Production | SUBMISSION (Links)

VET-MAN Film

>

2 Minute Extract



Production Stills

Behind-the-scenes Photos

Poster

Research and Development Journal

• Development
• The Brief and Feedback from Pre-Production
• Script Read-through and Rehearsal with the Cast
• Script Developments
• Scene-by-scene Blocking and Action
• Final Shooting Preparations: Production Design and Test Shoots
• Making the Poster
• Shoot Days
• Day 1 (Scenes 8 and 11)
• Day 2 (Scenes 7, 9 and 10)
• Day 3 (Scenes 3, 4, 5 and 6)
• Day 4 (Scenes 12 and 13)
• Day 5 (Scene 1)
• Day 6 (Scene 2 and Promo Photos)
• ADR, Reshooting and Pickups
• Edit Reviews and Feedback
• Rough Cut Review
• Fine Cut Review
• Cast Feedback
• Writer / Director Statement

Project Evaluation

Production | Evaluation

What worked?

• I am happy that I came up with a fairly unique and original idea during the Transition unit that I was able to develop into a very different story whilst maintaining the elements that drew me to the original idea in the first place. My main goal was to make people laugh and from the people that have seen the final cut, others do seem to find the film funny. When we have spent months in post-production, it is easy for the humour to run dry, so to see other people laughing at the jokes in the film, it is very refreshing and I am pleased that I was able to successfully write a comedic piece.
• Something I tend to forget when looking back at the project is how much effort we have put into the production value of the film. Having a working van with the VET-MAN branding, realistic-looking blood effects and veterinary equipment has really helped to boost the authenticity of the film. The use of background extras in the pub scene also helped with the realism we had been striving for. The practical effects were also very effective - the fake owl and the blood splatter in particular worked very well and helped with the believability of these scenes.
• I also tend to forget how ambitious we were with regards to working with animals and I really think this paid off. Having access to the Kent Owl Academy and the chance to film with the actual birds proved to be very successful in making the owl punch scene as believeable as possible. The cast also seemed to appreciate the opportunity to work with the owls, as it is such a 
• Our cast was amazing throughout the entire process and I am very happy with the cast we chose to fulfil each of the roles within the film. I feel we kept them in the loop - particularly through Mel's communication with each of them via email - and involved throughout the scripting process. On each shoot day, Ed and Dan would provide suggestions to potential changes to their lines that would feel more natural, and even provided some additional visual gags that I had not considered when writing. They are a talented pool of individuals and I am glad that we chose the cast we did.
• I feel that I worked well as a director, especially with directing a larger group of cast and crew than I was initially used to. As I have said earlier in my journal, I was especially pleased with how I was able to direct everyone in the pub scene, as there were so many people doing different things, I had to listen to everyone and ensure that everybody was on the same page and doing what they were supposed to.
• Katie, Melissa and I, as always, worked well as a team which was achieved through good communication and dealing with issues as and when they arose. Of course there were some disputes but we were sure to resolve them as quickly and we were able to create the film that we wanted to.
• I am also pleased with the visual style we maintained throughout the entire film. This was largely due to Katie's cinematography and camera skills, and I feel that we collaborated well to maintain a consistent style throughout. This was in line with the inspirations I cited back in the pre-production unit - The Thick of It, The Office, etc - and this allowed for the comedic beats to flow through visually as well as through the script and performances of our cast.

What didn't work?

• We had many issues with sound throughout the project. Half of the audio from the first shoot day was lost, the audio from the second shoot day was plagued with background noise from a nearby river, and some of the sound recordists were not very well-versed in using the equipment, so the quality of some of the audio just was not as good as it could have been. Since I was focusing on directing, Katie on filming, and Mel on ensuring everything logistically ran as smoothly as possible, I feel that the sound was under-appreciated. Had we considered how we captured sound in more depth, we may not have ran into the issues we did that had to be fixed in post-production.
• The ADR day did not go to plan at all, and was embarrassing, quite frankly. Whilst I was happy that we could salvage something useful through the improvisational material we recorded, I am disappointed that we could not utilise the opportunity to fix the missing and poor quality audio. This was largely down to a lack of knowledge in recording ADR sound. For previous projects, I have been able to replace poor audio simply through playing through the clip and asking cast members to record their lines more-or-less in sync with the video. This is an incredibly dubious way of recording ADR, but with a small budget and heavy time constraints, I would have been happy to repeat this on this occasion to fix certain small amounts of dialogue. It was only when we had invited Ed and Dan into the recording studio that we were informed of how complicated it actually is to record ADR. Ideally we would have reshot the scenes that we needed to, or had more time to have a proper ADR session, but we were already over-budget at that stage and we were unable to afford any more days to invite the cast back for reshoots.
• Some scenes unfortunately lack some vital coverage that would have really helped during the edit. One example of this was during the pub scene in which I would have liked to get another reaction shot from Al, who played Mark in this scene as he approaches Tim. This was because we had run over time at the location and so we did not have enough time to capture this shot. Katie and Mel have done a good job at working around this, but I feel that as the director, responsibility falls on my shoulders for not capturing these shots and I regret that we were unable to do so.
• The third shoot day (in Margate) did not go entirely to plan either, also due to various time constraints. This was to the point where we had to reshoot at a later stage and at great cost to the budget. This was due to some fairly last-minute issues that we ran into which were largely unavoidable. It would have been nicer to have had more of a budget to work with which would have meant that we could have had more time with the cast and we may have been able to fix some of the issues that we ran into during the production period. I feel that the crowd-funding campaign was not as successful as it could have been, and since we each put in around £600 each of our own money, we simply could not have afforded any more just working part-time jobs.
• I said in the previous section that I am happy with the production quality of the film, however there were some details that did not work very well for various reasons. The doctor's bag we used, for example, was a last-minute backup as the bag we had ordered did not arrive in time for the first shoot day. This left Tim with a rather pathetic tiny bag instead of an authentic-looking doctor's bag that would really have benefited the realism of the film. We would also have liked to have filmed the dog better. In an ideal world, we would have had a trained dog there on the day of the Margate shoot to play dead in front of and in the back of the van, but we struggled to find a dog that would work well enough, so we settled with my friend's dog who was a bit of a live wire and it was very difficult to capture the shot as he would move so much.
• I feel that we could have been more considerate about the costume choices in the film - Tim's costume in particular - which was largely due to overthinking the continuity of the film. I feel we became too wrapped up in the logic of Tim changing his clothes after the are covered in blood when we should have prioritised keeping his outfit consistent. This was an unfortunate mistake and since we made this decision in some of the key scenes that we could not reshoot.

What did I learn?

• I have learned a lot about working with other people, especially people that I did not know and specifically being in charge of telling other people what to do. The key to this was in communication: keeping the cast involved through the whole process, listening to everybody's ideas, and remaining calm and collected when things did not go to plan or when there were disagreements in the group. As a fairly quiet and introverted person, this was a daunting prospect at the start of the project, but I was keen to push myself to do this and it really paid off during the shoot days.
• I feel that I have also learned more about coping under pressure and dealing with unexpected issues whilst shooting. One that springs to mind is the night shoot, in which we discovered that there was a motion-activated light right in the middle of where we were shooting. This required a, off-the-cuff rewrite of the scene and actually worked well in our favour. By playing around with ideas from the cast and working out what was possible, I feel that we were actually able to improve the scene by integrating the issue into the scene instead of trying to hide it.
• A lot of the writers that I have researched over the course of this project and others have all referred to a particular aspect of writing that every writer needs to deal with - taking criticism. As VET-MAN is a comedy, a lot of lines that I think work may not work well with other people: comedy is subjective and what I think is funny may not be funny to others. Therefore I had to take all the criticism that was given to me on board, meaning that sometimes I had to be fairly ruthless with what I was cutting from the script.

Final thoughts

Overall, I am happy with how VET-MAN has come together and I am proud of what we have created. A lot of aspects worked very well - the van, the practical effects, the performances of our cast, the cinematography and many more played a huge role in the success of VET-MAN. Of course there were a number of things that let us down as well; sound being the biggest one in my opinion. However I do not think that this distracted from the main goal of the project and this has not got in the way of us producing a unique and original concept from scratch. I wanted to make a comedy as this was our last project at university and to have fun with it with the simple goal of making people laugh, and I feel I have achieved that.

Production | Writer / Director Statement

Tim has always dreamed of becoming a vet, but after failing his degree, he resorts to illicit means to keep his dream alive.

VET-MAN focuses on Tim Stewart, who has always aspired to be a vet, but after failing his degree certification, he seeks to establish himself as a mobile vet. After printing out his own diploma, he meets with naive third year veterinary student, Luke, as they seek out work in the ‘Vet Van’, but they soon realise that being a vet is more difficult than they anticipated.

The original concept for VET-MAN was conceived during the Transition unit toward the end of second year, and the idea has evolved dramatically as we decided to continue through to the Pre-production unit and finally for our final major project. I have already gone into depth on the inspiration for the concept in the pre-production package so I will avoid repeating myself too much. The overall concept began as a parody of The Supervet following an arrogant yet dangerously incompetent vet incorporating a fixed-camera mockumentary style. This evolved into more of a sitcom to give us more freedom with camera movement and style.

We agreed to shoot VET-MAN using a handheld camera throughout to provide an observational and realistic feel, as if the viewer is there with the characters and is involved in their antics. This follows a lot of popular sitcoms which adopt similar filming techniques, such as The Thick Of It, The Office, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, and more. We wanted to utilise crash zooms and free-flowing camera movements to simulate this tone and I feel this has really helped to maintain a constant visual throughout which has helped to emphasise the comedic elements. Bowen and Thompson cite the use of handheld camera movements to create an "amateur" feel as well as for realism, which we intend to use to reflect Tim's amateur veterinary skills (Bowen and Thompson, Grammar of the Shot, pg. 169). They also explain that a well-controlled handheld camera can add "kinetic energy" to a film, which will boost the sense that the audience are the characters on their adventures.

VET-MAN opens to a dimly lit room with a man, Tim (played by Ed Allenby), frantically searching through drawers and cupboards, desperately trying to find something. This our very first introduction to Tim and I opted to introduce him as a dark, mysterious character so that when his sister, Tess (played by Skevy Stylia), finally switches on the light, our expectations are immediately switched and we that he is not a cunning and mysterious character, he is actually a clumsy, arrogant and incompetent man chasing a dream that he can never achieve unless he overcomes his hubris. As we discover Tim is actually searching through his sister's house, we capture a glimpse of his scheme which is to practice as a vet, illegally, using his father's old veterinary instruments. We can see they have a strained relationship - she cares about him enough to warn him against doing anything illegal, but also calls him a "twat". As a younger brother to two older sisters, I was inspired to write Tess' character to embody the stereotype of the 'know-it-all' older sister who puts Tim down at every hurdle, but deep in her heart, she does truly care for him. There is a small callback in this scene to the 'original' VET-MAN film that we created back in the Transition unit through the photograph in the frame which is a still from that short film which we developed into what VET-MAN is now.

Tim's "I'm Vet-man" line is a motif found in many superhero films, such as The Dark Knight and Iron Man (see right) as the hero finds their identity through their super alter-ego. Where this is often used to empower superheroes, this is subverted in VET-MAN as his delivery of this line is overshadowed as he accidentally smashes a vase on his way out. Rather than building himself up as a confident and capable hero, he has shown that he is actually clumsy and not heroic at all. Subverting tropes such as these is the basic formula for creating comedy, whilst it is not necessarily 'laugh out loud' funny, this adds a layer of Tim's comedic flaws as a character. The musical build-up adds to Tim's views on himself, which cuts as he smashes the vase, further accentuating the expectation versus the reality of his character.

The next scene introduces us to Tim's sidekick, Luke (played by Daniel Hemsley), and we see how he looks up to Tim as a role model. Luke's character was inspired by a character on Peep Show, who is blindly infatuated with one of the central characters because he admires his music. Similarly, Luke looks up to Tim because he believes he is a talented vet but his boyish innocence causes him to overlook Tim's ineptitude. We are also introduced to the van, which plays a key role in the story and also leads into the Chekhov's Gun device through Uncle Pete's drugs stash that Tim and Luke find in the glove compartment. Finding the drugs in here plays into the later scenes in which the two scheme to poison an owl to trick the owner into letting them give it treatment, only to find out they accidentally give it the wrong 'antidote' which sends it into a frenzy.

The first obstacle in their journey comes in the form of a dog, which Tim carelessly runs over with the van. I have always been a fan of macabre humour, especially through shows such as The League of Gentlemen. I took some inspiration from the character 'Mr Chinnery', who is a cursed vet who kills every animal he touches, usually in very ironic and graphic ways. In my research, I found that it was the generally muted tone and the sudden bursts of gore that made his scenes so funny - this comes back to comedy forming the the subversion of the audience's expectations. As Tim tries to save the dog, he accidentally kills it in a small explosion of blood, just as Sheila (played by Susan Baskerville) arrives, looking for her pet. It is here that we see Tim's illicit and cold-hearted nature shine through, as he agrees to help Sheila find her Sooty, just as he has killed it (or so he thinks).

This scene is an example of how I looked to our cast to provide their own input into the script. The conversation between Tim and Sheila is quite different to how it appears in the original script. This was because I wanted the cast to feel comfortable in delivering the lines in a way that they sat right with them, and in a way that maintained the nuance of their characters. I looked to Armando Iannucci throughout the project - in series' such as The Thick of It, Iannucci gives the cast a lot of creative freedom to provide their own lines, which often works to create a realistic and spontaneous tone to their dialogue, or as Iannucci himself puts it "dirtying up the dialogue, making it feel more natural and real". From the very beginning, I wanted to keep the cast as involved in the dialogue as possible to know what works best for their performance to emphasise the humour already present in the script.

Tim sends Luke back to Sheila's house to deliver the bad news and he discovers that 'Sooty' was actually a cat and not a dog, so Tim and Luke have actually killed someone elses dog and delivered it to a sweet old lady in a bin bag. The two make their escape and head to their original destination: The Kent Owl Academy. As they arrive, Tim shares his scheme with Luke and we learn that his plan is not a plan at all, but instead just taking a chance on a potential client. Luke, blind to Tim's incompetence, sees this as a brilliant idea and the two head off to meet the owner, Mollie (played by Becky Black). Mollie is based on and named after the real owner of The Kent Owl Academy, who was incredibly important in the making of VET-MAN. She was able to provide the centre for us to film and she was very accommodating in helping us film with her owls.

As Tim's gamble fails, he resorts to a more sinister approach: to break in to the sanctuary late at night and poison the owl with something from Uncle Pete's stash in the van's glove compartment. This is the payoff we have from foreshadowing the drugs coming into play after they are introduced in scene 2, bringing the film in a circle and utilising a significant motif in the film. The Chekhov's Gun principle is used to signify that every element of a story that has any attention drawn to it should play a role in the wider story - Uncle Pete's stash is Chekhov's Gun and it has been used to create a shift in the narrative. The duo return to the owl sanctuary late that night and proceed with the plan. We chose to incorporate music here that is reminiscent of a heist or break-in, in a similar vein to the famous Mission Impossible score, but perhaps not quite as dramatic.

They return in the morning, pleased with how the plan has played out and they are eager to arrive at the centre to help Mollie cure whatever ailment is causing the owl to be so distressed. Reluctantly, Mollie allows them to help but as Tim injects the owl with what he believes is an antidote, Luke makes the horrific discovery that Tim has just given the owl an unknown solution from Uncle Pete's stash. As the owl swoops over to attack Tim, instinct takes over and he punches the owl out of the air. As Mollie recoils in shock and anger, we cut to black. This scene also plays into the macabre by using death as a comedic device and proving exactly how useless Tim really is as a vet.

Tim and Luke are then sat at the pub and Tim has a black eye. We did not need to see Mollie punching Tim, as the audience can fill in the blanks between the shot of Mollie being angry, and Tim having a black eye. As he licks his wounds, Tess appears at the pub looking to get their father's tools back from Tim and Luke spots Sheila in the distance. Sheila spots the pair and just as Tim steps up to confront her, he realises that Sheila is not alone. Tim stands up to find himself face-to-face with the intimidating Mark (played by Al Sawyer). Again, we cut to black and then back to Tim, this time with blood pouring from his nostrils. After the climax of the pub scene, the final moments of VET-MAN feature Tim at his lowest. He has killed two animals, been beaten up and lost the tools that would help him to achieve his dream of becoming a vet like his father. As the two drive away, the credits roll and we hear an improvised scene of Tim and Luke planning their next venture. I chose to end on an optimistic note to leave the possibility that the story could continue and that this is not the end for VET-MAN.

As the credits roll, we hear Tim and Luke discussing the future of the vet business. This dialogue was entirely improvised by Ed and Dan in the sound booth, the only direction I gave was that Tim and Luke are planning the next step in their journey. As the director, this was the most interesting experience for me as I could see how well Ed and Dan understood the characters to the extent where they could perform as them without needing any lines of dialogue provided to them. Going back to Armando Iannucci's work, sometimes the best lines of dialogue arise from improvisation, so I was happy that we were able to capture this for the credits. It has a very natural feeling to it and Ed and Dan had remarkable chemistry, allowing them to bounce off of each other and reach a satisfying punchline.

If I could return to the start of the project, there are several things I would likely change. Firstly, I would dedicate a lot more thought to the consistency of the costume in the film. Tim's scrubs in the first four scenes are very effective at conveying Tim's aspirations but we got a little too wrapped up in the continuity during the later scenes that we did not consider that it would have worked better to keep him in his outfit for longer. I would also have aimed to capture more coverage of certain scenes, which I will go into more detail in the evaluation. The sound of the film is also something that I would have liked to have considered more during the shoot days by ensuring everything was recorded properly and at the highest quality possible.

VET-MAN was the collaborative effort of myself, Katie, Melissa and our incredible cast and crew. What started as a basic concept of an 'incompetent vet' has evolved over the year into something that I am immensely proud of. I feel we have kept a clear and consistent style that benefits with the comedic tone thanks to Katie's cinematography, and Melissa's organisation and flare with the production design. Our cast have helped immeasurably through their enthusiasm and contributions to the script, accentuated through their talent as actors. I started writing the first few drafts of the script with the goal of making an audience laugh and I believe we have achieved that.

Production | Cast Feedback

In order to better evaluate how well we worked throughout the project, we decided to create a survey to send out to the cast members so that we could get their insight into how well we performed from the casting process to the end of production. They are professionals and have worked on a number of projects, from other student films to corporate work, stage plays and more, so their feedback will be useful for us to reflect on the project as a whole. This was largely for the benefit of myself and Melissa, as Katie's role was focused more on the technical running of the production than with the cast.

We came up with the following questions:

• Direction
• How would you rate the casting process? Please explain your answer.
• Did you feel your input into the script and direction was taken into consideration?
• Did you know what you were supposed to be doing in every scene?
• Any other feedback on the direction of the project?
• Organisation
• How would you rate the organisation of the project? Please explain your answer.
• Do you feel like you were kept in the loop?
• Were you kept up-to-date and informed on the schedule throughout the production process? (Casting to production to post-production)
• Did you feel looked after on set? Please explain your answer.
• How would you rate the food available on set?
• Any comments on the food?
• How did you find the reimbursement process?
• Any other feedback on the organisation of the project?
• General Feedback
• Did you enjoy working on VET-MAN? Please explain your answer.
• Any general comments on the project as a whole?

We sent this out to our six cast members and received very positive feedback, on the whole. Some of the comments that apply to my role include:

• The original post on Mandy was very clear in explaining what the project was and what was wanted from the character.
• In the audition room Alex and Melissa were very welcoming and happy to answer any questions I had.
• I was given redirection and the opportunity to play the scenes in different ways, which, as an actor, is very helpful and showed me that they were willing to work with me to find the best version of my character.
• Any queries I had regarding the direction of the scene were always answered, and I was allowed to try out different variations to find out which worked best; within the time constraints.
• On one occasion there was an ADR session which was not properly prepared for, but we were able to use the session for voiceover and improv work instead, which was a brand new and exciting experience for me in the end.
• There was always a friendly, jovial atmosphere on set, and we always were taken care of regarding food, drinks and other facilities.
• Sometimes creative differences and disagreement arose between members of the crew, but this was always resolved quickly.
• The one thing that could have sped up proceedings would have been a more concrete list of shots that the crew could refer to in order to know exactly what we were doing and when, without the need for debate on set.
• Everyone in the cast and crew were friendly, professional, open to feedback and working towards the same goal of making a great film.
• I never felt over worked or under appreciated, and I always felt taken care of.

I feel these comments are fair and I agree with them. We did use a shot list for every shoot day, however we did face some hurdles, especially time constraints, that meant I would gloss over the shot list on a few occasions. I do not feel this impacted on the final product too much, but I can appreciate that this may cause confusion for cast and crew members. This feedback is very useful to us as it gives us an external view of how we performed our roles during the shoot days.