After 3D, here is the future of film

When I first saw it in 1999, Maxivision48 produced a picture four times as good as conventional film. It still does. With 3D fading and the possibilities offered by a new Red camera, its time may be here at last.

Dean Goodhill, the inventor of MV48, laid low while seeking studio backing. Now, he tells me, the time has come to go public. After reading the recent letter from Walter Murch I ran on my blog, he wrote me one of his own. -- Re

Dear Roger,

I read your recent piece from Walter Murch with great interest. Walter explained the problems of 3-D perfectly and I would expect nothing less from him. So that inspired me to write with an update on our progress, and the frustrations that keep me up at night.

We're still trying to find additional financial partners that would allow us to build a complete prototype.
See full article at Roger Ebert's Blog »

That's not the IMAX I grew up with

It started for me with a letter from a Los Angeles filmmaker named Mike Williamson, who contacted me March 7 in outrage about a bait-and-switch involving IMAX. He paid an extra fee to see a movie in Burbank, and wrote the company in protest: "As soon as I walked in the theatre, I was disgusted. This was not an IMAX screen. Simply extending a traditional multiplex screen to touch the sides and floor does not constitute an IMAX experience. An IMAX screen is gargantuan. It is like looking at the side of a large building, and it runs vertically in a pronounced way. It is not a traditional movie screen shape....This screen was pathetic by IMAX standards."

If you will click to enlarge the graphic below, you will see that Williamson has a point. The illustration comes from Jeff Leins of, based on one with a useful article by James Hyder,
See full article at Roger Ebert's Blog »

See also

Credited With | External Sites