Also video will never fully offer the same subconcious experience as a moving picture. Film strobes as static images are quickly projected one at a time. Video is a constant series of refresh lines. People have done psychological studies about this, it is not something that you will readily perceive.
As a similar subconcious event, let me say that flourescent lights flicker although you won't see it. If you shoot it on video you will see the flicker. There is also a greencast to flourescent light, you eyes adjust somewhat but film shows this greencast. Some people voice dissatisfaction with working in an office that only has flourescent light.
At one time movies were meant to be seen projected onto a big screen. Some films are designed to be straight to video/tv syndication. This is apparent when films have a "tv safe" area in the shoot (little peripheral action). Early widescreen films were an outright attack on tv viewers, designed to give them "more" than they were getting at home (back when it was first believed that tv was going to put theaters out of business).
You are not only paranoid, but your wrong also. They were make movies and showing them in theaters before TV. Widescreen was gimick to get people back to theaters, later movie companies realized that they could make money by sell widescreen versions on VHS and DVD.
You sir are what is commonly called a movie purist, in that you are fanatically against anyone actually enjoying a movie out of the theater. You're a killjoy.
My reply to you is. :p