argument top image

Should animated films be considered for Best Picture at the Academy Awards?
Back to question

CGI is animation

Many live-action movies use some form of computer-generated imagery, or CGI, to convey aspects of the story being told on screen.
< (2 of 3) Next argument >

The Argument

Wholly animated films do not differ much from live-action movies that incorporate some form of CGI. In fact, they have a lot of similarities when it comes to planning out how sequences are going to be filmed and rendered. CGI is most similar to 3D animation, which is the same type of animation used in Best Picture nominated films like Toy Story 3 and UP.[1] The artistic techniques for creating 3D animation and CGI are not too different from one another. If films that use CGI are allowed to be considered for Best Picture, so should animated films.

Counter arguments

While CGI is used in many live action films, most of these films are not overly-reliant on this aspect of the creative process. CGI is supplementary to the live action aspect of these films. This becomes even more apparent when practical effects are used in conjunction with CGI. For example, filming a stuntman performing a stunt wearing a harness and cables and later removing the harness and cables electronically. While this isn't wholly live-action, it also wouldn't be considered animation.[2]


[P1] CGI has become so prevalent in live-action movies that, generally speaking, there is not much difference between animated films and live action films.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] While similar to animation, the fact that CGI must be incorporated into a live-action setting makes it entirely different from animation.


This page was last edited on Monday, 27 Apr 2020 at 13:31 UTC

Explore related arguments