WRITTEN BY HAFIZ SINADA
19 FEBRUARY 2017
In our present time, words like contemporary, digital, advanced etc.…, have become some of the most iconic words used to describe the eagerness of some to outcast the past as simply not valid anymore or not good enough to associate themselves with.
A new generation totally surrounded and isolated by technological tools and aspects of expression are taking over and leading the way in a world that doesn’t quite understand the adherence of the older generation to what they affiliate to and prefer to be associated with. I argue, along many from older generations, that they don’t have to ditch their former practices in order to engage with the newer ones, as combining both practises and putting them to work hand in hand is without any doubt an advantage.
The introduction of digital cinema didn’t happen all of the sudden. It has been long coming and anticipated for its ability to bring the unthought-of ideas and themes into practice for the sake of widening the scope of storytelling and filmmaking, beyond the pursuit of popularity and massive attraction. Yes, the digitalization of the moving images have served those purposes very well, but they also didn’t do any harm to the old ways of achieving the same goals.
The diacritical question to me is did it do harm to the critical approach to understand and analyse what makes a good film, such as Idea, Theme, Narrative, Premise, Plot etc.?
The answer to that almost mean nothing to the mass majority who pursue and enjoy watching films. On the other hand, to that minority who make good argument about what makes a good film, they will always keep analysing films as long as it means a great deal to film making philosophy and to themselves from whatever angle they look at that premise, simply because they will always be those who don’t care.