Yann Martel’s 2001 philosophical novel Life of Pi was considered powerful, and the book went on to receive much recognition, including the Booker Prize in 2002, and praise for its incomparable storytelling. The way in which Martel has captured the key themes of the story using some magical visual imagery made a film adaptation of the book sound impossible. Nonetheless, Ang Lee went on to direct and produce a shocking and brilliant adaptation of the book. With its release in 2012, Lee’s Life of Pi became a huge topic simply because of the way in which the film was able to capture Martel’s vivid descriptions, in turn, retaining the essence of the novel. This led the film to receive eleven nominations and four wins at the 85th Academy Awards.
MOVIEWEB VIDEO OF THE DAY
Unfortunately, to a majority’s disbelief, Life of Pi did not win the title of Best Picture. Instead, Ben Affleck’s Argo was given the award. Of course, both films are brilliant in their own way, but one can argue that the way in which Lee’s film received a largely positive reception and the exceptional visual effects might make it a better choice over Argo. Oscar’s Best Picture category is the one that is regarded as the most valuable and has a very specific and different voting system; preferential voting, and thus, it was surprising to not see Life of Pi win this category.
Visual Effects That Kickstarted A Whole Discourse
20th Century Fox
Life of Pi is one of those films that keeps on feeding the viewer’s eyes with every shot. The way in which Lee visually recreated the magical fantasies in Martel’s novel became a huge shock to a large audience when the film was released. The task Lee undertook was no easy one. In fact, in Martel’s novel, the environment played a prominent figure, and it was as much alive as the protagonist, Pi (Suraj Sharma) himself. Thereby, recreating an environment that is constantly changing while bringing in the fantasy element required heavy costs and a lot of brain power. Fortunately, the film was able to do that. This then opened doors for how digital characters could be created when bringing to life the visual imagery included in literary texts.
Since the relationship between Pi and Richard Parker, the Bengal tiger, played a central role in the film as it did in the book, it was absolutely crucial that the creators properly translated this animal character. After intense research and much attention given to the animal’s details including the most trivial ones like movements of the face, Bill Westenhofer, the visual effects supervisor, was able to create an uncanny translation of Richard Parker from the book, to film. According to him, Richard Parker in Lee’s film was “85 percent digital and 15 percent real”. Yet again, for the viewer, the character/animal was very realistic.
It is also notable how the film has transformed the imagination of the reader into visuals. This is prominent when it comes to capturing the different transformations of the environment. From the large whale to the flying fish and the vast ocean, it is impossible to believe that most of these were merely visual effects. The floating island that became carnivorous at night with acidic but shining water was a visual pleasure to the viewer. It achieved the perfect paradox that the story tried to create, with Pi realizing that such beauty can be quite hostile, in turn, bringing forth the environment to life.
The Rich Plot
Life of Pi follows a story with so much to unpack. In fact, the use of allegory makes the viewer question the narrator’s tale. Are the animals on the boat really animals? Is Richard Parker even real or was he merely a metaphor for the narrator’s fear? Converting all these questions into film means that the creators will have to be mindful of what they are revealing. Fortunately, Lee’s film has been able to allow the viewer to end up questioning the whole story. This has allowed the complexity of the novel to be transformed into the film.
Perhaps, this is one reason why both the book and the film received so much reception. Back in 2012, many critics and analysts predicted that Life of Pi would be the forerunner in the Best Picture category. One reason was the richness of the story itself. By the end of the film, the viewer is left reflecting on their own lives. Life of Pi has allowed many philosophical reflections to take place within the film, in turn, ensuring that the viewer is taken on a spiritual journey along with the protagonist. The fear of starvation, death, abandonment, loneliness, and cannibalism, amongst other things, is embedded in the film so much so that even if the audience is not present alongside Pi, it feels too real to ignore these humane emotions. All this combined takes the viewer on a different journey, which is why Life of Pi became a topic for much discussion.
Brilliant Cast
One other important reason why Life of Pi should’ve won Best Picture is its brilliant cast. With the then-newcomer Suraj Sharma auditioning for the role of young Pi with no prior acting experience, the film opened doors for a diverse cast. Suraj Sharma’s performance was not only phenomenal but also illustrated the effort he has put into creating and building Pi’s character. The narration and the ending by the late-Irrfan Khan were the perfect layer of closure that allowed the viewers to be attracted to the protagonist.
In addition to these lead roles, most of the leading cast was predominantly brown. This allowed Life of Pi to become a diverse film rich in different backgrounds and cultures.
