The stunt arms race is officially on. That means bigger stunts, more danger, and more people getting hurt to chase the big shiny prize they just created.
The safe and humane way forward here was better digital effects. This change will literally mame and kill people who didn’t have to get hurt.
This has always been the argument against having an oscar for stunts, but its hard to imagine that stunts could get much more dangerous that they already are.
Most stunt pros want to protect themselves from death even more than their defenders. They plan these stunts extensively and train hard for them. They do their best to leave nothing to chance. Yet they still take it to the edge, often, and they’ve been doing it since the beginning of film. Its highly doubtful they could even get more dangerous that those old Buster Keaton stunts, or the car chase scene in Death Proof, or many of Tom Cruise’s stunts in the Mission Impossible franchise, etc. We can all name 100 jaw-dropping stunts.
Getting killed or maimed is not likely to get you the Oscar, so I don’t think its a valid reason to not have a category for Stunts.
You have clearly never seen Order of the Black Eagle where a man gets his face run over as a stunt gone wrong. It’s low budget and they weren’t trying.
Idiots will hurt themselves doing stunts for cheap too without the prestige. The “Big” stunts are actually usually safer as they have more people knowing what they are doing.
Maybe we can just still give them the awards for putting their bodies on the line anyways for film making a thing that isn’t going to stop.
Idiots will hurt themselves doing stunts for cheap too without the prestige. The “Big” stunts are actually usually safer as they have more people knowing what they are doing.
Having a prize for stunts encourages more low budget unsafe stunt work too as people take risks to increase their prestige to get the bigger gigs.
I don’t deny that stunt work demands immense talent and effort and risk. Just like a performance artist who does five-finger filet really fast for money. But is it moral to give out accolades for it?
Would it be better to look at ourselves and say “Woah, this is fucked up. It’s fucked up that it’s happening and it’s fucked up that I’m entertained by it. What can I do to encourage less of this in the world?”
I’m not sure “swap” is quite the right word for it. Effects can be used to drastically reduce the risks for performers, which already happens. Stunt performers wear harnesses and safety wires for high falls that get digitally painted out. Functioning guns with blanks can be replaced by non-functioning guns that have muzzle flash effects added later (though I still don’t know how to accurately depict recoil). I would like to see awards going towards innovations in these areas.
That said, I’m not sure how to properly honor stunt performers for the risks and sacrifices asked of them without encouraging more people to do it.
Oh dear.
The stunt arms race is officially on. That means bigger stunts, more danger, and more people getting hurt to chase the big shiny prize they just created.
The safe and humane way forward here was better digital effects. This change will literally mame and kill people who didn’t have to get hurt.
This has always been the argument against having an oscar for stunts, but its hard to imagine that stunts could get much more dangerous that they already are.
Most stunt pros want to protect themselves from death even more than their defenders. They plan these stunts extensively and train hard for them. They do their best to leave nothing to chance. Yet they still take it to the edge, often, and they’ve been doing it since the beginning of film. Its highly doubtful they could even get more dangerous that those old Buster Keaton stunts, or the car chase scene in Death Proof, or many of Tom Cruise’s stunts in the Mission Impossible franchise, etc. We can all name 100 jaw-dropping stunts.
Getting killed or maimed is not likely to get you the Oscar, so I don’t think its a valid reason to not have a category for Stunts.
You have clearly never seen Order of the Black Eagle where a man gets his face run over as a stunt gone wrong. It’s low budget and they weren’t trying.
Idiots will hurt themselves doing stunts for cheap too without the prestige. The “Big” stunts are actually usually safer as they have more people knowing what they are doing.
Maybe we can just still give them the awards for putting their bodies on the line anyways for film making a thing that isn’t going to stop.
Having a prize for stunts encourages more low budget unsafe stunt work too as people take risks to increase their prestige to get the bigger gigs.
I don’t deny that stunt work demands immense talent and effort and risk. Just like a performance artist who does five-finger filet really fast for money. But is it moral to give out accolades for it?
Would it be better to look at ourselves and say “Woah, this is fucked up. It’s fucked up that it’s happening and it’s fucked up that I’m entertained by it. What can I do to encourage less of this in the world?”
Should we just swap all dangerous stunts with CGI then?
I’m not sure “swap” is quite the right word for it. Effects can be used to drastically reduce the risks for performers, which already happens. Stunt performers wear harnesses and safety wires for high falls that get digitally painted out. Functioning guns with blanks can be replaced by non-functioning guns that have muzzle flash effects added later (though I still don’t know how to accurately depict recoil). I would like to see awards going towards innovations in these areas.
That said, I’m not sure how to properly honor stunt performers for the risks and sacrifices asked of them without encouraging more people to do it.