Hehe.
First of all, thank you Zensteve, for referencing my project of passion. And thanks for watching it!
bluechip, the funny thing is that I actually made very little effort to make it look good. I shot the movie in 21 days, on a nothing budget, with a 2-person crew, and neither of the 2 people on the crew were legitimate cinematographers. And in post-production, I was on my own, and I'm no colorist.
I shot on the T2i. This camera (or any others in the Canon family) will blow-up to the big screen just fine. Look, I've been to plenty of film fests that screen movies on boring-ol' standard-definition DVD. And you know what? It's okay. Nobody gives a shit, because we're not there to see super-sharp images, we really only care about the story being told.
Zensteve saw my movie at the SoCal Film Fest, which was one of the few fests that actually asked me to send them a high-resolution digital copy of the film. So, Steve saw it in the best quality available for this film. However, the best quality available for this film still didn't have anything remotely resembling anything close to serious cinematography.
The long-winded point I make is that Steve's comments are only a reflection on the resolution and clarity of the picture being projected. To this end, a DSLR holds up quite nicely.