Academy Awards Nomination and Reaction

You know, I love Star Wars but.....

Some of the effects in EPII were not that great. In Padme's apartment, it's painfully obvious that OB and Anakin are standing in front of a blue screen. The digital camera does not capture depth of field well, it has a very difficult time with selective focus, and this is quite apparent.

The scene with anakin riding the Shaak was laughable, and I do mean people in the theater laughed when they saw it.

Sure SW had MORE effects. The award is not who has the MOST effects, but the best.

Gollum won it for them, it's as simple as that. Was anybody talking about an oscar nomination for Jar Jar, no. They were for Gollum.

 

you know what's funny - not a soul on this planet actually cares who wins the Visual Effects Oscar (bar those that were nominated and some internet fanboys). Maybe you should just take this a little less seriously.

 

I think Lucas said it best during the audio commentary of AOTC that with TPM, ILM had to go from 0 to 80 MPH in terms of effects whereas with AOTC, it was 80-90. I'll admit the effects weren't as good as they could've been, but you'd think they'd cut George some slack for pushing the enevelope on having the first major movie in DLP format. The lack of participation from Dennis Muren also hurt the quality of effects. Muren spent much of his time working on other movies like A.I when AOTC was in post-production. Here's hoping, he'll give his full attention to Episode 3 and give viewers ILM's own "shock and awe" campaign. With a good storyline of course to go with it.

 

Since DVD has taken on so strongly we're now able to see films in a totally different light. Before DVD we never quite realised how certain things in movies were done literally at the last minute and therefore don't have the same quality as the rest of the movie.
Take FOTR. When you watch the DVD you learn on several occasions that the Prologue was only added to the film 4 weeks before the premiere. Up until that point most of those scenes were intended to be part of the Council of Elrond or Gandalf's conversation with Frodo in Bag End. The decision to create the prologue was made so late by the studio that they had to use shots with less than perfect effects and also had to use music from elsewhere in the film since Howard Shore had already finished recording it.
Other examples are The Mummy Returns and Men in Black II. Both films had less than stellar effects but the DVD's reveal that ILM simply couldn't finish them in time for their projected release dates.
All this might explain why some effects in TTT are not as great as Gollum. It was reported on several websites that PJ had trouble finishing the film and had major arguments with the studio about the final cut. So PJ might have decided at some stage to allocate all resources to the crucial Gollum scenes at the expense of "not-quite-as-important" effects as the "hobbits with treebeard" shots. It has also been speculated that most of those shots were late re-shoot additions that needed to be included because the studio forced PJ to edit out the "ents at helm's deep" subplot (which we will see in the extended edition)

 

I agree Tukafo. What movie wants to be known only for it's award winning special effects?

 

Tukafo, at least you are talking some sense. With you talking about ILM not having enough time to finish effects, that got me think about Return of the King. Its likely that this will have many dodgy SFX. Still, at least the film will be good.

And I think AOTC should have won the award, but I'm crying over it because if it had to lose then what better than to lose to TTT. But if Spider-Man had won... I mean don't get me wrong, I love Spider-Man and think Raimi did an excellent job, but some of the effects were pretty poor.

I think I'll watch AOTC tonight.

 

Tukafo, at least you are talking some sense. With you talking about ILM not having enough time to finish effects, that got me think about Return of the King. Its likely that this will have many dodgy SFX. Still, at least the film will be good.

There are a lot of forces conspiring against ROTK's effects in terms of time... word is there are a (bigger than usual) number of new shoots that are going to happen for the film, there are over 150 new effects being done for TTT:EE, plus it needs to be completed a month sooner for Oscar review. From now on the Oscars are to be held in February to reduce the amount of time studios have to "market" their films to the Academy (also, the 5 best picture noms all saw release AFTER 12/18... the last 2 weeks of the year!). Of course New Line wants to see this one go out with a bang so they will need the final cut of the film in early November, about a month earlier than usual.

I really enjoy LotR (especially since I can't wade through the books... BORING!), but I think it's best shot for Oscars was with FotR... it had the fresh factor on it's side.

All I care about for SW is that it has the best produced DVD's on the market. Right now TPM is a top 3 sound demo disc and AOTC is the #1 visual demo disc. The podrace & coruscant chase scenes may be the best lengthy demo material ever composed.

 

Just because it won an Oscar doesen't mean it is the best. Look at Citizen Kane which is often considered the greatest film ever. Yet it did not win Best Picture or Best Director for Orson Wells.

Also look at Shakespear In Love winning Best Pictur over Saving Private Ryan. Or Gladiator winning Best Picture. Russell Crowe wining Best Actor over Tom Hanks for Castaway.

Also Gladiator won the Best Effects Oscar and they used the same process that Lucas and ILM did with TPM. Build the sets just high enough to shoot the actors against a real backgroud and finish the set with a CG painting.

So TTT wining the Oscar for Best Effects doesn't mean it had the best effects.

Besides the LOTR pictures are basicly unfinished when they are released to the public. We are just getting a rough cut. It is only when we see the Extended Cut that we get the real picture.

I whould say that Yoda, Jar Jar, Watto, the Kaminoains, and even Draco from Dragonheart give better performances than Gollum. People might have thought that Jar Jar was annoying but they treated him like he was a real life creature.

But Gollum is still very good and LOTR pictures are very good too. Hopefully when LOTR and Star Wars is finished everybody can just sit back and see that we will have another new film series to enjoy. LOTR will stand along side Star Wars, Indiana Jones, James Bond, and Back To The Future as one of the best film series.

Plus everybody should go look at Box Office Mojo and check the ALL Time Box Office list adjusted to inflation and higher ticket prices. While it's true the the Star Wars films don't make the same kind of money the first 3 did. Everybody can see that all the movies today don't make the same kind of cash. Even Titanic doesen't come near the box office take of A New Hope or the All Time Biggest money maker Gone With The Wind.

 

Durwood: "Shot for shot, CLONES was clearly superior to THE TWO TOWERS"

I wouldn't say that it was much better, because the VFX in both films were the best you will get in the world today. However, some people think that it is harder to composite CG animation onto a real background, and many make this their main argument in support of TTT. In my opinion TPM perfected this way before Lord of the Rings went into post-production.

However, it is harder to create the entire enviroment digitally, and although we seen many digital mattes in TPM, AOTC has succesfully shown us truly realistic digital environments. Especially in the case of the Clone Wars. For this, AOTC effects were far more original than TTT.

Also, Gollum was very well done but WETA basically replicated the use of effects that was used for Jar Jar in TPM and furthered it to include facial reactions as well. However, Yoda's facial movements were just as amazing and they never had a human face to act as a model for them. The face had to replicate the facial movements from scratch and they had to try and retry with Yoda. It was a far more difficult thing to do with Yoda, and it came off just as well as Gollum.

Although the sucess of the CG acts as a basis for the audience to believe in that character, it was Gollum's characterisation that made him so appealing, not the CG.

"the fake looking walking trees"

Pretty impressive actually, for something that is very difficult to achieve.

"Merry and Pippen floating in front of a plainly obivious bluescreen for most of the movie"

I would have to say that the medium shots and close-ups of Merry and Pippin on top of treebeard were the poorest visual effects of the film. The rest I thought were pretty special.

"and the nearly indiscernable battle at Helms Deep"

Its without doubt the greatest cinematic battle ever. It was a total assault on the senses and I think it blew most viewers away.

However, if its for VFX, then AOTC should have really prevailed.

 

When talking about Star Wars " Golum "
everybody`s talking about Yoda but what
about Dex, Taun-We, Lama Su and
all the others?

For myself I think AOTC is the best talking about effects, **** WETA if you can have ILM. Seriously, ILM would have won if
the Academy Award woudn`t hate Lucas
that much.

Dobby from Harry Potter didn`t look bad
as well. ILM?

Spiderman: CGI? WHERE?! A very few scenes with CGI. Most of the time from afar distance. ILM can make flesh people
that aren`t totally covered by a suit.

Maybe I´m too much of a LOTR basher.
I bash it because it`s way overrated while
the PT is way underrated.
I kinda liked FOTR but I never went to see
TTT. I only saw a few scenes of it but
it always seems to be pretty blury going for Special Effects.

ILM is special effects. They came up with
it.

 

I wouldn't say that it was much better, because the VFX in both films were the best you will get in the world today. However, some people think that it is harder to composite CG animation onto a real background, and many make this their main argument in support of TTT. In my opinion TPM perfected this way before Lord of the Rings went into post-production.

However, it is harder to create the entire enviroment digitally, and although we seen many digital mattes in TPM, AOTC has succesfully shown us truly realistic digital environments. Especially in the case of the Clone Wars. For this, AOTC effects were far more original than TTT.

It is harder to blend CG and reality than to create something entirely CG, because the integration must be seamless to achieve the effect. When WETA makes a CG orc, it has to look real next to a guy in make-up acting as an orc. And it does. ILM has no such problem, because when they make multiple characters of the same look they're all digital. Geonosians, clonetroopers, Kaminoans, etc. They don't have to match anything, except for their environment, which is, once again, digitally created. WETA has to composite the digital characters into the real world. The lighting on Gollum has to be perfectly matched to the lighting provided by the real-world environment the shots he is in are filmed in.

ILM matches the actors to the effects. WETA matches the effects to the actors. I would never say ILM had an easy job with AOTC, as it's obvious from the effects quality it took a lot of effort. But clearly, WETA has the harder job when it comes to effects compositing.

Also, Gollum was very well done but WETA basically replicated the use of effects that was used for Jar Jar in TPM and furthered it to include facial reactions as well. However, Yoda's facial movements were just as amazing and they never had a human face to act as a model for them. The face had to replicate the facial movements from scratch and they had to try and retry with Yoda. It was a far more difficult thing to do with Yoda, and it came off just as well as Gollum.

Jar Jar was not new. Nothing that has come after him has "replicated" the use of effects to achieve him, because those effects were already around. CG characters has been around since the 80's. Terminator 2 had the first CG biped. Dragonheart had the first CG character in a leading role. What did Jar Jar do that was new? Nothing. The only difference is that he was more prolific than any of those other characters.

Gollum looks better than Jar Jar or any other CG character ever has. On top of that, he gives a convincing performance and doesn't call attention, during viewing, to the fact that he is an effect. That is why Gollum is revolutionary.

[image=http://www.theargonath.cc/characters/gollum/pictures/gollum5.jpg]

[image=http://www.theargonath.cc/characters/gollum/pictures/gollum7.jpg]

Looks more photorealistic than any digital character in AOTC. Gives a better performance than any digital character in AOTC. Blows away every CG character in every movie that came before TTT. By far, one of the highlights of the film, and the reason it deserves the Oscar for its effects. Take him away, and I'd say AOTC and TTT were about equal.

Its without doubt the greatest cinematic battle ever. It was a total assault on the senses and I think it blew most viewers away.

Agreed. This stuff about it being too dark and unviewable is some of the saddest "rationale" behind an argument I've ever heard.

 

Someone should blame Tolkein then if they have a problem with the "darkness" during the Battle of Helm's Deep. It was meant to be that way. The point was that that pivotal battle took place during the most miserable conditions possible -- rain and lightning and dark clouds everywhere. It's the true test of courage for the heroes to see if they could overcome the most hellish odds thrown at them. And the darkness is symbolic given what occurs in the story.

 

Darth_Insidious: "It is harder to blend CG and reality than to create something entirely CG"

It can be, but this is not my point. Although it is entirely CG, the compositing of seperate CG elements can just be as difficult and in the case of AOTC was more difficult. Especially where you have both CG and real actors against a completely artificial backdrop. At one point to put a CG actor into a real back-ground was pretty hard, but ILM were the ones who perfected that effect a while back. It is no longer hard, but is now pretty simple to ILM artists and others like WETA.

However, the new challenge to ILM, which they admit in documentaries was to try and pull of truly realistic digital enviroments and then compositing the real actors into that enviroment (both CG and real, but esp real). It is much more difficult than you admit DI and has never been used to the extent that it was in AOTC. AOTC was a whole new level of VFX. TTT was not.

Darth_Insidious: "WETA has to composite the digital characters into the real world"

ILM have been doing this succesfully for several years. Tell me how the integration in TTT was made any more difficult from previous work of similar sorts.

Darth_Insidious: "Jar Jar was not new. Nothing that has come after him has "replicated" the use of effects to achieve him, because those effects were already around."

"What did Jar Jar do that was new? Nothing"

If you feel Jar Jar was just another CG character then you were wrong. It marked the first effective use of motion-capture and control techniques for replicating CG characters from human actors' movements. May I say that this was then used by WETA to achieve the Gollum effect, and they improved it to include facial movements. The reason this was necessary was because Gollum was once a Hobbit-like creature and had very human features and this had to be noticable in the CG character. Yoda and Jar-Jar are not supposed to have anything human-like about them.

Darth_Insidious: "Looks more photorealistic than any digital character in AOTC"

He's not more photorealistic, but because we can see the human side to his features, it is understandable why viewers would say he is more "realistic" than Yoda. I still think that Gollum was great, but if you asked 100 VFX artists what was the greater development in VFX was I'm afraid they would probably go for AOTC. ILM have always been at the front of VFX technology and still are.

Darth_Insidious: "Take him away, and I'd say AOTC and TTT were about equal."

Whatever you say bud. ????? ?????

Finally, regarding the Battle of Helm's Deep, thanks for agreeing with me about something DI. When I walked out the cinema I said that the battle scenes would be very hard to be beaten in the near future. But then I remembered the Battle of the Pelennor Fields is on its way. Roll on ROTK....

 

What did Jar Jar do that was new? Nothing. The only difference is that he was more prolific than any of those other characters.

Conveniently forgetting about the clothing Jar Jar wore throughout the entire film that was all CGI.... oh and don't forget about Watto, Boss Nass, all the Gungan Warriors that also set a new standard for a CG character that wasn't just skin and bones.

And I find it fascinating that the LOTR films are being given credit for realizing the vision of their creator. Star Wars does the exact same thing (except without a 50-year-old manuscript to draw from) and is criticized because it wasn't what people thought it should be.

*chuckles in amusement*

 

All effects houses write new coding for almost all movies. New things are being done every time an effects-heavy movie comes out. It does not make those new things important necessarily. Clothing simulation had been done before Jar Jar. His was done the best at the time, that I won't dispute.

And sorry, Boss Nass being a fat-ass doesn't make him anything new. He, like all the other Gungans, was a digital biped. Digital bipeds had been done before. He didn't look real, he didn't give an incredible performance. That goes for the rest of the characters you mentioned. Thought I find Watto to be most impressive, as his line-delivery and conversations were dead-on.

I have no doubt that the prequels perfectly realize the vision of their creator.

 

However, the new challenge to ILM, which they admit in documentaries was to try and pull of truly realistic digital enviroments and then compositing the real actors into that enviroment (both CG and real, but esp real). It is much more difficult than you admit DI and has never been used to the extent that it was in AOTC. AOTC was a whole new level of VFX. TTT was not.

There were scores of movies that had put human characters on CG backrounds. Doing it over and over and over in the same film doesn't make it newer.

ILM have been doing this succesfully for several years. Tell me how the integration in TTT was made any more difficult from previous work of similar sorts.

WETA's work was more difficult because they had to composite a CG character into varied real environments, and at the same time get him to verbally and physically interact with human actors a great deal. Lighting especially is difficult when you're dealing with real places. Easier to match a digital character to a digital backround than a digital character to a real backround.

If you feel Jar Jar was just another CG character then you were wrong. It marked the first effective use of motion-capture and control techniques for replicating CG characters from human actors' movements. May I say that this was then used by WETA to achieve the Gollum effect, and they improved it to include facial movements. The reason this was necessary was because Gollum was once a Hobbit-like creature and had very human features and this had to be noticable in the CG character. Yoda and Jar-Jar are not supposed to have anything human-like about them.

Motion capturing had been done years before TPM came out, and effectively at that.

He's not more photorealistic, but because we can see the human side to his features, it is understandable why viewers would say he is more "realistic" than Yoda. I still think that Gollum was great, but if you asked 100 VFX artists what was the greater development in VFX was I'm afraid they would probably go for AOTC. ILM have always been at the front of VFX technology and still are.

You have the VES telling you that TTT had superior effects. If AOTC's truly were so ground-breaking, then it would've swept the same way Towers did.

 

This thread isn't supposed to be an in-depth discussion on AOTC's effects compared to TTT's effects. It's supposed to be reacting to the Academy Awards. TPM, Terminator, Dragonheart, and other movies mentioned shouldn't be dragged into this discussion.

 

The one award AOTC was nominated for was Best Visual Effects. It lost that award, and it's only right that the merits of the movie in that category be put against the comparitive merits of TTT. And it's certainly relevant to bring up other movies when talking about the originality of the effects.

 

WETA's work was more difficult because they had to composite a CG character into varied real environments, and at the same time get him to verbally and physically interact with human actors a great deal. Lighting especially is difficult when you're dealing with real places. Easier to match a digital character to a digital backround than a digital character to a real backround.

Yoda, among many other CGI characters, accomplished this brilliantly in AOTC.

 

The bulk of Yoda's screen time was spent on fake backrounds.

 

My point is that you can try to sit here and discuss it all day, but I don't think anyone here is going to change their mind. Some think that AOTC had better effects, while others think that TTT did. In the end, it all comes down to a personal opinion.

You've shared your reaction. Let someone else come and give their reaction. People often get put off by threads where two or three people are having a somewhat-heated discussion. There's no reason to continue arguing your opinion against someone else's. Neither of you will change your mind, and both of you believe you are correct. Agree to disagree, and let other people share their thoughts on AOTC's performance at the Academy Awards.

 

Darth_Insidious: "There were scores of movies that had put human characters on CG backrounds. Doing it over and over and over in the same film doesn't make it newer."

Yes, they had been placed on digital matte backgrounds, but not totally encased in a
3-D enviroment to the extent of AOTC. It has ben very a very under-rated part of its VFX.

DI: "WETA's work was more difficult because they had to composite a CG character into varied real environments, and at the same time get him to verbally and physically interact with human actors a great deal"

Again, done before by ILM and others setting up the work done by WETA.

I'll say it again in case you keep saying this. It's been done before.

DI: "Motion capturing had been done years before TPM came out, and effectively at that."

Like all technology is developed before it is utilised. Motion capture technology was developed earlier but not used on a main character in a motion picture until TPM - FACT!