big-Screen TV?

Oppenheimer launched a new debate about ‘true IMAX’ — but does the format matter?

Share this story

Share All sharing options for: Oppenheimer launched a new debate about ‘true IMAX’ — but does the format matter?

What is true IMAX?

When is a movie not true IMAX?

What’s the difference between true IMAX and filmed for IMAX?

What is the future of true IMAX?

Why does it matter whether a movie is true IMAX?

Are any movies entirely in true IMAX?

How do you tell if a movie is true IMAX?

Loading comments...

What is Digital Cinema?

Share Presentation

Presentation Transcript

What is Digital Art?

Digital Cinema Destinations Corporation

DIGITAL CINEMA January 2006

Digital Cinema

What is Digital Applications?

What is Digital Citizenship?

What is Digital Storytelling?

Digital Cinema Packaging Primer