If this incident had involved Keanu Reeves then it might be perceived a bit differently. Anyway, I haven't at any point claimed that the actor is completely blameless in this situation (maybe Alec Baldwin also messed up by pointing it and pulling the trigger when he did) I've questioned the seemingly popular idea in this thread that once an actor has been told a prop gun is safe, they are expected to open it up and check the ammo for themselves.
Alec Baldwin fatally shoots woman with prop gun on movie set
- Thread starter NVP
- Start date
If this incident had involved Keanu Reeves then it might be perceived a bit differently. Anyway, I haven't at any point claimed that the actor is completely blameless in this situation (maybe Alec Baldwin also messed up by pointing it and pulling the trigger when he did) I've questioned the seemingly popular idea in this thread that once an actor has been told a prop gun is safe, they are expected to open it up and check the ammo for themselves.
No one said that they did need to be a real-life expert... come on this really is brain worms stuff here, you're way too quick to (perhaps intentionally even) misread what has been posted.
Likewise, if someone were to say that being able to drive a car would be useful if you were to drive one on a movie set do you interpret that as being a "driving expert"?
Did you ignore the bit about someone showing them the weapon is safe/clear if that is more practical?
The basic point here is that if you're going to handle a firearm then having some basic competency + knowing that it is actually safe/knowing what condition it is in (not just taking someone's word for it) ought to be standard.
You seem to just want to argue against points no one has made here.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,169
- Location
- London, UK
Oh wow maybe you got lucky. TMZ is a gossip magazine/website though. Its not exactly the Associated Press or Reuters is it
TMZ can print something not caring a damn if its true because they don't have any kind of reputation to protect, they are just interested in clicks. And of course any other news outlet is going to attribute it to TMZ, they can then just say they were quoting what TMZ had published if it turns out to be nonsense.Oh wow maybe you got lucky. TMZ is a gossip magazine/website though. Its not exactly the Associated Press or Reuters is it
Perhaps context is important to consider sometimes!
I mean it's pretty normal. You shoot something and it leaves a hole.
You appear to have not replied to the second part of the paragraph.
Hence my ND comment.
But he was practicing drawing and shooting he needs to learn the movement and needs to "look cool" when did you ever see a cowboy film with trigger discipline o
You appear to have missed the joke.
I responded to the various posts in this thread expressing views that could perhaps be summarised as "An actor on set when handed a prop gun that he has been told is safe/cold by the designated authority, is still responsible for checking it and should open it and examine any ammunition".
Here is my post again:
Since then I've seen the news update Alec Baldwin film tragedy: What are the rules for guns on movie sets? which does not appear to support claims that an actor is personally responsible for checking the prop gun and any ammunition it may contain once it has been declared safe and handed to them on set to use.
Some people may be confusing real life where having a loaded gun in your possession is a serious personal responsibility and clearly you should know how to use it, compared to a movie set where there are rules, processes and defined responsibilities in place (such as having a professional armourer on set) and assuming things don't go horribly wrong (as they did in this case) there may be no expectation that the actor will ever have a fully functioning loaded firearm in their hand. Yes some actors will actually be proficient at what they are portraying, but I have certainly seen interviews where actors have claimed that despite what you may see them do on screen, in real life they have never fired a gun, don't have a driving license or whatever.
For clarity I will state again that I am not arguing that Alec Baldwin is free of all blame in this situation, but as it stands it does not appear to have been his responsibility to check any ammo that was in the gun after he was told that it was safe/cold.
The principal thing being objected to is that someone could be in possession of a firearm without actually knowing it was safe. That seems very silly and rather dangerous and has indeed tragically ended with someone being killed. It's especially silly after two previous incidents on the same film set.
There have been plenty of news updates, that doens't negate what has been said here. In fact, whether he's deemed by some people to be responsible for physically checking himself or not doesn't negate the position that he should or at the least should be shown and should know what state that weapon is in regardless of whether he personally loaded it etc... That it had live ammunition is crazy but even blanks can injure or kill at close range.
They'd already had two incidents on the same set with blanks being unexpectedly fired from firearms that a stunt person was merely told were "cold", he's going to be pointing it at someone... It was really silly not to want to check, especially given the prior incidents.
Note the article also mentions:
BBC said:
See the last line there - as per the Instagram post I shared in the post you made some sarcastic reply to - when told he had a cold gun he could have simply said "show me" right?
No, I don't think anyone is confusing that, the basic principles people seem to be using as the basis for objections though that firearms are dangerous, you ought to be familiar with basic weapon safety and the firearm you're using and you ought to know what state it is in still apply. A movie set isn't some magical place where no harm will come to you, a firearm is still dangerous!
Even blank rounds can be dangerous in close quarters ergo weapons safety should still be a concern.
No one is saying that guns aren't dangerous or that they shouldn't be handled with care.
Your singling out the line "Any actor who is required to stand near the line of fire should be allowed to witness the loading of the firearms" and interpreting it to mean that "when told he had a cold gun he could have simply said "show me" right?" does not really follow. That guideline appears to apply to other actors on set who might be concerned about getting shot(!) and so would like to witness the armourer loading the gun before it is handed to the actor who will be using it.
Anyway, I've clearly stated my point which appears to have subsequently been vindicated by the official guidance (such as it is) and I have no wish to be dragged further down a dowie hole.
Again, the basic principle I'm arguing is that you should know what state the firearm is in rather than simply rely on told. That could be achieved by being shown and/or or by being competent to check (if practical) etc..etc..
It's a line from a BBC article FFS!
Are you not able to apply any common sense here - anyone in the scene or in the line of fire etc.. should be able to see the firearm is safe.
It's not clear what your point is, you came in with some bad analogies about spacecraft and operating theatres and now you're just trying to make excuses for bad safety practicies.
Now you're being called out on just frankly silly arguments you're trying to claim "dowie hole".
Again, the basic principle I'm arguing is that you should know what state the firearm is in rather than simply rely on told. That could be achieved by being shown and/or or by being competent to check (if practical) etc..etc..
It's a line from a BBC article FFS!
Are you not able to apply any common sense here - anyone in the scene or in the line of fire etc.. should be able to see the firearm is safe.
It's not clear what your point is, you came in with some bad analogies about spacecraft and operating theatres and now you're just trying to make excuses for bad safety practicies.
Now you're being called out on just frankly silly arguments you're trying to claim "dowie hole".
I know it's from a BBC article - I posted the link to it and it does not show that the actor is responsible for checking the ammo in a prop gun the armourer has declared safe/cold. Typical dowie trying to pretend the conversation is all about a light hearted response to your own attempt to introduce bad analogies, rather than the main question/point which seems to been proved correct. You must realise that people can see through your nonsense when you do this, so I will leave you to your dowie hole.
Not sure if this has been posted.
"Rust" assistant director was fired from previous movie after gun incident injured crew member
https://edition.cnn.com/entertainme...n-10-25-21/h_8d709a2b77fdd9d815e5a5fd49b49ed6
"Rust" assistant director was fired from previous movie after gun incident injured crew member
https://edition.cnn.com/entertainme...n-10-25-21/h_8d709a2b77fdd9d815e5a5fd49b49ed6
Doesn't look good for the AD if he has previous form for failing to check guns before declaring them safe/cold.
How he could have thought it was okay to not check a gun which had been left left outside for several hours unattended is beyond me.
How he could have thought it was okay to not check a gun which had been left left outside for several hours unattended is beyond me.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,340
tricky thing about showing safe/clear on set is if (presumably, going by "western" that we're talking an old school revolver here) they're using dummy rounds then your standard clear check is going to confirm that yes it is indeed loaded with what do indeed look like rounds.
now how alike a dummy round is going to look in terms of case markings etc to a live round isn't something i'll profess to knowing much about, but one would presume that a dummy round who's purpose is to look like a real round (as opposed to a snap cap) probably looks like a real round.
now how alike a dummy round is going to look in terms of case markings etc to a live round isn't something i'll profess to knowing much about, but one would presume that a dummy round who's purpose is to look like a real round (as opposed to a snap cap) probably looks like a real round.