Visual FX Nominations Lowered to Seven

Considering Hollywood's ineptitude at picking the Best FX in a film, I doubt this years winner will be the one that is truly the best. Example: The three Star Wars prequels. All three films were snubbed by the Oscars, and Episode 3 wasn't even nominated!! Now, despite what any of you out there thought of the films themselves(poor acting, shallow story-line, awful script, whatever....), you have to admit the visuals were amazing at worst! There weren't ANY films out when the prequel films were, that had anywhere NEAR the FX extravaganza and plain awesomeness that those films displayed! 1999, The Matrix beats out TPM. REALLY?!?!? The Matrix??? Give me a break!! 2002, LOtR:FOTR beat out AoTC. Well, this was a bit better on Hollywood's part, but still wrong! AoTC, though rather silly, had fabulous FX that were definitely better than LOtR! 2005, well, as I said above, ROtS wasn't even nominated....and the over-bloated, horrible film, King Kong won it instead.....sheesh......well, once I saw how Hollywood snubbed George in 1999, I KNEW they would continue to do so in 2002 and 2005. They didn't like it that he was an independent film maker and that his movies made TONS of money, which they were left out of! So, they snubbed him. I suspect we'll see that same stupidity from them again THIS year!

Sorry, EagleManiac, but I agree with the awards.
Matrix's FX impressed me far more than Phantom Menace. Fellowship's FX impressed me more than Clones. And I thought the FX in King Kong were amazing. The Prequel Trilogy had good CGI, sure, but it didn't really do much for me.

I really hope Transformers doesn't win, though my argument against it comes down more to robot designs (hate them), editing (wretched) and fight scene choreography (this is at least tangently part of FX.)

300, Pirates, Golden Compass each had some pretty impressive FX. I don't remember being that impressed with the FX for I Am Legend nor for Bourne Ultimatum.

And I thought I for certain saw somewhere that the Golden Globes are already canceled.

Yep - read about it
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20169794,00.html
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/exclusive-golden-globes-cancelled/
http://www.smh.com.au/news/film/show-stopper-golden-globes-cancelled/2008/01/08/1199554612222.html

The Studios, at this point, are starting to be inconvenienced. Combine this with WWP and UA signing contracts with the WGA - the strike is going in the right direction.

Merin, well, that's your opinion(s), and you are definitely entitled to them. But my point is, it wouldn't surprise me if The Bourne Ultimatum won for best FX! And, the fact that Spiderman 3 and HP5 were left off the list is another reason I made my points above. I never thought The Matrix's FX were even GOOD, let alone worthy of the award. I didn't like that trilogy at all, and thought the plot was stupid, but hey, we all like different things, right? I liked the SW Prequels, to a point, but I'm not one of those that couldn't find fault with them......but I stand by my opinion that visually, they were, and are still, some of the most impressive FX ever put into modern films! As much as it pains me to say it, from the 7 movies listed above, I'd have to say it will probably be PotC:AWE. Geeez...I hope not....at least 300 was a BETTER movie, but I don't know if it will get the nod for best FX.

Speaking of FX, to me, the best visuals of all time have to go to the original, 1979 release, 'Alien', with a very close second going to 2001:ASO. These were films with amazing FX BEFORE the flood of CGI FX that seem to dominate films today. The use of REAL plastic and metal models, IN CAMERA FX, matte paintings(which are truly incredible works of art!), motion control cameras, and so on is a by-gone era that I miss! Hell, my all-time favorite film, The Andromeda Strain, looks more "real" than anything that has been released in the last 2 decades, and it was released in 1971!!!!

Maybe I missed something in watching the film, but why is The Bourne Ultimatum even being considered for a nomination in special effects? There were no real effects that stick out in my mind in the film, and certainly not to the degree of Transformers, 300, or Spider-Man 3.

Regarding the Star Wars prequels, sure the effects were great, but The Matrix absolutely deserved to beat Phantom Menace for Best Visual Effects. Bullet-time was an entirely new concept and technology developed for the film and was far more creative than adding massive amounts of CGI-created characters and machines.

Speaking of the "Bullet Time" FX in The Matrix, that effect was actually pioneered in Dark City. That same ripple effect was used to show the "psychic power" of the main character and the "Dark Ones". So The Matrix didn't INVENT that effect, Dark City did....but all those that were awed by The Matrix seem to forget that! All The Matirx did was add slow-motion and a bullet to it. Oooooo...real innovative! And, it's a silly "slow-mo" effect with some CGI ripples. I think Jar Jar(as absolutely horrid of a character that he was), was FAR SUPERIOR to that silly slow-mo ripple effect, which IS CG, by the way. But, again, we all have our opinions on this, and yours is different than mine. We all see things differently as well. I just know I'm right! LOL....sorry, couldn't resist!

Have you watched the Bullet Time feature on The Matrix DVD? It details the technology used to create the Bullet Time effect. The ripples you refer to have been used in movies many times, but never in the way they were used in The Matrix. Either everything was moving in slow motion or everything was moving in real time. The Matrix used a combination of the two where the camera moves in real time while the characters move in slow motion.

Either way, you're right that we can agree to disagree, despite the fact that you're wrong. ;-)

EagleManiac is right. This is a matter of opinion (which FX were better) and as such disagreements are expected. :)

The Star Wars Prequels had good FX, not knocking that at all - I just personally wasn't as impressed, I guess.

A film like Bourne's effects are less CGI, less robots and space, and more the action sequences, the explosions, the car chases - those all use visual effects, even if they look "realistic." That said, I agree that Ultimatum (as great a film as it was) doesn't resonate with me as having any stand-out FX.

FX have nothing to do with quality of story or acting or any such, though - so while I didn't see it, Evan Almighty may well have had some amazing FX (for tis budget it better have had something!)

I personally think the visuals and action sequences of 300 deserve it. Failing that, Pirates was such a visual feast of fantasy insanity it's hard pressed to not think of it for FX.

Harry Potter had a pretty cool duel between Dumbledore and Voldemort at the end, and a few other interesting effects, but most of the movie was character driven to the point of magic taking a real back-seat. And all the stupify and disarming spells don't take much in the way of elaborate FX.

Spidey - eh - I think Venom looked about half as bad as the Transformers robots did, and Sandman often looked a bit fake.

i think transformers will probably win. im still scratching my head at bourne. if bourne is considered, why not live free or die hard? just seems out of place considering the cgi heavies in the list. 300 could be a contender too but then i think back to sin city which basically used the same techniques and i dont think it was given a nod. time will tell though. im just an ILM fanboy, everything they do seems to be really amazing.

Honestly, and this is no way an insult to anyone who liked it, but I thought The Matrix was a bad movie, at best. Keanu Reeves can't act to save his life, and that whole opening sequence where Morpheus has him crouching around his office floor was so silly I was actually laughing! And Reeves' acting was so over-the-top, he made William Shatner's WORST Captain Kirk moments seem like Academy Award Winning Acting! I thought the FX were OK, but not great, and the whole story was just a cobbled together montage from The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, Dark City, and Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure(well, maybe not that last bit....). I saw it ONCE, will never watch it again, and never saw the sequels, which I was told by those who LIKED The Matrix, were worse and made even less sense, and never answered the basic question, "What IS The Matrix?".

So, as I see it, Hollywood will probably pick the film of those 7 listed that THEY liked the most, and not necessarily the "best" for FX.