OVP: Best Visual Effects (2010)
The Nominees Were...
Ken Ralston, David Schaub, Carey Villegras, and Sean Phillips, Alice in Wonderland
Tim Burke, John Richardson, Christian Manz, and Nicolas Aithadi, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1
Michael Owens, Bryan Grill, Stephan Trojansky, and Joe Farrell, Hereafter
Paul Franklin, Chris Corbould, Andrew Lockley, and Peter Bebb, Inception
Janek Sirrs, Ben Snow, Ged Wright, and Daniel Sudick, Iron Man 2
My Thoughts: Unlike our three Best Makeup contenders, where each film oddly received their only Oscar nomination in the category, with Best Visual Effects, we've got several films that have received multiple Oscar nominations in other categories, including one Best Picture nominee, so I have to make sure to be sparing in my critiques of the films, as we're going to be spending a long time dissecting their nuances.
However, I don't need to be so stingy with our first nominee, Iron Man 2, as this was the film's only Oscar citation. For those who missed it or are trying to distinguish it from the many, many films in the Avengers universe (I both love and hate that the Marvel universe is so expansive and impressive in the world of filmdom, as I am a true blue devotee of the Marvel comic books in print, but have always steered a little further to the DC Universe when it comes to cinematic ventures), this is the one with Mickey Rourke as Whiplash, intent on revenge on Downey's Tony Stark, and honestly, that's about it. Whereas the first film was fun due to Downey's hammy nature, this film, like most sequels, indulges in the things it did well in the first film, making it seem less special and as a result, damaging our memories of the first film in the process. Downey has now been doing smarmy and smug in so many films that it's hard to tell if he's performing anymore or if this is just an extension of his personality. The film continues to highlight that, while Gwyneth Paltrow may get on the nerves of some people as a result of Goop and her Martha Stewart-style celebrity, she can play comedy and fun with such an ease that you sort of wish she'd been a romantic comedy actress, or at least an Emma Thompson-style performer over the past decade, rather than playing Sylvia Plath.
The movie's effects borrow heavily from the first film, almost to the point of wondering if there was anything new here. It doesn't help that Whiplash (Rourke getting his one big paycheck that came out of The Wrestler before slipping back to the B-Movie place he was in before) is a character fairly similar to Iron Man, with only some high energy whips to add to an ensemble that borrows heavily from Tony Stark's artillery. The rest of the film is a been-there, done-that sort of trope, and I have to say that it's disappointing the Academy didn't give this nomination to a different film that was attempting something new, or at least was operating at a level of excellence that is so good, it's impossible to deny them (see The Lord of the Rings series for an example).
Hereafter was at least trying something somewhat different, and the first ten minutes are an impressive feat of CGI, actual physical effects, and one stunning sequence involving a boat being capsized by a skyscraper of water. That being said, I have to deduct mad points from the film for essentially being one giant effect. If this were an award for single Visual Effect, I might give it to it, but it's a plural sort of category, and the rest of the film completely disregards this giant opening, and is a wholly different film. This isn't to say that that's a bad thing (most films overuse effects), but you can't win based off of one specific thing. It's not even in the same realm as, say, The Tree of Life, which goes back and forth between its effects sequences and its reality. The movie itself, which we've reviewed before, is a bit dry in some places, but the fact that it got an Oscar nomination for effects work is proof that people didn't actually watch the film when they were nominating-they just watched the ten minute reels, which is not the point of the Visual Effects category.
If it were, then perhaps Alice in Wonderland would have had a shot at the win, instead of being content with a nomination. After all, there is a sea of eye-popping effects work in this film, with CGI characters like the Cheshire Cat and the Tweedles, as well as a sea of matte work that visually stuns throughout the movie. However, the visual effects, much like some of the other elements of the film, are too gaudy and saturated to add anything other than bright colors, distractions, and noise to the film. The movie, which is dreadful and somehow grossed $1 billion worldwide, goes with the bigger is better mentality, but the point of Visual Effects (and all technical categories) is not just wizardry and greatness in your craft, but also to add to the overall movie. Even in a terrible film like The Wolf Man, the Makeup heightens the films action sequences and its overall horror asthetic, rather than distracting or taking away from the plot (however thin it may be). With Alice, you have impressive work, but it shouts "look at me, I'm a new creation" at times when it should be simmering in the background. The movie also feels too cartoonish at times, particularly when it's surrounded by actors like Hathaway, Bonham Carter, and Depp completely shooting for the rafters with their performances, and that cartoonish nature makes the visual effects appear less impressive than they really are.
Harry Potter is a film series that vastly improved as it went along in regard to its effects, but I also feel that while Alice had too many effects, Harry just comes under the wire with too few to be considered the trophy recipient. I remember during the ceremony for this award that they showed Nagini, probably the most memorable effect in the film, and thinking, "yeah, that's about right." The movie uses much from its previous films, and while it's operating on a more technically proficient level than Iron Man 2, and so I don't have as much to complain about being new, it lacks a bit when it comes to something truly extraordinary. The second half of this film, with the giant forcefield around Hogwarts and the break from Gringotts, gets into far better and more impressive work, but this film, though strong, lacks that single effect that pushes it into the winner's circle.
Normally I'd build the suspense a little bit more with whom I was going to pick as the first place, but like everyone guessing this category with the Academy, it's fairly obvious who is going to take it. No other film from 2010 was working with the visual mastery of Inception. Though we'll get to the film's other merits at a later point (we have writing and a Best Picture category to suss through), there is no denying the way that it seamlessly, totally merges its high concept plot with a series of mind-bending effects. The two scenes that stick out include Joe Gordon-Levitt, fighting on walls in the elevators, and the scene that probably would have cinched it an Oscar nomination if it didn't have anything else, Paris folding in on itself. Both are jaw-dropping, and worthy of the title Oscar-winning.
Other Precursor Contenders: The Visual Effects Society, a relative newcomer to the awards season, breaks its films out into Visual Effects-driven films, as well as supporting effects, so they found room for all of the nominees, though Hereafter was relegated to supporting effects (and won the award), being joined by Robin Hood, Salt, Green Zone, and Black Swan. Joining the remaining four nominees in the Visual Effects-driven film category was the technical work on display in Tron: Legacy (Inception of course won the actual trophy). BAFTA also chose to honor Inception, but substituted Toy Story 3 and Black Swan in over Iron Man 2 and Hereafter. The remaining member of the seven-member bake-off (that has to suck, doesn't it, knowing you had a 70% chance at an Oscar nomination and still missed?) were Tron: Legacy and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. All-in-all, I think most people were right in thinking that Tron: Legacy was in sixth place and was probably a just miss being taken out by either Iron Man 2 or Hereafter.
Films I Would Have Nominated: I have said it before on this site, and will probably say it again before these write-ups are done, but I am a huge fan of Edgar Wright's witty, silly, brilliant Scott Pilgrim movie and it pains me to think that Iron Man 2 and its redux of all of the effects it had already won a nomination for two years prior skipped over the creative effects of Scott Pilgrim. No, they aren't as loud or as eye-popping as some of the other nominees, but they are used so brilliantly to tell the story, which is the point of the effects, that they should have been amongst the five, though as I'll point out with my winner in a moment, they didn't deserve the eventual trophy.
Oscar's Choice: Oscar made the relatively easy decision of going with the critical and commercial hit Inception. With a blowout of this nature, you sort of have to wonder what got second place, though my gut is telling me it would have been Alice in second considering its strength in other categories.
My Choice: An easy decision for the win, with Inception making it to the top of my heap, and that includes all films of the year. In second place, I'm going with Harry Potter, and, after weighing the negatives of each (they're all in 1-2 star territory for me), I'll go with Alice, Hereafter, and Iron Man 2 to round out the category.
But what about your thoughts (and I know you have them)? Is there anyone out there that favors something other than Inception to have won this award? What does everyone have in the far more competitive Number Two slot? And if you're making room for Tron or Scott Pilgrim, whom do you cut?
No comments:
Post a Comment