Watch Side by Side For Free

Powerful

Perfect cast and a good story

i must have seen a different film!!

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Hollywood insiders are aware of a battle that has been brewing for quite sometime now: the technology to capture the image has two camps- film and digital and each are perhaps overwhelming the other. Film is photomchemical and the method by which cinema has been created and projected for all these years (since the late 1890). Digital cameras are new on the block and because they can do everything a film camera can but with less production costs, they are vying to be the medium every director chooses. Keanu Reeves questions industry insiders from top directors and cinematographers and gets a honest non biased overview. This is a good watch for anyone interested in the technical and "behind the camera" scenes of making of film and television. The documentary is precise and educative.

If you aren't familiar with the debate of film versus digital when it comes to shooting movies, then this little documentary, Side by Side, is a great place to start. It's a documentary that chronicles the rise of digital video and how the technology started as something raw, dirty, and very poor quality, but quickly became a true contender against film, and is now beginning to surpass film as the gold standard medium to shoot movies on. The film details the workflow of movie making from getting the shot on set, to processing, to editing, to color correcting, and finally to distribution to theaters, most of which now project digitally as opposed to film projectors which dominated the industry until about ten years ago. This is a fantastic little doc, and it's even executive produced and narrated by the great enigma that is Keanu Reeves. Seriously, it's the most compelling you'll ever see Neo. Keanu jokes aside, this really is a fascinating documentary that gives us candid discussions and genuine insight from some of the greatest minds working in the industry today. Reeves interviews everyone from Martin Scorsese, to Lena Dunham, with Christopher Nolan, David Fincher, Danny Boyle, Wally Pfister, and Lars von Trier in between. Plus a swathe of other big names that it would be absurd of me to list completely here. The bottom line is, Side by Side has some of the most significant and valued opinions of the film industry within its runtime. Side by Side tells a story of digital's rise and film's descent that is a fascinating one if you aren't already familiar with it. Living in Los Angeles and working within this field this whole conflict is nothing new to me so I'm not necessarily getting any new information by watching Side by Side but with so many great interviews that's not what I enjoy this movie for. I watch it for the insight of listening to an admirable director talk so openly and candidly about their work.I've gained new perspective on some of my favorite filmmakers from this doc, and I walked away being able to fill an entire trivia book with things divulged in these interviews. Things I never knew before, like how Danny Boyle's masterpieces 28 Days Later and Slumdog Millionaire were shot by Anthony Dod Mantle, the cinematographer who shot the very first Dogma '95 film, an incredibly experimental film movement that I now want to spend some time familiarizing myself with. The great thing about this doc is that it never picks a side. Rather it just puts the two alternatives... side by side (aha!) and lets the audience draw conclusions. The film certainly has more digital advocates than film ones, but when the figurehead of the film camp is Christopher Nolan you've already got a hell of an argument. I do think that the death of film is inevitable and imminent, and I think most of the industry, including the makers of this documentary, know that as well. Thus there was never a better time to make this film, now that both mediums can be compared side by side and we can have a serious discussion about the pros and cons of each. In ten or fifteen years when celluloid is a thing of the past we will always have this fantastic documentary to remind us of the immaculate run that film had, and the beginnings of a digital technology that would fully surpass the medium of film.

As someone who appears in this film I can't help but feel that everyone posting here has missed an essential point. Archive. How do we deal with digital storage. It's the elephant in the room that is dismissed with a simple "oh technology will advance and solve this" Really? Just look at documentaries and TV news archives, there's far more available about events pre-1980 than there is about events afterwards. Why? because of the move away from film...Out-takes and rushes are stored from old films, this is not the case with digitally shot movies. The finished movie is all there is in most cases. The rushes have been recycled because nobody wanted to pay for the disk storage and the continuous copying to new formats that would have been required. I've been involved in digital shooting since the early 80's and there have been a huge amount of different formats in that time, how many of them can still be read even if the material had been stored? We live in an invisible age, there will be no trace of us in the not so distant future.

The documentary investigates the history, process and workflow of both digital and photochemical film creation.Keanu Reeves says that digital "could" replace traditional film. However, by 2012, I am fairly confident that there was no "could" -- digital had become the more common way to shoot a film. (Although, this may be more on the low budget end -- they offer plenty of big name films from the last five years that are still on film.) I appreciated learning that digital cameras not only affect the finished product, but actually the process, too -- even the actors. The natural breaks of switching rolls every ten or so minutes are removed, which results in Robert Downey's mason jars of urine.The rise of CGI is covered, which is both a good and bad thing. Bad CGI is far too common and a weak replacement for practical effects. But good CGI is a major boon, and as the industry progresses, this could result in some impressive things.Digital as a whole is growing and evolving -- we learn of David Fincher's role of making cameras lighter during "Social Network". We learn that "Slumdog Millionaire" was the first digital film to earn an Oscar for cinematography (but certainly not the last). George Lucas seems overly enthusiastic about the rise of the digital movie, and we all know how he has abused computer technology. But his overall point is right -- we are at the beginning of a new technology, and only by jumping aboard ship will it get better.I do love that everyone thinks 3-D will burn out, as it is a joke or a gimmick for money. Could not agree more.