Firsly GL has to submit ROTS to the academy in order for it to be eligible for oscars.
Secondly both Matrix and TTT movies had original SFX combinations to them when compared to TPM and AOTC. Complete CGI characters are not enough nowadays.
I would be very surpridsed if Hayden Christensen wins Best Actor
I'm sure Star Wars will be submitted, but will it even be selected is the question. They always choose 3 films to be nominated. There's not even a chance Hayden would be nominated. Not only do any actors hardly ever get nominated for fantasy/sci-fi films, but Hayden Christensen is a bad actor. I think he looks better in Episode 3, but he was horrible in Episode 2.
I thought Phantom Menace had far worse effects shots than Maul falling down the shaft. Many many worse ones. It didn't lose because of one shot. It lost because Matrix was far superior as far as effects.
ROTS has a great chance of getting an oscar in the special effects department, but best actor/actress, supporting actor/actress - it just aint gonna happen🙁 which is kinda sad since Alec Guinness was nominated for best supporting actor, and the first movie was nominated for best picture. A long time ago....🙁
Hayden for Best Actor?!?! WTF!?!
There is NO way he'll even be nominated... the only awards ROTS has a chance of winning are the technical ones... ie Visual Effects, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Costume, Art Direction (?).
Personally, I don't think it'll win anything... the academy hasn't liked any of the prequels.
Y'know...this is really a stupid conversation. NO ONE here has even seen the damn film yet. Will it be nominated...most likely.
Claims like: "ROTS has a great chance of getting an oscar" cannot be made.
Thanks for everyone else saying the effects weren't all that great. I was starting to think I was nuts.
Originally posted by tlbauerle
If that is the case with Bullettime...I stand corrected...But as far as believability...CGI doesn't come close. Sorry. Maybe its because I've done some CGI work and use photoshop extensively for work and play...but I can see right through stuff and so can a lot of people.
Water for example...I have yet to be convinced of ANY CGI water. Textures...they are good, but still not convincing. In fact...I think the problem is in the detail...it's too clean.
Really? That's strange, because I use Photoshop, Illustrator, Renderman, Maya 6 and a few other programs on a regular basis, and my knowledge of these systems has only made the PT MORE impressive to me. The water in Kamino wasn't convincing? Or even the surface scenes of Finding Nemo? Damn. That's weird man. My friend and I, both designers with frequent users of these systems, and are by no means considered amatuers in our work, find the PT to be just mindblowing, the amount of work, the breakthroughs for the industry as a whole, the doors opened for smaller companies to get going because ILM has simplified what was once thought years off... Watto alone, the stubble, the texture, the facial work, the lighting, just amazing. Yoda, with his still jiggling ears, especially in the trailers for ROTS, just looks outstanding. I love picking up on all the tricks they do, it impresses me that much more because I know how much more the general populace is being affected sub conciously by such subtle work.
Sorry man...Kamino looked like crap...Close ups were decent, but wide establishing shots look terrible. I never bought it was water. My curse is seeing though this stuff...
I'm this way with all digital stuff. I went to a photographer's gallery the other day and while my mother in-law gasped at the stuff, I was like...Um...its all photoshopped and all cover levels were tweaked, etc. She was like..no...I was like..Yes...and ultimately I was right.
I just can't buy a lot of it.
Look there is no question that ROTS will be nominated. The other five movies were nominated before, so I am pretty sure it will be nominated. The question is who will it go against. I have been thinking of other possible movies. War of the Worlds, ILM basically going against itself, Fantastic Four, Sin City, King Kong, Batman Begins, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. That is all I can think of right now. Anybody else have anymore movies.
Originally posted by tlbauerle
Y'know...this is really a stupid conversation. NO ONE here has even seen the damn film yet. Will it be nominated...most likely.Claims like: "ROTS has a great chance of getting an oscar" cannot be made.
Thanks for everyone else saying the effects weren't all that great. I was starting to think I was nuts.
you are nuts, the people claiming the matrix has better effects than Star Wars are too. Go watch one after the other. There's just no comparison. And for someone who thinks this is a stupid conversation, you've sure done a whole TON of posting to defend your position. We've seen enough trailer, we've seen screen shots, tv spots, clips up the wazoo... and every shot I've scene so far has just been amazing. In the Matrix films you can ALWAYS tell when they use a digital double, like when Neo fights the multiple Smiths (obviously many of them that weren't doubles were digital), I can point out every time Neo is digital, his clothes just don't hang right in their digital people. And I love the Matrix almost as much as Star Wars, but its just not BETTER than Star Wars in the effects category. There are a bunch of scenes in AOTC I bet you didn't even notice were altered because they're so sublte. I'll list them, and I'm sure you'll just say you know because, duh, I've posted them already, but you'll claim you knew because you use Photoshop.
In the speeder chase, Obi-wan's hand is digital when he catches Anakin's lightsber, not because Ewan had any problems. His hand just went out of frame and that take happened to be the best performance. So instead, the moved the frame down and added a digital hand catching a digital lightsaber.
When the younglings are training, they've all been repositioned in the shot and had their arms digitally removed and then replaced with digital animated arms to show them fight properly because, as Nick Gilliard points out, its very hard to get 6 year olds to follow fight moves to a T. If ILM had done the shot as filmed, they'd all kill each other. So they moved them around in the shot and digitally replaced they're arms.
Then, when Anakin's picking up on Padme in that gazebo like thing on Naboo that overlooks the water, GL thought it odd that he suddenly touches her back, so he digitally inserted a hand caressing her hand BEFORE Anakin touches her back.
And that's just the tip of the ice berg of touched up effects that weren't planned, only done because of neccessity. You know how many people I've pointed that out to had actually noticed that on their own? Zero. So I think the CGI in that film was MORE than a little subtle.
Originally posted by tlbauerle
Sorry man...Kamino looked like crap...Close ups were decent, but wide establishing shots look terrible. I never bought it was water. My curse is seeing though this stuff...I'm this way with all digital stuff. I went to a photographer's gallery the other day and while my mother in-law gasped at the stuff, I was like...Um...its all photoshopped and all cover levels were tweaked, etc. She was like..no...I was like..Yes...and ultimately I was right.
I just can't buy a lot of it.
I see through it too, so can THE ENTIRE GRAPHICS PROFESSION. The difference here being, that because I know the craft, I respect good work. I can always tell when something is digitally augmented, for me it comes down to the quality. Would anyone ELSE (not graphics professionals) notice? If the answer is no, than the artist has done their job, and I respect that. That is what deserves awards, not flashy, obvious effects. And the funniest thing about this conversation, is that Bullet time isn't TECHNICALLY a special effect. You just make an enclosed circle around your target with cameras, shoot them while the computer controls frame rates for each camera, compile the shots, and then insert a digital background ( which ILM has already perfected in TPM...see Podrace, Geonosis, most of the sets period...). Bullet time is actually manipulating camera work, so its more in with cinematography.
Originally posted by vader519
Look there is no question that ROTS will be nominated. The other five movies were nominated before, so I am pretty sure it will be nominated. The question is who will it go against. I have been thinking of other possible movies. War of the Worlds, ILM basically going against itself, Fantastic Four, Sin City, King Kong, Batman Begins, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. That is all I can think of right now. Anybody else have anymore movies.
ILM doesn't really compete with itself, they do hundreds of movies a year, its just that in the last ten years, Rob Cloeman and the rest of the TPM/AOTC/ROTS team have been getting all the press.
Dude...
First off, I never said digital double work in the Matrix Sequels (Whose SFX sucked in comparison I think) were good...at all.
Secondly Obi-Wan catchign the saber...I didn't know about. That looks good. Some other things do not.
The younglings scene...I didn't know about that for sure but supposed it was CGI, thanks for the confirm. THAT is the reason I hate that scene...it NEVER looked real. The movements look way un-natural.
The hand caressing Padme looks weird to me...I don't think the movements match the shoulder/body and space.
Finally...BULLETTIME is a special effect since it requires 3D environments to make it work. Its more than camera work.
Now I have never said what ILM does isn't good...its just not always the best...AND I think fans who believe STARWARS should win an Oscar because it's STARWARS need to take a step back and judge the film based on its merits.
I think the technology is cool...but do not like the digital directing from the editing room because I think performances loose synergy when they have been edited together. Less is more...for me...but GL likes total control...which I am against.
First off, Finding Nemo had far better water effects than Attack of the Clones which is sad. The water effects were horrible in AOTC. Secondly, when I mentioned visuals as far as the Matrix, I was referring soely to the first one. But all the Matrix movies have far, far better visuals than Star Wars. Yes, that scene with CG Neo and Agent Smiths was horrible too, but there are so many obvious CG stand ins in AOTC, Obi Wan and Jango Fett in their Kamino fight scene was horrid, as was Jango Fett capturing them after the droid factory sequence, not to mention many times throughout the rest of the movie, the CG clonetroopers, the CG Yoda is pretty bad as well, the puppet was perfect. I think the new Star Wars movies use CG for anything, instead of using it where it should. Sin City, Hitchhiker's Guide, King Kong, Narnia, Batman, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, War of the Worlds, Harry Potter are other visual films-look for any of these to possibly be nominated as well.
Its not because its star wars, because I like the spider-man comics, but I didn't think the movie had very good effects. You don't see me clamouring for Oscar nods for acting do you? Writing? Picture? All right then. I am a professional designer who has studied and dabbled in special effects since the age of 14, when I write 50 some odd posts just defending a movies effects, its not for the movie, its for the quality of its effects. I think Starship Troopers was an awful movie, and the Lost World Jurrassic Park as well, but either one of them should have beat Titanic for effects. Same thing here, I don't care that its Star Wars, I care about the contributions to the industry that have been made AS A RESULT of the prequels and the fact that they deserve an Oscar, 'specially against the movies they have so far run up against in the category, and certainly against anything coming out this year.
My thoughts:
The Matrix totally deserved to win over TPM... I think the Bullettime thing has been discused enough here and I agree that it was a huge step. TPM just had some real crap stuff. Like the Eopie's or whatever the hell they are.
and yea, The Matrix sequels had awful VFX (especially Neo taking on the agents *cringe*) which is why they were'nt even nominated for oscars...
And AOTC didn't deserve the win either: Kamino, CG Jango (awful), CG Clonetroopers, younglings, the whole Dooku speeder chase, the cowthing Anakin rides... all horrible! god, I'm surprsed it even got nominated!
I'm not saying there weren't good shots... as mentioned Obi Wan's hand, Yoda was good most of the time...
the VFX Oscar is judged on "the basis of: (a) consideration of the contribution the visual effects make to the overall production and (b) the artistry, skill and fidelity with which the visual illusions are achieved."
For me Lucas uses CGI to an extent that really takes away from the "overall production"... of course I'll have to actually see the film to be able to judge it properly. But from what I've seen there are some shots that have me worried.
As for what was said earlier about the score, I'm not too sure what I said was true... ESB and ROTJ were both nominated for score even though they weren't entirely 'original'. As were HP I and II... For eligibility "The work must be specifically created for the eligible feature-length motion picture." ... so, I dunno
ya know, while I'm bickering about the overuse of CGI in these films I thought I wouldn't be surprised if ROTS isn't nominated for 'Best Animated Feature Film' which has to be "a motion picture of at least 70 minutes in running time with a significant number of the major characters animated, and in which animation figures in no less than 75% of the picture’s running time."
I'd say ROTS qualifies...
I'm kidding, of course 😉