HELP with uni dissertation, Answer my question please?

I'm a uni student at the university of south wales and im studying my final year of prop making for a Degree.
Im writing a dissertation on the role of a prop maker posing the question "Do you need to be a master armorer to make quality weapons and armor for films?"
Could you please give your opinions, Do you think you need to be a master armorer to make these props? Or do you think the way films and tv are made these days that you can construct things differently.
Please avoid yes or no answers, if you have time to discuss your idea please do. Dont be afraid to talk about older films, new films, old and new techniques, cosplay, replicas and materials.
I just need to gather different opinions. So once again....
"Do you need to be a master armorer to make quality weapons and armor for films?"

I'm a uni student at the university of south wales and im studying my final year of prop making for a Degree.
Im writing a dissertation on the role of a prop maker posing the question "Do you need to be a master armorer to make quality weapons and armor for films?"
Could you please give your opinions, Do you think you need to be a master armorer to make these props? Or do you think the way films and tv are made these days that you can construct things differently.
Please avoid yes or no answers, if you have time to discuss your idea please do. Dont be afraid to talk about older films, new films, old and new techniques, cosplay, replicas and materials.
I just need to gather different opinions. So once again....
"Do you need to be a master armorer to make quality weapons and armor for films?"

I think the answer is a "no", but it certainly doesn't hurt to be one. Just look at someone like Tony Swatton, he's a genuine blacksmith who's made over hundreds of weapons for film, stage, and television. One such iconic prop he's made is Dustin Hoffman's hook from Hook, and the hero prop was all hand-forged.

Though, I don't think it's necessary to have a that kind of background to make these things for movies, I do believe that having some training or experience in another discipline before prop-making, set dressing, costuming, concept art, etc, is important because that can only lend more of a verisimilitude to the work. One example that comes to mind is Ralph McQuarrie and his work as a concept artist on Star Wars. He had no background or association with science fiction before then, but that didn't matter. He was asked to do some work by George Lucas because of his background in industrial design, and that experience would guide his design choices, giving that world a believable foundation.

I think a part of that has been lost in recent years. We see repeat designs and patterns, often times putting form before some idea of function, and that comes from other artists drawing inspiration from other artists. An inevitability, but I see it as a kind of cannibalization. In the world of concept art, I've seen courses and have guidebooks that teach a certain "style" within the industry. There's a standard that's being taught that is, maybe not creatively empty, but it is very limited in scope.

It depends on what the weapon has to do.

If it's a fire arm that needs to be practically fired, then a master armorer will have a lot of legal paperwork and knowledge to make this happen safely and legally. The armorer will interface with local law enforcement on behalf of the production, and will oversee performer fire arm training.
If it's a practical bladed weapon, then ditto.

If you're using a prop non functioning fire arm and adding your effects digitaly then as long as you adhere to your local safety laws, and have the relevant permissions, and keep the local law enforcement informed, then no, as your firearm could be a toilet role tube...
If you are using a completely safe 'fake' bladed weapon, then ditto

Just my opinion

Jim

John Howe talked about this some on the Weta Workshop documentary on the Fellowship of the Ring DVD. Plate armor doesn't always move the way you expect it to, and the plates interact with each other in unusual ways, and unless the designer is familiar with actual armor, they're likely to make bad choices.

No you do not. Just look at some of the brilliant work made out of foam and paper.

Exactly, Thank you. The opinions are really really helpful.

Excellent choice of dissertation topic! I chose something similar for mine a few years ago (Has CGI diminished the effect and quality of hand crafted props in Film and TV).

I would personally steer more towards 'No, you don't need to be a master armorer to make quality pieces for film'.

This is making the assumption though that your idea of quality isn't dictated by function. There is the saying in a lot of hobbies 'Form over function' and in many productions there are weapons and armor that look visually incredible, even down to the smallest detail, but when looked at it terms of usability they wouldn't be feasible were it a 'real' item. An extreme example could be a lot of the female armors we see in fantasy films. The often over sexualised pieces can look great be be extremely well made, but their functional realism and practicality is next to useless.

In short I guess it would be good to discuss and define what exactly you consider to be quality. Discuss quality from an actual master armorers point of view (perhaps sending off a few emails to armorers and blacksmiths). Alongside this, discuss quality from a screen production requirement and point of view and see if they even need a master armorer in the first place.

echowhiskey said:

"Do you need to be a master armorer to make quality weapons and armor for films?"

Click to expand...

I'd start by considering what it means to be a "master armourer". Who decides? I would say that it's a title earned through reputation. Sure, there are probably self-proclaimed "official bodies" who claim ownership of the title (which they will no doubt give you for a very reasonable exam fee and ongoing yearly charges), but the reality is that a master armourer is determined organically, by the mastery of the skills that drives the quality of their work.

You might get some mileage from considering that one becomes a master armourer by making quality weapons and armour. Can you make quality weapons and armour without becoming one - whether you intend it or not?

When people want quality weapons and armour, then they look for the person with the established reputation for making them. It isn't necessary to be a master, but it increases the opportunities.

Of course, this highlights the problem with defining "master".I'm looking at "master" through a purely skills/experience-based lens and not even limiting it to the context of films and props. As others have said, within that context, there may be legal implications in the title, expected knowledge of how to bring together "weapons" and safe practice on set, possible insurance requirements for recognised qualifications, etc.

You might be a master armourer in one sense, without being a master armourer in the other.

There is also a school of thought that you cannot be a master "anything" until you have an apprentice. What better way to demonstrate your mastery of a skill than by teaching it to another?

So, start by working out what you mean by "master". That should fill up the first few thousand words