Technological innovation may bring new colors to cinema, but in the end the role of cinema – to make sense of, filter and analyze reality – is unlikely to change much in the short or even long term.
It is quite obvious that the 3D revolution that has occurred before our eyes will, for the foreseeable future, increase its impact on the filmmaking process as a whole. On the one hand, it allows filmmakers to bring things to the screen that they couldn’t even dream of a decade ago. On the other hand, this freedom of action often lowers the bar for their own creative ambitions. Today, it is this dilemma that is causing quite fierce controversy. For example, one of Hollywood’s biggest directors, Christopher Nolan, has publicly questioned the importance of 3D, saying that with a good script you can do with two-dimensional images. And yet, it seems that in 10-15 years 3D will finally take over. Moreover, given the continuing process of technological development, it is logical to assume the improvement of existing developments for an even deeper immersion of the viewer in three- and four-dimensional cinematic spaces.
Another important factor is the growing geopolitical role of China, which is already echoing in the business strategies of major Hollywood and Chinese studios. The Chinese leadership’s strict protectionist policy (the number of Hollywood premieres in China is strictly regulated) is paying off, allowing the state to produce large-scale productions on its own. Box office receipts for these productions often top $100 and even $200 million, which is already comparable to the box office results of many Hollywood blockbusters. However, in early 2012, the restrictions that had served the national film industry well were lifted, but this is unlikely to fundamentally change the situation. Given the number of potential viewers inside the country, the only task China faces now is to build new cinemas, which ideally should number in the tens of thousands. When this task is accomplished (which no one seems to doubt will happen), China will be able to successfully compete with Hollywood, which will inevitably lead to a redistribution of spheres of influence and redistribution of financial flows within the global film industry.
India has no less potential, but the initial insularity and focus of the Indian film industry exclusively on its own viewer is unlikely to enable it to reach the world stage. This will require a fundamental reconsideration of India’s own cinematic tradition. This scenario seems highly unlikely for the time being.
European cinema will remain a haven for something auteuristic, which demands first and foremost artistic value, and then commercial potential.
What place in this changing system of coordinates will Russia take? Most likely, the Russian cinema will remain a pleasant “exotic” for a Western audience, focused primarily on the names of specific directors. From a technical point of view, Russian cinema is too far behind similar examples of Hollywood production, and it is not clear what could eliminate the gap in the foreseeable future.
The increasing weight of the Internet in the mass media space every year will most likely affect not only the technology of promoting films to viewers, but may also partially replace going to the cinema. The increasingly popular Internet cinemas, where anyone can watch yesterday’s new releases completely free of charge and legally, could pose serious competition to their off-line prototypes. Of course, given the serious development of technology, which reduces the difference between the two to a digestible minimum. Do not forget about the pirate torrent trackers, distributing content illegally, which does not stop the lion’s share of movie buffs around the world.
Much less change is to be expected in the techniques, the manner of presentation, and the basic principles of cinematic language. Of course, as noted above, technical innovations can bring new colors to cinematography, but in the end, the role of cinema – to make sense, filter and analyze reality – is unlikely to undergo major changes in the short or even long term. In this sense, the 21st century, the second century of cinema, will be the time when the system of coordinates will be formed (some would say it happened at the end of the 20th century), within which cinema will harmoniously exist as an independent and, most importantly, self-sufficient art form, on a par with literature, theater and painting.