I thought most big films also had a proper armourer / gunsmith.Seriously doubt it because most have never had any real safety or firearms training. The property master team and special effects team and likely a production safety officer would be the ones being interviewed sans coffee.
I think Baldwins a total ******** but I feel very sorry for him right now to him realizing he inadvertently killed someone.
Yep.I thought most big films also had a proper armourer / gunsmith.
If you'll excuse the phrase, given the Western context, it appears the company making the film is circling the wagons here.Assistant Director handed him a loaded firearm and told him it was “cold.”
I‘m hoping Manslaughter charges will be pending.
I wonder if action stars will now want to see weapons loaded in front of themselves, just prior to use.
Same. I was in a gun shop and the owner was checking my eye position. I had checked the gun when I got it out of the cabinet, again when I took it out of the bag, and then when he asked me to point it at his face. As a never served civvy that was very difficult - pointing a gun at someone - he had to keep moving the barrel towards his face as I kept aiming off.Firstly RIP to the poor woman.
But call me old fashioned and i am a never served civvie with absolutely no formal firearms training whatsoever, but if i am ever in a position that requires me to pick up anything that resembles a gun/weapon/firearm, whatever you want to call it, the first thing i do is make sure that i know what state it is in.
It takes only a moment or two, and then if you follow the basic and obvious safety rules then this tragic incident would not have happened.
It may be different on film sets, (and it should't be), but one thing i always do is always regard the weapon as loaded and lethal, without exception.
It sounds more like the making of Chubby Rain 2 by the day.Yep.
But since when did Baldwin do 'big' films?
Post #33 goes into the ins-and-outs of proper procedures.
Which seem to have been tossed into the bin on this one.
AND, just looking at the DM...
OK, it is the DM...
- Production crew on the set of Rust walked out on Thursday morning in a row over hotel rooms and long hours
- On Thursday, when they arrived to pack up, they found a team of local workers waiting to replace them
- Union rules stipulate that no live rounds are ever to be used on a film set - the replacement crew are not believed to be union members
and... Unionized workers had walked off the set hours before the fatal shooting, after they complained about ... another safety incident days earlier involving 'two misfires' of a prop weapon.
TBF, there are artistic exceptions to the rule "don't point a gun at someone".
In this case, he was probably required - for cinematic effect - to shoot directly at the camera, behind which were stood the two people the bullet subsequently passed through.
Given the previous safety furores in the film industry, however, it does make one wonder why they haven't utilised offset or remote camera controls for just such a situation.
Latest reports indicate that it was an actual live round from an unmodified weapon, and not some sort of failure in a prepared theatrical weapon, ie one with an internal BFA and utilising flash powder or similar. Astonishing.
Certainly, that's what BBC appear to be saying...
Suspect as ever in these things that it was a catalogue of multiple and compounding failures that resulted in tragedy - the Brandon Lee case was exactly this. Had any link in the chain of errors/mischances been broken, it would not have occurred, but it did.
Sadly for the one who fired the fatal shot, Baldwin, he may be the only party not to have made a mistake, especially if required by his team to fire directly at the camera....
In fairness to him, he was on the program to talk about terrorism and the question was sprung on him. So he was explaining on the fly. I'd put his level of knowledge and experience way above the majority of people who post on Arrse.