Motion Capture
Posted:
Andy Serkis is lobbying for an Oscar nomination for playing a monkey. Industry insiders don't rate his chances however, not due to the fact that he's portraying an ape but because his performance uses motion capture.
Motion Capture or performance capture, as many actors prefer it to be called, is the process in which a poor cast member is forced into a very tight and a slightly unbecoming green spandex suit covered in tiny cameras and 'dots' (to use their technical term). These cameras capture every facial expression and movement of the actor, which are then converted into a digital model by computer animators. In short, it is witchcraft.
This process means that actors can now portray skinny schizophrenic goblin things (Gollum), annoying orange frogs (Jar Jar Binks) and blue cat hippies (Avatar). Up until recently motion capture was seen as a bit of a fad, but with Avatar becoming the biggest film this side of Pandora and Andy Serkis (of Gollum and King Kong fame) slipping into the spandex again to portray a slightly smaller ape in 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' and garnering much critical praise, motion capture has far greater esteem.
In 'Rise' Serkis plays 'Caesar', a clever ape who leads a revolution against his evil human overlords. It's a surprisingly subtle performance, considering he's a monkey, and is the highlight of the movie. James Franco also used motion capture in the film to portray a tree, although no one asked him to.
With Serkis' monkeying around (lol) proving such a hit with audiences and critics, pressure is steadily mounting on the Oscar committee to take notice. The problem is that motion capture cannot simply define where the work of an actor stops and an animator begins. There is no way of knowing for sure how much of the animators' skill resulted in Serkis' excellent performance. For all we know the animators and director added a particular set of facial ticks or the odd movement to Serkis' performance in post production? Thus the argument goes that it would be unfair to compare Serkis to other actors who's performances weren't enhanced (or hindered, depending on your viewpoint) by motion capture.
In the end though it's worth remembering that filmmaking is such a collaborative process that to call an actor's performance solely their own is silly. The actor was reading from a script whilst being told what to do by a director and was then lit, made-up, costumed, shot and edited to perfection. The work of an animator surely just counts as another facet of the filmmaking process, utilised in order to further aid an actor’s performance. I think having an animator add the odd tic and glance is a fair enough when you consider that most motion capture performers are pretending to be someone who isn’t even human. That can’t be too easy.
The Oscars should definitely consider motion capture performances and possibly just conduct a little more research into the each individual portrayal, in that way working out how much of the performance is down to the actor and how much is a result of the animator’s work.
In my opinion though, Serkis is nothing special, Manis the orangutan's portrayal of Clyde in 'Every Which Way But Loose' is far better and more nuanced.
Wait, this blog didn't mention Christmas once! It wasn't Christmassy at all. JINGLE BELLS! Phewf that was close.
Merry Christmas! If you're planning to make Eggnog, make sure you don't leave it in the fridge for too long or terrible things happen. Trust me.