It seems that every acclaimed director is trying to do his best to make a ‘practical’ film, that contains low to none of CGI shots. Now it’s the turn of the great Scott. In an interview, the ‘Napoleon’ director explains what it takes to shoot ultra complicated ‘practical’ fight scenes, utilizing a minimum amount of CGI and VFX plates.
No-CGI is the new trend
We discussed a lot on this. Top-notch directors are doing their best to make a big-budget action film with minimum utilization of CGI. We saw this on the most acclaimed mega projects. For instance, Tom Cruise was bragging about Top Gun: Maverick minimizing CGI and VFX (although we’ve seen that it’s not very accurate). Nolan’s Oppenheimer is maybe one of the most solid references for zero CGI, by implementing in-camera practical shots of quantum physics. And of course, there’s The Creator which was shot on a consumer camera in order to allow the operation of small crew shooting in real locations. Ridley Scott’s “Napoleon” would be no different.
Epic ‘practical’ battles
In this fascinating interview, Sir Ridley Scott and History Hit’s Dan Snow talk about all things, Napoleon. They are trying to understand what motivated the multi-award-winning director to take on the epic and complex life story of Napoleon Bonaparte at this point in his lm-making career. Join Dan and Sir Ridley as they delve into the history of the man who defined an era and break down the epic battles that saw Napoleon rise to Emperor and fall to exile. From the Siege of Toulon to the Battle of Austerlitz and finally Napoleon’s clash with the Duke of Wellington and General Von Blucher at Waterloo, Sir Ridley provides insight into the huge, industrial task of capturing these battles for the big screen. In the interview, Scott was asked if he feels incredibly lucky to have created those epic films. His answer: “Every time!”. Moreover, Scott mentions that there’s no CGI applied. “It’s all real. When you are using CGI and AI, the audience can tell it is fake. All of this is real shooting” he stated. Watch the interview below:
It’s all real. When you are using CGI and AI, the audience can tell it is fake. All of this is a real shooting.
Napoleon Director – Ridley Scott
Napoleon: To be released in 70mm
It has been confirmed that Napoleon will be released in 70mm and IMAX formats. Obviously, Ridley Scott’s ‘Napoleon’ will be released in IMAX. But the 70mm release is very intriguing. Although the film was shot on IMAX-certified digital cameras (it’s 100% digital), it’s supposed to look better when projected via celluloid. Generally speaking, film projections look better as they have added depth compared to digital. In that case, the movie goes through post-production image adjustments that don’t technically add any new detail but make it look better. It reminds us of another glorious project, that is Dune. The movie was shot digitally (on the ARRI ALEXA LF), then was transferred to 35mm film, and then scanned back to digital. All that to create the most accurate emulation possible, reducing the digital sharpness, and elevating softness. That is a different process, as in Dune there was no film projection. Hence, the 70mm projection that will be made for Napoleon, promises an artistic and authentic ‘film look’. Of course, the best option was to shoot Napoleon with IMAX film cameras and project it on IMAX 70mm projectors, just like Nolan’s Oppenheimer. But again, they have decided to go digital. Thus, shooting 100% digital and projecting in 70mm might be a smart strategy to enhance imagery, especially in films like Napoleon.
Napoleon’s Fight Scenes: 300 Men, 100 Horses, 11 Cameras
Ridley Scott’s ‘Napoleon’ has become the anticipated movie of the year. The film stars Oscar-winner Joaquin Phoenix and was shot by the legendary cinematographer and Ridley’s cinematic partner, Dariusz Adam Wolski. The movie contains mighty action sequences. As stated by the acclaimed director, the fight scenes were composed of 300 men, 100 horses, and 11 cameras. It seems that the main camera is the ARRI ALEXA LF. Additionally, It has been confirmed that Napoleon will be released in 70mm and IMAX formats, although it was shot 100% digitally. If so, the final product will undergo a special process of scanning it to celluloid in order to grant a pure film look. That would make it even more beautiful, as the film’s visuality is based on real epic battles that you’d definitely want to watch on a huge canvas. Napoleon is scheduled to be released in the United States and the United Kingdom on November 22, 2023, by Sony Pictures Releasing, before streaming on Apple TV+ at a later date. We can’t wait to watch it.
![First Ever Filmed for IMAX Ballet: Shot on RED V-Raptor XL [X]](https://ymcinema.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/First-Ever-Filmed-for-IMAX-Ballet-Shot-on-RED-V-Raptor-XL-X.001-480x384.webp)
When I hear/see stuff like this all this tells me is that these so called directors don’t know how to use these tools/technologies. Your goal should never be to try to use something as least as possible. Your goal should be to use it as effective and efficient as you can. Don’t over or under use something. Both practical and visual effects suppose to enhance each other, not replace
Unless the color timing is literally being done by chemical processes 100% of the shots in this, and virtually every film, have VFX.
How irresponsible is this kind of journalism that leads the public to believe something we all know is false, just check IMDB to see the long list of CG artists involved in the project and cringe at the laziness of the “journalist” not to challenge the marketing garbage.
It’s all lies. At least eight companies supplied the visual effects for the movie.
https://www.artofvfx.com/napoleon/
Oh really?
Funny because I helped the work on Napoleon, I remember writing a script that would automate the totally not CGI crowds in my VFX studio…
Yet another article that not only denies our contribution and massive efforts on the movie. But that openly spits in the face of our work so that all the credits can go back to the director.
Truly infuriating. This is a pile of lies.
IMDb lists over 300 people in the visual effects crew for Napoleon…
Utter nonsense. I too worked at a facility that provided loads of CG people, environments, explosions — the works. This movie has LOTS of CGI.
What a huge sack of lies this article is pushing. This is terribly research journalism and should be removed for misinformation. There is a lot of VFX work in Napoleon, just as there was for Maverick and Oppenheimer. Yossy, have you learned nothing each time this thoroughly baseless claim was made on other films?
As already mentioned .. as a „Journalist“ a bare minimum of research should be done. This is basically Hollywood propaganda.. how many VFX artist need to work on a movie to be classified as a CGI supported movie? 300 apparently is not enough.. 500? Or does it need to be over 1000, where it’s impossible to hide CGI was involved?
Should we apply the same rules to other roles like DOP? „No DOP was used“ .. only 1 main DOP.. so that does not count then, let’s just ignore him.. plus the „irrelevant“ second unit directors.. does not sound right does it?
Just give people the credit they deserve..
CgI is a tool as video/sound/special effects/costumes ect..
Use it right.. then there is no need to „hide“ aspects of the production.
Maybe VFX -artist should also go on strike.. would be fun to see green screens instead of windows.. or superhero’s pretending to fly in a static pose in from and a green screen..
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt13287846/fullcredits/visual_effects
I want you to scroll through this list of people that you’re hurting with this disinformation. Who is paying you to lie like this? Where is the money coming from that makes you so eager to spread obvious disinformation? I can’t imagine you’d lie about this without a good reason.
This article is lazy and filled with false information that wasn’t fact checked. 300 men and 100 horses doesn’t sell the literal thousands of troops these battles had and in the trailers you can see it’s significantly more than 300 people….
This is Top Gun Maverick all over again, the movie that was “all practical” and then was nominated for best VFX because you know it had 2000+ vfx shots in it.
Movie’s like this are the reason artists miss birthdays, graduations and important moments in their and others lives because the work needs to be done in overtime and often has been mismanaged by the same people peddling the “ItS AlL PrAcTiCaL” BS Give them the respect they’ve earnt or GTFOH.
Ok, once more a “sponsored” article about a Film that olds hundreds if not thousands of VFX in it. No matter what Producer, Studios or Directors saying! The lie “No CGI here” is either a Propaganda campaign against the VFX Business which is finally close to gain the first time a Union.
BlueScreen, wire removal, stabilisation and clean up are ALL part of VFX even Colorgrading.
Similar “sponsored” articles are out there about TopGun 2 for example. But in the credits – what a surprise – over 400 VFX artists. And as a little hint, nearly all airplanes are CGI, because most of the Jets are no logner in service to use.
So, please, dear writers (i can’t name you journalist, because this would it make it nessesary, that you did research if this was true or not – and clealy is not) remember what the job is – its not copy past or a extension of a proposal which you need to uphold…
“This article was written with no brain” is probably a more accurate headline than what we read above.
You’re telling me they found crowds of protesting medieval peasants to fire cannons into? Armies of extras to fire cannons at over an ice lake? 19th century war ships to take out for the day and destroy? The Egyptian Government to get onboard with firing cannons at their pyramids? What an insult to the HUNDREDS of VFX artists that have spent months working on this. Does Ridley Scott really need his ego inflating that much?
What a clickbait rubbish! No big film is done without of VFX support in this century. Never! As well as there is no movie without of wardrobe or location scouting, or concept design. You are insulting every VFX-industry worker in here.
VFX are necessary to provide safety on set and save millions in the film budgets. If the director says it was practical, it means they have filmed the shot basis instead of dropping the entire frame straight to the post-production crew. True, not every director wants Lord of the Rings look with fully-digital characters added everywhere, but no VFX/CGI was used?! No way.
Please do the fact check before publishing such a nonsense!
What kind of mentorship you are giving to the new generation through such an article?
The newcomers would assume there is no need to study VFX to do the film and will learn the harsh truth the hard way losing money, opportunities and spirit.
Scott & Nolan are masters in understanding the VFX workflow, and they tailor the VFX services to their needs, which makes them great & successful. They do use visual effects as any other filmmaking department tool.
You do want the VFX usage to look like a bad sign? Too unprofessional. Go ahead and see more unfinished indie projects and empty pockets because of false examples like this one.
CLICKBAIT ARTICLE!
Hands up for all the good VFX artist who did work on that movie, you were great.
Don’t let people just pretend you never worked on movies just because they can’t notice your work. It’s just because you made it too good.
Aren’t you ashamed of writing nonsense like that?
How can you not be utterly embarrassed at writing an article like this that pretends that hundreds of peoples work does not exist. If you had any spine whatsoever, you would write an apology article and explain how you are wrong.
I suspect that we won’t see such an article though.
What a load of misleading b. s.
There’s countless cgi shots in these mentioned films. Read the credits! Read the credits!
Why do you think there’s hundreds of digital artists there?
This article is an embarrassment and and insult to every VFX practitioner. It’s especially insulting to the hundreds of VFX people who worked on all the VFX heavy films name checked in this poorly researched, badly intentioned article.
I do find it funny how Ridley always needs half a dozen or more cameras. I mean there’s coverage and then there’s I’ve got so much money let’s just get every angle and decide later in the edit money.
First and last article I’ll ever read on this website, utter nonsense and lies.
Yes, it’s all real, they time travels back in time to film Napoleon. All real, everything, it’s a documentary.
Garbage article. Totally enhancing the problem that invisible vfx artists are struggling under.
So I guess they forgot about this…..what a bunch of sucka ass writers. it needs to stop!!!
The VFX are made by:
MPC (VFX Supervisor: Luc-Ewen Martin-Fenouillet)
ILM (VFX Supervisor: Simone Coco)
BlueBolt (VFX Supervisor: Henry Badgett)
Outpost VFX (VFX Supervisor: Joseph DiValerio)
One of Us (VFX Supervisor: Victor Tomi)
Light VFX (VFX Supervisor: Antoine Moulineau)
In-house (VFX Supervisor: David Bowman)
PFX (VFX Supervisor: Javier Menéndez)
Ghost VFX
This reporter either don’t have proper education or just too young and afraid to put their name in this article to shame of lame.
An Apology to the VFX Community❤️
https://ymcinema.com/2023/11/20/an-apology-to-the-vfx-community/
Worst interviewer ever. Educate yourself. He induces and hints towards an answer to the question assuming AI (which is a word that is badly used in this case) and CGI. Good VFX (CGI being part of it) is invisible. It blends with real plates, it allows us to go back in history, and recreate scenes that are not even possible to see in real life or any practical shooting. PLEASE, Mr. Interviewer and whoever is responsible for this article, GET EDUCATED. Get the facts clear. The VFX Industry has suffered a lot after the strikes with thousands of people being laid off since May. This is sad to read.
https://ymcinema.com/2023/11/20/an-apology-to-the-vfx-community/
Dude, educate yourself a bit. And think when you use any public spotlight, about the effects of what you’re doing. This is not harmless and cute – it’s false, insulting and divisive.
Absolutely garbage article. Please educate yourself instead of spreading more egregious lies. This is the lowest type of journalism, not surprised it’s from a ymcinema writer. VFX played a HUGE role in this film, and claiming otherwise is completely bogus. DO BETTER
https://ymcinema.com/2023/11/20/an-apology-to-the-vfx-community/
Mr Mendovich – You are doing the entire VFX industry a disservice by your ignorance and lies. i suggest you do your research before you make these infantile claims of no CGI. You clearly do not understand the simple basics of how VFX is applied to movies today. Ok it has no CGI armies in your face. You are writing with the naivity of a 12 year old.
https://ymcinema.com/2023/11/20/an-apology-to-the-vfx-community/
Shame on you yossy for peddling this lies
Come on folks, you can do better! Please don’t perpetuate this anti-CGI flexing.
This particular case is brilliantly (and very specifically) addressed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yPLwJr3xa4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6lLZgKrqwM
WRITE ABOUT THAT! After your “apology”, make your words count and talk about the VFX in this breakdown from BlueBolt actually showing you how much CGI they used. Absolutely ridiculous.
Bullshit, there is ton of CGI. It disheartening to see them taking all the credits from the hardworking vfx artists.