AOTC: Oscar nominations

[edited]

YJ edit: When you are banned, don't come back under another name. Doing so doubles the original ban.

 

TadjiStation: "AOTC is ABOUT the visual FX."

George15: How did you come to that conclusion?Let me guess you have tea with GL every week and he just blurted that out.

How I came to that conclusion is up on the screen. By placing an overwhelming emphasis on the VISUAL aspects of his films (i.e. the perfection of all of the visual fx shots), and by de-emphasizing the roles of acting and dialogue, it becomes clear (at least to me) what Lucas is striving for in the SW films. He's making movies about how cool visual fx can be, and he places a skeletal script around it and calls it a day.

This doesn't negate the fact that AOTC got a nomination. It deseves the nomination it received. However, there's more to the role of Visual FX than looking good and fooling the eye.

 

I do know what cinematography is and I have some background in it. First of all "it's all made in a computer" is a load of crap. All the shots are storyboarded and approved beforehand, just like any other film. Furthermore, most shots have a mixture of CGI and live action. Secondly, the finished shots must be approved by Lucas himself. I can assure you a lot of work goes into figuring out the composition of each shot, whether it is digital or not.

Just a few of my favorite shots, in terms of composition, balance, movement, and lighting:

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/bgzam.jpg]

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/starstalk_2.jpg]

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/4083.jpg]

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/v4.jpg]

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/4049.jpg]

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/balcony.jpg]

 

I agree Pooja that it's very hard work. But that work is better recognized as "Best Special Effects" (which it has earned as a nomination) rather than "Best Cinematography". The voters are more interested in natural, not artifical, locations. Because anyone could then go into the computer, rearrange actors or props, and make it look pretty, all in the comfort of their cubicles. But for those men that painstakingly compose shots on location, braving natural elements like weather, light, and other physical obstacles, and still give us something arresting and breathtaking, they do it on the set. That deserves far more recognition. Road to Perdition is an excellent example of this, and my own personal pick for Best Cinematography.

 

I don't deny that the line between cinematography and visual FX is becoming blurred. However, I don't think the cinematography of AOTC should be dismissed merely because much of it was digital. Even in those examples I gave, most everything was indeed real.

 

I agree with foxbatkllr on this issue.

Even if the line between digital and real is being blurred these days on-set, the end goal of the cinematographer is to make sure the film looks good.

So much of the beautiful imagery in Fellowship of the Ring came from the color grading that was all digital (see the DVD documentary on color grading, it's fascinating). Andrew Lesnie and Peter Jackson worked closely with the technicans to make this work. FOTR got best cinematography. And it deserved it.

I don't know how much David Tattersall (D.P. of AOTC) is involved with what goes into the bluescreen space. So that's why I suggest that AOTC should have been nominated for "Best Cinematography: David Tattersall and ILM jointly".

I agree it sounds weird. But no less weird than people suggesting that Andy Serkis and WETA share a nomination for Best Supporting Actor.


Anyway. I felt T2T deserved a nod for Cinematography as well. And while Road to Perdition was a good-looking flick, and I hope it wins (of the nominees), for my money, the best-looking "Earthbound" movie of the year was The Bourne Identity.

Hey, I calls 'em as I sees 'em.



On a side note, that shot foxbatkllr posted of Anakin... looks like a giant Anakin head rising above a mountain range, grabbing a mountain with his fingers and saying "Grrr, Anakin SMASH mountain village".



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Excellent pics, fox. Beautiful images, and proof that Lucas has a keen eye.

My fave shots in the entire film are probably the majority of the scenes in Tatooine.

 

"He's making movies about how cool visual fx can be"

Again your jumping to conclusions based on what has been displayed on screen and not hard evidence(quotes).Until you have a direct quote from Lucas stating that he puts more emphasis on effects,than anything else I won't concede.See that's how the game works.

 

George15
"to Anakin´s nightmare may be one of the most cruel/worst cuts EVER."

You obviously havn't seen alot of movies.

LOL

MachinatingMachiavel
For example, what some consider bad editing in the cut from Qui Gon's call beyond the grave after the tusken slaughter, "Anakin - NOOOO" to Obiwan on Geonosis fussing about what Ani's up to -- I actually consider good story telling, and EFFECTIVE editing.

Yeah it is, the score connects them beautifully too. I love these (and the following) scenes.
If you listen carefully to the score (and I bet you did) from Anakin´s arrival on Tatooine till the end of the funeral.
There´s non stop TOP NOTCH music
(except for the artistic musical silence during most of the asteroid battle) !!!
It´s really an incredible achievement !

I think JW didn´t get an oscar nod for AOTC because:

a.) he´s nomintaed for another score(s ?)
b.) the rehash of TPM soundtrack and using one and the same bits & pieces of music
in different scenes of the SAME movie
(not his fault, but that´s how it is)

JohnWilliams00
Road to Perdition is an excellent example of this, and my own personal pick for Best Cinematography.

I Agree 100%

 

TTT was indeed very cool, but I don't see how it could be nominated for best editing.

The battle in Helm's Deep gains momentum, then cuts to the Ents (which looked fake) 'talking'.

Thats bad editing.

 

earn the difference between continuity and editing before you comment

I do know the difference. And I'm pretty sure there's bad editing in the Boromir death scene .

You're still confused. Editing happens in post. Continuity happens on set; crew members take notes and Polaroids to ensure that the mise-en-scene remains the same from take to take.

The continuity of Boromir's hand is the issue here, not the pacing of the cuts. Therefore, the editing has virtually nothing to do with it.

The battle in Helm's Deep gains momentum, then cuts to the Ents (which looked fake) 'talking'.

Thats bad editing.

So we have one questionable cut in a film of hundreds upon hundreds. Cutting together a battle sequence of Helm's Deep's caliber from over fifteen hours of footage is no mean feat, you know, and that's just one sequence among many.

I think JW didn´t get an oscar nod for AOTC because...

Technically, he can't. A certain percentage of a film's score has to be completely original to qualify. AOTC's, for obvious reasons, wasn't. (Howard Shore's TTT score couldn't have been nominated either.)

And Otis: I agree. One-hour movies are the way to go. Jungle Book 2 for Best Picture!

 

"So we have one questionable cut in a film of hundreds upon hundreds. Cutting together a battle sequence of Helm's Deep's caliber from over fifteen hours of footage is no mean feat, you know, and that's just one sequence among many."

No, thats just one off of the top of my head. And its a pretty important sequence, being the whole ending and all.

And why cut LOTR slack? People here seem to get pissed if one frame has dust on it in SW, yet PJ cutting film from "over fifteen hours of footage is no mean feat."
I guess the guys at Lucasfilm just sit around twiddling their thumbs.

Another example of bad editing in TTT...
The whole Arwen sequence.

Again, overall TTT is an excellent film, but there were some instances of bad editing during VERY important sequences.

 

I do agree that the cutaways to Arwen and Treebeard disrupted the pace somewhat, but it quickly recovered each time. Perhaps the extended edition will smooth things out.

No one's accusing Lucasfilm's post team of twiddling their thumbs, but I'm sure you know of the Herculean effort it took on all parts to create a finished Helm's Deep.

We're talking about constant rain, week upon week of filming, huge crowds of extras to marshal, and ultimately over 900 minutes of footage to sculpt into 45. From that one single sequence in a fifteen-month shoot.

Speaking as an editor myself, that's a hell of a lot to look up to, especially when the overall result turned out as well as it did.

 

DeathStar1977 -- If you were the editor how would you have handled it differently? How else are you going to show the massive Helms Deep battle, the Ents storming Isengard, and Sam and Frodo in Gondor all at the same time? If you simply did it in chronological order, the audience would be bored and restless. It was almost essential to intercut, to increase the tension and momentum, the same way TPM and AOTC intercut their third acts as well.

And I happen to think that Sam's final speech, a stirring voice-over, over images of Helm's Deep and Isengard being ripped to shreds, was a beautiful and moving montage, and that's partly good editing. And the cut of Theoden vanquishing the evil spirit of Saruman was cleverly done and it stands out. That's also editing.

(and I still marvel at the logistics and craftsmenship used to realzie Helm's Deep. An undertaking of that size is definitely not easy, and I also thought it was edited, shot, and choreographed very well.)

 

TadjiStation "He's making movies about how cool visual fx can be"

George15 Again your jumping to conclusions based on what has been displayed on screen and not hard evidence(quotes).Until you have a direct quote from Lucas stating that he puts more emphasis on effects,than anything else I won't concede.See that's how the game works.

George15, I'm not sure what "game" your referring to, but I'm talking about the world of filmmaking, of which I'm a part. All I have to do is look at the sub-par acting and cheesy dialogue as well as the AWESOME fx to know where his prioities lie.

Quotes mean nothing. What's on the screen does.

 

Sure, overall Helm's Deep was amazing. And I hold the difficulty of filmmaking in the highest regard.

I don't think it was poorly done, quite the opposite, but the cutaway was frustrating.

I really liked how in AOTC the end batle just keeps building until we get to see our little green friend show his stuff.

As an editor, perhaps its the specifics that might bother you. Thats not a criticism, a good friend of mine is an editor and he is more detail oriented (for lack of a better description) than I am when it comes to movies. I'm more of a 'big picture' kinda moviegoer.

I'll forgive certain mistakes if the movie as a whole draws me in.

Both AOTC and TTT did in a remarkable way.

EDIT: "If you were the editor how would you have handled it differently? How else are you going to show the massive Helms Deep battle, the Ents storming Isengard, and Sam and Frodo in Gondor all at the same time?"

Thanks for asking! I would have had the Ents prepare for war just as the battle at Helm's Deep started. Have a long sequence at Helm's Deep, intercut with the storming of Isengard. After the deepening wall is blown up, I would have cut to Frodo and Sam. The explosion of the wall is a turning point, and thus a good time to find out what Frodo is up to.

Whats this about Saruman's spirit?

And I agree, the editing of 'Sam's speech' was very well done.

 

Fair enough.

 

"and I still marvel at the logistics and craftsmenship used to realzie Helm's Deep. An undertaking of that size is definitely not easy, and I also thought it was edited, shot, and choreographed very well."

Agreed. Again, its not the battle that I had a problem with. I just would have liked to see the battle coincide with the Ents storming Isengard.

 

"Whats this about Saruman's spirit?"

At the climax of Theoden's struggle with Saruman, the king throws his head back, and his eyes snap wide. In mid-motion, we cut to a wide-eyed Saruman, who completes the motion Theoden started by flipping backwards to the ground.

It's a very nice cut.

 

Gotcha! I thought that JW was talking about the end. Thats why I was confused.

Yes, that was awesome. I also liked how they 'merged' Saruman and Gandalf, both in appearance and voice, when Gandalf re-emerges in Fangorn Forest. "You are following the footsteps of two young hobbits..."

 

Yeah I worded that poorly, it's what Darth Geist said. I should of said the part where Gandlaf is "exorcising" Saruman's sway over King Theoden.

 

An example of editing that I loved in AOTC was how Anakin saves Obi-Wan in the fight versus Dooku:

"Brave of you boy"...cut to Obi reaching for his saber..."but I thought you would have learned your lesson." "I am a slow learner" Anakin spins back...Obi "Anakin!"...tosses Anakin the saber...cut to Anakin catching it...then a very slight pause as Anakin ignites the saber and starts fighting Dooku with two sabers.

I know some would say that we should have been able to see Obi in the sequence, but to me thats something that belongs in moviemistakes.com. The intensity of the sequence, combined with the beautiful movement was outstanding.

EDIT: I'm veering off topic...Its hard to choose between TTT and AOTC in regards to efx. Both were excellent. Yoda, Gollum, Coruscant, Helm's Deep, Geonosis. WETA did the best job they could with the Ents. They weren't poorly done, they just looked kinda fake (I know its a fine line).

Spiderman, on the other hand, looked like it was done by a fingerpainting kindergartner.

 

Can we please talk about the great FOTR and not it's inferior sequel(if you can call it that).TTT is a poor adaptation.It may be a good film(no where near the league of FOTR tho)but it's still a poor adatation.BTW it's also way better than the OT.Especially ESB.

PJ's biggest mistake was making Helms Deep the center piece of the movie.What a waste of 45 minutes.If that scene was cut to oh lets say 30 minutes then PJ could of squezed the rest of the book into the movie without surpassing 3hr.There would be no need for that asinine gondor sequence, so PJ could of precisely followed the book.The gondor sequence was just included to occupy Sam and Frodo during the battle,because for some reason PJ wants to save the encounter with *spoiler* shelob for the next movie.Grr I hate you Peter.

 

Take the movie on its own terms, George. You'll have a much better time. And have patience; Shelob is there, just waiting to strike.

The reason they gave for delaying her entrance is a good one: if they hadn't, Frodo and Sam simply wouldn't have much to do in ROTK.

It's the same reason they extended their encounter with Faramir. In the book, their meeting is a nearly irrelevant non-event; Faramir meets them, sums up their intentions and sends them on their way, much like Tom Bombadil. Granted, he serves a thematic purpose, and proves that despite Boromir's failure, men can be strong?but Aragorn serves that same purpose without the need for repetition.

ROTK spoilers

However, as Faramir obviously figures into the plot later on (as opposed to Bombadil), the filmmakers needed to include him. Now, instead of making his appearance in TTT a simple speed bump, as in the book, they instead used it to dramatically raise both Frodo's despair and Sam's devotion to a new level.

Books are books. Movies are movies. Some books are structured in such a way that they can be filmed page-for-page?both Harry Potter movies have come close. Some, like Tolkien's, are written in an entirely different style, and thus special care needs to be taken to preserve the essence of the books while at the same time constructing a viable film.

 

"Shelob is there, just waiting to strike."

Not to mention the paths of the dead, Pellenor fields, the black gate...

Its going to be a rough ten month wait.

EDIT: As far as the actual award is concerned, if TTT wins, I wouldn't be disappointed. Still, it would be nice for AOTC to win. Star Wars deserves some recognition.