Red Mosquito

dimejinky99 wrote:Performance enhancing drugs are illegal in sport. If it even only gives the cheater a 0.0001 second advantage leading to a win, it’s cheating and if caught the cheater stripped of the medal.
absolutely no difference to what happened here. He’s a prick and he’s stolen that Oscar.

you're an idiot

Lol. Come on Dime

It’s art, not sport.

Jorge wrote:Lol. Come on Dime

I had to go all in on it

Imagine saying to Cillian Murphy or Raiph fiennes hey the accent ain’t right. We’re gonna just tweak your performance a bit with the ai

They’d physically throw you over the nearest table!

dimejinky99 wrote:

Jorge wrote:Lol. Come on Dime

I had to go all in on it

Imagine saying to Cillian Murphy or Raiph fiennes hey the accent ain’t right. We’re gonna just tweak your performance a bit with the ai

They’d physically throw you over the nearest table!

i wonder if there are other ways in which an actor's performance is enhanced in a movie in post-production... hmm...

Anders wrote:It’s art, not sport.

In an awards context it’s exactly the same thing. If you think it isn’t just look at the tens of millions studios spend just even getting their film / actor etc noninated. Hollywood doesn’t get to make the distinction its art and different than sport.

dimejinky99 wrote:

Anders wrote:It’s art, not sport.

In an awards context it’s exactly the same thing. If you think it isn’t just look at the tens of millions studios spend just even getting their film / actor etc noninated. Hollywood doesn’t get to make the distinction its art and different than sport.

But it is art

not all art is created equally

for instance, The Brutalist had a budget of $10 million. Should the movies that spent more money be in a different league? if we're gonna be using sport rules

Anders wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Anders wrote:It’s art, not sport.

In an awards context it’s exactly the same thing. If you think it isn’t just look at the tens of millions studios spend just even getting their film / actor etc noninated. Hollywood doesn’t get to make the distinction its art and different than sport.

But it is art

Tell that to the guy who’s trained all his life to get to the Olympics and has his gold stolen by a fraction of a second by some guy who’s all juiced up.
It’s no less a theft

No more winners that have used cgi or special effects?

dimejinky99 wrote:

Anders wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Anders wrote:It’s art, not sport.

In an awards context it’s exactly the same thing. If you think it isn’t just look at the tens of millions studios spend just even getting their film / actor etc noninated. Hollywood doesn’t get to make the distinction its art and different than sport.

But it is art

Tell that to the guy who’s trained all his life to get to the Olympics and has his gold stolen by a fraction of a second by some guy who’s all juiced up.
It’s no less a theft

It’s art. Anything goes. Got nothing to do with doping in sports.

As silly as this conversation is, it does make me wonder about a future in which all performances are enhanced with AI to a much greater degree. Will probably have to award the entire team who worked on the performance instead of just the actour.

tree_ wrote:As silly as this conversation is, it does make me wonder about a future in which all performances are enhanced with AI to a much greater degree. Will probably have to award the entire team who worked on the performance instead of just the actour.

Since everything can be done in post-processing now, that's been a fuzzy area for awhile.

BurtReynolds wrote:

tree_ wrote:As silly as this conversation is, it does make me wonder about a future in which all performances are enhanced with AI to a much greater degree. Will probably have to award the entire team who worked on the performance instead of just the actour.

Since everything can be done in post-processing now, that's been a fuzzy area for awhile.

Yeah probably. And everyone wants to pile on the little guy, getting by on a measly $10 million. Just think of all the work that went into Dime's precious SW movies.

Anders wrote:No more winners that have used cgi or special effects?

Oh cmon. That is not the same thing and you know it.

If you want to make that argument Andy Serkis should have won two Oscar’s for his Gollum performances in two towers and return of the king.
He wasn’t even nominated as it was cgi.

It was his performance though.

that's not even James Earl Jones 'neath that Vader mask, dime!

It's a collaborative artform, so it makes these awards kinda silly and just for fun anyway. Was it really the actor? The director? The costume designer? Some poor loser sitting at a computer fixing everything? Who can say!

dimejinky99 wrote:

Anders wrote:No more winners that have used cgi or special effects?

Oh cmon. That is not the same thing and you know it.

If you want to make that argument Andy Serkis should have won two Oscar’s for his Gollum performances in two towers and return of the king.
He wasn’t even nominated as it was cgi.

It was his performance though.

It was his and the animator's performance.

tree_ wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

tree_ wrote:As silly as this conversation is, it does make me wonder about a future in which all performances are enhanced with AI to a much greater degree. Will probably have to award the entire team who worked on the performance instead of just the actour.

Since everything can be done in post-processing now, that's been a fuzzy area for awhile.

Yeah probably. And everyone wants to pile on the little guy, getting by on a measly $10 million. Just think of all the work that went into Dime's precious SW movies.

In which tree doesn’t understand the difference between actors giving a performance and movies that are heavily and completely dependent on cgi.

Ps no actor in Star Wars has ever been nominated for an Oscar whether in prosthetic cgi oe anything.

Make a better point than this mindless one

AI / cgi performances or enhanced performances aren’t recognised by the academy. Do keep up.

BurtReynolds wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

Anders wrote:No more winners that have used cgi or special effects?

Oh cmon. That is not the same thing and you know it.

If you want to make that argument Andy Serkis should have won two Oscar’s for his Gollum performances in two towers and return of the king.
He wasn’t even nominated as it was cgi.

It was his performance though.

It was his and the animator's performance.

It would habe been total shit if it was just 100% pure cgi tho. It was his performance brought the character to life in all his paranoids sckitzo glory. And he wasn’t even given a nomination as it was a cgi character.

He would have gotten a nomination had they just put him in prosthetics.