Marc Young
January 27th, 2004, 03:35 PM
The three movies nominated for best visual effects for 2003 are:
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
Master and Commander: Far Side of the World
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl
Say what? I didn't notice anything groundbreaking or visually stunning in any of these movies. Gollum was unusual, but he was already realized in LOTR 2. The wooden boats in the other two movies were not that realistic. You want realism? Re-watch Errol Flynn in The Sea Hawk, or any pre-1950's movie with pirates or sea-faring men. I've seen better fighting skeletons in a Harry Harryhausen film.
Why did the Academy snub Matrix Reloaded, Matrix Revolutions, Terminator 3, Hulk, Freddy vs. Jason, Lara Croft Cradle of Life, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, X2, Underworld, etc. I prefer seeing special effects in futuristic or horror movies, not movies about the past. There must be some bias in the voters (i.e., ILM).
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
Master and Commander: Far Side of the World
Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl
Say what? I didn't notice anything groundbreaking or visually stunning in any of these movies. Gollum was unusual, but he was already realized in LOTR 2. The wooden boats in the other two movies were not that realistic. You want realism? Re-watch Errol Flynn in The Sea Hawk, or any pre-1950's movie with pirates or sea-faring men. I've seen better fighting skeletons in a Harry Harryhausen film.
Why did the Academy snub Matrix Reloaded, Matrix Revolutions, Terminator 3, Hulk, Freddy vs. Jason, Lara Croft Cradle of Life, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, X2, Underworld, etc. I prefer seeing special effects in futuristic or horror movies, not movies about the past. There must be some bias in the voters (i.e., ILM).