Why the latest Robocop isn’t as good as the original!

Ok first off, please excuse the crap title, I really couldn’t think of a better one.

I finally got to watch the new version of Robocop and I have to say it’s actually a pretty good film.  I’m not going to go into depth about the film and hopefully there won’t be any severe spoilers. But if you haven’t seen the film yet then maybe you’ll want to watch it first.

Here’s the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INmtQXUXez8

I have to say, when I first heard they were making a re-boot I was annoyed. Robocop is a classic and I felt it shouldn’t be touched.  It’s like when I heard that they were going to re-make American Werewolf in London; luckily so far I think that one’s on hold.


So despite this I was pleasantly surprised.  The people that made it obviously cared for the original and instead of going for a straight out copy they put a new spin on it and I think for the most part it works. They even kept the original music which I believe was a very wise move.  But for me it still felt a little bland, especially towards the end.  And I started to wonder why this was.

You could say it was because it wasn’t original but I don’t think this is a valid point. You only have to look at the Batman franchise to see that if it’s done well it can be re-booted even if the 1989 version was great.

So I started to just think about the script and why the original just felt so much more exciting. What I realised is that one of the problems with this new version is that there isn’t a clear and precise baddy. Add to this the fact that the baddies aren’t really that bad. I mean, yes they weren’t the sort of people you’d like to invite to a dinner party but their actions never really felt nasty, like really nasty.

I suddenly remembered a tip from Blake Snyder’s brilliant screenwriting book “Save the cat”.In it he mentions that when you have a hero you have to make the villain twice as nasty as the hero is good. Robocop re-boot didn’t do this. The villians were just your average baddies.  For another example of how to do it right, look at the Rocky movies, specifically Rocky 4 and Ivan Drago.

Ivan Drago

Here we have an enemy that seems impossible to beat. In every way he seems better then Rocky. He’s taller, faster, stronger, he has no personality so it feels like Rocky really is up against a Robot.  We see him kill Rocky’s friend Apollo Creed, so we know what he’s capable of. Making the baddy really, really bad makes us root for our hero more. We don’t know how he’s going to survive but he has to, it keeps us watching,.


If we look at the original baddy in Robocop, Clarence Boddicker we as an audience get to see how nasty this guy is within about the first twenty minutes of the movie.  He kills Alex Murphey in the most horrific way and for no reason at all other than he hates cops.  He could of injured him and walked away. But no he wants to kill him but not before torturing him first.

Here is some clips of Clarence doing what he does best, being nasty and bad


So within the first quarter of the film we have a villain that we hate, we really, really want him to die in the most painful way possible. But we also know it’s not going to be easy.  This is such a simple tool in screenwriting but it was completely missed in the latest Robocop.

The new film has got essentially the same  plot but because of this fundamental flaw I found that the film ended up a little bland.

So to sum up, if you’re going to make a film with a villain, make sure he/she is the most nasty piece of work you can imagine.  Unless you’re making a deep and meaningful film, in which case the baddy has to have some background to why he/she is such a nasty piece of work.

Hope this was useful and if you have any thoughts on this please get in touch.

Till next time.


The power of a musical score.

I’ve mentioned this a in a few of my past blogs in regards to how music and SFX really add the emotion to a film and I think this Star Wars clip doing the rounds at the moment really drums this home!

As funny as this scene is, it was probably pretty close to what it sounded like on set.  I think this really does demonstrate how sound is just as important if not more so than the visuals.

What camera should I get

Ok this is going to be a short post, mainly because I just spent an hour writing one only to discover when I accidentally hit the backspace button that it’s been lost forever.

So I just want to mention a blog I saw the other day by a guy called Jackson speed…I have no idea if this is his real name but it sounds pretty cool either way.

He’s written a great blog about the camera he uses, which happens to be the same as mine.


And the points he covers are exactly how I feel too.

Here is a link to his blog.


Let me know what you think

In till next time,

Wow! I know I know it’s been a long time!

Ok sorry for the massive lack of updates.  I’ve had month after month of crazy amounts of work and then just haven’t had the energy to sit down and write something interesting.

It doesn’t help that I couldn’t actually think of many interesting things to talk about seeing as we haven’t been able to make any films for a while.

I was thinking about maybe talking about animation techniques or VFX techniques but didn’t want to stray too much from the actual core part of making films.  If you feel this might be of some interest then I’m more than happy to oblige?

I have decided one thing over the last few months and that is to scrap the part of 22 days later where by we have to use a costume, phrase and prop from our viewers.  It’s not that I didn’t like some of the ideas that we pulled out the hat. After all without them we wouldn’t of had the insane films we’ve made so far.  But to be honest we just weren’t getting enough ideas coming in and at the moment I’ve got quite a few short films I’d really just like to make without random input.

Maybe one day I’ll add that part back in but for now I’m going with just making a film in 22 days. If I get an influx of complaints then I will consider bringing that part back.

Although it has been pretty much work, work; work these past few months – by the way I can’t believe it’s been over 2 months since my last post; we did manage to shoot a short film.

The idea was to enter a short horror in a competition called: Short Cuts to Hell.  Unfortunately we left it far to late – the night before, and so had to make up the story, film it and edit it in around eight hours.

It actually came out ok, the only problem was that one of the rules of the competition was that the film couldn’t be more than three minutes. Our film no matter how we tried to cut it came in at around four minutes.  So we decided to call it quits.

I have decided to that it would be a shame to just leave it and so over the next few weeks I’ll finish it off and see what we get.

Here is a still. It’s worth noting that because there was only two of us we didn’t bother with any lighting and just used what we had in the room…which is why it looks a little bland.

Screen Shot 2014-09-11 at 23.37.28

In till next time – hopefully not two months.


All great films should start with a great story, or should they?




I hear this a lot.  A great film starts with a great story, or script. If you haven’t got a great story then no matter how good your actors are, no matter how good your sets are and no matter how good your effects are, your film is going to suck!

I agree with this… to a certain extent.  BUT,  I don’t think a great film starts with a great story and I don’t think it’s the most important part of the film.  For me, the most important part of a film and something that I feel is the absolute key to why some films become classics and some films just don’t, isn’t the story at all, it’s the CHARACTERS!

And even go as far to say that you don’t need a great story to have a great film. But if you haven’t got great characters then you’re film isn’t going to be too interesting to watch no matter how gripping the story is meant to be.

Lets look at an example. How about Star Wars!

This film is classed as a classic,  95% of the people I know love this film.  There are a few that wouldn’t place it in their top and actually a couple that haven’t even seen it, but they’re just weird. Overall I think it’s safe to say that Star Wars is a classic film. But why?  Is it the story, after all if story is so important than surely if you read the screenplay without knowing anything about the film beforehand would you’d be blown away.  Well in the case of Star Wars the screenplay isn’t exactly on par with Citizen Kane. For starters the films called Star Wars.  Now this is so etched into out culture that it’s hard to separate ourselves from the words, a bit like Coca Cola or Mc donalds.  But just for a moment try and see that title as if you’d never heard of it before, STAR WARS.  It may just be me but honestly that’s an awful title, straight away it screams B-Movie!

So what about the story?

I won’t go into the story as, lets face it everyone knows what it’s about and if you don’t, well where have you been for the last 37 years? But to sum up. a farm boy goes on a mission to battle the evil empire. Along the way he meets a smuggler and some droids.  He falls in love with a girl, follows his dream of becoming a rebel fighter and destroys something called “The Death Star” (another awful name).

I’m actually surprised that Star Wars got green lit and I believe that if it wasn’t for the great characters in that film it would of been a flop. Don’t believe me?  I think one only has to look at the Phantom Menace to see how a very similar film can fall flat on it’s face.  Yes the story wasn’t great or as simple as Star Wars but I believe what really let that film down was the characters.  Apart from R2D2 and C3PO I don’t think there was one character in that film that I cared for, or believed.

So lets take a look at what made the character in Star Wars so good.  Well this goes back to something I’ve spoken to before and it’s a rule that all forms of art need to contain, so as not to be BORING and that’s contrast. If you don’t have contrast you have bland.

Contrast in characters can come in many shapes and forms.  It can literally be their shape, BIG and small, or their voices LOUD and quiet or speed FAST and Slow.  They could also have contrast in their behavior, maybe they’re always really angry but ever so often get very scared.

All of the characters in Star Wars are rich with contrast. Either within themselves or up against each other.  Each character brings something unique.  Luke is very loyal and driven.  Han is very gun-ho and easy come, easy go. Leia is very feisty and independent. C3PO is a worrier and quite feeble.  R2D2 is fearless. There’s also contrast in C3PO and R2D2’s size that gives them a very Laural and Hardy feel.  I could go on but hopefully you get the idea.

Now if we look at The Phantom Menace we have lots of characters who I honestly can’t remember the names of.  This in itself proves how forgettable they were.  It’s unfair to say that didn’t have personalities but they were so bland that it was hard to have interest in any of them.  No contrast in characters equals no chemistry between them.  If the characters are basically cardboard cut outs then why should we care if they live or die. The story could have the best twists and the biggest obstacles for the characters to overcome but if we don’t care for those characters then it means nothing.

You see this problem a lot in horrors.  The biggest problem with horrors is that the ratio of cost verses profit is so good that Hollywood loves to churn them out.  This is great in that there’s more horrors and I do love horror. The problem is that most horrors are seen as a way of making a quick buck and so character and story go out the window.  When this happens you also loose the horror. It doesn’t matter how scary the monster is, or how many jump scares there are, if I don’t care about the characters then it’s not scary.

If when watching a horror the characters are so bad, I find myself actually willing the monster to catch them and hopefully kill them in the most entertaining and horrific way.  On a side note, for me, one of the quickest ways to kill a characters believability is to get them to say or do something that no one in their right mind would do, or that’s just completely out of character.  Now I know sometimes the story has to be driven forward but I’d rather the story was a bit slower with great characters, than fast with really bad ones.

Another classic example of a film that could of been bad if it wasn’t for the characters and Directors vision, is Alien. When this was written no studio would touch it.  They felt it was a really bad B-movie but at the same time Star Wars had been released and 20th Century Fox needed something to keep the ball rolling and so they took it on.  Here’s a great documentary if you’re interested.


After many re-writes they felt it was just about good enough to go ahead but they didn’t have much faith in it.  It was Ridley Scott who at the time was a very new Director, that had the vision to take the film and make it feel as real as possible.  If it wasn’t for the solid acting and the depth of the  characters,  Alien would have been a very different film and probably a very poor one.

I feel so strongly that characters are the key to a great film that I’d almost go to the point of saying you don’t need a story to keep people watching. Take Big Brother, ok so this is reality TV so slightly different but people will quite happily sit and watch an hour of other people walking around a house, shouting at each other.

Now it could be argued that there is a story because certain people form friendships, there are rivalry and scheming all of which are keys to a story.  But if we look at story in the traditional sense then Big Brother has none.  The biggest hook is that they’re real people, we know that the feelings they have are real. Now the producers of Big Brother aren’t stupid and they don’t just put a lot of boring, similar people together, after all where’s the fun in that and more importantly where is the contrast?  So what you get in Big Brother is a mixture of people from all walks of life with very different personalities. Some loud, some quite, some confrontational and some diplomatic.  That is why we watch and it has very little to do with story.

Of course if you have great characters that the audience believes in and you then put them in difficult situations, placing obstacles in their way,  that’s when your story becomes gripping.  But without those real characters, the story is just an empty container.

I’d love to know other peoples opinions on this so drop me a comment or a mail.

Till next time,






The sound of Silence.



I wanted to follow on from my last blog with an interesting point someone brought up in regards to sound design.  They mentioned how sometimes no sound at all is just as powerful as the use of music and Foley.

This is something that I completely forgot to mention  and if used correctly can really add power to your films.

I was watching a TV drama the other night, it was called The Suspicions of Mr Whicher.  There was one particular scene where one character was talking to another in a crowded pub.  I actually can’t remember what the conversation was about but during their conversation it became quite tense.  It suddenly occurred to me that one of the reasons why was because all the sounds around them had almost become silent and it was just their words being heard. One of the characters left and slowly the ambient sound raised again.  It’s really quite a simple tool but helped immensely in emphasizing  that this was meant to be a tense scene.

I do believe that this will only work if it’s contrasted against loud noises. For example there are  scenes in Saving Private Ryan that do this too. Although there’s no reason why a whole scene can’t just be silent, only using subtle sound effects to tell the story in effective ways. For example a ticking clock, a crow or the howl of wind slowly getting stronger.  This all work just as well as using music to communicate to the audience subtle clues and beats.

So although music is great for adding tension and pace to your films, those silent moments really do help. And if you use your sound effects in inventive ways you can really punctuate the pace of the scene.

Let me know your thoughts.

Till next time,






The art of music and sound Effects

First off I just want to say that I am by no means an expert in Sound Effects.  This is simply a quick blog on my experience and thus tips and tricks that I’ve learned work  to enhance a film.

One of my biggest discoveries over the past few years is how much visual impact sound brings to your film, yes that’s right I did say Visual.   It’s almost like sound is a nitro boost for your visuals. If done right it can take an average scene or dare I say even a boring scene and add so much feeling and depth to it.

I once heard someone say that sound is the soul to a film. It’s the emotions of the characters that the audience can’t see. I thought this was such a great way of summing up music and SFX. He’d hit the nail on the head. In a novel a writer can tell you what the character is thinking and feeling. In film we can’t do this.  Yes a good actor should be able to convey something through their gestures and camera angles can also convey a certain mood or empower a character but it’s music and sound that feeds us those vital clues.

I think a great example of how we as humans perceive things is the Kuleshov experiment.

If you haven’t heard of this then watch the movie below and think about the man’s reaction and what he may be thinking

You may be surprised to know that each reaction shot of the man was exactly the same shot.  What Kuleshov had discovered was that by showing the audience an image, for example that of the soup or the dead child, we as humans automatically perceive what we feel the character should be feeling.


That is the power of editing but of course we’re talking about sound here.  The reason why I’ve given this as an example is because it goes to show how easy we as an audience can be manipulated but how we can also misinterpret a scene.  Obviously most of the time you’d want the music or SFX to enhance the emotions the audience members believe the character is feeling. So in the example of the man looking at the coffin, some somber music would be quite fitting.  However music can also be used to create a juxtaposition.

For example if we took the imagery of him looking at the woman. Without sound we automatically feel like he’s lusting over the woman.  But what if we were to play some sinister music over the top?  How creepy would that be?  This is where music is really useful in bringing out the subtext of your script, the words not spoken.

They say that sound is 70% what you see on screen and I believe that.  How many times have you happened to catch a scary movie on TV but the sound was on mute. Did you find it scary?  But I bet if you turned the sound up and closed your eyes you’d actually feel a little fear when the creepy tense music started.

This doesn’t mean you should be adding music to everything. There is a time and a place.  This is one of the problems we have when creating out 22 days later films.  With only 22 days to make the films from script to screen it means we have no time to find a composer.  So we’ve been having to use free music and SFX for everything. We’re also not very good at composing so it’s quite hard to be able to blend the music in and out. It was better to let the music continue to play in till a good point to fade it out rather then just abruptly fading it out.

If you do need to end some music abruptly it’s worth hiding it under a sound effect. An example in our film was when the four characters enter the hall at the beginning.


The music playing is fine up in till there’s a bang and they all turn to see what it is. By fading the music quickly under the bang sound effect it works quite well.

If you’re lucky you can also find tracks that blend together quite well and so go from one to the other.  But there will be many times when you just find that the music needs to fade out and it just doesn’t sit well.

This is why if you are going to make a film and you want it to be of the highest quality then hire a proper composer and sound mixer.  They’ll add so much to the production of your film. They’ll be able to take scenes that you thought were good to new levels. Bring out subtle acting cues and tense moments that just didn’t exist before.

A good example of this was the scene in the Great Spielron where Katie brings out the hat.


I wanted this to be very tense with a sense of foreboding.  We managed to source a subtle low bass drum type sound.  Just adding this to the scene created a real sense of fear.

Or another example would be when the boy goes to take of Ludwick’s hat.


This scene was a nightmare to film.  Nothing was going right on set and the shots I ended up with were poor and not at all what I’d imagined when I’d first written the scene.  But by adding the SFX and music, it brought it together.

Laying down music and sfx early can also really help you get a feel for your scene.  As long as you know the mood you’re aiming for it’s a good idea to find a piece of music that fits this well and just lay it down so you can pace your edit on it.

There was one particular part in The Great Spielron, part of the same scene as mentioned above where  the boy is entering the stage, Ludwik is laying down cards on the table.


We spent ages trying to edit this piece together. I wanted to show Ludwik’s temperament  through the close up of his hands.  I wanted to cut between the cards being dealt and the boy getting closer,  adding an air of tension to the piece. But no matter what we tried we couldn’t seem to get this across. It was only when we placed down a foley sound of the cards being placed on the table that we realised it was this sound that added to the tension. Like a ticking clock…or bomb.

It gave us the road map we needed to structure the edit.  Things always work well in threes and we knew that having three cards slowly being placed with the flicking sound, cutting between hands and then boy, would really add to the tension.  Unfortunately we didn’t have enough coverage in the footage to get this across as well as I’d of liked. We still added the sound of the cards being placed,  you didn’t physically see them but it still added to the tension…just not as much as I’d of liked.

Sound and music can not only add emotion to your film but can also emphasis objects.  The perfect example of this and one that is probably way over used but still works, is the sound of a sword being drawn.  How many times in a movie do you hear the “Shink” sounds when a sword is pulled from its sheath? There’s no way a sword would make that sound in real life and yet we believe it on film. It adds to the danger, it’s like the filmmaker is saying “this sword is really, really sharp”.

And so we decided to do it in our film too. I must admit I was skeptical about this.  It’s the shot where Mike picks up his knife from the table to tell his story.


He doesn’t even pull it from a sheath, he just picks it up.  We laid down the sound and it did sound comical.  But once we’d played around with the volume, added a bit of reverb and tweaked the high pass it actually worked.  Adding these subtle audio clues are a great way of emphasising items and clothing in your film.

One final tip is to not rely on all the sounds on set.  A lot of the time in films 90% what you hear is laid down afterwards.  Dialogue is probably the only sound that is used from the actual takes and even that sometimes has to be replaced afterwards. There are some scenes in The Great Spielron where we didn’t record any sound at all. All the scenes of Ludwick performing on stage were completely silent as I knew that it was going to consist of mainly Music and audience members laughing.


So to sum up.  If you want your film to have that professional feel, then make sure your sound is top notch.  You can get away with boring camera moves and lighting to a certain extent but if your sound is bad, it’s really going to show…which is ironic really.

Till next time.







Behind the scenes of horror The Great Spielron. Or how to try and put a film together in 3 weeks.


Hi everyone.

We decided to do a behind the scenes commentary on The Great Spielron. In this video Stuart carpenter (producer) and Peter Butler which is me (Director) talk through the video and try to cover as much behind the scenes bits as we can.

This is mainly coming from an Indie film perspective so all the issues we had in trying to create a film on no budget and in such a short space of time.

We tried to cover as much as we could regarding some of the issues we had in making the film, as well some of the fun bits. There was so much we could have talked about that it was easy to miss bits. But than that’s what’s great about having the blog as I can add all the things we forget here 🙂

One area we didn’t mention much of was the foley and music so I will try and cover that in a later blog.

For now I hope you enjoy our making of video. If there any questions please feel free to email or comment below.

Till next time,


Ouch…not really



In this blog I thought I’d continue on some of the techniques used in visual effects.

A lot of effects in movies are actually 2d mapped onto environments or 2d images used to hide unwanted items.  They’re also used to replace things like posters and number plates.

In my last blog I talked about the effects of creating the rabbit, the rabbit was one of the 3D effects in the film.  There aren’t that many 3D effects used in The Great Spielron but I had to use 3D for one of the more gruesome scenes where some of our characters get a knife in their heads.

I’ll break down one of these shots,  it’s where Katie throws the knife and it hits Mike square in the forehead.

When deciding the best approach for an effect I think it’s always best to ask the question “can this be done on set with real practical effects?” If the answer is yes then I always think this is the best approach as it doesn’t matter how good the effect is in CG, it’s never as good as a real prop.

Obviously for this particular shot that required a knife to be thrown, the answer was most definitely “no” we can’t use a real knife…well not unless we didn’t need our actor anymore, but we did so we decided it was best not to really kill him.   So the choice was to do it in CG (computer graphics).

This actually posed a problem when filming, as I realised we couldn’t even use a proxy object when Katie goes to stab Kevin in the head as even something soft like a foam knife would still hurt if it hit you in the eye.  So I had get them to act and react with nothing at all. It also didn’t help that it was about 12:00am and so we had about 10 minutes to wrap up the whole end scene. Everything in that last part of the movie was finished in about 15 minutes.  We just went handheld and tried to get as much shots as we could. Anyway I’m digressing.

Now on a big budget film there would be time set aside for the VFX supervisor to take measurements and measure lighting info, using things like a big chrome ball and a big grey ball.  You sometimes see these on the making of movies.  Basically what these do is allow the VFX artist to work out where the light is coming from and how intense it is.  By taking photos at different exposures they can then put this information into the computer and the lighting they get is pretty accurate to what was on set.  It also allows them to have reflections that match too, so the whole CG elements fit to the environment.

We didn’t have time to do this, I brought the chrome ball but we were so rushed that it never got used, I had to rely on my eyes to try and get the knife to match the real footage as best as possible.

One issue with using 3D elements is you can’t use the more basic technique of using 2D trackers to match the 3D element.  If you don’t know about 2D tracking you can view one of my latest blogs about it here http://22dayslater.com/2014/05/19/its-all-in-the-eyes-the-zombie-eyes/

Actually that’s not completely true.  If the camera isn’t moving around the object too much then you’d get away with this, which is something we did for out low budget one day horror that you can see here   Because the real footage was being seen from a pretty flat on view I knew that I could use a 2D track to basically “tack” the 3D animation to a point on the screen.

But for the shot of Matt, his head moves quite a bit and we see it from quite a few angles, so I knew the knife would be seen from many different angles as well.

This is where a different technique has to be used which is 3D tracking.  Like 2D tracking it uses points on the screen to work out how things are moving. But unlike 2D trackers it triangulates  using special algorithms to work out things like the Z depth of where things are in the scene. Although a lot of 3D trackers have automated settings, these usually only work on simple scenes. If a scene has a lot going on, with a lot of camera movement, it’s sometimes necessary to give the tracker more information, for example the focal length of the camera.  Sometimes you’ll see on the making of movies little markers, especially on green screen sets. These markers are a good way of showing the computer points to lock onto.  3D tracking is a real art in itself and something that can take many attempts to get a good result.

To track Matt’s head, I imported a 3D mesh that was similar to his head and scaled it to fit the real footage. The 3D tracker could use this as a way of marking where it needed to be in the footage.  You can see this in the video below.  Excuse the “Demo mode” I only have a demo version of the capture software

Now that I had the information I could map the real footage onto the 3D mesh and add a 3D knife. Below is an image of the 3D knife un-textured.


It was then simply a case of animating the knife going into the 3D head.  I added lights that looked about right to where they would of been in the real set and also added shaders to the knife so it looked like its real life counterpart. Shaders are a way of telling the computer what material an object is made of, basically how it will react with light. So in this case it was a stainless steel knife so needed to be very reflective.

The last thing I needed to do was to add a trickle of blood that ran down Matt’s forehead. To do this I used some of the fake blood we’d made up for the scenes with Katie and the hat.  In case you’re interested, making fake blood is very easy and involves Syrup, red food dyes and coffee.I might do a blog on that at some point.

I shot various version of this fake blood pouring down a green screen as you can see below


It was then a case of removing the green and cropping just one trickle of blood.  I used a 2D tracker so that it would stick to the movement of Matt. And as a final touch I used a tool in After Effects to bend it slightly so that it looked like it was following the contours of his face.

The last touch was to add a shadow to the area around the knife.

Here is a clip showing the different layers.

And here is the final result

The other knife shots were achieved in a similar way.  The only other thing worth mentioning is I added a slight blood burst when Kevin gets the knife yanked out of his head. This was a mixture of using stock footage and also a dust hit that I tinted red as I wanted to get that faint spray of blood you’d get if it was real.

So that’s that till next time.








Mutant rabbit


I thought I’d show you an insight into the process of building one of the characters from the film, which in some ways is the star of the film, the mutant rabbit.

This post does contain small spoiler so if you haven’t seen the film yet then what are you waiting for? 🙂

You don’t actually get to see much of the rabbit in the film. There were two reason for this. One was simply following one of the golden rules of horror which is, never reveal the monster till the end. A classic example of this is Jaws, it’s more scary because you don’t see the monster till near the end.

And just like Jaws this rule was applied for another simple reason. The rabbit, as in the case with Spielbergs classic, looked like crap and so I had to to think of as many ways not to show it as possible or at least keep it in the dark.

To be fair the model wasn’t terrible although I didn’t have time to study any ref let alone the anatomy of the rabbit so I quickly sculpted a model using a piece of 3D software called Zbrush.

This wasn’t the main issue, the biggest problem was the rig for the rabbit was awful. A rig is the controls that allow you to move the model around, very much like a stringed puppet. I’m not very good at this process, especially when I’ve only got an evening to do it. So the model had a lot of issues when trying to animated in that some of the limbs didn’t move very well and would distort strangely. So I was very limited in what I could do with it. Which is one of the reasons why when you see the silhouetted version of the rabbit jumping out of Ludwik’s head it looks a little strange.

The only other animation you see of the rabbit is when it hops out from under the sofa. Which again I made sure was very subtle and hidden in shadow.

So because of this I thought it worth sharing this video of the rabbit in all it’s ugly glory. I hope you enjoy the time lapse videos. I think in total it took about 4 – 5 hours to create the model.

Let me know if you enjoy these sort of behind the scene vids and I’ll post more.

Till next time,