Alec Baldwin shoots and kills cinematographer.

I suppose if Baldwin was supposed to be the victim of an attempted murder by hanging in a scene, he would immediately stick his head in the noose and be ok with being pushed off the chair because his safety guy said it was a safe noose with no potential that he would break his neck or strangle:rolleyes:.

After all he’s just an actor and doesn’t hnow about guns or nooses or dynamite sticks or hand grenades or land mines or Bowie knives or……..

Cheers
 
timrb said:
That does not apply here; the gun involved in this shooting was a revolver. Guns with restricted barrels are gas-operated semi-automatic firearms. When firing blanks, the barrel needs a restriction so that enough pressure is developed to operate the action. A revolver barrel should NEVER have an obstruction, since, as already noted, a following round (even a blank) can force the obstruction out and hurt someone. (Or the gun could blow up outright.) In any event, Lindberg is right IMHO. Baldwin was experienced enough that even though he is personally completely inept with a gun he should know enough to ask "Hey--aren't you supposed to show me that this thing is unloaded?"

Tim
Click to expand...
Don't make me GoogleFu up a Canadian movie armorer.
A restriction in a revolver can be used to change the flash and smoke pattern. With some loads without a restriction the powder can exit the barrel not fully burned and turn a fireball into a spark shower.
If you want an auto loader to remain fully intact/functional you would used a plug of some sort, ala US Army training with the "blank box" stuck in the barrel. To get an auto loader to cycle you can modify the breech locking lugs so it cycles without the full back pressure of a bullet.
Why did Sgt York use a Luger in the movie?
 
Last edited:
Chip Sylverne said:
How many westerns did the Duke, John Ford and hundreds of other actors, producers et al make in the history of Hollywood? How many times did they point guns at one another and pull the trigger? I don't recall any of those productions leading to an accidental death such as this. All that history tells me the movie production culture of gun safety is pretty strong and well established.

To state the obvious, something in this production was broken.
Click to expand...
They may never have actually pointed a gun at one another.
 
Robert Gee said:
Ok, and thanks. I see now I conflated the two.
Click to expand...
One of the other problems with the Lee shooting was the fact the gun (loaded with blanks) was actually aimed at him for the scene rather than using camera positioning and editing to work around that. That was back in 1993. I am going to assume that a lot of lessons were learned from that, apparently not all of them stuck for "Rust".
 
murphey said:
The yellow jeep being tumbled was entirely CGI. All the dinos running/flying flocks were CGI. Lots more than you might think. I teach this stuff.
Click to expand...
Wait ... what? The dinos weren't real?

Darn Hollywood, fooled me again!
 
Three of us, all Range Safety Officers, were discussing this at the range earlier this afternoon. In our opinion this will be an expensive situation with all is said and done. So many people screwed up that the lawyers for the victims and their families will be having a field day. There were so many people involved in doing stupid things that it will be what the fighter pilots call a "target rich environment".
 
Somebody will be triggered by this conversation. Then we’ll have some excitement. They may even get their arms in a twist.
 
Seems harmless to me, just a bunch of old guys shooting the breeze...
 
Well that’s it. I’m shot for the night. Off to go get some bench rest.
 
Some of these replies are really getting down range ...
 
Some of you guys are really primed, but I’m pretty hammered. Better let the brass know I’m gonna take a powder before somebody slugs me.
 
Article on the status of the investigation:

'Rust' shooting investigation focuses on assistant director, armorer and Baldwin, sheriff says: 'Nobody's been cleared'
"There’s three people that handled the firearm prior to the death of Miss Hutchins, so those people will be interviewed, are the focus of the investigation," the Santa Fe County sheriff tells TODAY.

https://www.today.com/news/news/rus...s-assistant-director-armorer-baldwin-rcna3990

Excerpt:

First Judicial District Attorney Mary Carmack-Altwies says she has not ruled out potential criminal charges. Even if there was no criminal intent, there could still be charges if there is evidence of "willful disregard" for the safety of others.

"We just can’t say that at this point because the investigation is not complete," she told Miguel Almaguer on TODAY Thursday. "We know mistakes happened. We’re not exactly sure who did, when they did, how they did it."

Investigators questioned 16 cast and crew members who were inside the church set where Hutchins was killed. Among the 600 items of evidence recovered were three guns, 500 rounds of ammunition and what are believed to be live rounds.

Mendoza told Almaguer that investigators were not aware of any other live rounds being inside the chamber of the revolver Baldwin used.

Authorities said they are also investigating reports that "Rust" staffers may have been taking live target practice when not filming.​
 
Last edited:
eaglepilot said:
How many of the posters here have actually worked on a movie set?
Click to expand...
(slowly raising my hand,no brag just fact) My Bacon score is one, or is it zero:dunno:
Not counting college "art films":cool:
 
Last edited:
Someone on Beechtalk suggested that the armorer deliberately put a live round in the weapon, because she was jealous of the lady who ended up getting shot, in a "lesbian love tiff".

Some of them are a special kind of stupid over there.
 
Armorer now says that it wasn't her fault. Well then, who's fault was it ?
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Well that’s what I was saying. You were being silly. Just about as silly as me suggesting he thought it was an elephant.
Click to expand...

I see. You weren't following me. My appologies. Let me be a little clearer. I wasn't saying what I thought was true. I was asking a hypothetical to explore the application of the statute to various states of mind. Sort of the same Socratic method from law school.
 
eaglepilot said:
How many of the posters here have actually worked on a movie set?
Click to expand...

0. But my wife walked through the shots of several films while she was in college. Apparently, USC is a favorite location for movie productions. Also, she has worked on several Tony winning productions in New York. (Including getting a "thank you" call out from the best actress recipient during the live award show.) So, she has no work experience with Hollywood movie sets and prop guns, but does have work experience with theatrical prop guns.
 
weilke said:
Armorer now says that it wasn't her fault. Well then, who's fault was it ?
Click to expand...

Probably wrong to judge based on appearance, but the pictures I've seen of the armorer don't strike me as a person that is a "fire-arms" type of person. I'd be curious to know her experience and qualifications, or if she was hired off the street, received 5 minutes of OJT and was assigned to fill that role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top