Hi it's Tod of Tods workshop here and today
we're gonna have a talk about film props. So historical film props, fantasy film
props, but ones which are about you know sword and sandals, as it's known in the
in the business. So medieval weaponry. Basically now I make very accurate
historical reproductions, museum grade stuff and that's my livelihood; but the
other side of my livelihood that you might not know, is that I also do film
and TV props, weaponry basically. And I've been doing that for 25 years, so I do
know a little bit about the industry. Now I watched lots of YouTube videos where
people are talking about films and the props that are in, them but they don't
really understand how those decisions have come about so this really is just to
explain how some of the decisions are made. When you are making film props now
the thing is I too love history, that's that's why we're here, we're all here
because we love history, and we love weaponry that's i.t
Now when I sit there and I watch a film you know I'm just like you guys, I sit
there and go" that helmets 200 years wrong" or "they didn't have a bow like
that" why was Robin Hood using a recurve and not a longbow. Whatever it may be. But
there are decisions there that I as a viewer am not party to and you as
viewers are not party to. And we're going to have a look at some of those, some of
the ones that we don't understand but I'll give you examples. Ones which
explain to you, why choices are made and these are things that we can all
understand when they're explained. Well when you're doing a historical prop the
devil is in the detail it really is, so you've got to make the overall thing
look right but you've also got to make the cross guard and a sword functional
or you've got to make the pommel not too heavy or whatever it may be. All of these
details count because even if you don't fully understand
what's going on with a sword, you you kind of get the feeling if it's right or
if it's wrong, so you've really got to strive to get it right. Now I think in
you know, in the nineteen 50's 60's 70's, people were less concerned about that.
But now in the dawn of the Internet that knowledge is at everybody's fingertips
and so there's lots more people who can say that's not right. Now let's say
there's a hundred million people out there watching a film or a series, that's
a hundred million opinions of what's right and what's wrong.
I can tell you now they're not all right, even the ones who all think they are, so
there are lots of rights. Okay but there are also definitely some wrongs. So if an
actor can't hold it or if the mould department can't replicate the prop
that's been made. Those are wrongs. If it causes problems for the cameras, that's a
wrong and it doesn't matter what we may think about it, it can't be used however
historically right it is. And I suppose the second point that I would like to
make is that we all need to get off our high horse. We we are not making a
documentary when we make these historical films, we are making
entertainment. Nobody goes to the cinema for a blockbuster on Corinthian columns
in ancient Greek it doesn't happen, all right. It's not entertaining that's
education, very valid, but not when you want to make a lot of money at the box
office. So we need to produce things which are entertaining and that means
that realism sometimes needs to get stretched a little bit. Now admittedly
annoyances and diversions are one of the main things that really annoys people
when you're watching film and TV and one of those primary causes for those
diversions those annoyances where things have changed or they're not as you'd
expect them to be is copyright. Now let's just say you take the example of a
book. The book is written, successful book Now he sells the rights, he/she sells the
rights to that book for a comic strip. Now somebody's bought the rights for
that comic strip and they designed the visualization because of course it's not
there in the book and the character looks like this, and he carries swords
like that, and if you then if the author then sells the rights to that book to a
film for instance, that's a different company to the comic book and because
it's a different company to the comic book they don't own the rights
for how it looks. So the fact that you've got a double-headed eagle crest on a
shield in the comic means that, absolutely specifically for copyright
reasons, you cannot have a double crested eagle shield in the film because you're
breaching copyright. You are taking the designs that another company has done
and that means you have to make changes and there's no choice about itunless they buy the copyright off the comic company as well. And the same is
true if you do television or film or comics or video games, the copyright is
owned by different people and the look needs to be different. Now film and TV,
much the same really, and videogames are interesting they're both in many
respects the same in that they're constructed fantasy. You can manipulate
things with computer-generated imagery CGI, you can make props how you want them to be, but, and here's the big difference. A film you are still constricted by for
instance a character, how he moves, what length of a spear he can pick up, how
that interacts with the wall that's right next to him. Computer games are not like that. You want it, you got it. So in a computer game or a film you want
a pump-action crossbow well you can do that either way it's not a problem, in a
film you want a longsword with a very pointed tip. That's a problem. No problem
for a computer game. Picture the scene. 2 A list celebrities, they're all dolled up
in in their plate armor they're just about to enter a battle on the field of
Agincourt. Now 2 nobleman nicely done, they're going to be wearing pig face
bascinets. Right first thing, pig-faced bascinets look kind of stupid.
Secondly they cover the face completely. You can't see the very expensive actors
that you've just hired, you can't hear properly what they say unless it's done
historically and authentically. You cannot see there eye movements, the way their
faces are working. So basically what you're gonna have for 25 minutes of
action sequence are two guys that you can't see, you can't read anything from
their face. You just got blank steel stupid-looking visors with two guys going "mhmmmhu hummun" that's all you're gonna get. Historical accuracy is
out the window immediately right? So they're going to be wearing open face
bascinets. That's the first thing that's gonna happen; you can see who they are you can do everything else. Did they ever do that? No. Historical accuracy gone completely.
Gushes of blood. Ridley Scott loves these I scratched my arm with a pin; blood
everywhere. It doesn't happen, but it is part of the style of his films. Do we
love them? Yes we do. Is there anything wrong with that?
Well yeah it's completely inaccurate but it's also right because that's what we
want. Come back to Agincourt again as an example. Sabatons. So the very
pointed armored shoes that guys wore. Historically accurate yes, anyway the
point being historically accurate yes. They are a health and safety hazard? It's
like walking in flippers, absolutely. They also look really uncool, no A-list
celebrity is going to wear those and then think about the colors and the
decoration. So I've just got a prop here this is a scabbard that I made dated
early to mid 14th century. It's covered in flowers nice little floral decoration here very very bright, very lurid. You put that into
a film and the viewers are going to be going "oh he's got flowers on all, what
does that mean?" you know and they're going to be questioning all sorts of
things. It'll distract from the film. Put them in a fairly plain ish scabbard
maybe with a little bit of flouncy decoration on it a bit of shininess.
People love it Great. A scabbard that is covered in
flowers no good at all, historically accurate? perfect. And then we come to the creative choices that are made. So as a maker I put my particular style and my
knowledge into the pieces I make but also I need to have input from
a lot of other people. Now directly, well indirectly usually, the director, through
the art director, will have an input into what I do. The armourer, costume perhaps very often the actor as well, and various other departments and stunts actually,
very notably. So these people all have requirements that I need to fulfill and
so what I'm able to do changes from perhaps what the perfect 14th century/
15th century sword might be. Suddenly I've got some restraints that weren't
there before, or not there in history. So you have a large group of people, all of
which have an interest in putting their two pennies worth into what you're
making. Not in a petty way, but because they will have requirements and it has
to fulfill everybody's requirements. So if the camera guy comes to me and asks
for a change, I can stand there and I can have a discussion
with him and I can argue my point and I can explain that in history this wasn't
the case and so on. That doesn't alter the fact that everybody is now standing
around and at two hundred thousand dollars an hour overtime or whatever it
is, people are looking at me to make a decision and to sort something out. Now I
can argue my corner at two hundred thousand dollars an hour, or I can just
accept that changes need to be made. I make the change and we all move on.
Sometimes these changes are made frankly on a little bit of a whim, we're all
human, we all like to have a bit of input into these things. But actually
everybody's grown up on set, they all understand the money that's involved in
delays, so it's really not about that. It's about changes that were not
expected. So let's just say the camera comes along and says actually that
pattern there on the costume is causing my camera to strobe, so can we lose that
pattern? So they put another piece of fabric over the top of that; that's now
changed the appearance in the colour of the costume and the prop that I have
done that sits over that, now stands out and looks garish for example. So I now
need to change the colour of that and then because the color has changed the
way the shadows work are a bit different, so I need to lift the prop up. So I need
to add another strap onto a scabbard or something like that.
These things happen continuously and you can't foresee them and it's not really
anybody's fault, it's just the nature of the industry that we're in. It's creative.
It's all subjective. We want it to look good we all want it to look good. So
changes happen even when you can't foresee them, so at the end of the day, you
make the change that is required from the department that needs the change
made. It might not be what you would choose to do, it might not be what you
did originally, but the bottom line is it's work. It's what needs to be done to
get the job rolling on and if you're not racking that overtime bill up for
everybody; bonus. Now the thing is, YOU and your opinions are also important, you are
the consumers, but don't forget actually you have to pander as a film company, to the masses, because you know, you guys out there, you 1 million of you who
happen to ever stumble across this film, whatever it is, you're informed. Okay you
know what you're talking about and so you have a great, you know,
relatively good understanding of what's happening on screen in front of you. The
other 99 million people don't. But they are the people you need to pander to
because they're 99 percent of the money. But when you pander to the masses you
have to give them what they want. You have to make people fly backwards when
they're shot. Baddies wear black, long bows creak, peasants are always dull and
not bright; these are the things that are needed in a film to portray the message
easily and smoothly and without, might annoy you, but without annoying the
masses, because for them it would jar. Now you might be happy to avoid these
cliches, but you might not, but again remember it is not a documentary that is
being made, it is entertainment. All of these conflicting requirements from the
various interested parties, the director, the art director, sets, props,
costume, armour, lighting, camera; they all have a bearing on how the weapon is
going to be designed. We are not party to those decisions when
we're watching the film, so it's very difficult to actually look at what they
do and say "oh well that's wrong", well you know what? if it works then it's right.
That is the point. Then we'll take the example of a longsword. So we have got
ourselves here a classic late 15th century long sword based on one in the
Royal Armouries. Now for close-up work I make a sword like this. This is not the
sword that actors fight with all right? What they do when you're fighting with a
fighting prop is you take this sword and you mold it in rubber and they're very
very good, but they are rubber swords with a carbon-fiber rod up the middle to
give them some stiffness. Now if we look at the point on this a classic 15th
century pointed longsword looks great, historically accurate. Brilliant. You
can't mold it, well you can mold it, but as soon as you start fighting with it
the tips break up and if you reinforce all the way to the point then you end up
with something that's actually very dangerous. So what you need to do is... I'm
just removing a bit of material here.... you see I've just put it a line there that
is the kind of tip shape that you inevitably end up with of one form or another. So I'll just move that close to camera so you can see
there that I've completely blunted off the point right? It needs to be like that
and as well as molding there's all sorts of other issues that need to be
considered. So we've got our nice long sword here if the blades too long it
starts interfering with ceilings and rigging on ships and woods and things
like that. The handle, even if it's a single handed sword, this handle needs to
be long enough to get two hands on to it. The reason for that is that it looks
good for action sequences, so if it's a single handed sword you want the guy to
be able to put two hands on it for the extra hard blow or whatever it is, so you
need quite a long handle on it. Very often the blade needs to be
short enough that you can wear it in a back scabbard. " Oh, back scabbard!" I hear
you say; so why do they do back scabbards? they never were around in
history or basically not. They don't really work. What is the point of them?
Well if you consider an action sequence of a guy jumping on a horse for instance
it's pretty difficult in a longsword scabbard that's dangling by the side,
again they just get tangled. When he's running through doorways, when he's going
past a table in a marketplace, whatever it is, longsword scabbards are difficult
to wear. They're always jingling about, they cause continuity problems because
they settle down in a different place and then costume get annoyed. Back
scabbards. So the scabbard is worn, the sword is worn on the back and that way
it always stays exactly where it's supposed to be, no continuity issues,
there's there's no action sequence issues, as long as the handle is not too
high above the head. So you're not tangling through things. They just make
life a lot easier, they're very difficult to draw, but actually you can get around
that in a film, it doesn't matter too much. So back scabbards are the absolute
darling of film was whether it's historical or not, but especially so in
fantasy. You get other weird little things like the design has to be in sympathy with with the character. So if the character is
rough and crude, then the sword will be a little bit rough and crude and the
fact that blacksmiths, essentially village blacksmiths and didn't make long swords is neither here nor there. If it needs to look like a village blacksmith
made it, then that's what you do. You make the village blacksmith the maker of the
sword and everybody's happy about that. It's a bit less restrictive when you're
making weaponry for fantasy films or historical fantasy films, because you can
take a little bit of this, can take a little bit of that, you put it together, you can
have this and it's all great. But inevitably you guys out there will be
going, and you don't know about all the restrictions, but nonetheless, you'll be
going" well that's the wrong sword for hunting orcs" and it's like well OK. Great.
Well the last time you went hunting orcs right? When you went hunting orcs, what
was the sword that you took? Because I'm reckoning you can't answer that question.
So it's very difficult to say what the right orc hunting sword is. Is it that
one? Well you know what? If that's the one it needs to be because of all the other
restrictions, then that is the perfect orc hunting sword. The last point I'm
going to make about why film props don't always seem to deliver what you expect
them to deliver. One of the big problems is differentiating between groups of
people. So if you think of something like the Last Kingdom. So you've got Saxons
and you've got Vikings, well they look pretty similar they dress pretty similar
they look similar. They fight in a similar way, their cultures, are you know
relatively similar. They both have round shields. Now, when you've got a bunch of
guys who are beating the hell out of each other with swords and spears you
need to be able to differentiate in that fast action that you always have in
these battle sequences, who, who is. So some have round shields, some have
square shields. Oh my god; right, nobody ever had square shields in 10th century
England, didn't happen. But nonetheless it's required to just keep the thing
running. And then again Robin Hood; there's a sequence early on where some
French ambush some English. Robin turns out, saves the day. The
French are shooting black fletched arrows, the English shooting white fletched arrows.
Nobody shot black fletched arrows, not in any quantity anyway, there
might be the odd oddball. The reason you do it, is so that when
you've got arrows flying around, you know who's shot what arrows. It's just simple
visual language that just helps us all understand. Historically accurate?
Not remotely; required? Yes absolutely. Well hopefully this film has been useful
to you in explaining some of the choices that go into historical props and why
things end up as they are, really. So what I'd say is next time you watch a
historical film, sit down, calm down, relax and just enjoy it for the spectacle it
is, because you can't know the choices that have molded the design of that film.
My last word on the subject is the 13th Warrior. If you're not
familiar with it, it is a grand fantasy Viking epic. Fantastic sets, some good
historical accuracy, a run along story that goes a hell of a pace. I love it. The
gladiatorial helmets; the Conquistador helmets, not so good. I still love the
film, I enjoy it for what it is. Thanks
As someone who works as an artist in the film industry this is SO GREAT to hear. It's a lot like that Rocket Jump video about VFX in films -- there are a lot of armchair critics who don't really understand how decisions are made on films, however much they think they do.