Simbo
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,235
So has this only happenned twice ever? Pretty good all things considered.
Its a fair point. Maybe any actor required to use firearms, cold or otherwise, should have to take a short training exercise before filming. Spend an hour or two explaining or reminding people on how to handle the weapons. It seems simple enough safety check now that you've explained it but i wouldn't have the first clue otherwise. Expecting people to be familiar with historical weapons isn't a great plan. The potential damage of a mistake is just so high.You keep saying that it's not the actors job, and I've acknowledged that while it might not be, it definitely should, yet you keep repeating it. Do you think that it's too much to change procedure so that actors are given instructions on how to verify that a cold gun is, in fact, cold?
You've got it wrong. What happened was the the gun was announced as 'cold', meaning there wasn't supposed to be anything in it, it was supposed to be empty. Turns out there was a blank (or possibly a ball round) in the cylinder, meaning that if he had been instructed on how to perform even the most basic check, he would have seen that the gun was potentially hot, and this accident could have been avoided.
I strongly disagree. I have fired thousands of rounds, I was a range conducting officer and instructed on various firearms like the SA80 in the RAF, and I couldn't be more clear in my mind on this.It isn't the actor's responsibility to check theses things nor should it be.
They employ specialist's to handle all of these responsibilities.
Anyone saying otherwise, does not clearly understand the role of what an actors job is.
For an actor you could literally teach them what they needed to know in 15 mins or less, we aren't talking of hours in the classroom.
Is it easy or not?How can you move responsibility to a specialist when they hired an inexperienced armorer in the first place
You're not being objective though, you're judging it from the perspective of someone who is first hand familiar with firearms and firearms safety procedures.I don't see the problem with trying to view the incident objectively
Absolute nonsense, I've worked at gun ranges for 20 years, I can't tell you the number of times where I've had inexperienced shooters do the most inexplicably dangerous shit 5 minutes after a safety briefing.For an actor you could literally teach them what they needed to know in 15 mins or less, we aren't talking of hours in the classroom.
Wouldn't be surprised if that's true
There's a difference in being a competent armorer on a movie set and being able to clear a firearm.Is it easy or not?
It makes sense as it reduces their liability in case of something like this and leaves it in the hands of professionals
If I could act, I wouldn't know the first thing about guns so i'd trust the expert.There's a difference in being a competent armorer on a movie set and being able to clear a firearm.
I know.There's a difference in being a competent armorer on a movie set and being able to clear a firearm.
How did you quote my deleted post?I strongly disagree. I have fired thousands of rounds, I was a range conducting officer and instructed on various firearms like the SA80 in the RAF, and I couldn't be more clear in my mind on this.
If you are holding a gun, you have a personal responsibility to know how to use it, clear it and make it safe (and know what good muzzle and trigger discipline is). You don't, ever, take anyone else word for it. It doesn't matter if you are an actor or not. For an actor you could literally teach them what they needed to know in 15 mins or less, we aren't talking of hours in the classroom.
The wider picture emerging is one of Baldwins company playing fast and loose with gun safety. Overall it's a terrible incident with a catastrophic outcome. He isn't some punter who appeared at the TA open day. He is a vastly experienced actor who has used firearms on many occasions on sets. You can't absolve him of all responsibility in this incident even though it was a chain of failures from the (his) production company. How can you move responsibility to a specialist when they hired an inexperienced armorer in the first place who then let the Assistant Director hand the gun to Baldwin.
Ding ding ding.It makes sense as it reduces their liability in case of something like this and leaves it in the hands of professionals
Because he's been handed something he ought to know how to use it. The very basic safety measure at least.Sorry, but I know nothing about guns. Absolutely zero knowledge beyond they go bang. Why do you presume Alec Baldwin is any different?
Instead of further speculating blindly, or quoting and commenting on other people blindly speculating, maybe we should try to take notice of the what we can actually know about what happened."Load or not, a weapon even if on stage it is never aimed at another human being". Set gun expert Bryan Carpenter tells the New York Post, pointing out how Alec Baldwin violated rule number one on set gun safety.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainme.../alec-baldwin-rust-camera-crew-walked-off-setThe tragedy occurred Thursday afternoon during filming of a gunfight that began in a church that is part of the old Western town at the ranch. Baldwin’s character was supposed to back out of the church, according to production notes obtained by The Times. It was the 12th day of a 21-day shoot.
Cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was huddled around a monitor lining up her next camera shot when she was accidentally killed by the prop gun fired by Baldwin.
The actor was preparing to film a scene in which he pulls a gun out of a holster, according to a source close to the production. Crew members had already shouted “cold gun” on the set. The filmmaking team was lining up its camera angles and had yet to retreat to the video village, an on-set area where the crew gathers to watch filming from a distance via a monitor.
Instead, the B-camera operator was on a dolly with a monitor, checking out the potential shots. Hutchins was also looking at the monitor from over the operator’s shoulder, as was the movie’s director, Joel Souza, who was crouching just behind her.
Baldwin removed the gun from its holster once without incident, but the second time he did so, ammunition flew toward the trio around the monitor. The projectile whizzed by the camera operator but penetrated Hutchins near her shoulder, then continued through to Souza.
Yep.It makes sense as it reduces their liability in case of something like this and leaves it in the hands of professionals
Based on what's been said by experts, actors do get instructions on how to use the guns, they are informed of the safety rules, and they are supposed to be supervised any time they're handling a functional firearm, regardless of whether it's hot or cold. So Baldwin should have been aware that he wasn't supposed to be using that gun without the armorer present, and should have known that pointing it another person is something you never, under any circumstance, do.Look at any situation where you are handed a piece of kit that can do damage in the workplace. You'd expect a rational user to request training on how to use it without causing harm.
I dont see any situation where he's totally free from blame.Based on what's been said by experts, actors do get instructions on how to use the guns, they are informed of the safety rules, and they are supposed to be supervised any time they're handling a functional firearm, regardless of whether it's hot or cold. So Baldwin should have been aware that he wasn't supposed to be using that gun without the armorer present, and should have known that pointing it another person is something you never, under any circumstance, do.
At this point, the only way he's free from blame is if he genuinely thought it was an inert prop.
I'd forgotten about the reports of several misfires/negligent discharges in the days leading up to the accident as well.I dont see any situation where he's totally free from blame.
He has to live with it now
How is an actor to know what is safe or not safe unless they have personal gun experience? They may not even be able to tell the difference between a prop gun and a real gun with blanks or similar. If Baldwin is liable it will be due to his role as a producer and not because he held the gun, unless there is something incriminating that we haven't heard yet.If it's an unmodified firearm capable of firing live rounds, personally checking to make sure that said firearm isn't loaded (especially not with live rounds) is part of basic gun safety protocols. Actors should definitely be expected to make that check, seeing as everyone else in every other circumstance is.
This is a very informative thread on how gun safety is handled on movie sets, written by a movie armorer. I've seen these same views echoed by numerous others.How is an actor to know what is safe or not safe unless they have personal gun experience? They may not even be able to tell the difference between a prop gun and a real gun with blanks or similar. If Baldwin is liable it will be due to his role as a producer and not because he held the gun, unless there is something incriminating that we haven't heard yet.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You need to post the source if you're going to quote articles.Cameraman Reid Russell told a detective the camera was not rolling when the gun went off, striking and killing cinematographer Ms Hutchins.
He added that Baldwin was very careful when handling firearms on set, and recalled an instance when the actor made sure a child actor was not near him when a gun was being discharged.
Baldwin, 63, was rehearsing a scene on Thursday in which he was set to draw his gun while sitting in a church pew and point it at the camera, according to court documents released on Sunday.
He drew the revolver across his body when the weapon fired and struck the cinematographer, Mr Souza told a detective.
Mr Souza also stated that because of his job he was focusing on the monitors of the cameras and screens when the incident took place.
Sky News*You need to post the source if you're going to quote articles.
If the reports are right, it's a set discipline issue. Allegedly the AD picked the gun up from the armorer's trolley - whereas normally the armorer or propmaster would be on set to give it to the AD. It also sounds like the AD didn't check the gun before passing it on to the actor.It'd be one thing to hand him a 'cold' gun that had blanks in it in error, its entirely another level of inprobability to hand him one with a live round in it. Has to be intentional surely?
As a producer sure he has some blame on itI read in The Telegraph (paywalled) that there was a lot of live ammunition on the set and that some of the staff had just been messing about shooting tin cans, whch wasn't an unusual thing for them to do. The gun that Baldwin shot was one of the guns they'd been using to shoot cans.
Too many rules broken and unfortunately a completely dangerous lack of care on someone's part - but not Baldwin's fault, in my opinion.
Same in the US because that wasn’t a prop gun but a replica of a 1800’s gun, in other words that was a real gun and the guy who survived had a real bullet in his shoulder, now the big question: they say they should be using a prop gun in a rehearsal, they told the actor the gun was cold he shoots the gun makes a big bang then he shoots again…wait they told you the gun was cold shouldn’t you stop immediately and request an explanation why the gun wasn’t cold?In Spain this can't happen as the props gun have a smaller chamber than the real bullets, so it would not work with them. Shouldn't that difficult
It was probably an accidental discharge while he was practicing removing it from the holster, which is pretty common.Same in the US because that wasn’t a prop gun but a replica of a 1800’s gun, in other words that was a real gun and the guy who survived had a real bullet in his shoulder, now the big question: they say they should be using a prop gun in a rehearsal, they told the actor the gun was cold he shoots the gun makes a big bang then he shoots again…wait they told you the gun was cold shouldn’t you stop immediately and request an explanation why the gun wasn’t cold?
Edit: just read was only one shot