Written by Anthony Watkins
What do you think of when you hear the word “performance?” Do you think of a person acting/speaking in front of an audience or camera? A person showcasing a talent on a stage? Can a person’s voice alone qualify as a performance?
All of these questions contribute to the debate of performance capture qualifying as an actual performance by an actor. Traditionally, we would certainly agree that an animated character has no correlation with a performance. However, as the technology of performance capture has evolved over the last decade, the previous agreement has slowly transformed into controversy.
Before we dive more into the issue, let’s briefly refresh what exactly we mean by performance capture. Performance capture (or motion capture) is the process of filming an actor’s movements and then digitally rendering those movements to create an animated character onscreen. The technique actually goes as far back as 1915, when animator Max Fleischer developed the Rotoscope, which allowed animators to draw over frames of live-action film in order to give cartoon characters a realistic fluidity. The technique was eventually adopted by Walt Disney and used in the first feature-length animated film Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Cottrell, 1937), as well as other early Disney films (Gray).
Today in performance capture, actors wear skin-tight body suits coupled with special markers (strategically placed around joints where bone movement occurs) that allow the cameras to effectively and accurately track their movements. Their movements are then rendered with state-of-the-art software to create a digital character. The technology really came to full light with Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings (2001-2003) trilogy in the creation of the sly, twisted creature “Gollum,” played by Andy Serkis. Jackson was able to advance the technology by allowing Serkis to be physically with the other actors filming in real time, rather than having to record Serkis’ part at a later date in a different, confined space (IGN). Serkis used his role as Gollum to springboard the technology and become a landmark actor in performance capture, as he would re-collaborate with Jackson to play King Kong in Jackson’s 2005 remake.
All of these questions contribute to the debate of performance capture qualifying as an actual performance by an actor. Traditionally, we would certainly agree that an animated character has no correlation with a performance. However, as the technology of performance capture has evolved over the last decade, the previous agreement has slowly transformed into controversy.
Before we dive more into the issue, let’s briefly refresh what exactly we mean by performance capture. Performance capture (or motion capture) is the process of filming an actor’s movements and then digitally rendering those movements to create an animated character onscreen. The technique actually goes as far back as 1915, when animator Max Fleischer developed the Rotoscope, which allowed animators to draw over frames of live-action film in order to give cartoon characters a realistic fluidity. The technique was eventually adopted by Walt Disney and used in the first feature-length animated film Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Cottrell, 1937), as well as other early Disney films (Gray).
Today in performance capture, actors wear skin-tight body suits coupled with special markers (strategically placed around joints where bone movement occurs) that allow the cameras to effectively and accurately track their movements. Their movements are then rendered with state-of-the-art software to create a digital character. The technology really came to full light with Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings (2001-2003) trilogy in the creation of the sly, twisted creature “Gollum,” played by Andy Serkis. Jackson was able to advance the technology by allowing Serkis to be physically with the other actors filming in real time, rather than having to record Serkis’ part at a later date in a different, confined space (IGN). Serkis used his role as Gollum to springboard the technology and become a landmark actor in performance capture, as he would re-collaborate with Jackson to play King Kong in Jackson’s 2005 remake.
Andy Serkis' character "Gollum" in Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy helped springboard performance capture at the beginning of the 21st century.
Performance capture would gain further attention in 2009, when director James Cameron revolutionized the technology by creating the “virtual camera,” which allowed him to see the digital characters live on a monitor as they acted. This allowed him to see the immediate results of the performances rather than wait to have software render the movements (Gray).
Zoe Saldana portrayed Neytiri through performance capture in James Cameron's Avatar (2009).
Weta Digital, the visual effects company responsible for the effects in Lord of the Rings, King Kong, and Avatar, returned to create performance capture in Rise of the Planet of the Apes (Wyatt, 2011). Andy Serkis returned to play another CGI character, “Caesar,” the lead ape in the rebellion against humanity. Using a light-weight helmet with a mounted camera attached, Weta captured every nuance of Serkis’ facial expressions down to the pixel, including wrinkles (Eisenberg).
After conquering "Gollum" and "King Kong," Andy Serkis returned to performance capture in Rise of the Planet of the Apes with his portrayal of "Caesar." He returned to the role in the critically-acclaimed Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014).
Many Oscars have been awarded to Weta for their pioneering visual effects work over the years. One key component has been left out, however. The actors, who, quite literally put the “performance” in performance capture are not recognized by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences come Oscar season. The reason is because the Academy does not believe a digital character should qualify as a personal performance. This inevitably forces them to make a definition of performance as a person who acts on screen without any digital or computer generated aid. I have some difficulty with this definition, since performance capture technology is able to capture virtually every detail of our facial expressions. Since we convey human emotion through these expressions, shouldn’t these also count as Oscar-nominating performances?
The debate is on-going, and will probably only grow as the technology progresses. What do you think? Should a CGI character created through performance capture be able to count towards a personal performance from an actor? Write out your thoughts in the comments below!
WORKS CITED
Eisenberg, Anne. “Animated or Real, Both are Believable.” The New York Times. 27 Aug. 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/business/technology-blurs-the-line-between-the-animated-and-the-real.html?_r=0>.
Gray, Ali. “A Brief History of Motion Capture in the Movies.” IGN. 11 July 2014. Web. 10 Sept. 2015. <http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/07/11/a-brief-history-of-motion-capture-in-the-movies>.
The debate is on-going, and will probably only grow as the technology progresses. What do you think? Should a CGI character created through performance capture be able to count towards a personal performance from an actor? Write out your thoughts in the comments below!
WORKS CITED
Eisenberg, Anne. “Animated or Real, Both are Believable.” The New York Times. 27 Aug. 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/business/technology-blurs-the-line-between-the-animated-and-the-real.html?_r=0>.
Gray, Ali. “A Brief History of Motion Capture in the Movies.” IGN. 11 July 2014. Web. 10 Sept. 2015. <http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/07/11/a-brief-history-of-motion-capture-in-the-movies>.
