En lille gruppe af Hollywood’s tunge drenge såsom Quentin Tarantino, Christopher Nolan og J.J. Abrams vil holde liv i Kodak og celluloid-film. De mener ikke, at de digitale kameraer såsom RED og Arri er egnede til biograffilm.

Kodak får kunstigt åndedræt
Selvom verden er blevet digital på mange fronter, filmes en stor del af Hollywood-filmene stadig på 35mm-film. Og det skal man blive ved med i mange år endnu, hvis det står til visse filminstruktører. De nye Star Wars film såvel som Jurassic World er allerede på den liste.

Kodak er eneste tilbageværende leverandør af 35mm-film og selvom deres salg er faldet 96 % gennem det seneste årti pga. nye digitale kameraer, der er mindre og som giver nye muligheder, vil man holde Kodak kunstigt i live. Hollywood er gået med til at købe et forudbestemt parti celluloid-film fra Kodak hvert år - også selvom man aldrig får brugt dem.


”Screening in digital format is like turning on the television. That's not what film is about.” argumenterer Tarantino, og Apatow tilføjer; ”There’s a magic to the grain and the color quality that you get with film.”

Mens de gamle filmruller i vidt omfang stadig opfattes som formatet, der kan give den mest “filmiske” oplevelse, samtidig med, at de kan levere selv høj opløsning såsom 4K, giver nye digitale kameraer såsom RED og Arri nye muligheder. En af mulighederne i det digitale format er HFR (high frame rate), som vi så første eksempel på i Hobbitten-filmene, der blev optaget i 48 billeder per sekund fremfor de typiske 24 billeder per sekund.

Martin Scorsese har sidenhen bakket op om initiativet, selvom han så småt selv er begyndt at filme med de digitale løsninger. Han forklarer motivationen således:

“We have many names for what we do — cinema, movies, motion pictures. And... film. We're called directors, but more often we're called filmmakers. Filmmakers. I'm not suggesting that we ignore the obvious: HD isn't coming, it's here. The advantages are numerous: the cameras are lighter, it's much easier to shoot at night, we have many more means at our disposal for altering and perfecting our images. And, the cameras are more affordable: films really can be made now for very little money. Even those of us still shooting on film finish in HD, and our movies are projected in HD. So, we could easily agree that the future is here, that film is cumbersome and imperfect and difficult to transport and prone to wear and decay, and that it's time to forget the past and say goodbye — really, that could be easily done. Too easily.

It seems like we're always being reminded that film is, after all, a business. But film is also an art form, and young people who are driven to make films should have access to the tools and materials that were the building blocks of that art form. Would anyone dream of telling young artists to throw away their paints and canvases because iPads are so much easier to carry? Of course not. In the history of motion pictures, only a minuscule percentage of the works comprising our art form was not shot on film. Everything we do in HD is an effort to recreate the look of film. Film, even now, offers a richer visual palette than HD. And, we have to remember that film is still the best and only time-proven way to preserve movies. We have no assurance that digital information will last, but we know that film will, if properly stored and cared for.

Our industry — our filmmakers — rallied behind Kodak because we knew that we couldn't afford to lose them, the way we've lost so many other film stocks. This news is a positive step towards preserving film, the art form we love.”


- Kilde: First Showing (1 & 2)