Do We Really Need Cinema 2.0?
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: AMD, Cinema, movie | Themes: Digital Entertainment
Opinion - AMD pitches an enticing idea that takes advantage of the massive horsepower hidden in the company’s graphics card. A second generation cinema, could the result, merging convincing cinematic digital effects with real time interactivity. But we wonder how successful such a Cinema 2.0, as AMD calls it, could be.
From a technology perspective, the potential of graphics chip technology is amazing. If only half of the general purpose GPU demos we have seen until today will be commercially available one day, I am absolutely convinced that this technology is the key to revolutionize the way we are using computers today, offering accurate speech recognition, the possibility of controlling elements on your screen with simple hand movements and real time 4D applications, for example within Google Earth.
One of these demos also included AMD’s Cinema 2.0 pitch yesterday, which AMD says "punches a sizeable hole in the sensory barrier that separates today’s visionary content creators and the interactive experiences they desire to create for audiences around the world." If AMD’s vision is right, then we may be able to experience life-like environments and jump into the role of actors on the screen.
"With Cinema 2.0 you won’t just play movies, you’ll play in them. Imagine the ability to look around the environments in a sci-fi movie, put yourself in the driver’s seat in a race scene, duck behind things and pop up to see what’s going on in an intense firefight - all of these things are possible with Cinema 2.0," said Charlie Boswell, director, Digital Media & Entertainment, at AMD.
According to the company, the secret of Cinema 2.0 is the "blending of highly complex and realistic graphics that traditionally are the exclusive domain of blockbuster films, with the dynamic 3D interactivity of popular video games." Each frame for a movie today can consume up to 30 hours of rendering time and we are far away from a real-time experience. To achieve a 25-30 frames per second real time rendering environment, more computational speed is required and it is generally believed that the needed technology is about ten years out in the future.
With GPUs that are already capable of delivering 1 TFlops per chip and a trend that doubles the performance every 12 months, we could see AMD’s Cinema 2.0 come to life much earlier. An enticing idea, but the question is: Do we really want that?
I don’t want to be all negative here, but I remember a trial of a sort-of interactive movie back in Germany when I was a teenager. The movie was filmed with two different viewpoints - the viewpoints of the two main actors. The movie was shown on two channels at the same time and you were able to switch between the channels and change your location. Needless to say, the concept flopped and was never repeated. You might say that this movie’s interactivity was very limited and I would have to agree, but I do believe that AMD’s Cinema 2.0 will face similar challenges.
Playing a video game and watching a movie are two very different activities - one of the active and the other one passive. When I am watching a movie at the end of a day or on a Saturday night, the last thing I want to do is become hyperactive, morph into the role of the main actor and check out what is going on the sidewalk while I am in a car race. Video games are the complete opposite: This is the environment where you expect to be alert an active and will engage in activities. In front of a good movie, I prefer a bag of popcorn over hugging the remote and annoying my wife with changing viewing angles.
Cinema 2.0 sounds like a good demo of graphics horsepower to me. But let’s leave it at that - a demo.
-
Previous News Article
Firefox 3 Released -
Next News Article
Firefox 3 Website Experiences...


It seems pretty clear to me that you guys don't like AMD. Or did i miss something. I mean, hwo can seriously say no to games delivering cinema quality visuals. Hello! Anybody home!?
i don't get it... why is this needed
@Gemmy, Yes, you did miss something. This isn't about "games with cinema quality visuals", it is about movies with gaming-quality interaction.
The problem is that a movie is a passive experience - an interactive movie ceases to be "Cinema".
I was under the impression that video games are exactly what's being talked about here. Ever since Half-Life came out, there have been games that make you feel as if you are the main character in a movie. The visual realism continues to get better, so what AMD is talking about here is just giving a name to something that's basically happening already.
@Mr_Man
What is being talked about is, making movies interactive. This is NOT the same as making an Activity more like a movie, if it were the verbiage would be the same.
The only time I would want interactivity in a movie would be if the movie was so old that it needed to be differnt for me to find any interest in it.
Does 'playing in a movie' mean switching POVs of a traditional film or playing a cinema-quality game? AMD's statements and this article is ambiguous about what this technology actually does - but there has been a growing trend in marketing games as more of an immersive cinematic experience.
However, the comparison to a failed 2-channel POV film sounds a bit unfair. Although movies are often a passive affair, I can see many people who would be interested in viewer initiated bullet time scenes or being able to move the camera on their own during action scenes. How about a mystery that a user can explore for clues on their own? Ballroom aficionados could spin around classic scenes of Gene Kelly! Certainly a market - even if only a niche market - exists.
Another factor in the usefulness of this technology is the advent of digital film. Without the high cost of a physical medium, a large chunk of a films cost can be removed. Add in advanced 3D rendering along with 2D to 3D virtualization, and you can see where a whole new home theater viewing experience could be created.
Is this what Cinema 2.0 will be? Most likely not. However, it could be the first step in developing a personal experience.
Myself, I'd love to watch a few Jet Li or Gene Kelly films where I could control the camera's POV - and do my own bullet time.
“Today’s demonstration of Cinema 2.0 represents a sip from the multi-billion dollar gaming industry’s Holy Grail, while presenting a new quest to digital filmmakers,” said Richard Huddy, worldwide developer relations manager, AMD Graphics Product Group. “Imagine going to the opening of a movie and upon getting home being able to play a game that looks and feels absolutely identical – right down to the character models and sets.”
So yes, AMD is talking about interactive Movies, AND games that will have the same quality of the movie.
As I agree that I would rather sit back and watch a movie play through than having to be active, if there was a game that was based on a movie that had the same quality and depth of graphics as the movie did, I would find that game to be the eye candy that I want. Granted, from the short demo and most of the press it seems like this is more wishful thinking than what will be to come.
As mentioned above, it seems that they are talking about more movies that you take part in than games that have the graphics quality of a movie.