OVP: Best Visual Effects (2019)
The Nominees Were...
Dan DeLeeuw, Russell Earl, Matt Aitken, & Dan Sudick, Avengers: Endgame
Pablo Helman, Leandro Estabecorena, Nelson Sepulveda-Fauser, & Stephane Grabli, The Irishman
Robert Legato, Adam Valdez, Andrew R. Jones, & Elliot Newman, The Lion King
Guillaume Rocheron, Greg Butler & Dominic Tuohy, 1917
Roger Guyett, Neal Scanlan, Patrick Tubach, & Dominic Tuohy, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
Pablo Helman, Leandro Estabecorena, Nelson Sepulveda-Fauser, & Stephane Grabli, The Irishman
Robert Legato, Adam Valdez, Andrew R. Jones, & Elliot Newman, The Lion King
Guillaume Rocheron, Greg Butler & Dominic Tuohy, 1917
Roger Guyett, Neal Scanlan, Patrick Tubach, & Dominic Tuohy, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
My Thoughts: 2019 was unusual in a few ways in terms of Visual Effects praise. Usually when a new movie comes out and is considered a landmark, it's considered a landmark by all. Recent examples such as Terminator 2, Titanic, Avatar, and Gravity all won this prize, but they did so with everyone acknowledging "yeah, no matter what I think of the movie, this is earned." In 2019, though, there are two technical achievements here that some considered a slam dunk, absolutely-deserve-this-honor win, and others are in the camp of disliking the works immensely, and so we're going to start with those two films for our conversation today.
The Irishman was one of three films in 2019 that relied on de-aging effects in a significant way for a principle character (the others were the non-nominated Captain Marvel and Gemini Man). There are moments in The Irishman where these effects work-where you are taken aback by a suddenly younger Joe Pesci, and Scorsese smartly doesn't have the characters in the same shot in a scene very often, so that you're suddenly reminded that Robert de Niro is not 40 like the actual 40-year-old actor standing next to him. But the effects aren't flawless, with Joe Pesci's head sometimes escaping his body, and Pacino, in particular, suffering in the de-aging (perhaps because Pacino as a young man was so handsome, and as a result it looks less like he's been de-aged and more like a bad facelift since we know what the young actor looked like). This is an interesting failure-this is certainly in a different realm for the technology-but it suffers badly upon re-watch when you realize that it's not just bad makeup, but the effects, making the actors look unusual in flashbacks.
The other "groundbreaking" film in this bunch is The Lion King, which created a more realistic, but still animated film for the creatures onscreen, including the scenery. The animals, though, feel ridiculous and firmly in the Uncanny Valley for anyone who has ever seen a David Attenborough documentary. I actually found myself laughing when the animals mouths would move in human ways, and while I don't know a better way to have achieved this (having them just staring and only talking through voiceover would also have been silly), it takes away the realism that the team is striving to achieve, and looks ugly. The background effects are gorgeous, and I see the potential here, but until this technology is perfected, it's a failure since a movie like Finding Dory is able to create an animated palette that's pleasing to the eye without feeling silly.
The final three nominations are for films with much more traditional effects, but for my opinion they fare better than the new technologies. First is Avengers: Endgame, the biggest film of all-time which only got one citation from Oscar (as we discussed, this lack of AMPAS love is unusual for a movie this size). The effects in many ways borrow from the previous films. There is no instantly iconic trick like the Thanos' finger snap, but after two films that failed (albeit with good intentions), I have to admit there's no flaws either. This is a well-crafted action movie with compelling fight sequences, particularly the mega-star showdown with Thanos. It's just not anything we haven't already seen from the franchise, and considering the budget & size of this movie, I feel like we should've gotten more.
Weirdly, the "end" of the Skywalker Saga for Star Wars did rise to the occasion. Rise of Skywalker, whatever your opinions on it, has top-notch effects that rival pretty much any other film in the series. The Rey vs. Kylo water battle ranks among the best from the series, and I loved the final Rebels vs. Empire battle with so many different ships attempting the sheer size of that moment. Rise isn't the landmark that some of its predecessors were in terms of visual effects, but that doesn't mean that it isn't doing something above-the-norm here, taking an already strong performance-record and making it shine further.
The final nominee is in a similar situation. No one can say that 1917 is obviously creating a new wave of war picture, but that doesn't mean it isn't crafting something glorious & lasting on the screen. The film's computer-generated effects, such as the running through a field of open fire by actor George MacKay or the plane crash, are super realistic, but it's in the cinematography that we find a lot of the most mesmerizing touches of the effects. The VFX team worked hand-in-hand with Roger Deakins to help curate the "unbroken shot" aspect of the movie, which is the film's signature achievement. One of the harder aspects of picking whether this team, Deakins, or both deserve the Oscar is that it's impossible to tell where it begins and ends, but that so much of the set was digital (and you never feel that) is extraordinary.
The Irishman was one of three films in 2019 that relied on de-aging effects in a significant way for a principle character (the others were the non-nominated Captain Marvel and Gemini Man). There are moments in The Irishman where these effects work-where you are taken aback by a suddenly younger Joe Pesci, and Scorsese smartly doesn't have the characters in the same shot in a scene very often, so that you're suddenly reminded that Robert de Niro is not 40 like the actual 40-year-old actor standing next to him. But the effects aren't flawless, with Joe Pesci's head sometimes escaping his body, and Pacino, in particular, suffering in the de-aging (perhaps because Pacino as a young man was so handsome, and as a result it looks less like he's been de-aged and more like a bad facelift since we know what the young actor looked like). This is an interesting failure-this is certainly in a different realm for the technology-but it suffers badly upon re-watch when you realize that it's not just bad makeup, but the effects, making the actors look unusual in flashbacks.
The other "groundbreaking" film in this bunch is The Lion King, which created a more realistic, but still animated film for the creatures onscreen, including the scenery. The animals, though, feel ridiculous and firmly in the Uncanny Valley for anyone who has ever seen a David Attenborough documentary. I actually found myself laughing when the animals mouths would move in human ways, and while I don't know a better way to have achieved this (having them just staring and only talking through voiceover would also have been silly), it takes away the realism that the team is striving to achieve, and looks ugly. The background effects are gorgeous, and I see the potential here, but until this technology is perfected, it's a failure since a movie like Finding Dory is able to create an animated palette that's pleasing to the eye without feeling silly.
The final three nominations are for films with much more traditional effects, but for my opinion they fare better than the new technologies. First is Avengers: Endgame, the biggest film of all-time which only got one citation from Oscar (as we discussed, this lack of AMPAS love is unusual for a movie this size). The effects in many ways borrow from the previous films. There is no instantly iconic trick like the Thanos' finger snap, but after two films that failed (albeit with good intentions), I have to admit there's no flaws either. This is a well-crafted action movie with compelling fight sequences, particularly the mega-star showdown with Thanos. It's just not anything we haven't already seen from the franchise, and considering the budget & size of this movie, I feel like we should've gotten more.
Weirdly, the "end" of the Skywalker Saga for Star Wars did rise to the occasion. Rise of Skywalker, whatever your opinions on it, has top-notch effects that rival pretty much any other film in the series. The Rey vs. Kylo water battle ranks among the best from the series, and I loved the final Rebels vs. Empire battle with so many different ships attempting the sheer size of that moment. Rise isn't the landmark that some of its predecessors were in terms of visual effects, but that doesn't mean that it isn't doing something above-the-norm here, taking an already strong performance-record and making it shine further.
The final nominee is in a similar situation. No one can say that 1917 is obviously creating a new wave of war picture, but that doesn't mean it isn't crafting something glorious & lasting on the screen. The film's computer-generated effects, such as the running through a field of open fire by actor George MacKay or the plane crash, are super realistic, but it's in the cinematography that we find a lot of the most mesmerizing touches of the effects. The VFX team worked hand-in-hand with Roger Deakins to help curate the "unbroken shot" aspect of the movie, which is the film's signature achievement. One of the harder aspects of picking whether this team, Deakins, or both deserve the Oscar is that it's impossible to tell where it begins and ends, but that so much of the set was digital (and you never feel that) is extraordinary.
Other Precursor Contenders: The Visual Effects Society splits its nominations between effects-driven films (the ones that actually get nominated at the Oscars) and the ones with supporting effects (which only rarely get cited with AMPAS, but are usually a more interesting lineup)...or at least those assessments are usually the case-not in 2019, though. The effects driven films included the victorious Lion King, triumphing over Alita: Battle Angel, Avengers: Endgame, Gemini Man, and Rise of Skywalker while the supporting effects had the Oscar-nominated Irishman winning over Oscar-blessed 1917, as well as Joker, Ford vs. Ferrari, and The Aeronauts. 1917 took the BAFTA Awards, besting the exact Oscar lineup, so little creativity there. The VFX branch has a bakeoff, though, so we know that Gemini Man, Alita: Battle Angel, Captain Marvel, Cats, and Terminator: Dark Fate were close. While Captain Marvel is the obvious choice there (considering it was the biggest hit), and it'd be amazing if Cats had been nominated (if only to watch the internet explode), my money is on Alita, which had a great bakeoff reel & some pretty impressive character design (at least from the trailer-I only saw Cats and Marvel of these five films).
Films I Would Have Nominated: I would have given the trophy to Ad Astra, and I don't really understand why it wasn't nominated. It's gorgeous, it has multiple interplanetary sets, and everything looks stunning. I know it wasn't a big hit, but this snub hurt, more than pretty much any other snub this year. Also, if I had to go with a de-aging film, it'd be Captain Marvel-Samuel L. Jackson's work is strong, and the other more traditional CGI is better than any of the Marvel movies in 2020.
Oscar’s Choice: In a very tight race, 1917 bested The Lion King, kind of a big snub for Disney who didn't submit for Animated Feature in hopes of winning this award.
My Choice: All right-I actually had Rise of Skywalker down as my winner-I thought it was the most technically impressive. However, after doing some research and realizing how much of Roger Deakins' work in 1917 was influenced by VFX, I'm going to 1917 by a minuscule margin (the most minuscule margin we're going to see of the 2019 awards). Behind it are Avengers, Irishman, and Lion King, in that order.
And those are my thoughts-what are yours? Oscar and I are 2/2 with being on the same page so far-are you with us or are you mad at me snubbing the Disney titles? Why is it that the Marvel Cinematic Universe has such a lousy track record with actually winning Oscars (just Black Panther pulled it off)? And what was the best de-aging film of 2019 (Irishman, Captain Marvel, or Gemini Man)? Share below!
No comments:
Post a Comment