Star Trek’s Zoe Saldana’s star continues to rise after 2009, especially now with her work in James Cameron’s Avatar. It is that work that has both the New York Times Magazine cover story and a new Los Angeles Times feature buzzing about her. Details below. Plus photos and news from Fashion week in New York, to bringing relief to Haiti in another ‘ZoeWatch.’
Zoe in NYT Mag
Zoe Saldana features prominently in a stunning image on the cover of Sundays New York Times Magazine (below). You can see a higher resolution version and more of Zoe at Great Performers in Film Slideshow Online. And she also appears in an online video talking about her favorite performance from the last decade (Tang Wei in the Ang Lee film Lust, Caution).
LA Times: Avatar Performance Capture Sparks Hollywood Debate
As we have reported James Cameron’s new performance technology which was used to capture the work of Zoe Saldana and the other actors in Avatar has started a debate in Hollywood. A new article in the LA Times discusses this issue of whether Zoe Saldana and other actors "deserve equal recognition" with the old fashioned live actors. Although Avatar has been scooping up nominations in just about every category for the big award shows and guilds, it isn’t getting much with regards to acting. Cameron thinks that it is actually the acting community that needs the most convincing, saying:
"There’s a learning curve for the acting community, and they’re not up to speed yet," Cameron said. "We didn’t get out and proselytize with the Screen Actors Guild as we probably should have to raise awareness. Not only should they not be afraid of it, they should be excited about it. There is a new set of possibilities, after a century of doing movie acting in the same way."
One person who seems to be on board is director Steven Spielberg, here is what he had to say about the technology and Zoe’s work:
"I like to think of it as digital makeup, not augmented animation," said Spielberg, who is using Cameron’s "Avatar" technology in his new movie, "The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn." "It’s basically the actual performance of the actual actor, and what you’re simply experiencing is makeup."
In the case of "Avatar," he said, "the digital makeup is so thin you actually see everything that Zoe [Saldana] is doing. Every nuance of that performance comes through digitally."
Hollywood debating if Saldana deserves same recognition even though she technically never actually ‘appeared’ in "Avatar"
Zoe at Fashion Week
Besides acting, Zoe Saldana’s other passion is fashion, and the actress attended multiple events last week in New York for Fashion Week. Here are a few shots of Zoe.
Zoe at the Prabal Gurung fashion show
Zoe at the amfAR Gala
Zoe hosting the myfdb.com launch party
Zoe brings aid to Haiti
But it wasn’t all glitz and glamour for Zoe. Late last week the actress also flew down to the Dominican Republic to bring aid to the survivors of the earthquake in Haiti, provided by Avon (Saldana was recently joined Avon as a spokesperson). Saldana, who spent many years in the Dominican Republic, has spent a lot of time and energy on Haitian relief efforts. She was quoted by DominicanToday saying:
I cannot remain with my arms crossed in the face of such a great tragedy for our brothers on the Island.
Zoe in Dominican Republic
Photos: WireImage & DominicanToday
Thanks to Ellen for NYT link tip
Saldana’s acting in Avatar was brilliant, powerful, passionate stuff. She was the kick in it’s kickassitude … Neytiri had a wide range of emotions to express and Saldana gave her more life than ten other capable actresses might have in the same rig.
Maybe it won’t be recognized right now, or next year, but it will be recognized in the fullness of time.
Plus: KEWT.
Not all that interested in Fashion Week, but nice to know Zoe Saldana is doing well.
The idea that she deserves less recognition because of digital effects doesn’t fly with me. You could equally argue that it actually takes more skill to act convincingly than without digital effects.
First message here, so please note that I’m sorry if my English is not correct (it’s not my mother tongue).
Concerning Saldana’s work in “Avatar”, I think it will only be fair if she (and her colleagues in the movie as well) is recognized of her very vibrant performance : without her, Neytiri wouldn’t have seemed so alive.
And considering Brad Pitt was nominated to the Oscars for his role in “Benjamin Button”, I don’t see where is the “debate” : Fincher’s movie was not bad (I liked it very much, especially for Cate Blanchett), but Pitt’s performance was absolutely not breathtaking (whatsoever with digital make-up, natural make-up or no make-up).
So if Pitt can be recognized for his work, Saldana could rightfully be recognized too (and, in my point of view, she is more entitled to than him).
I think she is a good actress but Avatars strength was the effects. The acting was ok but nothing award winning and the story was pretty stale being done so many times before.
Not a dreadful film by any means. An ok film that was visually stunning.
I think it probably has more to do with the performances not being in the same league as some of the better acted films.
She is such an incredibly stunning girl and she is a good actress. I’m sure her time for awards will come.
Honestly, the message in Avatar was even better than the message in Star Trek (2009). I think that there is a certain elitism that suggests that it’s okay that we pooh-pooh the earnest moralism seen in Avatar — “Gee, Avatar, so you say imperialism is bad — okay, got it! Sheesh!” — merely because we’ve seen it before.
But really, Star Trek itself is about a certain kind of moralism, and to see others espouse the same is not a bad thing.
I think that Avatar is more of a challenge than most of us think. If one considers oneself far too intellectual, far too educated to learn anything from such a movie, at least one can reflect upon the fact that sometimes the most important things are those upon which everyone agrees, and yet never remembers.
I am always amazed, for example, at how there are so many who condemn religion, except for their own, and how many espouse love, only to hate those who disagree.
Freedom means more than agreeing with those who agree with us. Freedom is a challenge, or else it is nothing more than a sop.
I am very happy for Zoe and her success in Avatar. I think that as Trekkers we should face the fact that while Star Trek (2009) was fantastic, Avatar was, in some ways, even more fantastic.
That, and the fact that is no God, IMHO.
#5
I think Colbert summed it up best as 45 minutes too long and preachy.
Yes, there’s nothing wrong with a fundamentally good message, hackneyed though it may be. But the difference is that at its best Star Trek hasn’t beaten the audience over the head and said “THIS IS BAD! THIS IS BAD!” (Eps like “Last Battlefield” aside.)
But really, if you’re looking for depth in Avatar, you’re barking up the wrong tree. Any critical analysis is probably going farther than what Cameron was thinking when he made it… “Oh! Make the moss and everything shiny and luminescent! And make the rocks float! And have a big action sequence!”
She really is a stunning woman, very beautiful and has got an extremly disarming smile. Ijust wish she would eat more….off course her time will surely come. I find her surprisingly talented
Zoe’s having a great ride, and using her fame well. That’s wonderful. Enjoy!
Zoe Saldana has clearly become a first-tier “breakout” actress. If her work in Trek or Avatar doesn’t get awards this year, she seems on track for prominent roles sure to garner sparkling props in the very near future. She’s gorgeous, she’s a riveting actor and she’s getting more publicity than Meryl Streep. She’s got the kind of career arc that will eclipse any film she makes. She’s making a deep dent in the fashion industry as well, better than your ordinary drop dead spectacular red carpet standout.
Yes these are their performances and yes they deserve recognition. And with “Avatar” Saldana has become one of my favorite movie actors currently working.
RK #7 Eat more?…oh so she can be overweight and acting jobs dry up? Great advice.
Was Saldana’s performance as Neytiri entertaining, with nuance and dynamic range? I thought so. The role certainly offered more opportunities than with Uhura. How did it measure up against other actors working in movies today? I’ve watched so much bad SF and animation that I can’t even guess; my calibrations are off.
How much does the “digital makeup” dilute the performance? Depends if you believe and understand Cameron’s explanation of the process (whether paraphrased or explained in detail, as in _CineFex_ #120). He alleges that e.g. Gollum in LOTR was 60-80% keyframed after performance capture, but with his new techniques, the Na’vi were only 10%.
If you want to see the “Avatar” cast get recognition, slide over to the just-announced noms for the Saturn Awards. (They categorized “Avatar” as fantasy and “Twilight” as horror, but hey.)
Zoe is not underweight. She’s been the same size since as far back as “The Terminal” and “Pirates of the Caribbean I”
And her performance in Avatar was the highlight and she does deserve a nomination.
@5: Yes.
#5- some yes.
However, overall it fails on message because it has no respect at all for even having an opposing viewpoint. By making the bad guys so one dimensional the message comes off as a joke. In order to convince those that don’t already see your message you need to find some common thread upon which to build. If you disrespect even their right to have an opposing viewpoint you fail. That is one of the keys in debate – and something that both sides in Washington fail at all the time.
Cameron might have well have put a black hat and mustache to twirl onto Giovanni in this movie, and turned Steven Lang into Maleficent.
@12
Is that the reason I thought Gollum was more real, then? I’m not sure if it’s just because now I know exactly how they did it or the exaggerated proportions of the Na’vi, but it seemed like Serkis was just more believable.
See, part of the problem is the same issue with voice actors.
Voice actors have historically been shunned and ridiculed by film actors. Films like LotR and Avatar, which blur the line between those two, have challenged this traditional prejudice but it’s still there. To film actors, Serkis’ work in LotR and King Kong and Saldana’s work in Avatar are still entirely different (and more importantly “lesser”) forms of performance.
I disagree, and I think society is heading that way as well, but I’d expect it to take awhile for actors to make the same shift since it’s a lot closer to their hearts.
I heart her. THATS ALL I GOT TO SAY ABOUT THAT!!!!
@15/martin:
This is true, and if you want shades of grey see “Battle for Terra” (2009), which covers some of the same moral themes as “Avatar.” (It also has alien-looking lifeforms, to address another criticism.) I happen to agree with Cameron’s simplified fairy tale-like script, but after two months the argument is a dead direhorse; and anyway, we’re debating the performances of the actors.
@16/davidfuchs:
I haven’t watched the LOTR trilogy recently but my guess is that Gollum looks more “real” to you because he’s exaggerated (dare I say cartoonishly?) to a degree the Na’vi aren’t. Some combination of the emaciated character design, Serkis’s performance and the post-keyframing pushes Gollum to “11” in many scenes. He’s just plain bonkers.
It’d be an interesting side-by-side comparison and topic for an SF convention, alongside other efforts like “ReBoot” (Bob the Guardian is blue), “Roughnecks: Starship Troopers Chronicles” (humans), and “The Polar Express” (more humans).”
Facial performance capture has been done before, but separately from the “gross” bodily performance. What “Avatar” did was (a) capture them at the same time, which is a big deal for actors, (b) monitor the face in more detail, and (c) drive “musculoskeletal rigging” that didn’t just *simulate* a body, but closely matched real anatomy. The post-keyframing involved patching things that were overlooked by the cameras, minor tweaks, and extras (ears, tails; probably movement the base of the throat, I noticed that).
#19: “I haven’t watched the LOTR trilogy recently but my guess is that Gollum looks more “real” to you because he’s exaggerated (dare I say cartoonishly?) to a degree the Na’vi aren’t.”
Good notion. I remember reading once in a book on animation techniques that in many cases, exaggeration is used to improve, rather than undermine, verisimilitude … one example given was speed. If a cartoon drawing (this book was about old-school cel animation) walks at a realistic speed, it looks phony … but if the pace is accelerated just so, it pings as “natural looking” to more viewers.