Well, just to confuse everyone after the "myth of the prosumer" thread... here's my 2 Euro's worth.
Format is irrlevant... if you give the movie going public a good enough reason to want to see your film, you'll get an audience. One of the factors that won't sway that decision is the camera it was shot on.
However, if you want that audience to grow via word of mouth (You do, trust me on this)... then having people telling their mates "it was a good idea but it looked dreadful" isn't in your best interest.
Where this gets more complicated is in the area in between production and the audience. Sales Agents and distributors get inundated by really, really dreadful DV movies. So, they are naturally suspicious of low end formats... unless the audience is already guaranteed
(I've got to go to a lunch meeting so more on this later!)
LATER:
OK. Now let's get into the complex stuff.
The problem with a DV shoot is it starts on the premise that there isn't enough money to do the job properly... in 99.99% of cases the film shot isn't really ready or suitable for commercial production. This isn't the same as saying it shouldn't be made, because how will you learn if you don't make stuff (er, let's not get back into that... LOL). What I am saying is this: a film that HAS to shot on DV is more than likely going to be a bad film... but this isn't because the format is bad, simply because nobody believes it's worth a higher level of investment.
So, there is a direct link between lack of budget, choice to shoot on DV and the ultimate failure of the film... however, the failure isn't a format failure; it's that the format is cheap allows people to green light a project that isn't properly developed.
So, although it is perfectly possible to make a fabulous, award winning film on DV... but it's unlikely because the format choice is driven by lack of budget and lack of budget is often driven by a poor starting point... ie the script and the skills of the film maker.
It's also possibly to get very high profile name actors to work on your film... but again the key is the concept, script and the abilities of the film maker. But, the thing is... if you've got a significant name, then you're probably able to secure either pre-sales or investment and therefore don't need to shot on DV.
Shooting on DV is an incredibly brave choice... for all kinds of reasons. Firstly, because the more limited the camera the higher your skill levels need to be to get an acceptable image out of it; secondly, because the industry will start with an expectation that the film is dreadful and will look for flaws in the images; and finally, I think Elliot Grove said it best when he said "DVC shouldn't stand for Done Very Cheap" basically, his take is that DV should be a creative choice not one of budget driven expediency.
I agree with him... we don't see many great films made on DV because it's harder to do well than conventional methods and the very cheapness of the format encourages people to greenlight scripts that needed either development or binning.
