DISQUS

Joshi · 10 months ago

Can someone please define visual effects for me (at least in this context)? I've always considered it as being the effects that aren't done on computer (i.e, most of the Troll Market scene in Hellboy 2 would be visual effects since the vast majority of that was practical), and the CGI stuff was special effects... or am I getting something wrong here?

I only ask because the movies listed above either have very heavy CGI effects used, or heavy use of practical effects. For instance, The Dark Knight was mostly practical (although I guess for stuff like Dent's makeup, there was some pretty flawless CGI being employed), but then The Incredible Hulk used quite a lot of CGI (and it wasn't exactly perfect either). And then we also have movies that only ever use CGI as a means to tell a story without it being a spectacle (Australia) and then movies that are almost yelling "look at these amazing computer effects!" (Journey to the Center of the Earth).

Needless to say, I'm confused (and possibly wrong about a lot of stuff).

Homero · 10 months ago

I think we can knock Australia off that list pretty easily, some of the close-ups during the stampede were embarrassingly horrible.

@Joshi
I remember watching a behind-the-scenes documentary a couple years ago that defined special effects as the stuff you see on set, like a fire or a real explosion and whatnot, while visual effects were those added in post production, but using the term "Special Effects" to encompass both types when talking about the Oscar category.

Of course, I may be wrong, but that's what I remember seeing.

Jette · 10 months ago

"City of Ember" had some lovely effects, I would certainly pick it over "Cloverfield" or "Prince Caspian."

RobertFure · 10 months ago

Benjamin Button should win here. The various ages of Brad Pitt look fantastic and are realistic to the point that you forget that Brad Pitt isn't a four foot tall 85 year old manchild.

BrianCGibson · 10 months ago

Special Effects are practical effects...Visual Effects are CGI or enhancements

Joshi · 10 months ago

Okay. Thanks. :)

Joshi · 10 months ago

I remember seeing similar in various DVD docs, but it never really cemented in my mind, which is why I got confused. ;) Thanks.

nick · 10 months ago

glad to see "Cloverfield" getting some support here. i know it won't win (hell, i'd be surprised if it made it to the final 5), but the amount of time it had to take to put the effects into footage shot on a handycam has got to be worth something.

Joshi · 10 months ago

Kudos on the detailed explanation, much thanks.

But just to clarify, considering my initial confusion, the award basically goes for both, be it practical effects (miniatures, make up, prosthetics) or computer effects? Thus making a film like The Dark Knight more eligible (i.e, more eligible than I originally thought) since it employed both.

rejectnation · 10 months ago

For a film to be nominated for this award, the effects artist must have created something not available for filming. For example, an entirely digital Empire State Building could not make a movie eligible, since one can easily film the building; on the other hand, a recreation of ancient Rome could, since it is impossible to film. However, movies are judged on the quality of all of their effects shots, not just one scene.

According to the official Academy Award rules, the criteria are:

"(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."

Aravind · 10 months ago

Ironman should win in this Oscars. Or the second in my opinion Coverfield. And also Dark Knight used great "invisible" CGI effects like Set extension, wire removal, capes, digital doubles but all seems nothing infornt of Ironman. (Also that stupid Batman Begins nominated for best cinematography previously, eventhough it didn't deserve that for that pathetic crapy camera works.)Maybe the jury will vote for it, due to Heath Ledger's death, just like we all made this movie the no:1 rateing in IMDb.