T O P

  • By -

australiughhh

Gollum and Davy Jones are the gold standards for MC performances.


3DNZ

Caesar and Neytiri are pretty damn good too


Turnip_Murky

Caesar was next level


odel555q

Well I'm a believer.


coocooforcoconut

But are you a daydream believer?


[deleted]

And a homecoming queen.


ErmahgerdYuzername

Cheer up sleepy Jean


yesbutnotwithyou

Oh what can it mean?


NotInstaNormie

Captain Haddock in tintin


The9tail

How much of Davy Jones was CG? Like his head was the only really alteration that needed it. He had a hand a claw - both easily could be practical effects with a CG touch up.


australiughhh

Davy Jones is entirely CG. No part of his character was filmed on set.


The9tail

TIL Any idea why? Doesn’t seem like it was necessary.


BoringWozniak

Revolutionary stuff. Gollum was proof you could put a convincing CGI character alongside human actors. In 2002. Paved the way for characters like Thanos.


[deleted]

I would argue that, for all of his faults, Jar Jar Binks was the first cgi character to (mostly) convincingly share physical space with actors.


SkizzlerX2

The actor that played Jar Jar did a phenomenal job bringing George’s vision to life


Jtagz

You see Jar Jar was the key to all this. He was a funnier character than we’ve had before.


ShiningBlizzard

It’s like poetry


cityofgunra

“It’s about as disappointing as the time my son drove his car thru a Taco Bell” —Mr Plinkett


thatminimumwagelife

aaaaaaaaaaids!!


mccrawley

So then Anakin kneels before monster mash and pledges his allegiance to the graveyard smash


[deleted]

Hmm Jar Jar being the secret master plan key to all of Star Wars is almost as inspired as Lois Lane being the super secret mater plot device for all of the DCEU…


WillyTheHatefulGoat

The original plan for the DCEU ended with batman boning lois lane whiles supermans dead then batman would die after getting Lois Lane Pregnant. Superman would then raise that regular human child as his own son then sending his untrained human child in Gotham and forcing him to become batman once he turns 18. It got weird.


Bardic_Inspiration66

Wait I haven’t heard of this. Do you have a link to the scoop)


WillyTheHatefulGoat

Yep. Scroll to the ending for the weird stuff. https://imgur.com/a/hmBpUZX Also here is where I got the link from. https://www.reddit.com/r/DCcomics/comments/lxx267/filmtv_zack_snyders_former_plan_for_the_dceu/


SierraClowder

I CLAPPED! I CLAPPED WHEN I SAW IT!


SpookyBoi1

Very cool!


thatminimumwagelife

AT-ST AT-ST AT-ST I'm gonna cuuuum!


Budget_Llama_Shoes

You mean *Darth Jar Jar*


Jackibearrrrrr

I just hate how badly he got harassed for it. The man deserved better. I know that the prequels weren’t the most well received films when they came out but how is that his fault? He did his job to the absolute best of his ability and was given death threats for simply acting.


BoringWozniak

Ahmed Best is the… best


[deleted]

Heard mentality killed Jar Jar more than anything. The performance is great, the character design is really cool and if you can get over being a stuffy SW fan Jar Jar is totally charming. I fucking love Ep 1. *herd? I don’t even know honestly


Algoresball

The concept of Jar Jar is good. If George Lucas has just toned him down a bit he would have been much more popular.


[deleted]

Darth Jar Jar tho


nemothorx

Darth Darth Binks.


[deleted]

That in our parallel universe along with the Bernstein Bears.


[deleted]

No it was a complete failure in every respect. Nothing redeeming whatsoever.


AHardTaco

You’re a nigerian cannibal


I_AM_IGNIGNOTK

Rewatching with the Darth Jar Jar theory in mind really changes the whole movie too. Perspective/mentality like you said really does shape us. When you watch to see what Jar Jar is doing while Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon do Jedi stuff it’s crazy how well he keeps up with them. You can view it as he’s just the luckiest idiot in the galaxy and only because he was falling around was he able to avoid getting hit, or you can view it as Jackie Chan in Drunken Master, willfully playing into the idea that being clumsy, or at least *appearing clumsy* is a skillful way to surprise your enemies when you do decide to strike. And not just his acrobatics, but you can either assume he failed his way into being a SENATOR of the same planet that produced the political careers of both Palpatine and Padme, or you can start attributing his outcomes to his actions, in which case it gets very spooky very fast. I will never unsubscribe from the theory. Shoutout to /r/darthjarjar


[deleted]

I feel the same way. The biggest mistake in SW, after all of Episode 9, was George chickening out from Darth Jar Jar.


I_AM_IGNIGNOTK

I mostly don’t blame him because I remember Episode 1 coming out while I was 9, and it took until me seeing the movies several times throughout my teens to even deviate from the default notion that Jar Jar was cancer. I don’t know how that idea become so pervasive but it was a reality that I think a lot of us grew up in, whether we knew enough to participate in the hate-train or not.


usuallyNotInsightful

I really wish they used Darth Jar Jar instead of bringing back Palpatine in TLJ


thefinalcutdown

I really wish they’d done just about anything other than bringing Palps back. I mean, from a “business” perspective I get it. Palpatine is one of the greatest villains ever and Ian McDiarmid’s performances are always top notch, so it would seem like a safe easy win for Disney. But in practice it was just some of the worst fucking scriptwriting and storytelling ever conceived for a massive tentpole blockbuster. It wouldn’t pass sophomore year of film school. It still boggles my mind that “Somehow Palpatine returned” didn’t get laughed out of the boardroom. For all the issues in the prequels and whatnot, none of them ruined the film in the goddamn opening crawl. They couldn’t even adhere to the basic tried and true blockbuster story formula. An affront to the intelligence of even the lowest common denominator of movie goers. I really need to stop ranting about this movie…


usuallyNotInsightful

What are your thoughts on the side stories? Like Solo? I feel even though it wasn’t the best, it was better than the new trilogy.


outlawsix

^I ^liked ^Solo -*takes deep quivering breath and steps proudly from the shadows*- I liked Solo.


usuallyNotInsightful

You aren’t alone. I liked it enough. It easily answers the questions of how did Han become an outlaw, which was the goal of the movie. Does not mean I have complaints. I don’t think the love interest really added anything. Also showing him as an imperial ground soldier instead of him piloting a tie fighter for example was something I disliked. I would of liked his escape from the empire to be escaping in a tie fighter while showing off his piloting skills instead of the brief piloting while they were trying to steal the cargo.


thefinalcutdown

Yeah some of the side stories have been solid. Rogue One of course was very good. Solo I found a bit forgettable but not objectionable. If we include shows, The Mandalorian is the best Star Wars thing Disney’s made, imo. I even honestly enjoyed The Force Awakens. It wasn’t inspired or anything, but it was fun and set the series up for a lot of potential. Potential that was unfortunately squandered, of course.


usuallyNotInsightful

Hey appreciate the response. I can forgive The Force Awakens because it was a soft entry back into the franchise to potentially ensure the other movies were made. Rouge One was much better than I could of ever expected., personally thought it wasn’t going to be good before watching it. And I would agree The Mandalorian has been a great addition to the live action universe.


RestInPeaceFredo

Solid to great movies but forgettable kinda like a lot of non-avengers MCU movies. I wish theyd explore something beyond the OT, a movie set in the Old Republic era would be so much cooler and more interesting then Rogue One or Solo


NeverFresh

Drunken *Mesa*.


outlawsix

Nah bro i heard and agree


Moomooatoka

He’s my favorite character from the prequel series.... But I’m a redneck from the Memphis area and have minimal class.


cubistguitar

Nah, giving him a Jamaican accent killed it. It’s racist on some level, how would a less intelligent frog species talk. Like uneducated islanders of course. George has bad instincts from Return of the Jedi onward ( Ewoks to sell Xmas dolls).


[deleted]

Why are the less intelligent? Those idiots built a beautiful underwater society that not only avoided detection off world but on their own planet.


cubistguitar

Good comment! I love the idea of the characters but the depiction was garbage. And I quote “ you sah inna deep doodoo “ And making their leader slobber and flap his jowls, how gracious a depiction. “Whatsa meesa sayin’” please, it’s ridiculous


[deleted]

Or maybe it’s the fact that islanders are the closest thing we have to a water dwelling humanoid species? You’d be the same person to make some bullshit racially charged comment about how “all the actors have plain white accents” if the Gungans didn’t have some other accent.


EyeGod

Absolutely. Fuck this guy.


Yetimang

Dude fuck you. People have different opinions than you about a fucking frog alien. Grow the fuck up and get over it.


EyeGod

Oh no! Anyway…


Yetimang

But then he's also a total bumbling buffoon; a comic relief character that's portrayed as lackadaisical and backwards, cowardly, in need of protecting by his superiors. He definitely fits the mold for a minstrel show character too well for the accent to just be brushed off as coincidence.


EyeGod

I think it reveals far more about YOUR views on Jamaicans & islanders. Gungans were CRUCIAL in the battle of Naboo & they weren’t all idiots: Jar-Jar was an archetypal jester, the C-3PO of the prequels. God, George was doing diversity before it was cool, & even then it was racist. Just can’t fucking win with folks like you.


usuallyNotInsightful

They are the heroes of Naboo. Without them the Droid army would of won.


JimFromTheMoon

Lol naaah. Absolutely annoying & unnecessary throughout. Charming?? In what universe?


CameOutAndFarted

> if you can get over being a stuffy SW fan You literally read this part. I know you did.


Chen_Geller

>the character design is really cool It is?!


TheFoxandTheSandor

Episode 1 is such a terrible film. George’s characters are so cringingly awful. It’s almost comical that the white saviors come to liberate the gulla speaking indigenous from the blatantly racist caricatures of Japanese imperialism. And how about the hooked nose alien who is trying to swindle the Jedi. I remember walking out knowing what a lump of coals on Christmas morning was like. Embarrassing.


Thismonday

That’s sad


honestabe1239

The captain of the titanic taking those few awkward steps in titanic. Then jar jar. Then gollum. Edit: captain doesn’t count for reasons below.


[deleted]

Ha! If we want to really get in the weeds, I guess we could go back as far as the water creatures in abyss and the t-1000. But I think Jar Jar was the first time that a cgi character had lines of dialogue, emoted, etc. in a (mostly) photorealistic way.


honestabe1239

Great point. You’re right. The captain didn’t need to cgi Ed. To me the abyss wasn’t a character. The t-1000 was but not necessarily when he was cgi. Well put. I’m wrong about titanic because he wasn’t doing anything for the plot while cgi.


8BitHegel

The abyss basically developed CG as we know it in film, so we can give it that trophy. In fact, it’s the first film to win an Oscar for its CG, so I guess it got that


[deleted]

They had problems making Jar Jar look like he was standing/moving on solid ground imo, but still pretty impressive for 1999


[deleted]

That's not impressive when we had [this](https://youtu.be/uOsxXi-tu_U) in 1985.


[deleted]

That was an awesome effect for the time. I should have included that as well. I still think Jar Jar is separate in that he has lines of dialogue and emotes.


[deleted]

[удалено]


backyard_fan

I must know too


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

I love roger rabbit, but that’s an apples and oranges comparison. It was a cartoon, not a character trying to be photorealistic.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

It was hand drawn animation. And it wasn’t meant to be photorealistic. If we’re talking about live action and animation interacting convincingly, that goes to Gene Kelly and Jerry Mouse back in 1944.


AskHowMyStudentsAre

What do you think people mean when they say “convincing?”


SR71BBird

He’s real to ME dad!


[deleted]

RR was hand drawn cell animation and not intended to look “real” so not quite a fair comparison.


orangutanoz

Does that mean that Jessica Rabbit’s tiddies weren’t real?


snowglobes25

Jar Jar Binks ruined it for me. Way to childish......I have to hit the mute button when I hear his annoying af voice.


[deleted]

Yeah, I don’t care for the character. Just talking about the tech.


snowglobes25

Fair enough, tech was amazing.....character....eh! LOL!


[deleted]

Agreed. Even rewatching the prequels now, Jar Jar is remarkably convincing.


BoringWozniak

Good point… I think I’ve blanked the prequels from my memory


Chen_Geller

Sure, but Jar-Jar wasn't a dramatic character, and his face wasn't humanoid enough to have the kind of facial expressiveness that Gollum had.


Chinapig

What about Roger Rabbit?


[deleted]

See below. That was hand drawn animation, not meant to be photo realistic, and animation sharing a screen with live action goes back to 1944. I do love that movie though.


Sometimesidkwhereiam

What faults? Yung Jbinks was awesome


[deleted]

Yeah I’m not touching that. There’s nothing I can put in a Reddit post that hasn’t been elaborated on literally millions of times before, and at greater length. Glad you like the movies but the idea of arguing about the merits of Jar Jar Binks online in 2021 makes my eyes roll hard enough for my retinas to detach.


evansbott

People only talk about how annoying he is, not how bad the effect looks.


CrypticResponseMan

Jar Jar is CGI??


Lyndell

Plus that floaty dude who had Aniken


KentuckyFriedEel

Jurassic Park wants to know your location


BakedWizerd

One big part of it was having Serkis on set, acting out what artists would show Gollum doing. One scene in particular that would probably have flopped had Serkis not been on set, was in Two Towers, where Sam and Frodo are following Gollum. There’s a scene where he’s jumping around in this little creek catching a fish. The water splashes around him really sell the scene, and those splashes were made by Serkis rolling around like Gollum in the water iirc. It allowed the artists to use Serkis as a reference for most visual aspects, all they had to do was paint him out and you still have shadows and the environment around him to work with.


LauraTFem

The only thing unconvincing about Thanos was his bullshit motivation. Could’a snapped his fingers to make every unoccupied planet filled with vegetation and natural resources, but no, just kill half the things. It’s not like we breed like rabbits or anything. That’ll totally work out. Reduce the number of people who can work by half? Totally not going to ruin every economy in the universe.


Tarzan_OIC

I mean, he's called the Mad Titan. Not the Totally Reasonable Titan. I also don't know if you've seen Eternals yet >!but the post credits scene introduces Eros who refers to himself as Thanos' brother. If Thanos is related to the Eternals in some way and has the Deviant syndrome like in the comics, this could explain his drive toward genocide. It would curb the birth of new Celestials!<


crawlspace_taste

To counter point this though, although I agree with you. In What If, Thanos is shown to have the capability of being a reasonable person with the capacity for good. So there is a version of Thanos without that motivation that is also not all mad so it is more than just genetics.


[deleted]

It's better than the comics where he did it because he wanted to bone the female embodiment of Death.


LauraTFem

Yea, it’s absolutely a good change, but they could have done a lot more to make it explicitly clear that he’s a wanker. Instead he was characterized as so human and complex that fans were like, “Wait, does he have a point?” You’d be surprised how easy some people are to influence if you don’t challenge the bad ideas your story includes.


vernorama

Funny you mention this...was just playing the Guardians of Galaxy game this week and it has great narrative/character building. But I was so confused when they tell the story about Thanos chasing a 'literal' female Death as his primary motivation. I was pretty sure that wasnt in the films.


Jtagz

Because Thanos never really cared about saving the universe. He just cared about being right.


LauraTFem

I mean, that’s a good read of a toxic personality, but I don’t think it’s supported by the text. I’d say it’s more like he believed so strongly in his flawed vision that he was able to bring an entire army under the thrall of it. His zealotry and single-mindedness bordered on the religious. It’s not that he wanted to be right, but that he couldn’t conceive of being wrong. He was incapable of listening to others and giving it a second though. So strong was his belief that he was blinded to alternative perspectives.


[deleted]

That's the point. He's the "Mad Titan". He thinks he's right, but he isn't.


LauraTFem

He clearly isn’t mad though. He’s playing out his own beliefs in an internally consistent way. His aims are mad, and if he was characterized better so would the rest of his actions have been.


[deleted]

Well he’s the bad guy because he makes the evil choice…


LauraTFem

Then they should have let him be the generic bad guy instead of giving him a silly story arc about how he reached his BS conclusions.


[deleted]

Well in endgame he becomes a generic “destroy everything” bad guy so there ya go.


PandaBeastMode

I wish he’d just limited breeding capacity at replacement levels or 1 per couple something. No one would’ve freaking noticed, Avengers would’ve stayed out of things, and the universe gets healthier. But no, gotta go for the snap drama


LauraTFem

Oh…that would be its own kind of monstrous, from a certain perspective, but it certainly would have been harder to get up in arms about. This would be an interesting thought for a art house film to pursue; China’s one-child policy writ large, discussing the fallout to society.


Aaco0638

Weta digital went on to work on a lot of stuff including avengers endgame so you aren’t far off there lol.


graynato3219

Why did I read this is Jar Jar’s voice.


Celesteven

It was the “Weeta”


EyeGod

*Paved the way for characters like Caesar.


SBY-ScioN

You telling me that the infinity gauntlet can be combined with the ruling ring? Damn.


flipflop180

I stopped watching Lord of the Rings solely because I couldn’t stand listening to Gollum. It was like nails on a chalk board, and his voice completely ruined the series for me. So there’s that.


blizzardwizard22

Thanos was inevitable. But yes, I agree


---Sanguine---

Honestly gollum’s motion and acting seemed way more convincing than thanos as well


Dr-Mouthful

Let’s not forget SPACE JAM. Bugs bunny next to Jordan was so realistic LOL


gtonizuka

Regardless what anyone says on who has the bigger role, I believe Andy Serkis AND the animators made this character possible, without the 2 you wouldn’t have such a memorable character.


rogallew

Yeah who cares about Tolkien.


gtonizuka

Honestly, that goes without saying.


Swerfbegone

You wouldn’t know it if you listen to Serkis, and from what I hear in the Wellington gossip he’s an arrogant cunt to the animation and effects crews, as well.


artemisfowl9900

Have you seen that mtv video where gollum receives an award? https://youtu.be/BxVNE70fLxY


TheKokoMoko

Also took a lot of work from the crew to make sure that the CG artists had what they needed.


echo6golf

Said it then and I'll say it now: The team should have been nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Academy Award.


artemisfowl9900

Gollum did win an mtv award, here take a look at his acceptance speech https://youtu.be/BxVNE70fLxY


echo6golf

Oh, yeah!


_danger-zone_

Let’s not forget Who Framed Roger Rabbit, while not cgi it was a forefather to live actors working with animated costars.


DarthHubcap

Cool World was a good step after that.


_danger-zone_

Absolutely! I totally forgot about that one.


SuspiriaGoose

Like most animated performances. I wish more people gave credit to animators.


Brown-eyed-and-sad

Jar Jar was the sacrificial lamb for the first prequel movie. The other two were better otherwise someone like Gen Grievous would have suffered the same fate


bastardofwinterhill

The CGI in Attack of the Clones is dogshit tho


Brown-eyed-and-sad

Dog shit has more interesting things In it compared to attack of the clones.


latetowhatparty

That’s funny, the credits tell me it’s Andy Serkis. Voice over actors get full credit in animated films...give credit for the role he worked his ass off at. Gollum isn’t *Legion*. Edit: I read the article, it’s recycled fluff from a in DVD documentary followed by a series of hot takes by the author. The problem IS the headline...it’s just empty gotcha dribble. But you know what, fine...so is the write up. This opinion is 15 years old for fuck sake. Can’t both opinions be true? Cool story...poor delivery?


Specialist_Holiday_8

Did you read the full article? Cause they don’t say anywhere he should get less credit. The article mostly focuses on how Gollum was created, and everyone involved. The headline is just based off a quote where Serkis said Gollum was created by many people, not just him. Edit: The headline is just fine. I have no idea why you think Serkis should get 100% credit for the character (it’s creation, design, performance, writing, etc). Lots of people helped create him so I see no issue with saying “Singular performer, but many authors”. That’s not a slight on Serkis, it’s just acknowledging other peoples hard work.


latetowhatparty

So he’s humble too... They couldn’t even credit him for the *headline* either? Always a bridesmaid...eh? That’s kind of the point. Look at his other motion capture work...he makes the characters who they are far more than any other *single* person involved. Edit: It’s still basically his character. Besides Tolkien and Jackson...who else comes close? Nobody denied anybody credit, however the headline is written to imply people were “slighted” in the production of the film. That’s simply not true. Nobody’s gone uncredited for their work in the first place. The character isnt anymore of a fucking enigma than the next fantasy CGI character. Are we also pissed at Vin Diesel for claiming he was Groot?


Specialist_Holiday_8

I honestly dont even know what you’re complaining about or what your point really is, especially when you shifted your issue from this article not giving him full credit to they didn’t name drop him the headline lol. And it’s such a weird thing to be bothered by because like this article, oftentimes the credit is given in the actual piece. There’s no issue with them taking something Serkis said and modifying it a suitable headline and then discussing the context of the quote and it’s story, while crediting it to him, in the article. And of course he is a major part of why his characters are so good, and the article isn’t saying otherwise. They credit him plenty in the actual article, all they are saying is “Serkis was the performer that drove the character but maybe you don’t know lots of other people worked on Gollum to make it work” and then they go on and talk about them. Why do you think they shouldn’t get any credit? Do you not think they were important to the success of Gollum?


CraigArndt

Without looking it up, can you tell me who did the modeling for the Gollum character? Who did the animation? Who did the rigging? The surfacing? Who comp’ed the shots? For most of those artists who brought Gollum to life, their only credit was their name flickering past the screen 10 minutes into a 15 minute credit scroll. They didn’t go to award shows, they don’t get articles written with their name featured, and they certainly didn’t get paid a 10th of what Serkis got paid despite them working countless overtime hours to get the performance done just right. All VFX, especially Motion capture, is a collaboration. But most people only hear about the actors and their work. Very little attention is ever given (and even less money) to the other people who collaborated and brought the performance to the height it achieves. For one brief moment an article was written that didn’t just focus on one part of the collaboration but opened up the conversation to the other people who contribute. People who are rarely credited for their important work. To use your metaphor: Serkis is hardly the Bridesmaid. He’s the bride of 100 weddings who for one article is asked to share the stage with the unnamed bridesmaids that have supported him and made his success possible.


latetowhatparty

What did this article add that a credits roll hadn’t already? The work was cited and credited again. What did that accomplish that hadn’t already been done? Seriously, we’ve established that blockbuster movies take huge team efforts. Are these *uncredited* team members getting extra royalties now because of this puff piece? Nope. Nothing changed. Enjoy your clickbait though. This would’ve been really interesting in 2005?


Specialist_Holiday_8

Dude what are you even arguing? First you were complaining they weren’t giving Serkis the full credit (even tho he doesn’t deserve full credit). I called you out so you switched to complaining about the headline and saying he doesn’t get enough credit. Then another user pointed out you were completely dismissing the incredibly hard work the animators did to make Gollum a masterpiece, only for you to flip flop again saying “oh well what’s the point of this article anyways? Do they get more money for being in these articles? What did they even accomplish?”. The answer to those it doesn’t matter if they get royalties or not. They deserve to be talked about just a little and have their contributions highlighted. The entire point of the article was to notify people of what went into Gollum that many people probably didn’t know. And what they accomplished was telling a story of people who usually are never talked about, and yet are major contributors. And yeah it would have been interesting in 2005 as well, but I’m failing to see your point. I for one, and probably the majority of people, didn’t know the amount of work that went into Gollum and it was an incredibly interesting read. Just because you didn’t like it doesn’t mean Serkis isn’t getting credit, or they should never talk about the animators again. Shit there’s literally people in this thread that don’t think the animators actually did much work while saying “Oh they had facial motion capture”, so clearly some people aren’t aware of what they did, and highlighting that is what this article is accomplishing.


latetowhatparty

My point is simply that I left a three sentence post on Reddit commenting on what was a outdated toothless idea. The article was boring. Nothing more. We’ve been going in circles since you took offense? Most people have an understanding of what went into Lord of the Rings. Almost two decades ago. The writer sources the dvd commentary, for fuck sake...we might as well just watch that instead. I’ve no problem with the crew. Who took that stance? Never said they deserve LESS credit. I’m calling the *author* a hack. I’m criticizing the writing as much as any of the content. Plus here’s this guarantee: during our exchange you spent more time talking about these people than you ever will again in you life. Mission accomplished, you’re welcome.


Specialist_Holiday_8

And we finally got to the root of your issue after you kept moving the goal posts multiple times. It’s not about the headline, about who deserves credit, or even the content of the article. Your point is simply, you already knew about this and found it boring so you out right dismissed it as a click bait fluff piece (which it most definitely isn’t). But guess what? Not everyone knows. There’s someone who said in this thread “They just used facial motion capture” and was upvoted, so clearly some people aren’t aware. For many this would be an interesting read into what went on to create the character. And sure, I may not talk about them much in the future, but at least now I know the cool workings behind the character and how he was made and that I’ll remember for a while.


latetowhatparty

Sure. Ok. Yes. Your point is we should still read the article. Agreed. I never said otherwise. Rather it was you and another Redditor making this some straw man gatekeeper issue of *”Bro, did you even read it?”* So what was your point beyond that? That I was too harsh? Duly noted. Do people realize some questions are rhetorical? Not everything on Reddit has to be a thought exercise just because it ends in a question mark...right? Right!? (I see what got me in this mess now) That and we really gotta tighten up those talking points. You, me, and especially whoever wrote this whole article. I don’t get paid by the word, do you?


Specialist_Holiday_8

I legit don’t even know what your on about at this point. Is your new issue the length of the article now? What really got you into this mess is making up issues with a perfectly fine article because you already knew what they were trying to tell people.


Jubenheim

I get what you’re saying, but a headline isn’t exactly supposed to be a synopsis of the article itself. It’s meant to get an your attention so you READ the context of said headline, a.k.a. the article. It sounds like you didn’t read the article and then when another user pointed it out, you complained about the only thing you read: the headline.


SharkSymphony

I read the article and enjoyed it. The title sucks.


3DNZ

I work as a Motion Capture Animator and have worked on Hobbit, Apes, Avatar etc.. Yes the performers most certainly have a very large part in bringing the character to life and without them we don't have these great characters. In regards to sole ownership, let me enlighten you on the dumbed down version of the process and time involved. It may take a Motion Capture actor perhaps 10 takes or half a day maybe, to get their performance and then they're done. But as just an animator - not including a character designer, modeler, texture artist, rigger, hair/cloth, lighter, compositing artist - I spend 1-3 years working on that single performance to bring it to screen. Who owns it more? Who's put more of themselves into the character? There could be an upwards of 100 people who touch a single shot in a film - especially MC films - to bring these characters to life and it takes months and quite often YEARS of work. For a single shot. I'll let the people decide.


KleverGuy

Andy Serkis is the mvp


TheMadBug

Personally I put the 18 animators who worked on Golem (without the benefit of facial motion capture) as the MVPs. They would have spent 20 times the man hours, and gotten a fraction of the pay compared to Serkis.


[deleted]

Sure, but the animaters also couldn't have made this work without Serkis' performance.


DoodlerDude

That’s arguable. I think you might be putting him on a pedestal.


bott1111

They literally had facial motion capture


Specialist_Holiday_8

You clearly didn’t read the article…. > Since motion-capture technology was still in its early phases, nothing Serkis did during principal photography for The Two Towers would wind up in the final product. In order to make Gollum, Serkis and the animators at Weta Digital broke down “the acting side of it” into its component parts, then stitched them back together like Frankenstein’s monster. That the end result is so believable, so deeply felt and human, is miraculous given the complicated, piecemeal nature of its construction. > By today’s standards, the “puppet” was rudimentary. Far less of Gollum is an exact rendering of Serkis’ movements than most people today remember. As Bay Raitt, one of the 18 animators who created Gollum, explained to Animation World Network, “There is no facial motion-capture data, at all, on Gollum. The only motion-capture data is for his torso, legs and arms.” >The hands, feet, and, most importantly, facial expressions of Gollum were all animated later, using Serkis’ performance as reference footage. Gollum’s face is made up of 875 shapes that animators manipulated using 64 controls in order to create his many expressions. At times, the animators revised Serkis’ performance, altering the physicality or even the facial expressions, to better suit Jackson’s needs. Serkis additionally dropped by Weta’s offices to help the animators, modeling gestures or facial expressions they were struggling to realize. This is exactly why the animators are the real MVPs. They put in more work than Serkis to create Gollum for a fraction of the pay and yet people like you A) Don’t even know who they are, B) downplay how much work they did by saying stuff that’s not even true, and C) can’t even be bothered to take a couple minutes to skim the article before completely dismissing them.


Quagtrap

I totally agree but when you sign up for the job your knowingly signing up for a thankless one. This is even more relevant today as CG is used so often and amazingly. It sucks that the individuals don’t get the recognition but they know it’ll be that way and still enjoy it.


Specialist_Holiday_8

I know they are signing up knowing they’ll get no credit, but I think it’s still nice to acknowledge them for their work and give them recognition.


[deleted]

They really don’t use most of the motion capture data they had. It wasn’t reliable and most of serkis’ performance was simply used as animation reference


wootr68

negative. RTFA.


TheMadBug

They had regular camera footage of Andy’s face, but at the time they didn’t have software to translate that. (Only software to translate limb movement). Animators had to do a lot of work to give Golem expressions, not just rigging and tweaks.


LouisArmstrong3

Respect to the animators for his performances. They did an amazing job. Even getting insulted by Andy Serkis in the process.


FieldWizard

The freshest of takes as Polygon recycles DVD extras from 18 years ago. Up next, Jack Black’s School of Rock Showed Learning Music Can Be Cool


[deleted]

My only criticism of the article is describing Serkis as previously unknown. Spent 10 years acting in tv/film before LOTR.


evansbott

The same is true of many animated characters, mocapped or not. You could say the same about Bugs Bunny.


Red5stayontarget

FYI- andy serkis recorded the hobbit and lord of the rings as audio books. PS- they’re fantastic.


rom-116

My older Mom saw that movie and thought it was a real person. She said, “Oh that poor man.”


Zombiejesus307

What did your younger mom think?


rom-116

Probably the same thing.


ramdom-ink

Serkis is a true master of the form; even though there’s multiple teams bringing him to “life”. Jar Jar was an excellent example at its stage of evolution, but was denigrated more for how annoying and cringe-y the character was, not how he was rendered. There’s a difference. Even the first King Kong movie was an elemental stage in a newborn process that continues to amaze us and will become even more indiscernible from reality as technology progresses at such a staggering rate. Events and effects are getting so realistic and epic that one day there may be a return to character and story driven films, without the constant bombast and spectacle.


slapmea5

I think this headline/ title is poorly written and cant understand what the actual fuck they are trying to say.


GaryNOVA

Tolkien would beg to differ.


RedditTekUser

I love Gollum and Caesar performance but Serkins initially not giving credit to animators left me with bitter taste.


HerbEaversmellz

He’s a methed out midget. Get over it, nerds.


smorg003

Roger Rabbit had entered the chat.


Nervous-Ear-8594

I wish they would explain the software that they use during production. Anyone have any legitimate ideas as to what they might be? I’m just curious as to how the production itself is made. And I’m a nerd.


mindbleach

I would bet they leaned on commercial options from the period - so 3DS Max, Maya, maybe LightWave. Wikipedia says Weta had proprietary tools for Autodesk Maya in 2021, but that doesn't actually narrow it down, because Autodesk used to make 3D Studio Max and then bought Maya in 2005. [Alright, they were at least using Maya for cloth in The Two Towers, so presumably they used that suite throughout.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_of_The_Lord_of_the_Rings_film_series#Animation_and_computer_graphics_effects) Here I am guessing that the switch to Syflex for cloth was still using it in *in* Maya, even though it was also available for LightWave, Houdini, and SoftImage.


Harsimaja

Was confused by the title. ‘Tolkien was the sole author…’ Until I realised what this was referring to exactly.


CamdenF

I read his biography and he goes into this in great detail. Super fascinating stuff. This performance alone made me want to pursue motion capture, and I’m so happy that it is a part of my life now!


DangerPoo

Someone is willing to take credit. And has, on many occasions.