<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Newly Restored Wings</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/</link>
	<description>Seeing today&#039;s cinema through the movies of the past</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:05:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: iluvcinema</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/#comment-310</link>
		<dc:creator>iluvcinema</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:55:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/?p=671#comment-310</guid>
		<description>This is good; it has been years since I saw this first on cable.

It looks like the success of The Artist may revive a mainstream interest in silents that have already been made.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is good; it has been years since I saw this first on cable.</p>
<p>It looks like the success of The Artist may revive a mainstream interest in silents that have already been made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Eagan</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/#comment-305</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Eagan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/?p=671#comment-305</guid>
		<description>Sorry for any confusion. The top photo is before, the bottom is after. These were supplied by Paramount.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry for any confusion. The top photo is before, the bottom is after. These were supplied by Paramount.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/#comment-304</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 16:32:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/?p=671#comment-304</guid>
		<description>Um, which picture is before, and which one is after?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um, which picture is before, and which one is after?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/#comment-302</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/?p=671#comment-302</guid>
		<description>JP: &quot;Now, I suspect that the “Artist” will cascade a host of redone, remastered, blue rayed, DVD’d silent films so that the studios can make another buck.&quot;

JP, and what&#039;s the matter with that? If it helps to get these early films exposure to a whole new generation or two, then all the better. The problem before was that the studios had lots of great films in their archives but didn&#039;t bother releasing them on any new formats due to to cost. I for one am glad that at least Wings is getting a decent release, and The Artist, along with the centennial anniversaries of a few studios, should help to bring a few more early cinema gems to new audiences.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JP: &#8220;Now, I suspect that the “Artist” will cascade a host of redone, remastered, blue rayed, DVD’d silent films so that the studios can make another buck.&#8221;</p>
<p>JP, and what&#8217;s the matter with that? If it helps to get these early films exposure to a whole new generation or two, then all the better. The problem before was that the studios had lots of great films in their archives but didn&#8217;t bother releasing them on any new formats due to to cost. I for one am glad that at least Wings is getting a decent release, and The Artist, along with the centennial anniversaries of a few studios, should help to bring a few more early cinema gems to new audiences.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JP</title>
		<link>http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/2012/01/a-newly-restored-wings/#comment-301</link>
		<dc:creator>JP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 23:50:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/?p=671#comment-301</guid>
		<description>Nice! Those people after the war were really scrappy. With half of the schooling that we have, they became movie makers and producers and engineers. It is inspirational to me how this period pre and post WW1 produced all of this. And the guys were natty dressers to boot (1930&#039;s) fashions were the cat&#039;s pajamas. :)
Now, I suspect that the &quot;Artist&quot; will cascade a host of redone, remastered, blue rayed, DVD&#039;d silent films so that the studios can make another buck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice! Those people after the war were really scrappy. With half of the schooling that we have, they became movie makers and producers and engineers. It is inspirational to me how this period pre and post WW1 produced all of this. And the guys were natty dressers to boot (1930&#8242;s) fashions were the cat&#8217;s pajamas. <img src='http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/movies/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Now, I suspect that the &#8220;Artist&#8221; will cascade a host of redone, remastered, blue rayed, DVD&#8217;d silent films so that the studios can make another buck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
