Awards For 'digital Performances'

[sp1814]

We were having a conversation at lunch about 'The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes', a film that me and my colleagues all think is pretty amazing.

Thing is - Andy Serkis (who also 'played' Gollum in the Lord of the Rings/Hobbit films, and King Kong) is very unlikely ever to be nominated for an acting award, even though (IMO) he brings so much to the role of Caesar.

What do you think?

Should someone playing a digitally realised character be eligible for an acting award (Oscar/BAFTA/Golden Globe etc)?

[Buenchico]

>>>Andy Serkis (who also 'played' Gollum in the Lord of the Rings/Hobbit films, and King Kong) is very unlikely ever to be nominated for an acting award

Apart, of course, from the 35 nominations (including 15 wins) listed here:
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/andy_serkis/awards.html
;-)

[rockyracoon]

Are their performances enhanced by the digitising? If it is then I don't think they should be eligible for an award, unless of course they create one specifically for these performances.

[Buenchico]

But, Rocky, an actor doesn't have to physically appear in a role (whether that appearance be digitally enhance or not) to put in a great performance. His/her voice can be all that is needed.

For example, Eddie Murphy was nominated for a BAFTA (and won several other awards) for his role in Shrek.

[rockyracoon]

That's true. Are they ineligable to be nominated if it's a digital performance?

[bibblebub]

He definitely ought to be eligible and there's ongoing chatter that things will change one of these years. It's crazy that Judi Dench gets an Oscar for appearing on screen for all of 8 minutes and yet his great performance for a whole film gets no recognition.

[askyourgran]

I would have thought that the actor's presence, his body and facial expressions would qualify for an award for his 'personal' role. Not being digitally altered so as to be unrecognisable. It could have been me perhaps hissing 'Gollum likes my pretty' (or whatever).

[sp1814]

Buenchico

Okay - I take you point, but many of those noms are for films where he appeared himself.

I personally would like to see some recognition for his 'digital work' from the big awards - BAFTAs, Academy Awards, Golden Globes.

The thing is - I don't think we or the critics can be sure of what is done on the set and what was added afterwards in the computer.

[Milvus]

Radio actors have awards. What is the difference?

[askyourgran]

Bit of a grey area there sp, I can understand that an actor plays the part and the digital enhancer does his thing, but in the film world, presence is what matters so who gets the prize?

[Aquariel]

The way I see it, he's giving a performance which has been captured digitally, but it's still his work, so he should be recognised for it. Many people who have seen the film all agree on his performance - the same as he did with Gollum. His performances made the character what it was. Another actor doing the motion capture would do it differently. It's the same situation as Scarlett Johanssen being ineligible for a Golden Globe for her voice work on "Her", even though her performance has been critically acclaimed.

An award for a performance should be allowed regardless of the type of performance. I don't think any voice-over work has ever been nominated for the best actor Oscar. It's time for the Academy to modernise! At least they should have a separate category for this type of performance as they deserve some recognition.