Technology or the Film Itself?

Anna Gregoline | May 14, 2003
This is a cool article about whether home theatre systems are changing the way movies are made. Which is more important, the technology or the film?

Lori Lancaster | May 14, 2003
[hidden by request]

Jackie Mason | May 14, 2003
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | May 14, 2003
I'll always prefer DVDs over videos because of how easily tapes can physically degrade, but after years of being a DVD junkie I'm kind of tired of special features. I really only watch the trailers any more, and those only because they're so short. Too many deleted scenes come with long, agonizingly boring introductions from the director (see: "Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back"). Most of the commentary tracks being made these days are not worth my time, because instead of discussing something interesting like funny stories from the set or how a particular scene was inspired, most of them are just nuts-and-bolts stuff like aspect ratios and apertures (see: "Spider-Man"). As for the better picture and sound of a home theater system, sure I intend to buy one when I have the money, but only to better appreciate my favorite films. The people (okay, "men") who invest in those massive home theater systems and like to show off their performance are home theater enthusiasts, not movie enthusiasts. For them, the equipment really is more important and interesting: That's their hobby.

Anna Gregoline | May 14, 2003
Really! It's hard to enjoy the movie when the dude is like, "Wow, listen to that bass!!!" at the most crucial scenes.I watched a movie about a year ago in a theatre that didn't turn on the surround sound - or perhaps it was broken. It was very disappointing and distracting.

Jackie Mason | June 6, 2003
[hidden by request]