Since motion-capture ...
Question: Since motion-capture performances are becoming more and more common, what are the chances of someone getting an acting nomination for a role like King Kong or Yoda in the new Star Wars movie?
Answer: With moviemaking technology changing at an ever-increasing pace, the Academy has been reviewing a number of its policies, and I've heard it suggested that over the next few years they'll wind up doing their biggest overhaul since the introduction of sound in the 1920s. I have to wonder, for example, whether the conspicuous absence of Frank Miller's Sin City – by any objective standard one of the most visually stunning films released in 2005 – in any category is because members of the various branches didn't know what to nominate it for, given that the photography was extensively digitally overhauled and the production was almost entirely computer generated. So far, the acting component of the Academy has declined to nominate anyone for a performance in which what audiences see on screen is entirely digitally constructed; they seem to be treating such work as being the equivalent of supplying the voice for an animated movie. Even in 2003, when The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King swept the Oscars, Andy Serkis was passed over for his remarkable motion-capture (or "performance capture," as boosters prefer to call it) characterization of the devious, groveling Gollum. I think the future is already in sight and at some point such performances will be recognized, but I don't think it's going to be soon. A large part of the reason will be resistance from actors, and you can hardly blame them: Motion-capture performances could, after all, be the first step in cutting flesh-and-blood performers out of the pictures entirely.
