Alec Baldwin accidentally shoots woman dead on set

Hootsmon

What dosen't add up for me is he must have been pointing the gun at the woman and you don't even do that with a gun loaded wih blanks. Pointing it and puling the trigger is to be expected with another actor for a particular scene involving a gun but pointing and firing on a cinematographer? yes, it's true we don't know, but if he has been messin' around he's fucked

monquixote

The story is that he was told it was a "cold" gun i.e. not expected to fire at all.

Given it went through two people it would suggest it was a full on live round rather than a tragic mistake with a blank.

Mellish

This isn't going to be sorted anytime soon. I imagine a lot of finger-pointing. But someone, at some point, should be held responsible. 

chrisj1602

Hootsmon said:

What dosen't add up for me is he must have been pointing the gun at the woman and you don't even do that with a gun loaded wih blanks. Pointing it and puling the trigger is to be expected with another actor for a particular scene involving a gun but pointing and firing on a cinematographer? yes, it's true we don't know, but if he has been messin' around he's fucked

Have you never seen a film when someone shoots towards the camera?

LastMantra

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Hootsmon

chrisj1602 said:

Hootsmon said:

What dosen't add up for me is he must have been pointing the gun at the woman and you don't even do that with a gun loaded wih blanks. Pointing it and puling the trigger is to be expected with another actor for a particular scene involving a gun but pointing and firing on a cinematographer? yes, it's true we don't know, but if he has been messin' around he's fucked

Have you never seen a film when someone shoots towards the camera?

Right!

drofluf

Hootsmon said:

What dosen't add up for me is he must have been pointing the gun at the woman and you don't even do that with a gun loaded wih blanks. Pointing it and puling the trigger is to be expected with another actor for a particular scene involving a gun but pointing and firing on a cinematographer? yes, it's true we don't know, but if he has been messin' around he's fucked

My guess, and it’s no more than that, is that he was handed a gun he’d been told was safe/cold and was practicing the next scene where he had to shoot it somewhere. Tragically he was given a loaded gun. 

The big question is why were there live bullets on set. But it also points to more training for anyone who handles a gun. I was taught that whenever you’re given a weapon it should’ve be unloaded (or at least without a cartridge in the chamber) but the onus is on you to ensure that this is the case, you don’t take it on trust. 

goldtop

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

My thoughts, too, but the USA is (sadly) a country where a gun is just an everyday thing to a lot of people. Even in CA.

There are tragicomically terrible videos on YT of US police officers demonstrating a gun to kids and doing an accidental discharge.

'Familiarity breeds contempt' as the saying goes.

stickyfiddle

drofluf said:

Hootsmon said:

What dosen't add up for me is he must have been pointing the gun at the woman and you don't even do that with a gun loaded wih blanks. Pointing it and puling the trigger is to be expected with another actor for a particular scene involving a gun but pointing and firing on a cinematographer? yes, it's true we don't know, but if he has been messin' around he's fucked

My guess, and it’s no more than that, is that he was handed a gun he’d been told was safe/cold and was practicing the next scene where he had to shoot it somewhere. Tragically he was given a loaded gun. 

The big question is why were there live bullets on set. But it also points to more training for anyone who handles a gun. I was taught that whenever you’re given a weapon it should’ve be unloaded (or at least without a cartridge in the chamber) but the onus is on you to ensure that this is the case, you don’t take it on trust. 

Yep. The top 2 rules of good gun safety:

• Never point a gun at anything you aren't prepared to destroy
• Treat eery gun as if it's loaded, even if you just checked & cleared it yourself.

Get those right and almost nothing else matters. I'm guessing that doesn't work in movie making though, which is why they are supposed to have strict protocols

soma1975

stickyfiddle said:

drofluf said:

Hootsmon said:

What dosen't add up for me is he must have been pointing the gun at the woman and you don't even do that with a gun loaded wih blanks. Pointing it and puling the trigger is to be expected with another actor for a particular scene involving a gun but pointing and firing on a cinematographer? yes, it's true we don't know, but if he has been messin' around he's fucked

My guess, and it’s no more than that, is that he was handed a gun he’d been told was safe/cold and was practicing the next scene where he had to shoot it somewhere. Tragically he was given a loaded gun. 

The big question is why were there live bullets on set. But it also points to more training for anyone who handles a gun. I was taught that whenever you’re given a weapon it should’ve be unloaded (or at least without a cartridge in the chamber) but the onus is on you to ensure that this is the case, you don’t take it on trust. 

Yep. The top 2 rules of good gun safety:

• Never point a gun at anything you aren't prepared to destroy
• Treat eery gun as if it's loaded, even if you just checked & cleared it yourself.

Get those right and almost nothing else matters. I'm guessing that doesn't work in movie making though, which is why they are supposed to have strict protocols

You would not be able to make films without pointing guns at people. As you say that is impossible to do on a film set and part of why you have armourer to make safe and keep safe. Who is supposed to show you a cleared chamber before handing it over. 

soma1975

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Usually because it is impossible to get an actor to react naturally to a fake gun firing. That's going to change obviously. 

Teetonetal

soma1975 said:

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Usually because it is impossible to get an actor to react naturally to a fake gun firing. That's going to change obviously. 

Surely the whole point of an actor is to do exactly that! 

I actually had no idea till this story broke that real guns, loaded with blanks or live were used. I'd always assumed they were genuine stage guns.

Sadly, I suspect the whole reason for using real guns is nothing more than an extension of the USAs love affair with guns. They just don't have the required respect for them as a nation.

drofluf

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Possibly because the fakes wouldn’t look real enough and they’d come into too much criticism? Given there are folk on here who can spot a fake Strat at a hundred paces I’d be surprised if there weren’t gun enthusiasts with similar skills. 

soma1975

Teetonetal said:

soma1975 said:

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Usually because it is impossible to get an actor to react naturally to a fake gun firing. That's going to change obviously. 

Surely the whole point of an actor is to do exactly that! 

I actually had no idea till this story broke that real guns, loaded with blanks or live were used. I'd always assumed they were genuine stage guns.

Sadly, I suspect the whole reason for using real guns is nothing more than an extension of the USAs love affair with guns. They just don't have the required respect for them as a nation.

No that is not the whole point of an actor. The point of an actor is to help tell a story and sell a film. Anything that aids them in doing that is considered. Clearly people have tried but there is a visceral and instinctive reaction to firing a gun that is incredibly hard to fake/time for the camera. Obviously many people have tried and many people (especially low budget movies) do it with it with fakes and add stuff in post with varying degrees of success.  You won't believe some of the things Tom Cruise does in his films that could just be done against a green screen instead. 

Your last sentence is just a weird bit of America-bashing for no reason. It's the same setup over here with firearm usage in productions, and for the most part same around the world. 

ICBM

A gun that doesn't contain any ammunition of any kind is just a piece of metal, it's not inherently dangerous in itself. It's safe to use real guns providing the correct procedures are followed at every stage, even if that means that sometimes a gun containing blanks is fired towards someone - but the point is that the correct procedures must be followed. Someone didn't here.

What puzzles me is why a genuine live round should be present on a movie set at all - I can't think of any reason for that. My guess is some variation of the Brandon Lee accident - the 'dummy' bullets they used weren't proper dummies made for the purpose, they were converted from real live rounds, so they still contained percussion caps and possibly some propellant residue. If that short-cut hadn't been taken there would also have been no problem.

chillidoggy

I fail to understand how, given the fact that people are likely to die from a gunshot wound, that the safety procedures haven’t been cast in stone for years. They should be universal, the same whatever, and rigidly adhered to.

crunchman

drofluf said:

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Possibly because the fakes wouldn’t look real enough and they’d come into too much criticism? Given there are folk on here who can spot a fake Strat at a hundred paces I’d be surprised if there weren’t gun enthusiasts with similar skills. 

It's not just the blast.  It's the recoil.  The gun applies a force to your hand and makes it go backwards.  No actor would be able to fake that realistically.  The recoil from a blank won't be as much as from a real bullet but it would be enough to give it some realism.

It's likely the gun was pointed at the camera, and the woman that was killed was standing behind the camera.

monquixote

chillidoggy said:

I fail to understand how, given the fact that people are likely to die from a gunshot wound, that the safety procedures haven’t been cast in stone for years. They should be universal, the same whatever, and rigidly adhered to.

They are.

Sets have armourers who comply with extremely strict protocols.

That's why things like this haven't happened for 30 years.

Something must have gone massively wrong on that set.

viz

drofluf said:

LastMantra said:

Why the hell do they still use real guns, surely someone could make something that looks real? 
These days you could add the blast in after. 

Possibly because the fakes wouldn’t look real enough and they’d come into too much criticism? Given there are folk on here who can spot a fake Strat at a hundred paces I’d be surprised if there weren’t gun enthusiasts with similar skills. 

It wouldn’t really bother me if the actor held a pink piece of plastic with the word “gun” written large on it, so long as the acting were good enough. Also I’m right now struggling to think of a film without a gun in it. Why is that? Oh, Snow White, maybe. 

Snags

chillidoggy said:

I fail to understand how, given the fact that people are likely to die from a gunshot wound, that the safety procedures haven’t been cast in stone for years. They should be universal, the same whatever, and rigidly adhered to.

Because people be dumb.