Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

Can we return to reality here? Baldwin is 63 yrs old. He's been in the movie biz 40 years and ~ half of his movies are shoot 'em ups. I say again, fuck a bunch of movie SOP, a jury will find him negligent. Correctly so.

You are going back to the Tom Cruise can really fly an F-14 thing. Play acting with guns made safe by others for 4 days or 40 years does not make one an expert. For 40 years other people have handed him guns that had blanks, fake ammo, or no ammo. He has 40 years in of knowing the various prop guns will not shoot people. Then they hired a low budget crew and BANG :o

* he'll go down for being part of the chain of command that hired incompetents ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 379
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

JFC, living as a semi competent human being requires us not to point guns at people and not pull the trigger. Need not be an "expert".

First thing i do even with my own is check it is empty

Posted Images

21 hours ago, Point Break said:

Curious….sorry if it was already mentioned…..is the gun in question a single action or double?

Single. An 1873 replica made by Pietta. 

Don't think that will be relevant. If he was practicing for a quick-draw shot to be filmed from the perspective of the target he had reason to be cocking the hammer.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mark K said:

Single. An 1873 replica made by Pietta. 

Don't think that will be relevant. If he was practicing for a quick-draw shot to be filmed from the perspective of the target he had reason to be cocking the hammer.  

Maybe….but if it’s a single action….he had to draw it, cock it, point it, and at the very least put his finger in the trigger guard. At worst….after all that then pull the trigger….for whatever reason. None of those things would be related to practicing his quick draw….or cross draw…or whatever it was. How in the world would the camera know if he cocked the gun? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blue Crab said:

Can we return to reality here? Baldwin is 63 yrs old. He's been in the movie biz 40 years and ~ half of his movies are shoot 'em ups. I say again, fuck a bunch of movie SOP, a jury will find him negligent. Correctly so.

I predict he skates on crim charges but gets creamed in the civil suit. 

Based on information that the presence of both a real gun and real ammo on a set is practically unheard of these days. Everybody has been using replicas which are modified to accept only blanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mark K said:

I predict he skates on crim charges but gets creamed in the civil suit. 

Based on information that the presence of both a real gun and real ammo on a set is practically unheard of these days. Everybody has been using replicas which are modified to accept only blanks. 

Yeah…most likely scenario. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

You are going back to the Tom Cruise can really fly an F-14 thing.

No sir, you are doing that. As false equivalencies go, that's a big one: Supersonic fighter jet compared to a single action revolver used by an actor experienced with weapons for 40 years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Point Break said:

Maybe….but if it’s a single action….he had to draw it, cock it, point it, and at the very least put his finger in the trigger guard. At worst….after all that then pull the trigger….for whatever reason. None of those things would be related to practicing his quick draw….or cross draw…or whatever it was. How in the world would the camera know if he cocked the gun? 

All are part of the quick draw, and if the real shot to come involved firing a blank... 

 

   Seems armorers spend a lot of their time coaching actors to do this. That may explain why the selection of that gal, her dad is in the biz and a world champion at the technique.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Mark K said:

I predict he skates on crim charges but gets creamed in the civil suit. 

More great legal analysis. 
It’s more likely you never hear another word about a lawsuit because a) even the lowest budget movie (which this isn’t) will have contracts in place with mandatory arbitration and b) the family will likely want closure and a check quickly rather than over the course of arbitration and/or litigation. 
 

If someone sprinkled live rounds in with the rest this is a different conversation. Didn’t some disgruntled crew walk off the set a few days earlier?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

More great legal analysis. 
It’s more likely you never hear another word about a lawsuit because a) even the lowest budget movie (which this isn’t) will have contracts in place with mandatory arbitration and b) the family will likely want closure and a check quickly rather than over the course of arbitration and/or litigation. 
 

If someone sprinkled live rounds in with the rest this is a different conversation. Didn’t some disgruntled crew walk off the set a few days earlier?

 I predict conspiracy theories. The investigation has a hell of a mystery:

 There have been thousands of staged movie and TV shootings over the last couple of decades, probably closer the 100s of thousands. Professional armorers are publicly stating that not only was the presence of a live round on a set an incredibly lapse, but even the presence of a gun capable of accepting one and firing it. Yet on the set of Rust not only were both there, they were together and laid out on the ready-cart.

      Insert Twilight Zone music sound track here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

No sir, you are doing that. As false equivalencies go, that's a big one: Supersonic fighter jet compared to a single action revolver used by an actor experienced with weapons for 40 years. 

Arghhh - he is NOT experienced with weapons, he is experienced with movie props. In other news, the actors that play bomb squad techs would likely blow themselves up defusing a real bomb and also would have no clue if the prop department handed them a real bomb and told them it was a prop.

"Shit, this thing has a chartreuse wire and a mauve wire, all we know is agonizing over the red wire or the blue wire and doing the opposite of what we're told" :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mark K said:

on the set of Rust not only were both there, they were together and laid out on the ready-cart.

      Insert Twilight Zone music sound track here. 

Certainly speaks to the negligence of the crew but and the production under Respondeat Superior but criminal charges for even the armorer would surprise me.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Certainly speaks to the negligence of the crew but and the production under Respondeat Superior but criminal charges for even the armorer would surprise me.  

    Dunno, but they managed to nail Randal Miller. Might not be relevant. 

  https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/mar/10/midnight-rider-director-randall-miller-jailed-for-on-set-death-of-crew-member

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

All are part of the quick draw, and if the real shot to come involved firing a blank... 

 

   Seems armorers spend a lot of their time coaching actors to do this. That may explain why the selection of that gal, her dad is in the biz and a world champion at the technique.  

I did a little Google work and it seems you’re right. The draw and cock at the same motion is quite common. I partially withdraw my statement. 
 

But even Paladin makes it two motions……

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

    Dunno, but they managed to nail Randal Miller. Might not be relevant. 

  https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/mar/10/midnight-rider-director-randall-miller-jailed-for-on-set-death-of-crew-member

  

That’s the misdemeanor/manslaughter rule and a diff fact pattern  

If Baldwin was committing an intentional criminal act and the death occurred during the commission of the act, he catches one too  there is no indication anything like that happened though  

 


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

More great legal analysis. 
It’s more likely you never hear another word about a lawsuit because a) even the lowest budget movie (which this isn’t) will have contracts in place with mandatory arbitration and b) the family will likely want closure and a check quickly rather than over the course of arbitration and/or litigation. 
 

If someone sprinkled live rounds in with the rest this is a different conversation. Didn’t some disgruntled crew walk off the set a few days earlier?

If a person signs a contract that has an arbitration clause. And then that person is killed. Is the family of that person also required to go through arbitration? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Arghhh - he is NOT experienced with weapons, he is experienced with movie props.

Cap, I completely got your point three tries ago.  I kid you not.

Cap, I completely got your point three tries ago.  I kid you not.

Cap, I completely got your point three tries ago.  I kid you not.

Movie props! Movie props! Movie props.

It just fails the common sense test. 40 years fucking around with guns on movie sets and no one ever mentioned gun safely? Alec, anti-gunner, is too stupid to have conversations with others about weapon safety? He never read anything about guns? He never was lectured about guns from the armorer back when he was just breaking in. For 40 years? You nor I have any idea what he's experienced in.

Kind of a funny hill to die on, Cap. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chinabald said:

If a person signs a contract that has an arbitration clause. And then that person is killed. Is the family of that person also required to go through arbitration? 

Depends on the state but generally yes. Estate is bound by terms of decedent’s contract. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

Cap, I completely got your point three tries ago.  I kid you not.

Cap, I completely got your point three tries ago.  I kid you not.

Cap, I completely got your point three tries ago.  I kid you not.

Movie props! Movie props! Movie props.

It just fails the common sense test. 40 years fucking around with guns on movie sets and no one ever mentioned gun safely? Alec, anti-gunner, is too stupid to have conversations with others about weapon safety? He never read anything about guns? He never was lectured about guns from the armorer back when he was just breaking in. For 40 years? You nor I have any idea what he's experienced in.

Kind of a funny hill to die on, Cap. 

Oh come now BC, it's just a movie prop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

Oh come now BC, it's just a movie prop.

Yeah. Hell, everyone knows movie prop 1873 Dragoon replicas can't really fire deadly projectiles. 

I just cannot believe Alec is a numbnut pretty face who needs his hand held and I don't think "what Hollywood does" is going to fly with a jury if if comes to that. Indeed as notions go, it's ridiculous on its face.

Although if Ed Eagle of Santa Fe is available for defense ... all bets are off.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Point Break said:

I did a little Google work and it seems you’re right. The draw and cock at the same motion is quite common. I partially withdraw my statement. 
 

But even Paladin makes it two motions……

I had that rig when I was about six in the late 50s.  It was gorgeous but the cap gun certainly didn't have a one ounce pull.  The leather was so stiff I had trouble getting the belt tongue in or out of the buckle.   Like totally unable to sort of trouble.  I remember the panic trying to get out of it once when I needed to take a leak; no access to my jean's zipper.  Fun times.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been checking, and it turns out AB's father, also Mr AB, was a teacher and HS football coach altho quite gay and a fem who wasn't fond of guns and never allowed even the mention of them around his large family of girls and 4 count 'em 4 boys. These were not your regular rough and tumble boys like most. Oh hell no. These were Irish Catholic choir boys one and all. In high school, AB played football himself but was told to strictly stay away from other boys who might be experimenting with cars and girls and guns and cigarettes and stuff. AB is willing to take a polygraph that he had never even seen real gun up close until picked to play in Miami Blues:

Miami_blues_poster.jpg

This was a decent movie with a bad guy and a cop. Both had guns. I spoke with a Baldwin rep just this very morning who said Baldwin told him yesterday that he had never even seen or held a real gun til that film shoot [reportedly without casualties] which wasn't in Hollywood btw. Miami is a "NO RULES" kinda place. He said the armorer had to tell him where to put his finger for realism.

In fact, my sources tell me that AB almost lost his parts in the Mission Impossible series, The Getaway, and about 20 more thrillers, most with gunplay due to his aversion to weapons, noise, and sexual situations. In Pearl Harbor, in particular, it was in his contract as Jimmy Doolittle that no shootings or explosions of any kind would be tolerated in AB's scenes. The man simply can't stand violence and has never even cursed outside his film roles. He said to me recently, "truth is I'm a dumb but handsome pussyboy, and have never even been in a conversation about guns, so there! ... I'm a vegan married to a yoga instructor FFS!"

Reports of bad behavior in parking lots and airplanes and potential suicide were discarded as fluff. Reports that he said: "If we were in another country ... we would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families, for what they're doing to this country."  Unfortunately, this comment was made on live TV but sissyman insists he didn't say it. He looked me in the eye and said, "so help me God."

I then reached out to the the other sissyboy Baldwins, all of whom were in the film Born on the Fourth of July which was only about blowing up shit in Vietnam in the first part of the movie. The three said they were "scared shitless" around weapons just like big bro."

But yeah, let's go with he's just a dumb monkey on a string.image.jpeg.6171a1e9ccd4ab94dfc1969a4e633d3e.jpeg

image.jpeg.183355eb5751c6bce71b300708095435.jpeg

How can Hollywood bad boy survive this grim tragedy? Writes ALISON BOSHOFF  | Daily Mail Online

 

Alec Baldwin shooting: Why fatal gun incidents in movies are rare

The Shadow [1994] - Rabbit Reviews

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

That’s the misdemeanor/manslaughter rule and a diff fact pattern  

If Baldwin was committing an intentional criminal act and the death occurred during the commission of the act, he catches one too  there is no indication anything like that happened though  

 


 

Involuntary manslaughter is still a criminal case though. He served time. I think involuntary manslaughter the most likely charge, if any. I suspect the 1st Asst Director (Hall) and the armorer are at greater risk than Baldwin, if it can be shown that actors typically don't check their weapon handed to them accompanied by the call "Cold gun on set".  Seems inescapably gross negligence for the armorer to hand someone a loaded weapon with that call, and the SOPs being presented in the press are that the 1st Asst Director is supposed to check before handing the gun off too. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Not an F4U expert:

df1c0ba96a91a4a4a0c2d19aec3c02c5.jpg&f=1

 

Not an expert detective:

Mariska Hargitay Workout Routine - Celebrity Sizes

 

Not especially good at being a nurse:

Here Are 23 Pictures Of The Cast Of "ER" Then Vs. Now

 

Does not actually know how to build cars:

Review of the Ford v Ferrari Movie Starring Matt Damon as ...

 

Would wet pants if confronted by a real motorcycle gang:

Sons of Anarchy Series Finale Recap: End of the Day

Pretenders for a living. meh

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Not an F4U expert:

df1c0ba96a91a4a4a0c2d19aec3c02c5.jpg&f=1

 

Not an expert detective:

Mariska Hargitay Workout Routine - Celebrity Sizes

 

Not especially good at being a nurse:

Here Are 23 Pictures Of The Cast Of "ER" Then Vs. Now

 

Does not actually know how to build cars:

Review of the Ford v Ferrari Movie Starring Matt Damon as ...

 

Would wet pants if confronted by a real motorcycle gang:

Sons of Anarchy Series Finale Recap: End of the Day

Smiley - Wikipedia

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When Baldwin receives the gun, he is under the assumption that it is a safe prop. Period.
 

A defence council that cannot sway a jury in this regard is pretty much in ‘My Cousin Vinny’ territory.

As to the AD, the armourer, and Baldwin as producer, those are separate questions.

Chances that Baldwin ‘as actor’ faces a jury for his on set actions are slim to none, unless in his  capacity as a witness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fufkin said:

When Baldwin receives the gun, he is under the assumption that it is a safe prop. Period.
 

A defence council that cannot sway a jury in this regard is pretty much in ‘My Cousin Vinny’ territory.

As to the AD, the armourer, and Baldwin as producer, those are separate questions.

Chances that Baldwin ‘as actor’ faces a jury for his on set actions are slim to none, unless in his  capacity as a witness.

Wouldn’t his actions pointing gun at people and pulling the trigger expose him to criminal negligence depending on whether that action is outside industry protocols?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Point Break said:

Wouldn’t his actions pointing gun at people and pulling the trigger expose him to criminal negligence depending on whether that action is outside industry protocols?

He is not knowingly pointing a gun, he's under the assumption that he's pointing a prop.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, fufkin said:

He is not knowingly pointing a gun, he's under the assumption that he's pointing a prop.

Which is a bit of the problem with living in LaLa land.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Point Break said:

Worse yet……”it’s not me…..it must be that guy”…..

Worse yet.... "it's not me, I'm not smart enough to know anything about guns"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Mann used live ammo in the rehearsal of the bank heist shootout in ‘Heat’.     Had some SAS guys for armorers and they drilled the actors.   No probs and they shot the scene with blanks.

-The Rewatchables w. Bill Simmons & Michael Mann. (Heat #3)

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, sledracr said:

481523187_baldwingun.JPG.81e2f21bb010f14c88d1a369a667cc9c.JPG

Last might I had dinner with a friend who is in the business.  I questioned him at length on how things work on the set regarding actors checking a gun before they start pointing it at people and pulling the trigger.  He indicated that in his experience the actors relied on the armorer and never took any personal action to verify the status of any firearm they were handed.

I was appalled, as I'm sure @Point Break and others on this thread would have been.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Double edged sword I guess. If an actor asks the Armorer to show them what is loaded in the weapon, and things go terribly wrong, one might argue them have exposed themselves to liability. Relying solely on the Armorer's word that a gun is safe avoids that "as per protocols" on the set.

That said, I'll bet very few actors going forward will not wish to be shown that the gun is absolutely safe I should imagine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, quod umbra said:

If an actor asks the Armorer to show them what is loaded in the weapon, and things go terribly wrong, one might argue them have exposed themselves to liability. Relying solely on the Armorer's word that a gun is safe avoids that "as per protocols" on the set.

Yeah.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but that second thing (clearly) doesn't make anything "safer", it only gives the actor the ability to claim that none of the liability should stick to him/her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Autonomous said:

Wait!

You're saying if a potentially dangerous device is something you use professionally you should know how it operates?

Sorry.

My bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Autonomous said:

Wait!

You're saying if a potentially dangerous device is something you use professionally you should know how it operates?

I'm so glad you specifically noted "device."

 

7883_ret a.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2021 at 5:46 PM, Mark K said:

I predict he skates on crim charges but gets creamed in the civil suit. 

 

he won't get creamed, as an actor,  but the insurance company will, so will the armorer  as it was her specific job to MAKE sure everything was safe, even though she claims she had nothing to do with the live ammunition ...   she will be found criminally negligent..    

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2021 at 8:39 AM, RedTuna said:

I had that rig when I was about six in the late 50s.  It was gorgeous but the cap gun certainly didn't have a one ounce pull.  The leather was so stiff I had trouble getting the belt tongue in or out of the buckle.   Like totally unable to sort of trouble.  I remember the panic trying to get out of it once when I needed to take a leak; no access to my jean's zipper.  Fun times.

i'm call bullshit of a one ounce trgger pull, i had a glock armorer work on my gun and set a 3 1/2lb pull and he called that light...   at one ounce you're likely to have it go off as you pull it out of your holster

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

he won't get creamed, as an actor,  but the insurance company will, so will the armorer  as it was her specific job to MAKE sure everything was safe, even though she claims she had nothing to do with the live ammunition ...   she will be found criminally negligent..    

I still want to know who the plinkers were. I still think she was among them, or at least knew what they were doing and allowed it. She wanted to be the fun armorer.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

i'm call bullshit of a one ounce trgger pull, i had a glock armorer work on my gun and set a 3 1/2lb pull and he called that light...   at one ounce you're likely to have it go off as you pull it out of your holster

Which is why I mentioned it (although I forget where I read it).  Three pounds is light for a single stage trigger.  I cannot imagine the incident revolver being under 7-8 pounds.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

i'm call bullshit of a one ounce trgger pull, 

Yeah, one *pound*, maybe, but one ounce?  I've only ever seen that on a VERY specialized rifle built for (attempting to) break a long-distance accuracy record.

One *pound* is achievable, but really light.  My competition pistols are generally around 24oz (1-1/2 lb)

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RedTuna said:

Which is why I mentioned it (although I forget where I read it).  Three pounds is light for a single stage trigger.  I cannot imagine the incident revolver being under 7-8 pounds.

 

 

I can. Set armorers on westerns seem to spend most of their time coaching actors on their quick-draws, and that armorer's dad was the world champ. The only likely reason they hired her for that job. 

 Review some of the vids of the quick-draw competitions. I would be surprised if they didn't have those sprung down to less than 2 lbs. 

Not that it's relevant, or anything. It appears to have been an actor rehearsing a quick draw shot, to be filmed from the perspective of the camera as the victim. That he pulled the trigger on his prop gun in rehearsal of such a shot would be normal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sledracr said:

Yeah, one *pound*, maybe, but one ounce?  I've only ever seen that on a VERY specialized rifle built for (attempting to) break a long-distance accuracy record.

One *pound* is achievable, but really light.  My competition pistols are generally around 24oz (1-1/2 lb)

https://www.hunter-ed.com/muzzleloader/studyGuide/Set-Trigger/222099_88850/
 

Flintlock is tricky for noobs.   Practice & be ready for a flash in your face.   No thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

people are saying it’s impossible to have the actors check the Gus everytime they are handed a gun prop. George Clooney seems to think it’s possible 
“Every single time I’m handed a gun on a set … I open it, I show it to the person I’m pointing it to, show it to the crew: every single take, you hand it back to the armorer when you’re done,” Clooney said.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Christopher Walken checks or attempts to check the guns that are involved in his films.

From the Wall Street Journal

There’s a famous story from the set of “At Close Range,” the 1986 film starring Christopher Walken and Sean Penn as father-and-son criminals. In one scene, Mr. Penn points a gun directly at Mr. Walken’s face. According to the story, Mr. Walken was diligent about checking the pistol before every take to make sure it wasn’t loaded. Moments before the cameras rolled, Mr. Penn grew frantic.

“Give me the other gun,” he shouted at a crew member, who duly complied. At that moment, the director called “Action!” The terror on Mr. Walken’s face is real, and it’s in the movie.

A recent on-set tragedy, in which Alec Baldwin fired a live bullet and killed a cinematographer during a rehearsal, has many in the industry calling for a prohibition against working firearms on Hollywood sets. There’s one problem: Actors love real stuff.

A century’s worth of American film actors have been trained to re-create reality as faithfully as possible when they work. They’ll go to almost any length to contribute an added measure of truth to a scene. If a script says a character has been up all night, an actor will come to work without sleep. Actors will gain weight, lose weight, hang out of airplanes, learn the saxophone, eat bugs and have teeth removed if they think it will help sell the audience on the reality of what appears on screen.


All drama is manufactured reality. An actor who plays Hamlet doesn’t know what it feels like to have an uncle murder his father and marry his mother. But he may have some real tragedy or misery in his own life to draw on. He uses his imagination to help fill in the gaps of his experience. It gets him halfway there.

Costumes and props serve the same function. When an actor puts on his character’s clothes, he is transformed. When you dress like a cowboy, you tend to walk like a cowboy. Most actors like to work with as few gaps as possible. Why? So it looks real. So they don’t feel phony. An actor wants the audience to look at the screen and see a cowboy, not an actor pretending to be a cowboy.

Actors themselves will probably resist any ban on the use of real guns on set. A rubber gun doesn’t feel like a deadly weapon when you hold it in your hand. It feels like a toy. A real gun has weight. It has heft. You can feel its power. When you pick one up, it changes how you behave. As an actor, you know what to do. You act differently when you’re holding a toy.

I’ve been out of the game a long time, but I still have actor friends. One of them recently sent me a link to a five-minute short in which he plays a guy who sleepwalks into the kitchen at night and drinks a healthy shot of Heinz Mayochup straight from the squeeze bottle.

“Did you really chug that stuff?” I asked.

“You know it!” he replied.

Everyone agrees safety must come first. But I know actors. They won’t give up their grip on reality so easily.

Mr. Hennessey is deputy features editor of the Journal’s editorial page. In the 1990s he worked as an actor in New York and Los Angeles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If and actor ACTUALLY puts the claimed effort into performing there roll  then they should put the EFFORT into learning gun saftey as you will learn what NOT to due and how to check that it is unloaded in one full day class 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, chinabald said:

people are saying it’s impossible to have the actors check the Gus everytime they are handed a gun prop. George Clooney seems to think it’s possible 

Ray Liota has apparently chimed in, too, saying  he checks the gun himself, every time, and doesn't care if it pisses off the armorer....

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2021 at 5:33 PM, kent_island_sailor said:

You are going back to the Tom Cruise can really fly an F-14 thing.

If it only took minutes to learn how to fly the F-14 I am sure he would.

I have never seen a prop cartridge so no idea how to tell one from a live round but no matter what kind, it only takes seconds to check if a firearm has a cartridge in it.  I am quite sure that anyone could be taught how to do that in minutes.

AB CHOSE not to learn that basic skill.  If reports of other negligent discharges happening on this set are true he is absolutely responsible, both as the one who pulled the trigger and as a producer.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2021 at 3:57 PM, sledracr said:

Ray Liota has apparently chimed in, too, saying  he checks the gun himself, every time, and doesn't care if it pisses off the armorer....

I'm in firm belief if you handle something that can maim or kill, you damn sure should know how to handle it and make sure it's safe. 

I hope Baldwin pays a YUGE settlement and fades off into obscurity.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2021 at 7:00 PM, NaptimeAgain said:

Don't assume actors are more functional than elementary school kids, who are more likely to be sober and otherwise unimpaired.  You can teach all sorts of things to anyone, but our country provides many examples of folks who apparently drank and screwed their way through school and didn't seem to apply what they were taught.

Hey!  I have a BA in theater (technical theater, in my defense), and I drank and screwed my way through school to a large extent.

However I also grew up around firearms, pierced a lot of beer cans and broke bottles, spent a bit of time in the Army sending live rounds downrange, qualified expert with the M16 and sharpshooter with the 9mm Beretta, and I never even came close to shooting anybody, accidentally or intentionally.

There are exceptions to every rule!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2021 at 8:34 PM, Autonomous said:

IMO hubris is a condition that affects too many actors people.

Edited for accuracy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...