So why HIM?

This message has been deleted by an administrator

This message has been deleted by an administrator

"because he can and because he excels at it"

Excels how? Is he extraordinarily flexible? Does he have particularly detailed expressive eyes? Is he missing bones that allow him to mimic apes more accurately?

I asked what makes him a good choice for these roles, and you responded merely by telling me he is a good choice. That's like if I asked 'why is the sky blue?' and you answered 'the sky is blue.' It doesn't provide much insight.

It seems like your question is more rhetorical than one meant to be answered. You seem to be waiting for the answer that resonates with your opinion, something along the lines of "It's totally ridiculous, right? Crazy film studios!" ...

My opinion:

His performance as Gollum made him a star, because it was a character whose body language and voice mattered a lot. Both of wich belonged to Serkis.
People wanted to know who is the man behind the CGI-mask, thus Serkis got into the spotlight. There were even rumours of an Academy Award nomination. I believe he would have gotten it, especially for The Two Towers, if he have had very convincing make-up on instead.

While motion-capture doesn't require star power, but a physically expressive actor/acrobat with a good eye for abstraction, I think Andy, thanks to The Lord Of The Rings, is a household name and box-office draw.

His work on King Kong and Tin Tin were simply further collaborations with Peter Jackson, and even with the Planet Of The Apes productions he is simply collaborating further on with the WETA special effects company.

I have only seen the mo-cap Serkis in the Lotr trilogy and King Kong.


But you, "audiopinions" , should lose the arrogant attitude. It gives a very immature, spoiled-brat impression.

Regardless of your answer, you or I or audiopinions could do all of that work he does. We all know it.

The real answer is he lucked out. There are plenty of people who can do motion capture that are unknown or will ever be rich and famous like him. He got a big role in Lord of Ring and that helped him till now.

---

Here's exactly the reason "why him", no opinions, just fact. He was good with voices originally, Peter Jackson brought him on and even remodeled Gollum to the actor. After Gollum and the Rings films were a critical hit, he started to get tapped more because he was well versed in the process of motion capture thanks to Jackson's films.

It's not like you just throw on a motion suit and facial sensors and have it down, that's really stupid thinking. The guy became an expert at the motion capture process, and let's say you asked him about how it works and what to do, and then asked a random actor like Brad Pitt the same question, who do you think would be more knowledgeable about the subject? Serkis does have range anyway, he inhabits vastly different characters in motion capture and real life. If you want to know how it all started though, he was just an actor with versatility in his voices and could keep up with the physicality of the work. Apparently his input with these films is pretty key, so he's basically a consultant too.

So to sum up, it's just resume people. He's got a strong one for that line of work, just like any other expert in their profession. That's why him.

ALL of the work that he does? that is pretty ignorant and arrogant...serkis' voice acting as gollum was as good as his physical acting - simply outstanding...so unless you can provide a link of you doing a reading of gollum's script in a completely original voice and be equally amazing, spare everyone the BS