This goes back to Frank Oz who should have won the Oscar for Yoda in Empire Strikes Back.
goteamnick on
In order for it to be a legitimate category, it would need at least five worthy nominees each year. And I don’t see that happening.
Besides, isn’t Rocky a puppet?
SanDiablo on
I’m learning that puppeteers also do the voices of their characters (Yoda, Rocky, Gollum, Caesar from PotA, etc.) Is it customary for all puppeteers to do this?
jonbristow on
No lol
ajemik on
Sorry, but they’re just trying to shoehorn some weird category because movie is popular. Idiotic.
If Caesar, Gollum; hell, even ET or Yoda weren’t worthy of nominations, why would this one be?
Dophie on
Absolutely fucking not. There have been dozens of equally impressive performances in fully animated films. This is all hype, made up by the film’s PR team, to create buzz. Rocky is great, and the work done by everyone involved is incredible. It’s insulting to imply that the “best argument ever” for an animated performance Oscar is only happening in 2026 and only because of a live-action movie.
m_busuttil on
It’s interesting because even the examples being mentioned in the comments so far are quite different categorically.
Ortiz and Frank Oz were puppeteers on set manipulating physical puppets and performing the character. Ortiz’s puppetry was often replaced or augmented by CGI. Serkis was physically on set but completely replaced by CGI. Bradley Cooper isn’t on set at all but is doing a voice performance for an animated character in a live-action movie. And then there are “Animated Performances” that are original in all-animated movies (Hanks and Allen in Toy Story) or that are dubs of foreign animation (Pattinson in The Boy and the Heron).
I’m open to the idea that it’s basically “any performance where you can’t see the actor’s actual face on screen” – but does it then potentially include, say, Scarlett Johansson in Her, where it’s a voice performance but there’s no animated character? Maybe that’s fine and maybe it’s good for it to be broad to get a sufficient spread of eligible performances every year, but do all these things count as the same thing enough to be judged against each other?
7 Comments
This goes back to Frank Oz who should have won the Oscar for Yoda in Empire Strikes Back.
In order for it to be a legitimate category, it would need at least five worthy nominees each year. And I don’t see that happening.
Besides, isn’t Rocky a puppet?
I’m learning that puppeteers also do the voices of their characters (Yoda, Rocky, Gollum, Caesar from PotA, etc.) Is it customary for all puppeteers to do this?
No lol
Sorry, but they’re just trying to shoehorn some weird category because movie is popular. Idiotic.
If Caesar, Gollum; hell, even ET or Yoda weren’t worthy of nominations, why would this one be?
Absolutely fucking not. There have been dozens of equally impressive performances in fully animated films. This is all hype, made up by the film’s PR team, to create buzz. Rocky is great, and the work done by everyone involved is incredible. It’s insulting to imply that the “best argument ever” for an animated performance Oscar is only happening in 2026 and only because of a live-action movie.
It’s interesting because even the examples being mentioned in the comments so far are quite different categorically.
Ortiz and Frank Oz were puppeteers on set manipulating physical puppets and performing the character. Ortiz’s puppetry was often replaced or augmented by CGI. Serkis was physically on set but completely replaced by CGI. Bradley Cooper isn’t on set at all but is doing a voice performance for an animated character in a live-action movie. And then there are “Animated Performances” that are original in all-animated movies (Hanks and Allen in Toy Story) or that are dubs of foreign animation (Pattinson in The Boy and the Heron).
I’m open to the idea that it’s basically “any performance where you can’t see the actor’s actual face on screen” – but does it then potentially include, say, Scarlett Johansson in Her, where it’s a voice performance but there’s no animated character? Maybe that’s fine and maybe it’s good for it to be broad to get a sufficient spread of eligible performances every year, but do all these things count as the same thing enough to be judged against each other?