Alec Baldwin fatally shoots woman with prop gun on movie set

Lol he's got some gall saying that, reminds me of the fire chief being interviewed after Grenfell Tower saying that she wouldn't change anything about the fire service's response even with hindsight.

Even if he feels like some of the criticism about conditions on set was unfair and that the strike action by some staff was unjustified, you'd think he would be a little bit more careful about how he framed his rebuttal in the circumstances...

Maybe his attitude that despite a fatal accident following questionable usage and storage of firearms the set was safe goes some way to explaining why the set was not safe.
 
Nasher said:
Uther said:
So is Baldwin culpable in any way? I would assume that if someone handed you a gun and said it was unloaded you would still be in a certain amout of **** if you then pointed it at someone without checking it yourself and shot them.
Click to expand...

If it was a total noob then probably not, but Alec probably has some experience with handling guns and he was also a producer for this movie.

American law is weird so who knows yet. It won't be murder but maybe some kind of negligence.

I think whoever was supposed to be overseeing safety on set will be the one who gets hammered though.
Click to expand...

To use a Western reference is it a bit of a Mexican standoff?

Baldwin is the actor and he could blame the AD for handing him the gun and saying it's safe.

The Ad could blame the armourer for telling him it's safe.

The armourer might blame the prop master as she apparently handed the gun after work but both might blame the production company for the unsafe environment on set etc.. a production company owned and ultimately controlled by... Baldwin.

Wizzfizz said:
Dis and dowie would make a lovely couple
Click to expand...

2/10 must do better...

Come on now, at least when Mag's pops in to do his driveby posting thing he does so with a little bit of style and panache. Gay jokes are rather lame in comparison.
 
Angilion said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59146864

"Alec Baldwin has shared comments from a crew member rejecting suggestions that the set of his film Rust was unsafe."

Someone was killed because basic firearms safety procedures were not followed. That's very obviously unsafe.
Click to expand...

Incredible! Especially considering reports of crew members playing with the firearms using live ammunition off set... I mean how did the live round even get there.
 
Werewolf said:
We also don't currently know if there were any assistant armourers/designated seconds on the set as it seems only the head armourer gets any credits when they're given at all on imdb (a bit like stunt men don't always get credited, but often the stunt director will).
.
Click to expand...
I know credit screens are already long but what is wrong with these people. Why would you not credit them?
 
Hotwired said:
He said the words "Read this" and linked a statement by a crew member.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CVybJ8FvsNY/
Click to expand...
Tbf the way it was headlined and reported by the bbc could have been more accurate, but I still don't think it's appropriate for him to be sharing stuff like that in the circumstances (I see him sharing those comments in that way as endorsing them publicly).

Particularly given most of the comments were about inconsequential stuff around union workers wanting a better hotel, working hours, how the producers weren't that bad etc. To me it just seems really odd and disrespectful that he'd get involved in all those issues at this point in time, while investigations are still ongoing etc, especially as it seems to minimise what went on leading to the death. Imo Alec should have stayed well clear of discussions like that for quite some time, and the fact that he hasn't makes me question his thought processes.

The Instagram post does minimise the gun safety issue and the shooting itself imo.
 
GreatAuk said:
Particularly given most of the comments were about inconsequential stuff around union workers wanting a better hotel, working hours, how the producers weren't that bad etc.
Click to expand...
I think that's pretty much the entire point of sharing it. Those workers (as far as I can see) are the ones being cited as walking off the film due to appalling safety, of course he's going to endorse someone saying they actually left due to petulant arguments about hotels.

It would appear from that post there are two distinctly different narratives coming from people on set - it will be interesting to see which turns out to be a closer reflection of the truth.
 
Breaking retail news! DFS are reporting to the market that they expect to be at less than 5% furniture stock capacity in the busy lead up to Christmas. Unconfirmed sources suggest that while corner sofas should be okay, there has been an unexpected and quite remarkable run on armchairs.

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
 
GreatAuk said:
Tbf the way it was headlined and reported by the bbc could have been more accurate, but I still don't think it's appropriate for him to be sharing stuff like that in the circumstances (I see him sharing those comments in that way as endorsing them publicly).

Particularly given most of the comments were about inconsequential stuff around union workers wanting a better hotel, working hours, how the producers weren't that bad etc. To me it just seems really odd and disrespectful that he'd get involved in all those issues at this point in time, while investigations are still ongoing etc, especially as it seems to minimise what went on leading to the death. Imo Alec should have stayed well clear of discussions like that for quite some time, and the fact that he hasn't makes me question his thought processes.
Click to expand...

Appears he feels his status obliges him to keep his social media accounts open. I guess there's only so many mornings of waking up to pages of hate messages about you, your wife and your children before you feel obliged to defend yourself to the mob even in a small way.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
Breaking retail news! DFS are reporting to the market that they expect to be at less than 5% furniture stock capacity in the busy lead up to Christmas. Unconfirmed sources suggest that while corner sofas should be okay, there has been an unexpected and quite remarkable run on armchairs.

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
Click to expand...

I take it back now, I was literally just commending your driveby posting earlier and now that happens!

dowie said:
2/10 must do better...

Come on now, at least when Mag's pops in to do his driveby posting thing he does so with a little bit of style and panache. Gay jokes are rather lame in comparison.
Click to expand...
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
I know credit screens are already long but what is wrong with these people. Why would you not credit them?
Click to expand...
Contracts and the fact that IIRC IMDB relies on people or the companies to enter the details and that takes time and costs money (if a company is doing it), most people only really care about the lead actors and famous actors for most entries so you'll see someone like Johansson or Baldwin credited in almost everything they've done because people have gone back to enter the details, and once they became slightly famous/got anything like a main billing in the film/TV programs it would have been done automatically.

So a film will usually have pretty much everyone (or at least the companies if say catering) named in the credits (if not necessarily all their positions*) because various groups/guilds/unions have fought to be listed as it affects their work history (especially back in the early days), hence why you get hundreds of entries for the likes of "SFX" from multiple companies, whilst IMDB is primarily crediting the lead cast and crew and I think anything more requires either the public or the cast/crew to submit their entries, and IIRC the standard IMDB pages show less detail than the IMDP pro ones which are typically subbed to by the likes of people in the idustry and probably have a lot more detail.

Basically the people in the industry don't rely on just IMDB** and when they do use it can get more detail, whilst the general public don't care enough to enter the details hence why things like Star Trek and Star Wars tend to credit a lot more people right down to random actors who only ever appeared as "cantina patron 1 (uncredited)" but smaller or older stuff, especially if it wasn't done in the US might only have say half a dozen cast and the writer/director credited unless it was cult popular.


*Props can cross over with armourer, costume and effects depending on various things and you don't normally know from the credits who worked quite on what (unless you get a special credit such as designer of a specific prop/costume).

**A director might look up quickly for the name of an actor they like, but they can also basically use their own/their production company (or studio) resources to find out who someone is, and anyone cast/crew who is applying for a job will have a CV and references and it's pretty simple for a director or producer to check (and reputation is important as people often know each other to some degree so a director might choose a props master and stunt director who might recommend an armourer they've worked with).
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
DERP
Click to expand...

Obvious troll post, obvious.

Mods must condemn....

Back on topic.

You would think Baldwin would just lay low and not shout his mouth off after killing someone.

Only a matter of time when he returns to form and assaults someone again.

I'm sure an out of court settlement and a sacrificial scape goat will be Parr for the course.
 
Kenai said:
I think that's pretty much the entire point of sharing it. Those workers (as far as I can see) are the ones being cited as walking off the film due to appalling safety, of course he's going to endorse someone saying they actually left due to petulant arguments about hotels.

It would appear from that post there are two distinctly different narratives coming from people on set - it will be interesting to see which turns out to be a closer reflection of the truth.
Click to expand...
Yeah will be interesting to see what comes out in the long term, although stuff like this to a certain extent only the people that were actually there will know for sure (particularly because in a year's time when everyone has actually had their say the news cycle will have moved on so it won't be reported anyway).

I just think it's bad form that Alec decided to get involved in that debate (especially in this way rather than a measured and diplomatic statement of his own if he felt he really had to comment) at this time, especially because it feels to me like it minimises the death and related firearm safety issues.
 
Hotwired said:
Appears he feels his status obliges him to keep his social media accounts open. I guess there's only so many mornings of waking up to pages of hate messages about you, your wife and your children before you feel obliged to defend yourself to the mob even in a small way.
Click to expand...
Yeah guess that might be part of it, but I don't think this was the right way to do that if he really felt like he just had to get involved. Can understand if he did have a bit of a siege mentality setting in, but at the end of the day he's a celebrity in the business of public communication, will have lots of friends agents, PR people to talk to etc, and should have realised what sort of a message sharing a post like that would send. The fact that he went ahead and shared it anyway (and it's the only thing on his Instagram account since the initial statement about what happened) makes me question his attitude towards the whole thing.

Guess I don't read gossip mags or twitter so don't really know how much abuse he / his family have been taking Tbf (although if they had been taking abuse then switching off or not reading comments might have been a better way to go...). Doesn't really fully explain why he decided to respond in this way to me though unless he already had a bit of a self righteous and dismissive attitude towards what happened and the factors that led to it.
 
Last edited:
Chuk_Chuk said:
I know credit screens are already long but what is wrong with these people. Why would you not credit them?
Click to expand...
@Werewolf has it pretty much correct. The only 'official' credits are the ones at the end of the movie in which you can guarantee pretty much everybody on set will be listed, mostly due to union/contractual rights. IMDB is basically a free-for-all, anyone lower than a HOD will be submitting their own credits on there if they can be bothered.
 
Scam said:
@Werewolf has it pretty much correct. The only 'official' credits are the ones at the end of the movie in which you can guarantee pretty much everybody on set will be listed, mostly due to union/contractual rights. IMDB is basically a free-for-all, anyone lower than a HOD will be submitting their own credits on there if they can be bothered.
Click to expand...
Everyone on set with an Equity card (or SAG equivalent), at least, and still then only certain roles. There will be all manner of extras, even with creditable roles, who are not entitled to a credit on screen, along with various cameo roles from 'name' actors who still go uncredited... although these do sometimes surface on IMDB, oddly enough.

But yes, I rewatched The Professionals the other week and noticed that the screen credits often had far more names than the IMDB pages.
 
Some people are not credited for illusion reasons for benefit of a big name actor.

The stunt guy that did a lot of Gimli in LOTR and the woman who did the dancing in Black Swan were deliberately not given credit for everything they did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom