January 22, 2004
Real and Hyper-Real
"Once upon a time - say, back in the 1970s - the visual trickery employed by filmmakers was meant to look real. In many of today's movies, however, the effects are meant to look cool. The difference is huge."
Special effects become Mannerist
CBC News Online | Jan. 13, 2004
Comments
Ah, my kind of post . . . anyway, it definitely IS interesting in how visual effects are being used, but I would add two things:
1. While many directors and VFX supervisors are definitely using visual and special effects to create a unique style and "jaw-dropping" shots, I would argue that their goal is still to make it look like it happened right there in front of the camera (I'm not saying it ALWAYS works, but that's usually their goal).
2. This article directly relates to how Academy members (Motion Picture, Television, and even British Academies) decide how they vote for the visual effects awards each year. You have to balance the quality/originality of the effects work with the relevance and support the effects give to the film (which you all would have seen, had you joined Mike Brinker and I at the VFX Oscar nominations last night . . .). That's why it's nice to see that BAFTA also nominated BIG FISH for its VFX award, because even though it definitely did not have the "flashiest" effects work, it supported the story and enhanced the audience's experience completely.
- Jason Scott
Posted by: Jason Scott at January 22, 2004 06:34 PM
I think "cool" versus "real" should be changed to "cool" versus "motivated by story." We seem to be sinking more and more into dangerous FX-needs-no-reason territory in some of these films lately. And the truth is, it works! as far as box office numbers are concerned, so who's going to bother getting us off of this destructive course? I'm pleading with you, Jason! Make them stop!
And since the dawn of awards ceremonies, there have always been nominations for "less flashy" whether it be in costumes, lights, acting, or SFX. My personal opinion is that it is only to give some kind of "respectibility" to these awards, which are so idiotic to begin with.
Fear my rant!
Posted by: kellee at January 24, 2004 04:28 PM
VFX is something too powerful than the film itself so that part of the audience are anxious to see the effects instead of movie, especially in those "bad" ones. However, those cool shot and fantastic digital scene are not completely meaningless. It is combined by art and technology. I think they bring me a lot of brain storms and creativity ideas. I think VFX movie is not traditional movie. It's more like a visual kaleidoscope, too feed the human's curiosities.
I love film, I also like VFX. To me the problem now is not too much VFX, but too few stories and motivations.
Posted by: jenova at January 24, 2004 11:25 PM

