Gardenista
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2016
- Messages
- 19,034
- Reaction score
- 157,441
Long, but good video with an armorer and prop-master (Dutch Merrick, he's been making the rounds on various shows) and a CDA/law prof
Yep. On the "Rust" set dummy rounds had holes in their side. Which presumably means that without inspecting each round for the hole, one couldn't tell for sure if it was a dummy.It seems that dummy rounds can be colored differently (for non theatrical/film use), or be crimped/indented or have holes or other markings to distinguish them from live rounds (which should NOT be on set). This is just my understanding at this point, and I may be mistaken, so all JMO.
Images of "dummy" rounds:
dummy round - Google Search..
I think a more likely scenario is that the insurance companies that cover productions will simply say, no more real guns on the set, period.I wonder if a lot of actors will now refuse to work with guns, real or prop, and insist on CGI. I would.
I don’t think you ever compromise on safety, let her use a fake gun, use technology to create the wanted effectsAnother thing I was thinking about, what if the actor has vision problems? One example would be Oscar winner Dame Judi Dench. Do you simply not hire such an actor based on inability to visually check a prop gun?
I don’t think you ever compromise on safety, let her use a fake gun, use technology to create the wanted effects
It's a movie. In movies people point guns at others and pull triggers. If the gun isn't loaded with real bullets, that shouldn't cause any harm.
It wouldn't take less than five seconds. Gun was loaded with dummy rounds. To check, one would have to unload the gun and inspect each round. There is no way an actor is expected to do that. An armorer is supposed to load and unload the gun. Not an actor.I disagree. I don’t think anyone should ever assume a gun doesn’t have a live round simply because they have been told by someone it is safe. It is the job of every single person who holds a gun to know firearm safety and to follow the rules yourself. It would have taken him less than five seconds to double check the firearm. Hardly too much to ask. Maybe HG and AD hold responsibility, but so does Baldwin.
I truly am having a tough time understanding why everyone is so eager to remove any blame from Baldwin himself.
The average person would be held accountable for shooting and killing someone, accidentally or not.
I believe AD claims he told her to check what was in the gun. That's how they found four dummy rounds and a casing from a live round that killed the cinematographer.
So....
It may not be so easy for producers to wash their hands of this, even EPs.
Why not? Anyone who is going to take the responsibility of handling a real gun needs to take the responsibility for the safety of it along with the staff hired to monitor the weapons. I genuinely do not understand this thought process that they will not be able to check the gun, have the gun opened for them to verify empty, properly loaded, etc. Doing this gives the armorer, actor, AD, whoever, one more opportunity to verify everything is correct.I agree. There's no way every actor can check every weapon they're handed on set.
It's a movie set. An armorer is supposed to load and unload the gun, not an actor. Actors are not in charge of preparing their props. That's why a movie set has a prop director, and armorer, and so on.Why not? Anyone who is going to take the responsibility of handling a real gun needs to take the responsibility for the safety of it along with the staff hired to monitor the weapons. I genuinely do not understand this thought process that they will not be able to check the gun, have the gun opened for them to verify empty, properly loaded, etc. Doing this gives the armorer, actor, AD, whoever, one more opportunity to verify everything is correct.
I don’t understand it either, in any other situation they would expect the person holding the gun to operate with gun safety protocol, I don’t see a movie set as excusing that. I’m not putting responsibility all on Baldwin but it was another failure.Again, I disagree. ANYONE who handles a firearm is expected to follow gun safety rules. Actors are not the exception to that rule.
Had he taken the time to check the gun himself, nobody would be debating this now.
I am not suggesting movie set safety protocols were not followed, but it is a gun. You never assume anything with a gun.
If you run around in a real world, pointing gun at people, you are likely going to be arrested. In the movies, that's what actors do if they are in a Western. And they are not getting arrested for it.I don’t understand it either, in any other situation they would expect the person holding the gun to operate with gun safety protocol, I don’t see a movie set as excusing that. I’m not putting responsibility all on Baldwin but it was another failure.
Why not? Anyone who is going to take the responsibility of handling a real gun needs to take the responsibility for the safety of it along with the staff hired to monitor the weapons. I genuinely do not understand this thought process that they will not be able to check the gun, have the gun opened for them to verify empty, properly loaded, etc. Doing this gives the armorer, actor, AD, whoever, one more opportunity to verify everything is correct.