Oscars in this area have been going to pioneers. Unfortunately, Star Wars has just been producing more of the same. More in quanity and more in quality. Granted it is amazing...but if you look at Matrix...those effects were ground breaking...LOTR...the quality was so much higher than anything else, it was incredible. But then again, some things don't make sense...like Spider-man 2 winning....
Ultimately it depends on what the competition looks like. Ask me again in January.
Originally posted by tlbauerle
Oscars in this area have been going to pioneers. Unfortunately, Star Wars has just been producing more of the same. More in quanity and more in quality. Granted it is amazing...but if you look at Matrix...those effects were ground breaking...LOTR...the quality was so much higher than anything else, it was incredible. But then again, some things don't make sense...like Spider-man 2 winning....Ultimately it depends on what the competition looks like. Ask me again in January.
dude, go back and read my last post about that. The matrix created ONE new effect, granted, those films looked amazing, but they weren't ground breaking in the industry. Only bullet time, which again they can't use in other movies because it just reminds everyone of the matrix. TWENTY SIX NEW TYPES OF EFFECTS WERE CREATED JUST FOR TPM. Its easy to say its more of the same, because they are supposed to have a semi-consistent look. The impact on the industry from just Episode 1 was incredible. Go read up on the subject, get the Star Wars editions of Cinefex magazine, go read trade press from the Special Effects industry and you'll see what I'm talking about. ILM doesn't get as much credit as it should these days because to the average joe movie goer, a lot of what's out there looks impressive, but the Star Wars films, PT and OT have made a lot of those OTHER movies possible, like LOTR, Matrix, and Spider-man (which the first one was severely lacking in scale and detail consistancy with its digital stunt double).
really, when i say 'f*** the academy' i dont say that out of
anger...i really dont care. i think the last time i watched the oscars
i was like 15 or 16, and even then it was a big *yawn*. also, the 'academy award winner' lable on a dvd has no impression on me
and is no factor in my decision to buy it or not. the academy just represents all superficial politics in a superficial organisation.
GL doesnt give a shit about them, so why should we?😬
Originally posted by eXSBass
For special effects we have:- The Opening Space Battle
- Various other shots
- Yoda vs Sids
- Ans Vs ObsWe have a hell ov'a Oscar winning moments there! If we don't win it then the judges are retards!
Honestly, besides camerawork and whatnot, movies are pretty much subject to opinion. I have too many of my own opinions to care abotu what "Oscar" has to say.
Originally posted by PVS
really, when i say 'f*** the academy' i dont say that out of
anger...i really dont care. i think the last time i watched the oscars
i was like 15 or 16, and even then it was a big *yawn*. also, the 'academy award winner' lable on a dvd has no impression on me
and is no factor in my decision to buy it or not. the academy just represents all superficial politics in a superficial organisation.GL doesnt give a shit about them, so why should we?😬
As for ROTS, it probably won't win, but its effects will be way better than anything else that comes out this year. For all the praising people give WETA and other effects shops, no one else can touch ILM, and Lucas pushes them harder than anyone else.
Unno
I disagree. Labels on DVD's mean something to me. If I know that a movie has won an Oscar, I usually go in with lower expectations
😉
Look for a ROTS vs. War of the Worlds vs. King Kong showdown, with the latter two sure to be favorites of Academy voters (b/c of Spielberg, Jackson...) Don't expect much from the Oscars
WOTW looks to be pretty exciting and I feel will have a better chance of winning than Episode 3. I think the reason Star Wars doesn't get it is because too many people are expecting too much. The special effects in most movies are not on par with the prequels, but since the settings are mostly natural, I think they just stand out more.
Star Wars is totally fictional and made from the ground up. In a sense, it meshes well as one piece and ultimately, doesn't force anything to stand out intensively. Sure, the scenes are big, but they're subtle at the same time. Nothing too overly "wow", just stuff that looks cool.
Not so sure if that's always a good thing, but the scenes are easily forgettable after you see some of them, but they never cease to amaze after constant viewings. That, in itself, says a lot.
Originally posted by mephistodesigns
dude, go back and read my last post about that. The matrix created ONE new effect, granted, those films looked amazing, but they weren't ground breaking in the industry. Only bullet time, which again they can't use in other movies because it just reminds everyone of the matrix. TWENTY SIX NEW TYPES OF EFFECTS WERE CREATED JUST FOR TPM. Its easy to say its more of the same, because they are supposed to have a semi-consistent look. The impact on the industry from just Episode 1 was incredible. Go read up on the subject, get the Star Wars editions of Cinefex magazine, go read trade press from the Special Effects industry and you'll see what I'm talking about. ILM doesn't get as much credit as it should these days because to the average joe movie goer, a lot of what's out there looks impressive, but the Star Wars films, PT and OT have made a lot of those OTHER movies possible, like LOTR, Matrix, and Spider-man (which the first one was severely lacking in scale and detail consistancy with its digital stunt double).
I know...but sorry...bullet time (at least the non-CGI bullettime) was even more revolutionary than what was done on TPM. It just was.
I know all about TPM, and did a paper on it way back in 1999 for English 102 (www.toddlbauerle.com if you want to read).
But TPM dropped the ball on some things ... like the Gungan parade at the end where everyone is in sync.
The problem is that the Academy doesn't differentiate between CGI characters and better looking CGI characters...and rightly so. I think if another film comes along this year and does something more revolutionary than just doing the same thing better...ROTS will have their work cut out for them when Oscar time rolls around.
ILM just isn't as cutting edge as it was fifteen years ago. It is a leader, but there are several FX houses that do extremely good work.