Should Frank Oz and his team been recognised by Oscar?

Watching the Empire Strikes Back right now with the commentary on and George Lucas says that they tried to get an Oscar nomination for Frank Oz and his puppeteers for the great work they did on Yoda in the film. The Oscar board dismissed the offer on the basis that it was just infact a puppet. There is no denying how great a job they do with Yoda. The way he comes across as a character is brilliant and seems just as alive as the rest of the cast if not more. You only have to compare the Yoda from the original trilogy and the prequel trilogy to see who is more 'alive'

Acting is pretending to be someone else so why cannot people who use puppets not be included in Oscar nominations? They are using their talents to create a character just like people like De Niro create the character of Travis Bickle and Jake Lamotta.

The same can be said for Andy Serkis in Lord of the Rings. He did an awesome job as Gollum and had it not been for him the character of Gollum and the relationship with Sam and Frodo would have been vastly inferior and yet he because he was not seen on the screen in the flesh he is not given a nomination.

Another example can be seen in Labyrinth, Jim Henson does another wonderful job with puppets and created some of the most wonderful characters ever but because they are puppets most of the time they are not given the recognition they deserve.


Rant over.

 

[image=http://www.cutc.org.nz/Newsletter/1999/News4/photos/oscar.jpg]
I do recognize them. They've been by the old trash can and they all need to scram!

 

Frank Oz doesn't play Oscar on Sesame Street! He plays Grover, Bert, and Cookie Monster! WRONG PICTURE!

 

I really think that the Oscars should start recognizing people even if they don't strictly appear on screen, such as Frank Oz or Andy Serkis. They are still acting.

Sadly, it's probably not going to happen just because it would be hard to choose where to draw the line. You're not going to give someone an Oscar for best actor for just reading lines, no matter how good. But if you start given them to people who did have control of the character's appearence on screen, people are going to want to ask for more.

It's quite a tricky thing, the Oscars.




The Cleric 007

 

It's quite a tricky thing, the Oscars

nothing tricky realy, it's all politics.

i have always been extreemly disgusted by the 'self awards' of the entertainment industry.

i can think of no more sad example of self indulgence than those award shows.

if they realy wanted to give meaningful awards they'd ask the viewing audience in totality or statitistical samples.

 

Ocars aren't a measure of quality. Oz's work in ESB will endure as a true milestone regardless of awards. I still feel that the best acting in any of the SW films was that of Oz/Yoda in ESB, beacause you absolutely believed in and accepted the character, when it very easily could have been the silliest thing ever put on film (like a certain character in TPM). Should Oz and the Yoda tech crew have received a special achievment oscar? Sure. But they're no worse for wear without it.

 

Hell, if Best actor/actress was open for nonliving characters, the T-Rex would've won in '93, Yoda would've bagged '81, the shark from jaws would've bagged '75...

 

Well, in the case of those who contributed both voice and movement to a character-- as Oz and Serkis did-- it seems to me quite clear that there should be a way to recognize them. But since such portrayals are rare, you can't really create a new category for them...

 

"Hell, if Best actor/actress was open for nonliving characters, the T-Rex would've won in '93, Yoda would've bagged '81, the shark from jaws would've bagged '75..."

Jake Lloyd in '99, Hayden Christensen in '02.....

 

lol

Marlon Brando in 72..