I read this article about Oscar picks from some experts in the field of technical awards. For the most part, it was very insightful. But one thing bugged me, that Kung Fu Panda is superior to Wall-E and should win. This was interesting because he mentioned that animators would believe it was the better feature since they look for different things. This made me wonder why anyone would ever think that, and I believe that it comes down to how you define the award.
To me, "Best Animated Feature" is kind of like "Best Drama," or "Best Comedy." It's not about which movie made you laugh the most, or had the most dramatic execution, but is about the movie in a genre that was the most well executed and brought the most to the art form. When you think about it like this, Wall-E is the hands down winner. The movie was overwhelmingly critically acclaimed and brought respect for animated films to a new high. It is much much more than "just a cartoon." Whereas Kung Fu Panda was enjoyable, but did nothing else besides make me laugh and think that it would score high at the box office. I have recommended it, but can't say that it brought the genre to a new high.
However, if you think about "Best Animated Feature" like a purely technical award, as in, which film advanced the state of the art in animation techniques, then I have no clue about which would be better without further viewing. I'm no expert. But it could very well be true that Kung Fu Panda had better use of animation technique, and production values.
One last thought. If Wall-E was a live-action movie, it would still be great. I'm not sure I could say the same about Kung Fu Panda.
Current Mood : Lazy
Current Music : Nada
No comments:
Post a Comment