Shudder, film lover, shudder. Warner Bros and Apple are releasing 'iOS special editions of The Dark Knight and Inception. In short, you can stream them through the App Store, download them to your device, or this is the clever bit your iPad, and then watch them on your iPhone. Nothing wrong there, on the face of it in fact, its a clever refinement of how you get films onto phones in the first place. None of it is even brand new technology. Its tough these days to get the train without someone at the very least working their way through Lost, and weve had to get used to averting our gaze in a never-ending battle against spoilers not that I spend my commute staring into other peoples laps, you understand. No, the problem is this: why would anyone want to watch films on their phone in the first place? Its difficult not to sound like a right plonker talking about this issue, so Ill just jump straight in with the word 'desecration. Watching films on your phone is a desecration of the art of cinema (told you Id sound like a ponce), and while it may be convenient while travelling, at least an e-reader will show the way it was intended to be seen. There are countless professionals around the world who labour for years years - on any one film, even the rubbish ones. Everything you see has been carefully deliberated over, considered, experimented with and argued over by technicians and artists of enormous skill. Every framing, focus pull, nuance of performance or crease in a costume will be designed to heighten the emotional or intellectual effect of their film. They will have made these decisions under the assumption that youll see their work on a screen the size of a bus, or at the very least one of todays hefty TVs. Watching a film on your phone invalidates all that work; its just a waste of time to spend a day mulling over which camera angle best captures a scene if the whole thing is going to be reduced to a screen the size of a pack of cards. This sounds like dorky genuflecting to some filmic priesthood who just want to indulge themselves, but its not. Film isnt TV; TV, by and large, is about shooting the events depicted as best you can within what are usually hideously demanding schedules. Theres nothing wrong with Eastenders, but its tough to argue that the experience emerges from the camera work in the same way as, say, Raging Bull. Ive experimented, and watching anything, be it Apocalypse Now, The Hangover or Uncle Boonmee, is a vastly reduced experience when youre holding a tiny gizmo in front of you. Vastly reduced, and totally different its like watching a DVD with the volume down. You get the kernel of the experience, but thats about it. You wouldnt hire a child to play King Lear. Theres more. While I adore the home entertainment experience as much as the next lazy man, cinema is meant to be a communal experience. A good audience can enrich a film to an enormous degree try watching Bruno in a room with a thousand people howling with laughter, then try watching it on a phone on the 10:52 to Cambridge, and youll see what I mean. Comedy and horror are where this most applies, but even Archipelago benefited from some shared chin-stroking in the cinema. Its difficult not to sound like an old stick in the mud or a film fetishist who cant understand why most people dont care about the deeper vagaries of film exhibition. But watching a film on a phone just isnt as good an experience and clever distribution methods wont change that. Or do I need to get a better phone? Telegraph