Side By Side is a film geek’s heaven, but even for the apparently uninterested it’s a cracking, surprisingly rollicking ride through the history of cinema. Put simply it explores the current movie debate; can digital ever match the majesty and grittiness of 35mm film? The answer is not as straightforward as you might imagine.
Keanu Reeves is our host, and he’s excellent friendly, funny, surprisingly knowledgeable about film history and also, obviously, very comfortable with a camera. Several times he asks a question which an unknown might not have got away with; several times the director in question answers truthfully because it’s Reeves. He might not be the world’s greatest actor but he has been in front of a camera, and he has worked with plenty of directors, and he makes that count.
The great, the good and the frankly weird appear in turn to say whether they are for or against the rise of digital and the death of 35mm, but not always giving views you might think. Danny Boyle, for example, is a real cineaste, but he’s actually all in favour of digital for the freedom smaller cameras give him. He claims Slumdog Millionaire would never have looked the way it did were it not for digital, and his DP was the first to win an Oscar for digital work rather than 35mm. Boyle is as entertaining as usual of course.
SIDE BY SIDE trailer from Axiom Films on Vimeo.
Then there’s Martin Scorsese surely the man who’s a walking history of cinema will stick up for 35mm? Well no, he’s as happy as anyone to take on the new technology becauye it can free up the camera and therefore the director.
In the Luddite corner there’s Chris Nolan, ironically for the man who uses special effects for his Batman movies with such relish. He insists film will always stick around, and some clips from the Dark Knight do indeed look beautiful.
Then there an ageing cameraman who makes the most interesting point of the film. Storing digital on a hard drive is almost impossible, he claims, whereas film is easy shine a torch through it and wind it with your arm and it will always work, a point that silenced the screening room.
So we go back and forth through the argument, with a little bit of the history of the digital camera thrown in David Fincher’s face when told he was using a £1m digital camera that had the same weight and handling flaws of a 35mm camera is a picture. It’s amazingly engaging, and the use of clips to illustrate points is fantastic.
The final irony is that this is a low-budget doc, shot on yes, you guessed it, digital and it looks superb. You really can’t tell the difference.
Overall verdict: Hugely entertaining ride through the history of cinema with a nod to the future which is not an clear-cut as you might think. And the old photographer at the end is right 3D is bloody awful.
Reviewer: Tim Isaac