(The above one was never used in the film "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" and substituted for one like the below one which is mostly CGI*)
I'm sure you can easily spot the difference, though I will say the CGI is pretty smooth but in movement I think moves too mechanically and too smoothly unlike an actor in makeup but that is just my eye.
I'm a huge fan of practical makeup. I think CGI is good at augmenting things, like taking out limbs or making see through cheeks and the like but I don't think an entire prothstetic should be substituted for practical makeup.
Makeup is an art and considering big budget films using CGI more than makeup and puppetry it seems I'm starting to get annoyed by the so-called 'Makeup' category at the Academy Awards.
Yes I was overall happy with the Oscars this year. (2013) The nominations for score rather annoyed me. There is some beautiful music out this year. I was almost sure Llewyn Davis would get more love than it did. I didn't like the film but I certainly respected it. (If that makes sense) And the obvious fact that "The Great Gatsby" was nominated for set design and not visual effects confused me. Because if you watch the VFX reel it's pretty clear that they didn't build anything for the film. But the same argument is being made about "Gravity" and the validity of lighting on a set vs lighting in a computer environment. "Gravity" is shot well, but it's a VFX film the weight of the visuals don't come from a great lighting direct (well they do but not in that way) but from a VFX crew mostly. Unlike a film like "Llewyn Davis" which is lit brilliantly by Bruno Delbonnel. (But playing devil's advocate I know tweaked in post) Yeah and Lana's song was beautiful for 'Gatsby' it was a great year this year I think. And everyone's 'snub list' will be different. I could see certain actors being switched out for others and no one would notice or care. I could go on for the entirety of my diatribe about past oscar failures (Shakespeare in Love*) But I won't I just had a strange epiphany about makeup . . .
Makeup . . .
Because I love horror movies. WHO DOESN'T! Monsters kick ass!!!
(*Jack Pierce - Frankenstein)
One of my main regrets in life is not having enough money to buy Jack Pierce's real makeup-photography book at auction a few years ago.
(*Tom Savini - Saturn Award Winner - *Day of the Dead)When . . . of the 2013 released films
"Dallas Buyers Club"
"Bad Grandpa"
and
"The Lone Ranger"
are nominated for makeup instead of . . . a makeup heavy film like . . .
"The Evil Dead"
You gotta say to yourself WTF Academy? Remember I'm not judging the "Evil Dead" as a film. I'm judging the category for makeup. The practical makeup effects in this film look amazing, the trailer gave me chills and when I saw the film despite a few plot hangups the makeup effects scenes were PHENOMENAL. So why is a film that rely's on one makeup effect like "Bad Grandpa" or relies mostly on the actors "Dallas Buyers Club" or a film well I won't judge Lone Ranter I've not seen it . . . but from the trailers I hope there are much better makeups than Johnny Depp's face in this. . . oh wait, William Fichtner is pretty good but . . .
no seriously, why isn't there any horror love in this category anymore ?
There are genuinely brilliant and iconic makeups in horror history . . .
I am starting to think Hollywood is starting to consider the "Horror" community a separate community from the "film" community as a whole. Like we're a clique, a niche, a fad, or any number of buzz words. But year after year after year after year horror has excelled, relished, and thrived in practical makeup. Now don't get me wrong I know 'The Exorcist' 'Wolfman' and 'American Werewolf in London' all received their due and even 'Carrie' (70's) for performance.
But why was
"Cinderella Man" nominated a few years back for simple cuts and bruises in makeup which is most makeup artists bread and butter and starting point and not something else . . . ?Makeups can create characters more often than not . . . but we, The Horror Community . . . create NIGHTMARES . . .
I'm not saying horror should automatically win . . . but I am impressed by how little I ever see it nominated, with few exceptions like "Pan's Labyrinth". And I'm also not saying this year they deserved any special treatment, but whenever I think about it I just assume both the Academy and Horror community haven't even tried yet they seem to be the only film genre genuinely excelling in trying to create new makeups and looks year after year. Yes the occasional character makeup or fantasy make up and usually old age makeup wins...but why not so often a good old fashioned monster.
No comments:
Post a Comment