Snake oil??

@cd318

This question of authenticity, or objective v subjective doesn’t seem to trouble movie fans or cineastes the way it might with some audiophiles.

This is an interesting observation. It may get more into aesthetic philosophy than the typical board discussion. While I'm a bit of an audiophile, I work in film.
I think there are quite a few movie fans who care a great deal about the presentation of image, but the question of fidelity is about the preservation of the intentions of the filmmakers who made it. Years ago, we wanted a film shot in 1:1.85 aspect ratio at 24 frames per second to play back that way, rather than at the old TV standard 29.97 fps with the sides chopped off to fit the screen. Filmmaking and film exhibition is not typically about recreation of the reality in front of the cameras-- you don't often hear people brag that it was like Brad Pitt was in their living room...shooting a laser rifle at aliens.
There are limited areas where a fidelity to reality might be prized-- think IMAX nature films or certain kinds of virtual reality. Or, on a slightly more mundane level, a concert film that promises "you are there." 
There are people interested in evolving filmmaking technology towards a fidelity to reality. Aside from VR, there's the push for ever higher resolution (8k+ cameras and lenses to match, 8k TVs) and high frame rates (60-120 fps, as seen in recent Peter Jackson and Ang Lee films). And then there are people like Tarantino and P.T. Anderson, who remain committed to shooting on film at 24 fps.
As you suggest, it may well be that the distance from reality helps us experience the films as stories. Or it might simply be a matter of convention. But it's an ongoing discussion. 

Sorry-- drifted far off topic. So yeah, I think the 3D enhancer fluid would meet my definition of snake oil.

 

@mhnyc,

"While I'm a bit of an audiophile, I work in film."


It's good to hear that some people in the industry still care about sound. 


"but the question of fidelity is about the preservation of the intentions of the filmmakers who made it."

That's also good to hear. Whilst mastering engineers like Steve Hoffman claim they are trying to do the same thing with historic audio recordings, virtually everything digitally remastered nowadays seems to have had excessive amounts of compression applied.

On metal, rock, and punk albums, this can have the effect of making them virtually unlistenable. Yet it continues. 

I also remember there was a bit of a controversy back when Shane (1953 George Stevens) was first transferred to Blu-ray and Warners announced they were going to alter the aspect ratio from the original 1.37 to 1.66. Incredible.

Since genuine improvements seem so hard to attain (due to marketing?), perhaps it's fair to say that snake oil can come in many different guises?

https://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2013/03/shane-aspect-ratio-conflict/

^^^ "Shane" was a great movie. At the time of its release, I was in Junior High School and worked part-time as an usher at the Orpheum Theater in downtown Los Angeles. I saw the film so many times that I knew all of the lines by heart. I still remember a lot of them even to this day.

Frank

I will buy a case very soon.(HO HO)

Oh no you won't ebm, you hate everything.