Yes, we know that technology seems to be ever converging, where a particular service, device or some media superpower seems to want your undivided attention—so selfish of them right? We’ll take a look at how this example of the newer generation of Samsung Smart TVs with built in Direct TV (press release) will affect you, the avid FilmBuff. We’ll break it down into the three “C’s”.

1. Convenience: This may seem obvious to the consumer, but there are also benefits to the service provider. Without the need to install Direct TV’s set-top-box (and we’re assuming the rooftop satellite also), it saves overhead for them, and you don’t have to wait endless hours at your home for the installation person to drop by. Add that to the fact you’ll have features like multi-room DVR, pausing live TV, being able able to record 200+ hours of content and record 5 shows at once—all without a box.

2. Choices: Mind you that with a TV like this you’ll already have access to the web, apps, games, video streaming services, storage for your personal pictures and videos in addition to accessing the Direct TV channels (as in the picture above). This may be overkill for the viewer, and we agree it is, kind of like eating at a buffet that includes all your favorite foods—what do you start with? Upon making your initial selections, will you have room for more? Sometimes being a kid in a candy store is not all that it’s cracked up to be and having a curator of content in an environment like this can be valuable (shameless plug, yes we know).

3. Content: With endless content providers fighting for your eyeballs, what’s a FilmBuff to do? Don’t fret, the flip-side to this is that you as a movie viewer (indie movie viewer at that) will have unprecedented access to content across the board all in one place, and you’re not confined to the size of your computer screen anymore. Finding that indie film, or a well made student short film, will all be part of the fun in this treasure hunt for quality content. The barriers to entry are increasingly breaking down as niche content and channels are being developed by not only large media companies but also regular people who want to just tell a story. Both these groups are realizing that a fragmented but a very targeted market can have its benefits. So don’t forget us when we spend endless hours curating for you content that doesn’t suck.

What an exciting time for video content! Will you be getting a “Smart” TV anytime soon? Or are you just fine with your “Dumb” TV for now? Let us know what you think below.

Stream on… stream on… stream until your dreams come true—Aerosmith fans anyone? According to a recent report released by Nielson, it sure looks like many people out there are streaming more videos to their video game consoles, or shall we say video AND game consoles? That may soon be the case as more and more people are getting online to not only play multiplayer games, but also to get their video fix on. Come with us as FilmBuff makes some predictions about the future of this trend while taking a look at what it could mean for your video streaming services. So take a break from shooting zombies and rescuing Princess Peach, and join us.

In taking a look at the chart below, created by the wonderful people at Nielson, we see an increase across the broad for all consoles (Xbox 360, Playstation 3 and Wii) when it comes to watching video-on-demand (streaming services). In contrast, when you take a look at the percentage of games being played offline and online, all three consoles have inconsistent trends, meaning they either have no change, increased by small amount or had an actual decrease in some cases. Let’s take a closer look at some interesting things for each console.

1. Microsoft Xbox 360: An interesting thing to point out here is that its growth of people playing games offline has stalled while it saw a boost in people playing online, thus an increase in people also streaming video online can be easily correlated.

2. Sony Playstation 3: Check out the percentage of people that use this console to watch DVDs and Blu-Rays. Even though it decreased slightly, we can see that a TV and film audience is already built in here, and it comes as no surprise to see a rise in streaming consumption.

3. Nintendo Wii: Here is something really interesting. A whopping 33 percent (increase from 20 percent) have streamed video of some sort while they are online. Now you have to remember this is the Wii so the age bracket will be a little younger compared to the two other consoles. If that’s any indication, this new generation seems to be favoring watching videos online a lot more as compared to last year—a sign of the times? We certainly think so.

So now on to the predictions of this future trend. We looked long and hard at our FilmBuff crystal ball here at our office, and this is what we came up with—by the way that’s not actually me in the picture. We had a fortune teller pose for this picture.

1. Marketing blitz: We mentioned earlier that these consoles may actually become a video AND gaming console, so the streaming video part of the console may be just as popular as the ability to play games. With that you will see a fierce competition for eyeballs. So imagine you’re playing a Batman video game and within the game itself there are those ever so clever product placements that entice you to watch anything Batman (or genre) related online—talk about integrated marketing, huh?

2. One box to rule them all: We know what you’re thinking, so which console is going to come out on top? This is where our crystal ball gets a little murky. Given the fact that consoles are not the only ones fighting for your streaming business, the telecom and cable TV operators have a huge stake in this game, as well, not to mention the portals themselves, such as Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, iTunes and so forth. It almost seems like an all out melee in World of Warcraft. Partnership and consolidation rumors abound almost on a daily basis, so until the dust settles we have yet to pick a front runner in this digital video race.

What are your favorite consoles? Have you been streaming lately? If so, what? Hit us up below.

It is 2012. And if the world doesn’t end in 11 months, it will be a true watershed year for TV technology. We’re for realz. We’re not just sayin’ it. Actually, at the Consumer Electronics Show this year, 4K resolution was revealed (4 times the resolution of 1080p), passive 3D screens (without glasses) and the most salient advent, Organic Light Emitting Diode screens. How. Cool. Is. That.

We kid. We didn’t know what that was either. But luckily, FilmBuff employs its fair share of nerds, techies and Magic The Gathering pundits to help us understand. Firstly, the background. Flat panel televisions, ostensibly, fall into two categories: LCD and Plasma. The technologies differ in their approach to clear images in a relatively simple, fundamental way. Plasma uses an array of tiny, gas-filled bubbles that when exposed to a charge light in specific color to create an image. LCD, is more like a sandwich, with two pieces of glass surrounding liquid crystals that light-up when varying charge is applied. Same result, different avenue. For their strength and weaknesses, read this.

Here is where it gets interesting. Seriously. The next branch divides LCD into two camps: LED and Cold Cathode Fluorescent Light. And rather simply, these are just the two ways the LCD is backlit. One uses smaller, more efficient LEDs, and the other uses bigger, cheaper and hungrier CCFLs. So where does OLED fall in? Actually, in its own category. OLED uses an organic compound between two glass plates that when charged produce color and light. Huge deal. No backlight necessary. In other words, the entire screen, as pictured above, is 5mm thick. It’s also more efficient, produces more colors and is capable of higher resolution. Did we mention it’s flexible? Yes, we too want bendy-cell phones.

So, what does all this nerd-speak mean? Why should we care? Well ‘Buffs, Mr. Roger Ebert puts it rather concisely. Movie theaters, AKA Multiplexes, are known for their overpriced snacks, sub-par staff and mysteriously sticky seats. And for our sake, their lack of quality screens. It’s not cool. His thesis results in six reasons for today’s movie revenue decline, including the proliferation of cheap, quality and large TV’s. And that’s where we come in. This home-screen advantage is beyond valid, further solidified year after year, price drop after price drop and by better and better sets. We don’t pity theaters who charge 18 dollars for a ticket. We support quality and value. And, well, it looks like sharp TV’s, digital distribution and our ever-cozy couch is here to stay.

What do you guys think? Movie theaters still tickle your fancy? Have a home theater of your own? Buying online? We wanna know! Seriously, we do!

Now of course you’ve heard of facial recognition technology at airports, on security cameras, some personal cameras and even Facebook, but Hulu seems to have joined in the mix—that’s right, Hulu. In a world of instant gratification it makes sense when you just need to scan your screen and click on an actors face and find out everything about that person, right? Of course you do, and it’s one less click to Wikipedia and IMDB.

Now before you rush to Hulu to test out this feature, you do have to setup this option before it works and for now it only works for certain new episodes and certain shows such as Glee, The Office, Modern Family and Lost, with movies not far behind.

Once you go to settings, then lab settings, you just enable Face Match, and you’re ready to go! Click on a recent episode of one the shows we mentioned above and you can “face-rec” to your heart’s content as seen below.

Now you may be asking how does this enhance my viewing experience?  Well, we here at FilmBuff created a list of  the individuals that we suspect may enjoy and employ this technology when watching videos online.

1. Celebrity hoarders: obsessed fans that just love to know anything and everything about their favorite actors. This could be a great launching pad to exploring their body of work, history, personal life, you name it. If you want to know what films Rainn Wilson has been in while watching The Office, well here you go! Kind of scary, huh?

2. People with short term memory: do you ever watch a show or film and forget the name of that actor, and it’s just killing you? Problem solved.

3. Hungry talent agent: When this technology gets widespread adoption in the film world—especially the indie film world, agents may call it the next best thing as they’ll be able to scout out new talent on a new level. Ari Gold, eat your heart out.

4. Tech geek: you just love to early adopt any kind of technology and must know your surroundings whenever possible even if it’s only on the screen. Come to think of it, it may make you feel like a Terminator when they scan their environment to hunt down their target—yeah, you know what we’re talking about…

Let’s hear from you, FilmBuffs. Do you think a feature like this will help you enjoy what you watch and discover more content that might be of interest to you? Or will it just be an annoyance and another obtrusive marketing machine that will eventually become Skynet?

Hit us up below!

Today’s video arena is saturated with classic film lovers, digital aficionados and all sorts of hybridizers in-between. Yet, in this time of upheaval—digital ease usurping the perennial film favorite—one company is rising from the ashes of war: RED. This monochromatic monster has developed an ideal combination of accessible, easy to use and relatively affordable digital cinema technology. But, don’t take our word for it, look at this. The company, founded in 1999, has guided itself with a pragmatic mission statement; i.e. high-quality components, respectful support, attractive ergonomics, easy user interface and price. This universally competitive approach brings to mind only one indirect competitor, Apple.

A tale of cinematic prowess is predictable when RED’s evolution started only 12 years ago. They began with the RED One. In 2006, the camera and its accessories premiered along with the $1000 down-payment on the equipment. It sold… well, very well. Despite its proprietary software and relatively new technology, the cameras were backed by Peter Jackson (he’s now shooting The Hobbit with RED EPICs) and more. Though, the early adopters were constantly begging and being begged questions: Why not film? Doesn’t it capture more? Doesn’t it get ‘that’ look and ‘feel’ better? Isn’t digital slow to load? Is it worth having to use new codecs, software and expensive hardware?

Well, fast forward to today and the answers become clear. And though we aren’t precognitive multi-billion dollar directors, we could see how this $#!% works. Plainly, the technology is adaptable, conducive to evolution and accessible. Film? Nah. How about solid-state flash storage, holding more data at a higher quality and much, much more durable? Feel? The fundamental ratios of even the most sharp CMOS sensors remain usable even with Super-16 and Super-35 lenses. Plus, film editing software can add whatever texure, tone or mood you’d like. Slow? With no spinning parts and proprietary software, well-engineered software, the upload and download speed is limited by your rig and internet speeds: AKA, faster than the splice and dice editing floor and more malleable. Yes, yes it is worth learning considering the cost and time benefits.

If you’re still aching to spend six figures on a Panavision film camera plus film, there is something else you should see. Those familiar with HDTV and ‘full’ 1080p should also be aware that RED’s EPIC and more affordable SCARLET are capable of 4k resolution at 60 frames per second @HDR. Think sharper than your flat screen can handle, sharper than Apple’s upcoming Retina displays, more pixels and at a speed where we can’t notice motion blur, distortion or ‘stillness’.

RED is off to a roaring start. And yes, there is competition, but Sony, Panavision and others have yet to combine the pillars of success like RED. So why is FilmBuff so excited for this technology to grow stronger and cheaper? Because with RED facilitating affordable, professional quality equipment, only more filmakers can actually produce their pet-projects, only more hidden gems will be revealed and only more pseudo-intellectual self-indulgent crap will be created. Wait, scratch that last one.

Thanks RED!

Do you guys have any experience with these cameras? Still using your Super-8? Prefer cheaper digital still? We wanna know! Comment down below!

It’s the most wonderful time of the year. Yes, we know the holidays are over, but to all the tech geeks and film buffs out there the annual CES (Consumer Electronics Show, Jan 10-13 2012) can be a holiday in and of itself! Join us as we preview the upcoming show and—before you say it—let us assure you that even a FilmBuff can find joy in such an event. You see, we’ve carefully selected certain technologies that may actually enhance  your viewing experience (you’re welcome). We can curate on so many levels—now that is scary!

Here’s the scene: you’ve just entered the Las Vegas convention center to attend the 2012 CES. To your left, Keynote speakers you are not sticking around for, exhibitions on your right, and smack-dab in the middle is an army of endless products. Your heart begins to pick up pace, and you suddenly feel overwhelmed. Quick, what’s a FilmBuff to do, you ask? Rest assured. You can relax and follow our custom-tailored preview of “What to Watch.” Here we go!

1. Glassesless 3D TVs: Sometimes new technology can be really interesting, and it may seem to change how you watch a film. Take 3D televisions, for example, the downside is that with it comes the bothersome and expensive 3D glasses that you have to wear. But what if a new generation of TVs come out where you get to experience 3D without glasses? Makes you think about 3D in a whole new way, doesn’t it?

2. 4K Televisions: Just when you thought it was safe to buy an HD Television, here comes 4K televisions. What the hell is that, you ask? While full HD TVs have a resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels, 4K panels are much sharper with a resolution of 3840 x 2160. Crazy, huh? How to get content to fully take advantage of this is another question, but nonetheless, keeping an eye out for the next evolution of TVs will be interesting not only for the consumer but also for current and future filmmakers.

3. Internet Televisions: Now of course this is not a new idea, but FilmBuffs should keep an eye out for the major manufacturers’ (Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba, LG, Samsung, etc.) units to see what is embedded in them and which platform comes out on top. For example, Google TV is a player that could monopolize accessing the internet from our TVs, and so it becomes a sort of gatekeeper for what content is most available and what we will tend to consume.

4. Keynote Speech—Robert Kyncl: This gentlemen handles global content for Youtube and seems to focus on bringing original content to Youtube and leveraging it as a major distribution channel. That alone should get the attention of FilmBuffs and filmmakers alike.

So what are you looking forward to at CES 2012? Is technology our friend when it comes to watching films? Or are you a purest and don’t have time to be bothered by such nonsense? Either way, hit us up below!

We have a full scale invasion, ‘Buffs. From The Godfather to Glee, there’s no escaping it. HiDef has invaded home theaters across the country and there doesn’t seem to be any turning back. While it may seem unnecessary, but harmless, to watch the cast of Glee prance around in high definition, seeing classic cinema in HiDef can be a little more disconcerting. It almost feels like watching a different movie than you’re used to. And besides, there’ s just something so authentic about the grainy cracks and flaws, right?

Well, actually, no.

Sorry to burst your bubble, nostalgic FilmBuffs, but, no, your cracks and graininess are not authentic to your movie viewing experience. They are authentic to film. They are authentic to film aging, but they don’t represent how the great filmmakers of the past intended their films to be viewed. One of the greatest advantages of the leaps we’ve made in digital technology is the ability to preserve films—and to restore them to their original glory.

Check out this video, showing side-by-side a comparison of the Back to the Future Blu-ray versus even its most recent DVD release. The difference is astounding, and those releasing Back to the Future are presumably working from newer, better quality prints than someone looking to release something from Charlie Chaplin’s filmography. Which brings us to a good point: Back to the Future isn’t exactly classic cinema in the sense that, say, Gone with the Wind is classic cinema, but using this video is worth the concession for Marty’s scarily appropriate line in the first clip.

In case you missed it or have a terrible Internet connection or were just too lazy to watch the video, that line would be, “Wow they really cleaned this place up. It looks brand new.”

That’s what HD restorations have the ability to do—clean up pieces of classic cinema to help them look brand new again. So, as film lovers, our verdict has to be in favor of the practice. This isn’t to say that we don’t get chills when we see the cracks in an old print of a great film, just that we understand that our reasons for loving those cracks have nothing to do with how the film is supposed to be viewed. HiDef is a gift for film buffs, a chance to see movies as they looked when they were released—something many of us weren’t able to do with the not being born and all.

So break down, buy a Blu-ray player and an HD television and just enjoy what HiDef has to offer. If you’re still feeling nostalgic, tuck that VHS player away somewhere safe and revisit the low definition world whenever your ‘Buff heart desires.

Whether it is the quality of the customer service or the availability of the films on demand, we all have complaints about our cable provider. Because cable companies only provide service in certain areas, many are left wondering if the grass is always greener with the provider next door. That’s why we decided to take a look and compare some of the biggest companies in the business. Check to see which company is raking in the most subscribers.

Examining numbers provided by the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, the current king of the cable world is none other than Comcast Corporation, which currently is in almost 23 million homes nationwide. Close behind is Direct TV, which is in almost 20 million homes. It’s a bit of a surprise that with its heavy publicity and wide mobile network that Verizon is not higher in the rankings, but that may soon change. Look below and see why.

For all Buffs out there, nothing is more important than the number of movies we can watch from the comfort of our own homes. Taken from each company website, above are the estimates of how many movies on demand were available on the actual television. Verizon is the current leader with around 3,500 movies to offer their viewers. Coming up in second place is Dish Network, which boasts around 2,600 movies on their movie menu. Not included in the estimates above were the amount of movies on demand available online since not all websites offer that capability. While Verizon might only be in seventh place in terms of subscribers, their plethora of movies on demand might just be the edge they need to get ahead in the game.

Here’s a bit of a breakdown of what each of the top five providers says sets them apart from the rest:

Comcast boasts of its wide coverage in 39 states, including the District of Columbia. This might be the reason why Comcast is the current leader in terms of number of subscribers. This could be due to the fact that they have the coverage that the other providers do not. As a top dog in the subscribers arena, one would think that they might offer up more movies on demand. However, Comcast offers a whopping 3,200 movies online. They may just be investing in the growing future of watching everything from the computer.

Direct TV heavily markets their technology with their large number of full-time HD channels. The company has over 170 selections, and they play heavily towards sports fans by offering a large variety of games and events on HD. With only around 800 movies available online, Direct TV has the same amount of movies available via streaming. To maintain their numbers, Direct TV might want to place as much weight behind movie lovers as they do sports fans.

Dish Network plays into the affordability factor. Much of their campaign is shaped by doing side by side comparisons with their direct competitor, Direct TV. For example, Dish claims that Direct TV customers pay at least 18 percent more a month. Dish might be a few million subscribers behind their competition, but they’ve placed a heavy investment in drawing in more consumers by having thousands more movies available both on the TV and online.  Via streaming, Dish offers an astounding 5,481 on demand offerings.

Time Warner claims that its service best accommodates its customers’ busy schedules. The company offers amenities such as 80 hours of DVR storage as well as the opportunity to catch a show you might have missed within the last 72 hours. Time Warner’s website is not as user friendly as Comcast, Direct TV or Dish Network, so it’s not as easy to ascertain whether they offer anything online. From the online browsing, it appears that they only offer movies on demand via the television. If Time Warner wants to ever overtake Comcast, they might want to look into making more offerings available via the web.

Cox Communications takes an interesting stance in that it likes to market the company’s community outreach and education. For example, Cox partners with organizations such as Boys and Girls Clubs of America to provide their services at free/discounted rates with free advertising time. While it’s understandable that Cox wants to place an emphasis on the personal touch with their services only available in 19 states, it’s hard to believe they’ll maintain their top five standing with the powerhouse Verizon breathing down its neck.

How do you think your cable provider stacks up against the competition? Let us know in the comments section below.

In a world growing by the niche, it is difficult to discern the heady criteria each interest group employs. How can you converse with Giants fans? Where do you start when assimilating at Comic-Con? Which forum will tell me how to sneak onto my ex’s Facebook? Well, fellow ‘Buffs, although we don’t condone that last action, we did do our best to gather the interesting and accessible bits of the audio world. For all those non-audiophiles, this isn’t proverbial rocket science. This is just articulating neodymium magnets, ridged mid-range diaphragms capable of 20Khz and voice coils… We’re kidding. This $#!+’s easy!

Within the cinematic arena, sound is detailed, prioritized and still breeding careers in Hollywood. Did you know a Foley artist is a sound mixer who creates single tracked sounds (like a door-slam) just for a scene in a movie? It’s gotten that serious and that specific. Accordingly, audio adoption has catalyzed technological prowess among such simple designs as a tweeter, midrange and bass. And rather expectedly, these varied audio producers create sound greater than the sum of their parts.

Which brings us to the door of two base camps. In the proverbial battle of audio dominance, stereo sound — specific to music reproduction — spars with surround sound — cinema’s cochlear satisfier. And though comparing the two is arguably apples to oranges, toothpaste to paint, dancing to lemurs (you get the idea), there are common denominators between the two. So, for our learned sake, we’ll take a look.

In a world where physical distribution is waning, and digital downloads are burgeoning, it only makes sense to hop on the virtual bandwagon. We know how to be lazy. We do it well. And thus, it seems expected to employ technology that ensures our lives stay sedentary, glued to the Barcalounger by gluttony and pizza grease.

The latest iteration of easy access stems from the enigmatic cloud. Though the recent adoption of this nomenclature has been successful, it has left most of us in the dark. Pretty simply, this ‘cloud’ is a server center, a series of online, connected hard drives that host software making it easy for us to login and access. It’s like someone else is hoarding your idle family albums.

Warner Brother’s is launching its cloud-based service at the end of the year. Titled, Ultraviolet, this pan-hollywood technology will allow the user to download films, shows, other media and play it on multiple registered devices. That alone is pretty nifty, but recent advents have helped this technique join with something worth our dollar. As a member of their proprietary service, you can upload previously purchased DVDs at select retailers to have your entire collection online, instant and ready.

The consumer software is based on the well assimilated Flixster. Using this soon-to-be updated software, provides a simple and expectedly seamless operation for the user, similar to a Netflix Insta-Watch.

Ultimately, this approach is similar to countless attempts and successes, which begs the question whether or not this service will survive in an already supersaturated industry. We believe it will survive, for the near future, but will take some major pushes to supplant or plainly erode the power of Netflix and Hulu. A multi-billion dollar conglomerate backing the work is a plus, but the name Ultraviolet alone seems gimmicky and trite to some of our fellow nerds. However, if there are exclusives, this might just trump yesterday’s visible spectrum.

What do you think of the multiple cloud services out there?  Do you ‘cloud?’  Do you even know what we are talking about?  Shout us below.

Whether they are willing to admit it or not, everyone loves a good action flick. Let’s face it; they’re called summer blockbusters for a reason. So the plot line may be a little shaky or the acting not always up to snuff, but damn, it’s STILL entertaining. From hard hitting explosions to losing yourself in an outer world experience, action movies hold a special place in our hearts.  With the emergence of new forms of technology, the envelope continues to be pushed.

When CGI hit the screens we found new ways to fly around with our caped crusaders and hometown heroes. This jump in technology made for some seriously stunning visuals, enhancing the overall movie experience and not to mention trying to justify the price of admission. So we had a better view from our cushioned (hopefully bed bug free) movie seats but how has that translated to home viewing? Let’s face it, few people have the luxury of having an in home theater, but we do have some pretty impressive TV’s on the market and they’re an investment we’re generally very willing to make. So here’s the multimillion dollar question: do all the advancements that are made to make action more intense ruin it for video on demand release?

Avatar was visually…uhhhmazing. Not only was this wildly successful everywhere, but it was (in our not so humble opinion) the most impressive use of technology in the movie biz to date. A 10 year love affair of the fantastic Mr. James Cameron, Avatar exploded on to screens in IMAX digital 3D. It wasn’t just the action scenes, but the overall environment that made us feel that we were walking through Pandora following Zoe Saldana’s scantily clad blue alien body. But alas, viewing this film even the most impressive home theater pales in comparison to the theater experience. It’s a great story (though often told), but the sensory stimulation provided in theaters is heavily dulled on both your home TV, or worse, streaming on your laptop.

However, some of us weren’t privileged enough to watch Die Hard in theaters and so our only experience has been through our TV.  Perhaps it’s the datedness of the technology, or our father’s inability to remember it on a large screen at the multiplex, but we’ve been told that the experience of Die Hard doesn’t change just because you are watching it on your home theater.  So apparently action “classics” can still be enjoyed by people on the small screen. But what about the future of action cinema?

While we definitely have our opinions, we’ve hit the streets of New York to ask people how they feel about seeing action in a theater versus at home.  We found one person who thought seeing action movies at home was a fine way to view them. Kayla, 21, said, “I think it works. As technology keeps getting better, the movies I watch at home do too and I watch a lot of movies.”  But there are still movie theater purists when it comes to action movies.  Dimitry, 24, said, “Personally, I think movie theaters are only worth the price of admission for big budget action movies. Most TV’s can’t hang with the frames-per-second speed and end up looking jumpy. Movie theaters bring out the bang in action movies.”

Go figure: people are divided when it comes to the comparison of watching an action movie on the big screen to watching it at home.  But here at FilmBuff we actually take the cop-out path…certain action movies are definitely worth our money and time to visit our local cineplex.  However, we’re with Kayla that as technology becomes better, we may just want to enjoy each explosion blow-by-blow on from our couch…especially if 4D watching comes to a living room near us.

What are your thoughts?  Do you see action movies in theaters or can you enjoy them from your home just fine?  Hit us up below!

We think it’s safe to say since the dawn of the moving image, filmmakers and entrepreneurs have been striving to change the film industry. From the advent of sound to the establishment of TV to even 3D and IMAX, the industry has been trying to make your cinematic experience as realistic as possible. But what if it could be even more realistic than it is now? That is, stepping outside the parameters of your movie screen and including you in the action. What if your movie going experience could go 4D?

And no, we aren’t talking about smell-o-vision. The Disney Research Lab in Pittsburgh has been hard at work at creating a virtual experience for gamers. According to this article, a demo at Carnegie Mellon University produced quite a sight. “The creators presented a gaming chair equipped with actuators that interacted with the spine of a player seated in the chair. When playing a racing game, the player receives virtual sensations that would let him ‘feel’ every curve, skid and speed bump that his vehicle came into contact with, as if he was really sitting in the car and not just in front of a screen.” For any of you that have been to Disney World or Universal Studios in Orlando are familiar with this sort of technology. Yet what’s impressive about the work being done in Pittsburgh is that it’s actually pretty inexpensive.

This could easily change the way people play video games, but can you imagine what it could do for cinema? You could feel every tumble, car crash, waterfall or practically any experience the actors on screen are feeling. What do you guys think? Would you want to see a movie this way? Or is it too much? Do you prefer 2D?

Just think for one second about all your friends (Facebook or real) who take artsy photos and upload them online. Think of all your friends who have a blog or post hilarious videos on YouTube. Are these friends artists? Are their random postings and musings, art? And how will the overabundance of digital media we see everyday effect how we think about the important cultural milestones of this era?

‘Buffs, if we just got a little deep or professorial for you, it’s probably because we can’t stop thinking about this new FilmBuff documentary that explores this whole digital revolution and what it means for art. It’s called PressPausePlay and if you listen to music, or watch videos or use the internet, we bet you’re really going to be into it. Directed by David Dworsky and Victor Kohler, the doc features interviews with super interesting people across many disciplines, from musicians like Moby and Robyn to filmmakers like Lena Dunham. (Just a sidenote: The movie also looks incredible, so if you’re a cinematography geek who can spend hours looking at trippy nature videos on Vimeo, you’re going to dig this film as well). Check out the trailer below to get a bit of an idea what we’re going on about.

PressPausePlay explores how digital technology has made it easier than ever to create media and be an artist. In music, cheap recording software, music blogs and sites like MySpace and YouTube have made it easier than ever for bands to record music and distribute their stuff to a wide audience. These digital technologies have democratized the music industry and it’s happening across genres. Without the ease and immediate access of the internet, we wouldn’t have one of the world’s biggest pop stars, or a new crop of inventive hip hop artists, or indie darlings recording out of their basement. And it’s not just music, the rise of cheap, easy digital cameras and editing software combined with numerous sites and platforms for distribution have made it so almost anyone with a camera can be a photographer or a filmmaker. This is amazing for creativity- as Moby says in the film, “When humans make stuff, we tend to make interesting things.” It also means more outlets for diverse creative voices. Artists won’t just be the people who could afford to go to art school or that the major music and film studios love because they’re cash cows. They can be anyone, and more non-traditional artists are be able to have a voice.

Here’s the rub, will all these voices drown out important work? As with most things, there is a flip side to the digital revolution. PressPausePlay also explores the worries and fears this cornucopia of creativity brings. If you’re an internet connoisseur (and who isn’t these days?), you probably know, there is a lot of mediocre stuff out there. Does the ease of digital technologies dumb down creative output? The film even brings up the uncomfortable question: is everyone supposed to be an artist? Every single day we are bombarded by so much media. 48 hours of content are uploaded to YouTube every minute (just try to wrap your head around that figure and not get a headache). For every young musician or filmmaker pushing the boundaries of creativity, there are 100 cat videos, songs about getting down on Friday and whatever you call this. With so much media, what will be the legacy of this generation? How will we even remember what was viral and what was actually important?

PressPausePlay has got us thinking about whether the digital revolution is good or bad, specifically in terms of film. Traditionally film is such an expensive medium, we think democratization can only be something good for the film industry, in a way that is different from music. In music, it can hard to tell the difference between a 3 minute song created by a teenager from Amarillo, TX on GarageBand and a 3 minute song recorded by a DJ on a major record label. But with film, you can definitely tell the difference between THIS and THIS. It still takes a lot of time and effort to make a feature film: the new digital technologies and platforms simply make it cheaper and easier for films to reach audiences. From the advent of technicolor to the rise of special effects, there is a long history of new technology advancing the art of film making. While there will always be reactionary film fanatics claiming 35mm is the only way to go, cheap, easy technologies will only advance what filmmakers can do and we’re excited to see what the next generation of filmmakers will come up with next.

In honor of the upcoming release on VOD of the lovely and semi-terrifyingly accurate movie Full Signal, we have decided to compile a list of technology that could be or could potentially be harmful. Technology is harmful?! Madness, you say! Oh. Settle down children, and let us enlighten you.

Everyone has heard that (real dumb in our opinion) argument that technology is just harmful because it makes us lazy. Yes. That’s true. If we can order groceries and clothes through our computer…why go out to the store? I’ll tell you why. Hello it is more expensive! To the point of shipping = whole week’s pay check if you don’t live with your parents/are not spoiled/don’t have a salary job.

So…that one was obvious. But we wanted to rant. Or our interns did, they don’t really get paid much. Also we starve them.

We came across an article, however, that talked about this lovely little thing called WiFi. WiFi is amazing, pure and beautiful. It let’s us watch TV shows illegally when we want to sit in Starbucks and sip a capp. It let’s us do anything without wires, plugs and hatred. It also maybe causes trees to bleed out of their bark and might make them weaker to other automobile emissions and KILL THEM. This is all speculation of course, but still. Apparently the radiation from WiFi somehow tries murdering the trees. And in case you didn’t know, trees are our only source of Oxycontin Oxygen. O2 if you will.

We are never going to stop using WiFi, so them scientists need to figure out how to make the trees stop bleeding before they die.

Technology = distractions, distractions, distractions. Not only from normal every day things like playing checkers or fly fishing, it literally could make you forget the dinner plans you made before. While the interwebs might make us more efficient in finding information, it causes us stress when we must multitask…when technically it should be the opposite. This is no good. We are typing this on a computer and also being stabbed in the face…we can’t feel either.

What do you guys think? Do you believe the articles–feel like cutting down on technology usage? We don’t. We need it to survive…do you?

Fandango, on Apple and Android, is like the above but  with a little more gloss (Twitter! MetaCritic! Did we mention Twitter? Twitter!) and a little easier to navigate when buying your tickets on the go.  Works best for chain theaters, but the price for buying online can get a little steep (i.e. no matinee pricing and an extra $2.50 for all tickets is put on with no real explanation).

We know the choices here seem brief, but trust us–they’re the best we came across during our testing.One certain purple app “on tap” was so buggy we couldn’t get it to load anything other than a Captain America trailer it kept repeating. These, however, are the best and brightest–plus we use them all the time.

What about you? What’s your favorite movie-going app? Let us know in the comments.

We sometimes wonder if we'll think back to these days on the internet as a sort of multimedia Wild West. In some strange and disturbing future where our internet browsing and media consuming tendencies are regulated (China?), maybe we'll look back on the '00s and '10s as a freewheeling time when we could look up whatever we wanted, browse whatever we wanted and watched whatever we wanted. If this is true, there is a potential new sheriff in town (wild west lingo FTW): Internet Data Caps.

Recently AT&T announced that they would start imposing a 150 gig data limit on their internet service customers. Other ISPs like Comcast and Charter have had 250 GB caps for a few years. There is one big force driving and influencing these data caps: streaming video. It depends on who you talk to... but either ISPs are imposing caps to deal with the immense amount of traffic from sites like Youtube and Hulu, or ISPs are looking for a way to monetize streaming video and make it profitable for them. So we at FilmBuff are thinking about how these data caps will play out in terms of movies. Will data caps change the way we watch films on the internet? Let's check it out!

First off, the caps American customers have had to deal with so far are kinda NBD. The average internet user (and even Netflix Watch Instantly's biggest fans) are going to be using no where near Comcast's 250 GB limit or even AT&T's considerably smaller cap. For now, these caps are targeting the tiny minority of internet users that make up for a disproportionate amount of its traffic. On AT&T's network 2% of users make up for 20% of internet traffic. That 2% are really the people who are going to be bumping against that cap, and, sidenote, kind of make us feel like we are doing the internet wrong.

But, what is kind of a big deal is what these caps hint at for the future of us watching cute cat videos for multiple hours. The internet is just getting faster as more and more technological innovations arise (you better believe those engineers in Silicon Valley are working hard for their Mustache Mondays). Sure, 150 GB is not that small in terms of the technologies we have right now, but, as this post on the Economist's blog points out, what about when streaming video quality increases or Blu-Ray quality video downloads grow in popularity? As new sites and technologies pop up, a 150 GB cap could become a problem for even your most casual internet users. It also concerns us that AT&T 's cap is smaller than earlier caps, even though the demand for data and traffic increases. It seems it is less about dealing with stresses on their networks bandwidth, as it is about gauging prices on their customer's monthly bills. The big fear is that eventually we'll turn into our totalitarian neighbors in the north: In Canada some ISP's impose teeny caps, that are sometimes as even small as 2 GB.

Tech site, Ars Technica, points out another very real, potential problem. If data caps become more common, the threat of smaller limits will cripple innovation. Perhaps the rising popularity of data caps, will make that guy with a great idea for a 3-D streaming video platform scared to pursue it, or make a venture capitalist less likely to invest in a newer faster movie download that just so happens to use a bunch of data. In the tech world, creating new sites and technologies is all about finding an audience in an overblown market. If going to a new movie site means indiscriminate fines, film fans might just end up going to their local cineplex. Proponents of these data caps might argue that all the caps do is cause sites to think of creative ways to lessen their data load. In response to the low data caps in Canada, Netflix offered their Canuck customers a lower quality option. But you can bet Netflix, Amazon and Hulu are not excited about introducing new technologies in those Canadian markets. And what about net neutrality, the legal concept that ISPs can't discriminate based on content? It could be argued that data caps target people who browse certain sites … Film Fans and streaming video consumers.

Internet access has become so ubiquitous and so immediate that people almost act like a good wi-fi connection is guaranteed in the constitution. No, it is not your unalienable right to search for the name of the kid in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom in the middle of a cafe. Even if it does help you win a bet. We can be pretty spoiled when it comes to unfettered access to the internet's many diversions, and eventually we may have to pay more for all the media we consume. Unfortunately, these data caps are not giving the money back to the creative forces behind all the data. When we watch a Spike Lee movie on Hulu and the data pushes our monthly limit over the edge, it won't be Spike's production company getting the extra dollars, it will be the big internet companies, out to make another buck. And that makes us feel kind of icky.

So, 'Buffs, what do you think? Do you see data caps as a necessary evil, or are you completely outraged at the idea of being limited in the number of Kung Fu movies you download a month? Debate it out in the comments.

Citing availability of a film in 3D is like claiming you can get a book with scratch n’ sniff: it sounds fun, but ultimately it’s a fairly useless addition. This has been the biggest problem since 2009′s 3D-splosion in a post-Avatar world, where James Cameron’s future for bombastic cinema has come back to bite us in the ass, in theaters, and especially at home.

The 3DTV market started rumbling during the 2009 Consumer Electronic Show where Panasonic leapt out of the gate with their new TV prior to Avatar‘s release. The jist, however, is that these would act as supplemental additions to most HDTVs and be a greater selling point than the then-current belle du jour, Internet widgets for a wi-fi enabled television. Instead of being able to slowly check your weather on your TV, you could get 1080p Na’vi in your living room…or so we all hoped.

WIRED cites two reports that bring up the biggest problem home 3D has encountered: people don’t want to wear glasses and it’s too expensive to justify a purchase now. It doesn’t hurt that a majority of the home theater folks are still wary about the lasting power of 3D, even if it has been a little under two years now. Ditto that the manufacture and sale of LED screens (i.e. those used on your precious 3D televisions) is taking a massive dip due to recession and people are just not buying them. So what’s the issue?

Dreamworks’ Jeffrey Katzenberg thinks 3D can escape the “Terrible Twos” if given a chance–and by chance, he means stop complaining and buy the damn tickets:

“We’re not the problem. We have made five films now in 3D and have built this amazing reservoir of knowledge and tools. Nobody else has made five 3D movies back to back. You can see the quality of the experience increasing with every film. The cost has gone down significantly for us the last three years, and there is still meaningful, incremental profit to us, even though the size of our audience has narrowed. On every account for us, 3D is a win. It’s not nearly as big a win as it should be, and it’s certainly not the win it was headed toward being, and that’s really heartbreaking to me because we have managed to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory as only Hollywood can do.”

Now that one of the cheaper 3DTVs is Vizio’s 32″ stuffed with needless apps (ok, not really–streaming Amazon Prime and Vudu on a big screen vs. a laptop is pretty great) at roughly $500 and change. But the point remains: when purchasing new TVs, it’s time to take the handy FilmBuff FAQs of life into mind. Join us.

Do you want to buy a new TV?

Yes!

Do you want to buy a new 3D TV?

I’m not sure. Yes…?

Think wisely–they can go up to $6,000 for one of the highest end sets.

Gosh. Do I still want a 3D TV?

We think you could. But you should prepare yourself for a significant lack of content and a lot of Avatar rewatching.

Wait, what?

There isn’t a whole lot of choice on cable for 3D channels or “pure” 3D films. But at least you’ll get a Blu-Ray player!

But I just want a 3D TV…

Nope. Gonna need a Blu-Ray player too. Maybe even a PS3.

But…

No but’s. Blu-Ray Player, 3D TV. Wave of the future.

I don’t think now’s the best time to get a 3D TV.

What’s wrong, Grandpa? Think there are tiny little demons in the printer again?

So, basically, now is the time to cautiously invest in a 3D TV possibly later in the year due to a significant lack of real content mixed with the fact that–more than anything–3D itself is a visual medium still being perfected by a group of large corporations and the major studio system who are all still unsure about which direction to head in?

Wah, wah! Demons in the printer!

Got it.

...you get the idea.

Sitting down to tackle a tablet review isn’t a question of a DVD/Blu-Ray/Laptop replacement, but more of a question of whether you like wandering around your living room in a media daze. Tablets have steadily grown in popularity after the whole netbook thing didn’t work out as a portable and lightweight travel tool.  Most importantly, what are we going to do now that Netflix is raising their prices again?

But as a tool, what does your average film buff  do when they want the happy mix of touch screen and Gene Roddenberry-esque device to do everything with a certain je ne sais ex machina, if we may twist our linguistic idioms. Hands down, a tablet is one of the easiest viewing experiences you can ask for; it’s handheld, light (usually…) and perfect for switching applications and choices in an instant. While a majority are meant for e-reading, they can still do some video thanks to their internal guts and a bit of know-how (coughNookColorcough). There’s also a definite shift coming for media friendly tablets, like the proposed “Hollywood” tablet that BGR revealed–and it runs on the “Kal-El” chip, natch–plus it’d be possibly shipping sometime this fall.

With this in mind, we sat down to do a deep investigative report using the resources at hand to…well, first off. We had a problem.

See, we were going to get our hands on an HP TouchPad. And we did! It felt heavier than the original iPad we also had, so we were curious about what to do. Hence, we referred to our friend, “Loaner,” when we couldn’t get the thing to turn on. This led to a series of comical events about plugging it in, rebooting and making coffee while we waited. Because we then learned the TouchPad’s main issue: it’s slow. Like, we could make coffee using a Chemex system, toast and poach an egg in the time it took the system to load up.

That’s when we gave up, since accessing the Android App store froze the tablet and made us check around other reviews to see if we were alone. (Answer: No, we were not at all). But there’s hope since everyone agreed it could be a better system with the next generation in HD–likewise with the iPad-for-professionals-rumor.

So what could we review? Well, the first generation iPad, which are now sold refurbished and damned to the island of misfit toys. It means no retina display, no awesome folding smart cover with magnets and no FaceTime, so we can avoid not seeing your face if you ever mistakenly use that feature. Instead, it’s all about the apps and battery life that we’re into; yes, we used Netflix without a hitch and even browse Crackle when we’re bored. So, of course, we’re biased toward the ease of switching rentals via iTunes and burning borrowing discs thanks to our VLC App gift from the past.

Yet even though we love our little tablet, we can’t stress this enough: buy nothing until the Fall. Even though it sounds great, the three-way dance about to occur between the upcoming iPad/TouchPad/”Hollywood” is going to be epic enough that it could change the course of portability and viewing.

We may even rethink our love for our Apple product if the shift in quality/speed and visuals head over to our friends at Amazon. Not that we don’t love the House of Jobs any less…it’s just…we don’t want our laptops to quit in the middle of anything importa