Not sure I understand the purpose of these "no way competition grade" CRT screenshots here
but hope to see some of the one correctly setup and without that green spot burn later.
These pictures may indicate some of the difference between CRT and Digital in a way that for a CRT projector, it is less plug and play than a any typical digital i can be compared with?
When we set up a CRT we need to "make" the picture more from scratch than from any Digital i know, the picture needs lots of work and know how to be made to look correct and as good as it possibly can..
Even a good digital need some calibration and adjustment to make a correct looking picture, but not in a starting from scratch as a typical CRT setup.
Some that may not be familiar with CRT projector can get more info about that from this you tube video showing the setup process for the Sony 1292 9" CRT model ( Sony's 9" model before the complete re-design that resulted in the G90)
The later Sony G90 is one of the most over engineered and complex menu controlled plug and play CRT projector ever made, but setting up it still needs the same correct alignment and lens flapping etc. The EH Marquee is more basic hardware hands on, modification and tweak able CRT around....
The posted screenshot here may also show that it is often harder to photograph CRT projected pictures vs digital, but without the same scenes photographed of a digital projector from the same camera etc, it is hard to know how these scenes compare. I do not have that movie or BD captured sources, so can not try these on the G90 or RS520.
CRT is generally often harder to photograph than digitals because of the softer looking CRT signature with no pixel screendoor projector focus plane to focus on (harder to know when the camera have optimal focus of the lens, (can not thrust the auto focus)), the way the CRT refresh each frame, were the picture is only partly "on" in a very short period of time with different on time for the the RGB phosphorus, that may confuse the light meter white balance and exposure in a camera etc.
It is also often easier to get a sharper looking CRT picture on screen when the projector is not setup to produce a lots of light, but a low light projected picture is harder to get correct when using a camera.
A Camera will for low light need longer exposure times, an aperture setting letting more light pass trough the lens where its optical properties is not the best, and using higher ISO settings that combined with longer shutter times may often cause more noise from the camera chip and some more processing etc.
From one of the posted pictures
that still looks a little under exposed the exif exposure data show f/3.6 2sec ISO 400
that indicate a EV0.6 > 0.0553 fL low light picture on screen....
Edit: see you posted some more screenshots from the U-571 movie, are these more competition grade screenshots from your CRT setup MP?