<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
 <channel>
  <title>Cinephobia</title>
  <link>Cinephobia</link>
  <description>Writing About Movies New and Old</description>
  <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:15:56 GMT</lastBuildDate>
  <generator>ListGarden Program 1.3.1</generator>
  <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
  <item>
   <title>Review: Avatar</title>
   <link>http://www.cinephobia.com/avatar.html</link>
   <description>&quot;Cameron hasn’t solved any of the problems of 3D (how could he?) so the shitty colours, focus problems, awkward separation of different planes and general distractingness of 3D remain. The empiricist in me can’t argue with the raves from others about how immersive they find 3D, but I remain frankly completely bewildered. In particular, I find it odd that in an age where many so-called cinema enthusiasts are actually home theatre enthusiasts, people would enthusiastically embrace a technology that so aggressively degrades image quality.&quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cinephobia.com/avatar.html&quot;&gt;Click through for full item&lt;/a&gt;).</description>
   <pubDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2009 23:15:54 GMT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>The Best Year for Animation Ever?</title>
   <link>http://www.cinephobia.com/blog/2009/12/best-year-for-animated-features-ever.html</link>
   <description>&quot;Stuart Wilson of hoopla asked my view on the suggestion that this the best year ever for animated films. The short answer is 'no, that's silly.' &quot; (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cinephobia.com/blog/2009/12/best-year-for-animated-features-ever.html&quot;&gt;Click through for full item). &lt;/a&gt;</description>
   <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:44:53 GMT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>Review: 2012</title>
   <link>http://www.cinephobia.com/2012.html</link>
   <description>&quot;Inflation of scale is coupled with deflation of ambition: Emmerich’s career has been a prolonged exercise in lowering our expectations so that we accept what he dishes up without question. It works to a point.&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cinephobia.com/2012.html&quot;&gt;Click through for full item&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
   <pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:15:26 GMT</pubDate>
  </item>
  <item>
   <title>All A-Twitter</title>
   <link>http://www.cinephobia.com/blog/2009/11/all-twitter.html</link>
   <description>&quot;When audiences expect sites to update with new content at least daily, that's a huge demand on the author; 140 characters allows for the faster turnover without the chore factor. Twitter is basically reducing our expectations of on-line content so that it better aligns with expectations about how fast sites should update.&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cinephobia.com/blog/2009/11/all-twitter.html&quot;&gt;(Click through for full item).&lt;/a&gt;</description>
   <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:09:23 GMT</pubDate>
  </item>
 </channel>
</rss>
