Originally Posted by [Irishman]
I think we shouldn't speak for him.
My comments about the look of film being irrelevent arise from some brief, easy to do research in the IMDB database. You can easily repeat it if you have any doubts.
Down at the bottom of the IMDB home screen is a link to the "Top 250" films of all time. Go there and then notice that you can get the information broken down by individual decades in the lefthand column. Choose a decade, then an individual movie, and go to the "Technical Specifications" screen for that movie. Under "Cinematographic process", note what it says. "Spherical", "Anamorphic", and "CinemaScope" are examples of entrees indicating that the movie was edited and post-produced optically. That means the Director and splicing tape using the original camera film negatives, i.e. optical post production. But if the entry is "Digital Intermediate (2K)" or "Digital Intermediate (4K)", then whatever the source, the movie was digitized for the editing and post-production. Following post, it can be distributed on film or digitally for the theaters, and on disk for Home Theaters.
In the past, say the decade of the 1960's, 100% of the movies are shot on film, post-produced optically, and distributed on film to theaters. The disk versions of these movies have but a single digital generation of speration from the film, disks are usually taken from the optical interpositive print.
In this particular decade (2010-2019) I checked the technical specs on the Top 50 films, and these are the results:
90% (45 of the 50 movies) were digitally edited and post-produced.
10% (5 of the 50 movies) had no information about Cinematographic process.
0% (0 of 50 movies) were optically edited and post-produced.
As for the source media of the movie:
1 of 50 movies was shot entirely on film.
7 of 50 movies were entirely animated.
10 of 50 movies were shot entirely on HD video.
28 of 50 movies were shot on a combination of film and HD video (and most had digital video effects inserted then).
4 of 50 movies had no information about source media.
===> 47 out of 50 movies were available exclusively as 35mm or Digital Cinema distribution prints. There were 3 movies available in IMAX 15/70 prints, 35mm prints, and Digital Cinema.
The words "Movie" and "Film" used to be synonymous. They are not anymore. NOBODY makes a movie entirely on film anymore, then distributes the original film images. EVERYBODY goes through a digital intermediate step, it saves lots of time and money in the edit and post-production phases.
The usual disclaimer: The IMBD data is niether static nor 100% accurate. Nor is a sample size of 50 movies per decade statistically significant - but I trust that my points are made.
IMHO, "the look of film" is entirely missing from contemporary movies. The only exceptions being those movie makers who elect to expend part of their budget for digital simulations of the look of film, such as the artificial lens flares inserted into Star Trek
Those of you enamored of the look of film may chase after it if you wish. I'm not going to bother. The film era has ended already, which I suspected but did not know with certainty before I did an hour's research in IMDB.