But what impact are these technological advances having on film culture today and tomorrow?

At the lower end of the film spectrum, the availability of affordable filmmaking equipment is meaning that for a lot of people, getting out there and making a film, is within their reach. Critics may argue that this will result in a glut of no-budget, poorly made films and this is undeniably true. As Melvin Van Peebles’ mentioned recently: "Let's go back to the most primitive technology. Everybody can talk, but that doesn't mean some people aren't boring." But on the other hand, it will allow a generation of future filmmakers to practice their skills and develop their talent within their safety of the home, rather than on the set of a "x million" dollar movie. The accessibility of the means of filmmaking, is possible this single most significant aspect of the ‘digital revolution’ but it is not limited to first time filmmakers and amateurs.

One such film is Third World Cop, directed by Chris Browne. A few years ago, Browne had the vision of a Jamaican film industry and set out to make films representing Jamaican culture. Now with Third World Cop, the follow up to the successful Dance Hall Queen, the accessibility of the equipment has enabled the Browne to realise his vision. This is just one case where digital technology, in enabling the filmmaker to overcome financial obstacles, has given a cinematic voice to an otherwise unrepresented culture.

In addition to facilitating the creation of movies by new or disadvantaged filmmakers, the affordability of digital technology is leading to a new ways of filmmaking. Where previously, the costs were prohibitive of the number of takes and the amount of footage shot, the minimal costs of digital videotape is seeing a radical change in the way a film is shot. A $20 digital videotape compared to development and printing costs means that the director doesn’t have to be happy with second best, he/she can do the take one more time in the pursuit of perfection or experiment with shooting the take in a slightly different way. These takes can also be fitted into similar length shooting schedules because of the less time it takes to set up the shot.

This is similarly good news for most of the actors who have enjoyed the freedom of shooting digitally. The most significant aspect of this is the diminishing presence of the camera. With many directors filming rehearsals and more takes, there is less of a separation between before and after the director cries ‘action’. Together with the smaller size of the digital cameras and in some cases a number of different cameras shooting simultaneously, actors are finding that they are no longer able, or no longer have to, act for the camera and that the presence of the camera and filmmaker is easy to forget.

The freedom to improvise and experiment with their performances without the pressure of ‘getting it right’ for the take is also a benefit. As the actress in Mike Figgis’ forthcoming Time Code, Mia Maestro says:

"Every time someone you were interacting with changed their character, you ended up changing yours to meld in or conflict better. We were trying out new things all the time and it was a really beautiful and completely different way of working."

It has already been noted that there is a growing difference for actors between shooting conventionally and digitally. A situation which could possibly lead to a new generation of ‘digital’ actors, at home with the freedom and flexibility of shooting digitally.

In two scenes in particular from "The King is Alive" – the forthcoming fourth Dogme film from Kristian Levring, the flexibility of shooting digitally was exploited to improve the performances. One is where the character is hallucinating and exhausted, lost in a desert. To achieve the highest performance they were able to continue shooting for five hours inflicting the very characteristics on the actor. Later on, on the same shoot they were able to use the flexibility of digital to take advantage of a desert storm and shoot an impromptu scene with the actors physically battling against the elements.

Whether or not the greater freedom to repeat takes will result in less attention being paid to preparation and the adrenalin that getting it right for the one take brings, will remain to be seen, but the advantages of liberation and freedom for the actors are indisputable.

In addition to moving the power from the financier to the filmmaker and lifting restrictions, digital technology is having an effect on film style itself. Most noticeably, the lightweight, portable cameras are at last providing the most flexible and versatile cameras possible. As Arturo Ripstein spoke of his earlier dreams, he now had a "camera with wings".

This has preceded the predominance and indeed association of digital camera with hand-held camerawork: It is hard to tell what the exact reasons behind Dogme 95 are, but it is undeniable that the Danes have brought digital filmmaking into the spotlight with their minimalist, technically puritan films and undeniably linked shooting digitally with hand-held methods. Indeed, in that digital film has been always linked with hand-held (read amateur) filmmaking this might be one of the major factors to overcome should Digital become integrated into the industry in the future.

Other filmmakers are also taking advantage of the digital cameras’ flexibility and ease of use. As is quite widely documented within the industry, the songs in the Palme D’Or winning Dancer in the Dark were shot with 100 cameras. The unusual nature of the collated footage is reminiscent of some of the Soviet Montage editing by the likes of Eisenstein, except that in this case, they were able to capture the material in far fewer takes. Quite what Von Trier was aiming to achieve in this situation is not surprisingly unclear, but it is undeniable that the technology is enabling exploration and experimentation in the filmic medium. Another to follow this path is British filmmaker Mike Figgis, whose new film Time Code has already provoked much interest for it’s breaking of many filmmaking traditions. For the film, Figgis uses 4 cameras simultaneously recording related scenes and stories as they are played out in real time, captured in one take. To screen the outcome of this, Figgis has split the screen into four sections, so that each 94 minute take can be played out interrupted, and the four sections be compared and contrasted, together on the same screen. A bold and courageous piece, this unusual form could only be possible with modern digital technology.

Although Dogme has been unreserved about it’s use of the smaller, less professional cameras, at the other end of the scale film cameras currently seem to be dominated by Sony’s 24P. Together with the development of quality digital projection, the digitally shot and projected image is achieving an unbelievably high quality. But there are significant differences between the two mediums. Digital will undoubtedly soon be, of a higher quality in terms of sharpness and clearness and will clearly be better than screenings of dirty, scratched prints on old film projection equipment. But film still retains the edge with its capturing of colour and contrast. So is one better than the other and will digital replace film totally? I think not, and furthermore both will continue for a long time, but with different uses. I believe that we will see the big, flashy, computer graphics enhanced films such as Lucas’ next part of the Star Wars trilogy (due to start shooting on High Definition video) together with commercials and pop promos move towards digital for it’s clarity, and sharpness of image. However, for most, if they can put up with the relative inflexibility and expense of film, film will be the choice for the films where the greater emphasis is on the emotive elements and landscapes. These pictures will, I’m sure, come to be projected digitally and will probably be a better image as of course, the viewer sees a ‘new’ print every time, but film will continue to have it’s fans, just as there are still many who prefer the sound of Records to CDs.

It is apparent that digital technology is not only changing the technical side of film production and exhibition, it is also bringing with it new approaches to filmmaking. In allowing an unprecedented freedom of expression it is giving filmmakers the time and liberty to experiment with many aspects of filmmaking and not since the coming of sound has film culture had such an opportunity to evolve and reinvent itself. With the advent of digital technology the opportunities within the medium are huge, as we now enter into the second century of cinema.

Filmography

The King is Alive (dir Krisian Levring) Zentropa Filmbyen, Denmark
Asi Es La Vida (dir. Arturo Ripstein) Filmania SA de CV, Mexico
Third World Cop (dir. Chris Browne) Palm Pictures, Jamaica
Time Code (dir. Mike Figgis) www.redmullet.com