The Worst Film Ever

It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

Awesome Movie

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

I'm usually down for a good film-based documentary, so I decided to give this one a try as it looked like such an interested concept. While it was indeed a very intriguing subject, one has to truly be a hard-core film buff (the technical stuff) to really get into it.The topic of "digital film" vs "celluloid film" truly is a fascinating one and deserves a documentary like this. Whenever a medium change is about to define any industry, it is always a turning point filled with pros and cons that must be discussed in order to obtain some sort of understanding. That concept is the high point of "Side by Side".Sadly, I wish they would have made this doc a bit more "user-friendly" to those (like me) who wanted to see the comparison "in action". There is far too much "talking" and far too little actually comparison of the two film methods. Clearly, this was a doc made for not just film buffs, but more towards camera buffs who really get into the technical stuff.The choice of Keanu Reeves as narrator/host is also a terrible one, as his dry, bland story lends nothing towards the excitement factor.Thus, "Side by Side" will be a great little doc for those internally fascinated by film. If you are just a "movie fan", however, you can probably skip it.

(36%) A documentary with its sights clearly focused more on film aficionados than the typical causal movie goer, which is both the films strength and weakness. Its strength lie in that it knows most people out there will care very little if a film is shot digitally or using film so long as it looks good and is entertaining/well made/both, so it does not really go after that type of film fan at all. This really is much more of a technical and opinion based affair that you really need a genuine interest in the inner workings of film industry to really get anything out of, and if you don't then I'd advise you to watch something else.

After seeing James' Avatar I felt doomed for the future of film, given to special effects over script, character development, storyline, you name it. However, the screen was a feast for the eyes but so devoid of everything else celluloid has provided. I was very concerned until I viewed this documentary. What a collection of visionaries and representation of excellence in their respective fields! It was soothing to hear similar concerns expressed for any degradation of the art form and the emphasis on preservation was most appreciated. I truly am brought to the divine by the talents of many filmmakers over the past century and am thankful for this delicate discussion and candid interview. Kudos Keanu!!

Sadly, as a person who has been a part of the filmmaking process for a long time, a lot of what was discussed - the end of celluloid, and the watching of movies on phones, is true. However, the bright side for me, is that there appears to be two schools now for film appreciation. There are twice as many people in the world now as there was in the 50's. people obviously still want to watch films-stories of US. There will always be a place for quality that is best viewed on a big screen in a room bigger than the living room. Humans sharing an experience with other humans, watching a story made well, hopefully , won't disappear. There has been a lot of growth and accessibility for 'pop' film...reality shows etc. That's fine. Change is good, I welcome it. A problem with digital is that product is made too much by ONE person. The great thing with film is that the product like a symphony contains input by a lot of people. Digital pictures are often too narrow and predictable since the technology allows one person to have so much say in the result