Film’s perceived pedigree is pretty much defunct. Back about 30 years ago, (1980s) film still implied theaters (quality, art) as opposed to television (crap, advertising). TV was the medium of video. Video camcorders (camera / recorders) were getting cheaper and the average Joe could almost afford one. That meant the democratization of technological storytelling – more people could explore. Hours of recording time with a $5 VHS tape that could be instantly reviewed – impossible with film. Of course, a huge amount of junk video was generated. Film’s expense meant greater discipline was required to do anything at all, hence film’s pedigree.
Nowadays, the word film is being clung to by old school film makers as a way to distinguish what they do from the great unwashed masses of YouTube. Time is running out though – everything is digital, the tools are ubiquitous and snobbery is pretty much a waste of time.
This has been an editorial by Dan Kelly, like it or not.
2 Responses to Film’s perceived pedigree is defunct