3 ms·
>Does the Oppenheimer movie include a lot of CGI? >No. Director Christopher Nolan told Collider that Oppenheimer has "zero" CGI shots. This includes the bomb te
by anshumankmr 3y ago
>Does the Oppenheimer movie include a lot of CGI?
>No. Director Christopher Nolan told Collider that Oppenheimer has "zero" CGI shots. This includes the bomb tests, which were recreated without CGI (Computer-Generated Imagery). "I think computer graphics, they're very versatile, they can do all kinds of things, but they tend to feel a bit safe," said Nolan. "That's why they're difficult to use in horror movies. Animation tends to feel a little safe for the audience. The Trinity Test, ultimately, but also these early imaginings of Oppenheimer visualizing the Quantum Realm, they had to be threatening in some way. They had to have the bite of real-world imagery. The Trinity Test, for those who were there, was the most beautiful and terrifying thing simultaneously, and that's where we were headed with this film." Last year, Top Gun: Maverick took a similar approach and it paid off (although a limited amount of CGI was used in the Tom Cruise blockbuster).
This can't be. I had read the statement but the final shot where he and Einstein talked near the pond, where we see the visions inside Oppenheimer's mind, had to have been CGI. Also, though I am not sure how they filmed the Trinity test practically, it had to be a smaller explosion made to look bigger, so it had to have required some compositing work. The rest of the movie did not really have all that much in terms of VFX since almost every other was scene was dialogue heavy and was mostly shot inside closed spaces. The scenes where Oppenheimer was giving a speech and was experiencing visions of an explosion also could have been done 100% practically.
This is not a slight on the movie or on Nolan, cause it would have been much easier for him to do the trinity test or the scene of Oppenheimer dreaming about atoms via CG (which I recently read was done by using an aquarium and glass balls). It was just Nolan doing his best to market his movie, considering the fact the cast nor his writers were available to market the movie.
As a side note, I want to add that I felt the scene with the Trinity test was fantastic, especially the fact that the hall went dead silent for a few seconds,but the actual shot of the mushroom cloud paled in comparison to the actual footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfK9G7UDok&ab_channel=atomcentral https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dfK9G7UDok&ab_channel=atomc...
https://youtu.be/hyiXpECM7eg?t=224 https://youtu.be/hyiXpECM7eg?t=224
This I felt that whenever we saw the actors reacting to the explosion, they are being bathed by the light from the explosion, but seeing the actual explosion itself did not live
up to how Oppenheimer himself said that it looked like a thousand suns shining in the sky at once.
But with the excellent music, acting, writing, direction, shot composition etc. it is easy to forgive.
- xeyownt 3y agoWhy can't this be? Lot of FX can be done without CGI. The director says there is no CGI, why would he lie?
- senectus1 3y agoI think maybe he was overstating.. Like the world in flames "visions" he was having have to be CGI..
- anshumankmr 3y agoYeah the only way Nolan could have done that practically, is if he nuked the whole world. /s But I am eagerly awaiting the BTS to see how he pulled off that one without CG. I am planning a rewatch very soon in the hall to see if I can figure it out.
- rurban 3y agoNo CGI. He did shoot and edit on film, without any digital conversion. You can do a lot of things with normal film editing tricks
- anshumankmr 3y agoHow would he specifically show a hundred ICBMs being launched and a vision of a world being engulfed in fire.
- wodenokoto 3y agoFor the same reason why 90s directors would lie about miniatures being CGI.
- dclowd9901 3y ago> Last year, Top Gun: Maverick took a similar approach and it paid off I’m inferring from this statement that the movie was somehow more successful due to its reliance on practical effects. That seems like a pretty good incentive to lie.
- 3y ago