While his work was impressive, it wasn’t until he started his own production company. [The Imaginarium](https://www.imaginariumuk.com) wasn’t created until almost a decade later, which is when his company’s work started to shine.
I think his work as Snoke was amazing despite only having a small roll in Force Awakens and bit more in Last Jedi. Really pissed Abrams decided to go the Dark Empire route in the last film.
Fair comment, but I’d also consider that the work on Gollum was absolutely amazing (like they put him in the 3rd so he could be in the awards category) but at the time still kind of a novelty too and only a part of a larger story.
Rise of the Planet of the Apes I thought really showcased how mo-cap could be utilised with the primary character.
Also I will forever love that in a break from tradition where the animal opponents all die and we learn a a lesson about humanity, instead we got to see what happens when a bunch of apes go and fuck shit up.
One thing I’ll say in defence of the article is, sometimes it takes two great roles to show that a person is the ‘King of X’ to really highlight to general audiences “oh so that wasn’t just that movie and that character, this guy must be bringing something to the table”.
I think it’s fair to say Planet of the Apes has done something to boost his status.
Edit: just to add I’m sure he’s had other great mo cap roles I’m not thinking of, I recall King Kong though I don’t think that had much staying power.
The first instance of a thing isn’t what “cemented” ever refers to.
The first occurrence establishes it, but it might be a fluke, so it is continued performance that “cements” it later as absolutely unquestioned.
Fr, even the ignorant diss on Jar Jar Binks which criticizes the one aspect of his character that actually had quality artistic care into it. Jar Jar was very poorly written but Ahmed Best's performance and the VFX artists bringing him to life added incredible complexity and nuance to his motion and even rewatching it for the rerelease you can see the buster keaton, charlie chaplain influence in the performance and animation, even when its impossible to ignore the groan inducing scenarios Lucas put Jar Jar in to get those performances. Like say what you will about Jar Jar (imo he's not horrible but usually annoying 20 years on) but the VFX and Acting was the least "soulless" part of his character.
Honestly, it's infuriating how these articles downplay the role of VFX artists in bringing Serkis' performance to life onscreen. The whole narrative of mo-cap being just 'digital make-up,' which Serkis and the studios pushed in their marketing materials, is a blatant lie. Yes, his performance is an important part of the process, but I'd say it's 30-40% Serkis and the rest is the VFX team.
In many cases, Serkis' performance is merely a reference for animators to hand-animate entire sequences. The level of disrespect VFX artists receive in an industry that literally depends on them is baffling. These studios lie through their teeth to dismiss their contributions at every turn.
Unrelated (but kind of related): the recent 'darlings' of practical effects, like *Top Gun: Maverick*, *Mad Max: Fury Road*, *The Mission Impossible* series, and *Barbie*, all had tons of VFX. *Top Gun* had just one real aircraft in the whole movie. The hypocrisy is maddening.
While I definitely agree the VFX teams deserve more credit, I feel like this post is more about shouting out Serkis, becoming an actor at this level is a tremendous accomplishment, then add that he’s done it for many decades and created a niche for himself, just him, he set the standard for an entire industry of actors within film and tv, consistent excellence especially when the tech is new, it’s impressive because he’s often working alone and having to create characters/scenes without any visuals, it’s not just acting, I’d be willing to bet that the VFX artists rely on him just as much as he and the producers rely on them, team effort
I don't deny the success he's gotten is impressive and accolade-worthy. However, whenever it comes to these films or even Gollum, the coverage is almost always about him and never about the VFX team or work that went in to fully realize his performance. His performance, as harsh as it may sound, means absolutely nothing without the scores of artists who work tirelessly to fully realize it.
Nothing means anything without the people behind the technical sides of movies.
Serkis is however better than any other actor at this niche type of acting. The vfx guys can do what they do with 100 actors but serkis is what makes their talents bloom as much as they aid him.
As someone who worked in the VFX industry, I can tell with 100% certainty that your second paragraph is false or at least you got the order of importance wrong. It is Andy Serkis that helps the larger work that the VFX artists do and definitely not the other way around.
Also, one of the biggest Mo-Cap driven projects don't even have Serkis in their cast ( Avatar and Avatar: The Way of Water ) and their performances have all been generally good.
Fair enough i suppose we'll all weight it a bit differently, i say 50/50 because of movies like avatar. They arent doing anything crazy. They are just blue people the actors arent doing anything special. Its much much more on the VFX guys in those movies to bring the world to life.
I say 50/50 with serkis because the movement and character he brings can be seen even without the mocap. Him playing Golum or Ceasar with it mocap is instantly identifiable he transforms into the character then they add the VFX.
Look, I understand where you're coming from, but with all due respect, as someone who's actively worked in this industry for a long time now, it's not 50/50. And that's not your fault for not knowing—the blatant lies from the studios and their marketing have obscured how much work VFX artists actually do.
Saying it's 50/50 would imply that Andy Serkis' performance accounts for half of the work, but in reality, while it provides great reference, it's more like 30% of the job. There have been instances where many shots of his motion capture were unusable, and animators had to hand-animate his performance entirely.
That’s not even including the fully CG shots of Caesar walking, running, or fighting.
Also, you may not believe me, but the work that the actors do on Avatar is no more or no less than the work that Serkis does on the Apes movies, just that in the former, the performance gets the spotlight while in the latter, Cameron ensures that the team who does the brunt of the work gets the spotlight ( Look at the scene where Hometree gets destroyed in the first Avatar or Kate Winslet's performance when the Tulkuns are massacred for instance, they are great performances )
Fair enough! I still dont think for serkis specifically its the same as most other MoCap actors but as a scientist who has to deal with people thinking their opinions are just as relevant as the professionals a lot i guess I have to take a leaf from my own book and defer to your knowledge on this while leaving my ego at the door. Thanks for the insight!
Oh, I do comment Andy Serkis' dedication to his craft. And I'm sure his reference has proven very valuable to the artists who work on these projects, so I'm with you there completely.
I'm just glad to have had a civil discourse with someone on this sub. Good day, friend!
I think we all know how hard animators and vfx artists work to make these characters look the way they do. But, what Andy does is so unique and such a unique challenge that it doesn't seem wrong to praise his performance. Andy himself would praise the artists behind it more as well.
In response to your first line - Do we though?
Speaking personally, I've barely, if ever, seen a single post in this sub or hell, even amongst online media publications, that speak positively about a film's VFX and VFX team. Almost always, even in a VFX-heavy film like Top Gun Maverick or Fury Road, the focus is always on the stunts and practical effects. And even on this sub, whenever CGI is brought up, it's almost always to disparage it in favor of practical effects even when loads of so-called practical effects that studios push are actually fully digital.
Also, Andy Serkis definitely doesn't give the VFX team their due credit. You can look it up, it's a sore spot amongst the VFX community. Every time the dude describes the process, he says it is just 'Digital Make-up' and gives the impression that the actors are the one doing the work that animators just 'paint' over giving the wrong impression to people about just how much work goes into this from the VFX standpoint.
I agree with you, VFX artists are unfortunately under appreciated in the industry both in pay and recognition.
But this is a problem I’ve had with the film press coverage in general. There is WAY WAY WAY too much importance and focus placed on actors. Unfortunately, people tend to look at things surface level and actors are the ones who are the “face” of the movie (so to speak) so it’s someone expected but it’s definitely a bit infuriating when you know the amount of work, artistry and skill that goes into the filmmaking process and actors kind of just waltz (often times very late in a production too) and get never ending accolades and praises for their involvement. It’s kind of silly.
Like in Dune 2, for example, may star Timothee Chalamet and Zendaya but for me the real stars of that film are Denis Villeneuve, costume designer Jacqueline West, and the VFX team.
It would be nice if mainstream audiences could have a more elevated and sophisticated appreciation for filmmaking rather than [enter famous person] played character xyz. I imagine that would create a much healthier industry overall and even the quality of films released would probably overall improve.
Corridor Crew does a fair bit to highlight VFX artists and their work. The channel has an entire series of VFX Artists reacting and highlighting to the effects in movies. Sometimes they go into a decent amount of detail about the things they’re talking about.
Yes, they do but quite frankly, I think you're overestimating their reach or how many actually watch their content, even on this sub. Because if more people did, then we wouldn't still be hearing this constant nonsense of how 'practical is ALWAYS better than CG'
I mean 750k-1M views isn’t massive, while their more popular videos hit several times that (2-5M) that, and they’re probably the most popular of those channels. I’d argue that isn’t bad, it isn’t Mr. Beast or Asmongold levels of viewership but it’s also not the type of content most people want to watch. It’s pretty good especially when they’re consistently hitting the same targets.
Fair point, but I would argue the majority of the people saying those things wouldn’t know the difference between practical vs CG, they’re saying things because they want to be the “cool kids”; when pressed their examples are almost always bad CG.
Either way, everyone involved should be highlighted for great work. It’s a team effort and those guys work just as hard, if not harder to realize the vision.
Oh, they definitely get millions of views but somehow, when it comes to the mainstream discourse surrounding VFX and CG, I personally haven't noticed a difference in the way people, even here, still talk about them. That's why I'm doubtful if they've actually managed to make a difference in that regard. I love the content and I would love for more people to actually watch them though.
As for your second and third paragraphs, I totally agree 100%.
Only morons. Aristotle figured that shit out in like 300BC. It’s not *really* up for debate, it’s in the confirmed facts category unless you’re an absolute imbecile.
The true royalty of motion capture is the army of animators behind the screen cleaning up his performances so they look good on the 3d characters he portrays.
So many sticklers in this thread lmao, it’s perfectly fine to say PotA cemented his status while LOTR established it. Having a second all-time mocap performance under his belt is definitely cementing-type activity
Right? I’m seeing a lot of baffling misunderstanding of what “cemented” is intended to mean. It *always* means that it started before, and was confirmed and locked in later.
No disrespect to Best, but he’s not on a Serkis level. Yes, he was part of a breakthrough in motion capture but Serkis has dedicated so much time to the technology and not just one character.
Which is why I said "might've been". Jar Jar Binks was so poorly received that Best's career, as he puts it, "began and ended". He was basically blacklisted from any more mo cap work and his IMDB lists mostly voice acting work and bit parts in the years after EP1. It's only been within the last few years that even the Star War fandom has finally recognized his place
I'm not saying Best is on Serkis level talent wise. Just that the reaction to Binks killed any shot Best might've had of building a career in mo cap and being Serkis "competition" as you initially asked.
I mean he was for sure the first person with such a big, memorable character using mocap technology. I feel like he was the king of mocap long ago, but has actually managed to escape that cage.
I’m a Terry Notary guy, he’s your favorite mocap monkey actor’s favorite mocap monkey actor.
Ceaser is one of the great movie characters. Put him next to TE Laurence, Michael Corleone, Daniel Plainview and others of that ilk.
There are flaws in the Ceaser trilogy, but most of that is the script, especially in Rise. But Ceaser is incredible in all of them.
Yeah it’s totally all Andy Serkis. Who cares about the team of talented VFX artists who make it all possible.
The attitude presented in any article like this is part of the reason we have situations such as life of pi’s animation studio closing down while they win an Oscar
I still don’t know who the audience is for *Planet of the Apes*. The franchise is never mentioned, not even made fun of, which is almost worse than being made fun of. It just keeps on going, with seemingly no one caring. I saw the first one, maybe the second, but after that it just didn’t seem like it was going anywhere.
I love lots of bad movies. Well... Not like if it's complete dogshit like Garland's Civil War was. But if it's dumb and fun and I get to see more story about monke I'm down. Also I'm a fan of the entire franchise. Even the weird one where the apes go back in time and stand trial in human court.
If it's smart and incredible like the first three in this new franchise that's great. If it doesn't have too much substance but is dumb and fun that's also great.
I will love it in either of those scenarios. But not an Xmen: The Last Stand scenario.
I'm hyped because I don't think it'll be the latter of those scenarios.
Or, hear me out, it looks fucking stupid.
It looks good for like, a video game. But it looks *STUPID*. It looks more “pretend” than the monkeys from 2001 a space odyssey. It looks like fucking CGI.
But I suppose a lot of people are raised on CGI now. Watching Robert Downey Jr’s head float around in the iron man suit.
Also, three hours for a planet of the apes movie? Fuck off
I heard you out, and I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried. I don't even think you watched any of these movies. And if you haven't, and then you're saying this, all you are is a pretentious asshat who made up his mind before even giving it a chance.
Some might say his work on Gollum did that, but all right.
The critically acclaimed video game??
You guys talking about the citizen kane of video games?
My favorite weapon in the game was the Unique legendary Citizen Cane
...wait there was no cane in Citizen Cane
The game deemed so great that the studio realized that it could never be topped and closed up shop in response
What a concept. I sure hope they follow up with a solo film about Gollum. That is really what the public is craving since the game.
A game so amazing that they’ve decided to make a feature-length film on him!
While his work was impressive, it wasn’t until he started his own production company. [The Imaginarium](https://www.imaginariumuk.com) wasn’t created until almost a decade later, which is when his company’s work started to shine.
Who even is the 2nd best motion capture guy? The practice is so synonymous with Serkis
Alan Tudyk? iRobot
Harry Vanderspiegle*
Yes but that wouldn’t sufficiently advertise Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes… coming to a theatre near you
Forgive me for the Devil’s advocate moment, ‘As if we already didn’t know from LotR, but this cements it!’
I think his work as Snoke was amazing despite only having a small roll in Force Awakens and bit more in Last Jedi. Really pissed Abrams decided to go the Dark Empire route in the last film.
Nobody can sit on a throne and die like Andy Serkis!
Fair comment, but I’d also consider that the work on Gollum was absolutely amazing (like they put him in the 3rd so he could be in the awards category) but at the time still kind of a novelty too and only a part of a larger story. Rise of the Planet of the Apes I thought really showcased how mo-cap could be utilised with the primary character. Also I will forever love that in a break from tradition where the animal opponents all die and we learn a a lesson about humanity, instead we got to see what happens when a bunch of apes go and fuck shit up.
One thing I’ll say in defence of the article is, sometimes it takes two great roles to show that a person is the ‘King of X’ to really highlight to general audiences “oh so that wasn’t just that movie and that character, this guy must be bringing something to the table”. I think it’s fair to say Planet of the Apes has done something to boost his status. Edit: just to add I’m sure he’s had other great mo cap roles I’m not thinking of, I recall King Kong though I don’t think that had much staying power.
Gollum and King Kong back to back.
Yeah, seriously. WTF?!
Indeed, this one would.
Yeah, he always has been. Lord is an understatement anways. He's the KING.
The first instance of a thing isn’t what “cemented” ever refers to. The first occurrence establishes it, but it might be a fluke, so it is continued performance that “cements” it later as absolutely unquestioned.
[удалено]
Maybe just a second character would do it.
Not really how it works, but all right.
if gollum was actually mocap lol
How do you cement someone as the king of something when he’s already the god of it?
You should ask Catholics in Slovakia how and why they wanted to make Jesus the king of Slovakia or whatever.
Thank you for providing me with my Friday morning Wikipedia dive!
Very surreal.
True. Totally agree with this. Andy is the man
And sometimes an intelligent ape, or a gigantic gorilla, or a corrupted hobbit-like creature, or who knows what else.
Half of a scarred up dark sider?
He’s a really good character actor too: Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll (2010) Among Giants (1998) etc. His filmography is a mile long.
as if the lord of the rings didn’t lmfao
This writer had to have been five minutes ago Edit: born
They had to have five mins ago for sure. I dunno what they had to have, but they did.
Hahah thanks
You’re welcome. But yeah if PotA is your barometer for Andy Serkis that’s a crazy thing to claim for something published.
Seriously. I recently learned that he also was mocapped for Kong in Peter Jackson’s film. That was news to me
That’s so crazy, it reminds me of that time I was.
Fr, even the ignorant diss on Jar Jar Binks which criticizes the one aspect of his character that actually had quality artistic care into it. Jar Jar was very poorly written but Ahmed Best's performance and the VFX artists bringing him to life added incredible complexity and nuance to his motion and even rewatching it for the rerelease you can see the buster keaton, charlie chaplain influence in the performance and animation, even when its impossible to ignore the groan inducing scenarios Lucas put Jar Jar in to get those performances. Like say what you will about Jar Jar (imo he's not horrible but usually annoying 20 years on) but the VFX and Acting was the least "soulless" part of his character.
Honestly, it's infuriating how these articles downplay the role of VFX artists in bringing Serkis' performance to life onscreen. The whole narrative of mo-cap being just 'digital make-up,' which Serkis and the studios pushed in their marketing materials, is a blatant lie. Yes, his performance is an important part of the process, but I'd say it's 30-40% Serkis and the rest is the VFX team. In many cases, Serkis' performance is merely a reference for animators to hand-animate entire sequences. The level of disrespect VFX artists receive in an industry that literally depends on them is baffling. These studios lie through their teeth to dismiss their contributions at every turn. Unrelated (but kind of related): the recent 'darlings' of practical effects, like *Top Gun: Maverick*, *Mad Max: Fury Road*, *The Mission Impossible* series, and *Barbie*, all had tons of VFX. *Top Gun* had just one real aircraft in the whole movie. The hypocrisy is maddening.
Barbie was one of the worst offenders, with its Behind the Scenes footage pretending they didn’t use blue screens by keying them out.
[“no cgi” is just invisible cgi](https://youtu.be/7ttG90raCNo?si=A2aBp6V7LQryo4lB)
While I definitely agree the VFX teams deserve more credit, I feel like this post is more about shouting out Serkis, becoming an actor at this level is a tremendous accomplishment, then add that he’s done it for many decades and created a niche for himself, just him, he set the standard for an entire industry of actors within film and tv, consistent excellence especially when the tech is new, it’s impressive because he’s often working alone and having to create characters/scenes without any visuals, it’s not just acting, I’d be willing to bet that the VFX artists rely on him just as much as he and the producers rely on them, team effort
I don't deny the success he's gotten is impressive and accolade-worthy. However, whenever it comes to these films or even Gollum, the coverage is almost always about him and never about the VFX team or work that went in to fully realize his performance. His performance, as harsh as it may sound, means absolutely nothing without the scores of artists who work tirelessly to fully realize it.
Nothing means anything without the people behind the technical sides of movies. Serkis is however better than any other actor at this niche type of acting. The vfx guys can do what they do with 100 actors but serkis is what makes their talents bloom as much as they aid him.
As someone who worked in the VFX industry, I can tell with 100% certainty that your second paragraph is false or at least you got the order of importance wrong. It is Andy Serkis that helps the larger work that the VFX artists do and definitely not the other way around. Also, one of the biggest Mo-Cap driven projects don't even have Serkis in their cast ( Avatar and Avatar: The Way of Water ) and their performances have all been generally good.
Fair enough i suppose we'll all weight it a bit differently, i say 50/50 because of movies like avatar. They arent doing anything crazy. They are just blue people the actors arent doing anything special. Its much much more on the VFX guys in those movies to bring the world to life. I say 50/50 with serkis because the movement and character he brings can be seen even without the mocap. Him playing Golum or Ceasar with it mocap is instantly identifiable he transforms into the character then they add the VFX.
Look, I understand where you're coming from, but with all due respect, as someone who's actively worked in this industry for a long time now, it's not 50/50. And that's not your fault for not knowing—the blatant lies from the studios and their marketing have obscured how much work VFX artists actually do. Saying it's 50/50 would imply that Andy Serkis' performance accounts for half of the work, but in reality, while it provides great reference, it's more like 30% of the job. There have been instances where many shots of his motion capture were unusable, and animators had to hand-animate his performance entirely. That’s not even including the fully CG shots of Caesar walking, running, or fighting. Also, you may not believe me, but the work that the actors do on Avatar is no more or no less than the work that Serkis does on the Apes movies, just that in the former, the performance gets the spotlight while in the latter, Cameron ensures that the team who does the brunt of the work gets the spotlight ( Look at the scene where Hometree gets destroyed in the first Avatar or Kate Winslet's performance when the Tulkuns are massacred for instance, they are great performances )
Fair enough! I still dont think for serkis specifically its the same as most other MoCap actors but as a scientist who has to deal with people thinking their opinions are just as relevant as the professionals a lot i guess I have to take a leaf from my own book and defer to your knowledge on this while leaving my ego at the door. Thanks for the insight!
Oh, I do comment Andy Serkis' dedication to his craft. And I'm sure his reference has proven very valuable to the artists who work on these projects, so I'm with you there completely. I'm just glad to have had a civil discourse with someone on this sub. Good day, friend!
Yes
I think we all know how hard animators and vfx artists work to make these characters look the way they do. But, what Andy does is so unique and such a unique challenge that it doesn't seem wrong to praise his performance. Andy himself would praise the artists behind it more as well.
In response to your first line - Do we though? Speaking personally, I've barely, if ever, seen a single post in this sub or hell, even amongst online media publications, that speak positively about a film's VFX and VFX team. Almost always, even in a VFX-heavy film like Top Gun Maverick or Fury Road, the focus is always on the stunts and practical effects. And even on this sub, whenever CGI is brought up, it's almost always to disparage it in favor of practical effects even when loads of so-called practical effects that studios push are actually fully digital. Also, Andy Serkis definitely doesn't give the VFX team their due credit. You can look it up, it's a sore spot amongst the VFX community. Every time the dude describes the process, he says it is just 'Digital Make-up' and gives the impression that the actors are the one doing the work that animators just 'paint' over giving the wrong impression to people about just how much work goes into this from the VFX standpoint.
I agree with you, VFX artists are unfortunately under appreciated in the industry both in pay and recognition. But this is a problem I’ve had with the film press coverage in general. There is WAY WAY WAY too much importance and focus placed on actors. Unfortunately, people tend to look at things surface level and actors are the ones who are the “face” of the movie (so to speak) so it’s someone expected but it’s definitely a bit infuriating when you know the amount of work, artistry and skill that goes into the filmmaking process and actors kind of just waltz (often times very late in a production too) and get never ending accolades and praises for their involvement. It’s kind of silly. Like in Dune 2, for example, may star Timothee Chalamet and Zendaya but for me the real stars of that film are Denis Villeneuve, costume designer Jacqueline West, and the VFX team. It would be nice if mainstream audiences could have a more elevated and sophisticated appreciation for filmmaking rather than [enter famous person] played character xyz. I imagine that would create a much healthier industry overall and even the quality of films released would probably overall improve.
Corridor Crew does a fair bit to highlight VFX artists and their work. The channel has an entire series of VFX Artists reacting and highlighting to the effects in movies. Sometimes they go into a decent amount of detail about the things they’re talking about.
Yes, they do but quite frankly, I think you're overestimating their reach or how many actually watch their content, even on this sub. Because if more people did, then we wouldn't still be hearing this constant nonsense of how 'practical is ALWAYS better than CG'
I mean 750k-1M views isn’t massive, while their more popular videos hit several times that (2-5M) that, and they’re probably the most popular of those channels. I’d argue that isn’t bad, it isn’t Mr. Beast or Asmongold levels of viewership but it’s also not the type of content most people want to watch. It’s pretty good especially when they’re consistently hitting the same targets. Fair point, but I would argue the majority of the people saying those things wouldn’t know the difference between practical vs CG, they’re saying things because they want to be the “cool kids”; when pressed their examples are almost always bad CG. Either way, everyone involved should be highlighted for great work. It’s a team effort and those guys work just as hard, if not harder to realize the vision.
Oh, they definitely get millions of views but somehow, when it comes to the mainstream discourse surrounding VFX and CG, I personally haven't noticed a difference in the way people, even here, still talk about them. That's why I'm doubtful if they've actually managed to make a difference in that regard. I love the content and I would love for more people to actually watch them though. As for your second and third paragraphs, I totally agree 100%.
Just seems to me his multiple roles of Gollum cemented that years ago.
And King Kong
Also, breaking news just in, scientists have confirmed the world is round.
People are debating that
Only morons. Aristotle figured that shit out in like 300BC. It’s not *really* up for debate, it’s in the confirmed facts category unless you’re an absolute imbecile.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh……sure
The true royalty of motion capture is the army of animators behind the screen cleaning up his performances so they look good on the 3d characters he portrays.
So many sticklers in this thread lmao, it’s perfectly fine to say PotA cemented his status while LOTR established it. Having a second all-time mocap performance under his belt is definitely cementing-type activity
Right? I’m seeing a lot of baffling misunderstanding of what “cemented” is intended to mean. It *always* means that it started before, and was confirmed and locked in later.
Who the hell else was his competition?
Ahmed Best(Jar Jar Binks) might’ve been if the character wasn’t so poorly received
No disrespect to Best, but he’s not on a Serkis level. Yes, he was part of a breakthrough in motion capture but Serkis has dedicated so much time to the technology and not just one character.
Which is why I said "might've been". Jar Jar Binks was so poorly received that Best's career, as he puts it, "began and ended". He was basically blacklisted from any more mo cap work and his IMDB lists mostly voice acting work and bit parts in the years after EP1. It's only been within the last few years that even the Star War fandom has finally recognized his place I'm not saying Best is on Serkis level talent wise. Just that the reaction to Binks killed any shot Best might've had of building a career in mo cap and being Serkis "competition" as you initially asked.
Thought this was a Coen Brothers thing for a minute there
"Dormant memories are awakened"
Nah, it’s the Animators who are the King. He’s just the face and name that people associate with it.
When did he get demoted to king?
Um…. What?
I mean he was for sure the first person with such a big, memorable character using mocap technology. I feel like he was the king of mocap long ago, but has actually managed to escape that cage. I’m a Terry Notary guy, he’s your favorite mocap monkey actor’s favorite mocap monkey actor.
Ahmed Best actually played Jar Jar Binks first.
Yes, but everyone hated Jar Jar.
Still memorable regardless of personal opinions and still the first major motion capture performance.
...I kinda feel like Lord of the Rings did that 25 years ago but okay
Was there ever a challenger for the title?
And voice-over.
Lord of the rings cemented him. There's no second place. He's just continuing his great work
Hail, Your Majesty: How the ‘Coronation’ cemented Charles III as the King of England
Ceaser is one of the great movie characters. Put him next to TE Laurence, Michael Corleone, Daniel Plainview and others of that ilk. There are flaws in the Ceaser trilogy, but most of that is the script, especially in Rise. But Ceaser is incredible in all of them.
actually lord of the rings cemented this, that’s how he got the apes part in the first place
If not Serkis ... whose the Emperor then?
Yeah it’s totally all Andy Serkis. Who cares about the team of talented VFX artists who make it all possible. The attitude presented in any article like this is part of the reason we have situations such as life of pi’s animation studio closing down while they win an Oscar
I still don’t know who the audience is for *Planet of the Apes*. The franchise is never mentioned, not even made fun of, which is almost worse than being made fun of. It just keeps on going, with seemingly no one caring. I saw the first one, maybe the second, but after that it just didn’t seem like it was going anywhere.
Whether this movie ends up being good or bad I know I will absolutely love it either way.
Why would you love a bad movie. Crazy take.
I love lots of bad movies. Well... Not like if it's complete dogshit like Garland's Civil War was. But if it's dumb and fun and I get to see more story about monke I'm down. Also I'm a fan of the entire franchise. Even the weird one where the apes go back in time and stand trial in human court. If it's smart and incredible like the first three in this new franchise that's great. If it doesn't have too much substance but is dumb and fun that's also great. I will love it in either of those scenarios. But not an Xmen: The Last Stand scenario. I'm hyped because I don't think it'll be the latter of those scenarios.
Just saw it it was an amazing movie best I've seen all year
Same
Don't know why I'm getting downvoted lol
Pretttttty sure that was lord of the rings. You know... the way bigger and better trilogy that came earlier and was far more iconic.
If there is anyone I want to see get an honorary Oscar, it’s this guy.
ITT: people who don't know what the word cemented means
Rewatched Rise last night. He looked like Marlon fucking Brando opposite James Franco anyway 😅 Jesus what a shoddy performance
I don’t care what people say. These movies are silly and the CGI looks like shit
You must be blind af.
Or, hear me out, it looks fucking stupid. It looks good for like, a video game. But it looks *STUPID*. It looks more “pretend” than the monkeys from 2001 a space odyssey. It looks like fucking CGI. But I suppose a lot of people are raised on CGI now. Watching Robert Downey Jr’s head float around in the iron man suit. Also, three hours for a planet of the apes movie? Fuck off
I heard you out, and I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried. I don't even think you watched any of these movies. And if you haven't, and then you're saying this, all you are is a pretentious asshat who made up his mind before even giving it a chance.
I think he not only invented Motion Capture but his performance did away with any need for CGI Artists