Andy Serkis brings up an interesting point when he insists that motion-capture acting — a la Rise of the Planet of the Apes — is acting , plain and simple. As the performer, you record movement and voice, much like any conventional thespian, except later someone colors over you with computer voodoo. But does that take anything away from the award-worthiness of a role? Should the Oscars key up their appreciation of this artform?
See the original post:
Talkback: Do Motion-Capture Actors Deserve Oscar Cred?
