• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Alec Baldwin fatally shoots crewmember on set of movie with prop gun

Status
Not open for further replies.
If actors would actually learn how to *act* (as differentiated from role playing) there would be absolutely no need for a "prop" gun to have the capability of firing any type of projectile whatsoever.
 
Maybe we should wait for all the facts to emerge before rushing to judgement?
And guns is one of those topics people love to pontificate on, even if they know nothing about it.
As somnone who has been an Civil War reenactor for years,and had a lot of experience with 19th century weapons, (the movie is set in the 1880's) I can't imagine how the hell live ammo instead of blanks were used.
I just hope this does not become another Gun Control yelling match, since this happened in a situation where even countries with strict gun control laws would allow guns to be used.I suspect pure idiocy was responsible.
BTW blanks, at close range, can be dangerous. A blank is a round iwht a small poder charge but no bullet/projectile. But the pure sicharge can hurt you at close range. THis si something we stress in training in my reenactor group. The rule is never discharge your weapon st any person who is less then 15 feet away from you. Live ammo is forbidden in a reenactment battle, and all weapons are inspected before a battle to be sure they are not loaded. Only time live ammo is used is on a rifle range in a shooting competion which is very carefully montoried for safety.
 
I fully expect Baldwin will have no culpability in this case.

However, what scenarios (if any) are there that might implicate him? I mean even as being a producer? Is there any scenario where he might be be considered even partially liable for this outcome?
 
Steve said:
If actors would actually learn how to *act* (as differentiated from role playing) there would be absolutely no need for a "prop" gun to have the capability of firing any type of projectile whatsoever.
Click to expand...

BS. You just hate guns, and would totally ban them , I suspect.
How the hell are you going to shoot a gun battle without a gun of some sort.
What next? Ban swords because they are potentially dangerous?
And acting ability has nothing to do with this, btw.
 
dudalb said:
How the hell are you going to shoot a gun battle without a gun of some sort.
Click to expand...
With a prop gun with no capability of firing any type of projectile whatsoever.

Like other films have done if other posts in the thread are accurate.
 
dudalb said:
BS. You just hate guns, and would totally ban them , I suspect.
How the hell are you going to shoot a gun battle without a gun of some sort.
What next? Ban swords because they are potentially dangerous?
And acting ability has nothing to do with this, btw.
Click to expand...

Calm down.

He simply mean that you should be able to act as if the gun fires without having a blank firing prop gun.

He's correct, or at the very least has a valid point. You should be able to just give someone a totally inert non-firing gun and have them, ya know ACT, like they were firing it.

Again it is 2021 the smoke and bang can be added in later.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
Calm down.

He simply mean that you should be able to act as if the gun fires without having a blank firing prop gun.

He's correct, or at the very least has a valid point. You should be able to just give someone a totally inert non-firing gun and have them, ya know ACT, like they were firing it.

Again it is 2021 the smoke and bang can be added in later.
Click to expand...

I don't think any human being is going to be able to convincingly mimic the sharp recoil of a real firearm, though that's kinda a moot point because blank firing guns often have much reduced recoil anyway.

It's simply too fast to fake it, and doing so would probably be very noticeable. Better to just pretend these actors are high-speed-low-drag-tactical-elite-operators with perfect recoil control.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Calm down.

He simply mean that you should be able to act as if the gun fires without having a blank firing prop gun.

He's correct, or at the very least has a valid point. You should be able to just give someone a totally inert non-firing gun and have them, ya know ACT, like they were firing it.

Again it is 2021 the smoke and bang can be added in later.
Click to expand...

I would also be shocked if we didn't have the technology to give a realistic feel of shooting a weapon to a completely fake gun. Some form of technology should be able to be placed in the handle, and down a fake gun that mimics the act of firing.
 
Okay the point is putting a device that is capable of firing a deadly shot under any circumstances into a movie set is not necessary

Someone can make a mechanical gun prop that recoils without actually firing anything out of its barrel or having the ability to do so if someone messes up.
 
dudalb said:
BS. You just hate guns, and would totally ban them , I suspect.
How the hell are you going to shoot a gun battle without a gun of some sort.
What next? Ban swords because they are potentially dangerous?
And acting ability has nothing to do with this, btw.
Click to expand...

Quite the over reaction there son :jaw-dropp. How about you reply to what I wrote instead of what you imagined.

Prop guns are a necessity on many sets. I have no issue with that. Those guns should be rendered completely inert. And actors worthy of the name should be able to portray a convincing gun shot without actually having the prop do the job for them.

And acting ability has little to do with many things that so called actors actually do on screen.
 
plague311 said:
I would also be shocked if we didn't have the technology to give a realistic feel of shooting a weapon to a completely fake gun. Some form of technology should be able to be placed in the handle, and down a fake gun that mimics the act of firing.
Click to expand...

Might be more trouble than it's worth but you could move a weight inside the gun to simulate the recoil. It would move fast in the right direction when simulating the recoil then move back in to position more slowly at a pace the actor could resist.

For small guns that might be hard to do. And the mechanism might bring it's own safety risks.
 
But, not to step on my own point but just for completeness and fairness, as I said earlier we are talking 3 (and that's if you want to count Jon-Erik Hexum which you arguably could not do) deaths related to prop handguns in the last 40 years so....

There's been dozens of stunt driver and several stunt pilot deaths I can name off the top of my head and we still just use modified cars and planes.
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
Quite the over reaction there son :jaw-dropp. How about you reply to what I wrote instead of what you imagined.

Prop guns are a necessity on many sets. I have no issue with that. Those guns should be rendered completely inert. And actors worthy of the name should be able to portray a convincing gun shot without actually having the prop do the job for them.

And acting ability has little to do with many things that so called actors actually do on screen.
Click to expand...


Ever hear of blank rounds? Used in films all the time.
And, on stage as well.
Not to mention renactments .
If safety procedures are followed, no one is hurt. Safety procedures were not followed.
I repeat, I suspect you just want to ban all firearms, period.
 
RecoveringYuppy said:
Might be more trouble than it's worth but you could move a weight inside the gun to simulate the recoil. It would move fast in the right direction when simulating the recoil then move back in to position more slowly at a pace the actor could resist.

For small guns that might be hard to do. And the mechanism might bring it's own safety risks.
Click to expand...

Applying a little technology to potentially save a life or prevent injury seems worthwhile to me.
 
plague311 said:
I would also be shocked if we didn't have the technology to give a realistic feel of shooting a weapon to a completely fake gun. Some form of technology should be able to be placed in the handle, and down a fake gun that mimics the act of firing.
Click to expand...

Go to the 5 minute mark (airsoft).

 
JoeMorgue said:
But, not to step on my own point but just for completeness and fairness, we are talking 3 (and that's if you want to count Jon-Erik Hexum which you arguably could not do) deaths related to prop handguns in the last 40 years so....
Click to expand...

And when is the last time you read about someone being killed by a bullet at a Civil War, Revolutinary War, name whatever war you like where firearms were used reenactment?

Of course this should be fully investigated..it will be, the film industry guilds will see to that.
I was hoping this would not become another gun control shouting match, but it has.
Just confrims my opinion that some gun conrtrol advocates really want to ban the private ownership of guns period, even black powder replicas.
 
dudalb said:
And when is the last time you read about someone being killed by a bullet at a Civil War, Revolutinary War, name whatever war you like where firearms were used reenactment?

Of course this should be fully investigated..it will be, the film industry guilds will see to that.
I was hoping this would not become another gun control shouting match, but it has.
Just confrims my opinion that some gun conrtrol advocates really want to ban the private ownership of guns period, even black powder replicas.
Click to expand...

You're literally the first person shouting.
 
Steve said:
Applying a little technology to potentially save a life or prevent injury seems worthwhile to me.
Click to expand...

You don't have to pay for it.
And, as pointed out, how often odes this happen?
I freely admit you would probably ban Historical reenactments because they iinvolve the use of firearms. You can't cgi at a reenactment..or on stage for that matter.
 
plague311 said:
I would also be shocked if we didn't have the technology to give a realistic feel of shooting a weapon to a completely fake gun. Some form of technology should be able to be placed in the handle, and down a fake gun that mimics the act of firing.
Click to expand...

Blanks usually don't give any recoil, anyway. That has been "faked" for years.
 
dudalb said:
Not really. Steve posted a classic Anti Gun slogan on the first page.
Click to expand...

Yeah you're off screaming at voices in the wind to a degree that would make ponderingturtle proud.

You went off on some wild tangent about stage whatever Civil War fan club you're a fan off.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Yeah you're off screaming at voices in the wind to a degree that would make ponderingturtle proud.

You went off on some wild tangent about stage whatever Civil War fan club you're a fan off.
Click to expand...

And you don't know much about reeanctments, do you?
 
JoeMorgue said:
But, not to step on my own point but just for completeness and fairness, as I said earlier we are talking 3 (and that's if you want to count Jon-Erik Hexum which you arguably could not do) deaths related to prop handguns in the last 40 years so....

There's been dozens of stunt driver and several stunt pilot deaths I can name off the top of my head and we still just use modified cars and planes.
Click to expand...

List of film and television accidents

A search of this list only brings up the three deaths related to prop handguns. But it also backs up your point about numerous stunt deaths. These deaths were completely unnecessary, but they're still happening.
 
shemp said:
List of film and television accidents

A search of this list only brings up the three deaths related to prop handguns. But it also backs up your point about numerous stunt deaths. These deaths were completely unnecessary, but they're still happening.
Click to expand...

Well CGI and even robotics* are reducing the dependence on stuntmen as well. I can also safely assume that a lot of older dangerous vehicle crashes and other stunts would be done with CGI these days. I don't see this as a bad thing.

*https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/28/disney-imagineering-has-created-autonomous-robot-stunt-doubles/
 
dudalb said:
Ever hear of blank rounds? Used in films all the time.
And, on stage as well.
Not to mention renactments .
If safety procedures are followed, no one is hurt. Safety procedures were not followed.
I repeat, I suspect you just want to ban all firearms, period.
Click to expand...

Well you suspect wrong. True, I do not care for the ubiquitousness of privately owned firearms, but I would not care to see them all banned. Hunting and target shooting are legitimate uses that I am quite content to see continue. Enough of this silly sidebar.

Now, blank rounds carelessly discharged have killed. Guns that were mistakenly not loaded with blank rounds have killed. In a situation such as filming there is absolutely no reason at all for a prop firearm to be capable of discharging anything at all from the barrel. Then safety procedures would be as redundant for a prop firearm as they are for a prop light saber. They seem to have managed somehow to portray light saber deaths in movies without using real lasers.
 
dudalb said:
Maybe we should wait for all the facts to emerge before rushing to judgement?
And guns is one of those topics people love to pontificate on, even if they know nothing about it.
As somnone who has been an Civil War reenactor for years,and had a lot of experience with 19th century weapons, (the movie is set in the 1880's) I can't imagine how the hell live ammo instead of blanks were used.
I just hope this does not become another Gun Control yelling match, since this happened in a situation where even countries with strict gun control laws would allow guns to be used.I suspect pure idiocy was responsible.
BTW blanks, at close range, can be dangerous. A blank is a round iwht a small poder charge but no bullet/projectile. But the pure sicharge can hurt you at close range. THis si something we stress in training in my reenactor group. The rule is never discharge your weapon st any person who is less then 15 feet away from you. Live ammo is forbidden in a reenactment battle, and all weapons are inspected before a battle to be sure they are not loaded. Only time live ammo is used is on a rifle range in a shooting competion which is very carefully montoried for safety.
Click to expand...

This is pretty much my experience as a Rev War reenactor. Before the battles we would have to take the ramrods and drop them into the musket barrels - if there was no resounding "ping" of the rod hitting the base of the barrel that meant there was probably trouble - dirt getting in the barrel, a blank round someone forgot to dump after the last battle, or a rusted barrel being the most likely culprits, it was rare that it was a true live round.

Rev War was relatively easy as everything is a single shot flintlock. In Civil War there are more potential issues with cap and ball revolvers being harder to check. It worried some of my fellows who also did Civil War since the yahoos who carried revolvers were often 'dismounted cavalry' of the "yee-haa" brigade and not the most responsible of firearms users.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
And when is the last time you read about someone being killed by a bullet at a Civil War, Revolutinary War, name whatever war you like where firearms were used reenactment?

Of course this should be fully investigated..it will be, the film industry guilds will see to that.
I was hoping this would not become another gun control shouting match, but it has.
Just confrims my opinion that some gun conrtrol advocates really want to ban the private ownership of guns period, even black powder replicas.
Click to expand...

Who, apart from you is shouting about gun control?
 
dudalb said:
You don't have to pay for it.
And, as pointed out, how often odes this happen?
I freely admit you would probably ban Historical reenactments because they iinvolve the use of firearms. You can't cgi at a reenactment..or on stage for that matter.
Click to expand...

You "admit" that? :eek:

Yeah I know, an occasional death is a reasonable price for a grieving family to pay for the public to be entertained by "realistic" appearing movies. Sick attitude, son.
 
I don't remember people who fly helicopters for fun acting as if changes made in response to the Twilight Zone: The Movie incident were a personal attack on them.
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
Applying a little technology to potentially save a life or prevent injury seems worthwhile to me.
Click to expand...

Right. Read a bit more of my post. Is it worth it if the cost is creating more deaths and injuries some other way? The device I described is not guaranteed to be without problems.

It's just a throw off idea that isn't even ready for Shark Tank.
 
Well, this has certainly taken a header off a cliff.

All of the civil war, and gun fighting aside, I don't think there has to be any drastic changes, but I do think using some form of airsoft or mechanical gun that can't shoot or be loaded would be easier for all involved
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom