stagpanther
New member
I still think some kind of culpability for Baldwin is inescapable--but we'll see how it goes.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
First case involving Halyna Hutchins's death goes to trial .
- Thread starter Metal god
- Start date
I just don’t understand, with today’s technology, why are functional firearms even allowed near a movie set?
Modern safety standards dictate that if a safer option exists, the safer option must be implemented regardless of cost to the company. If there’s an option to completely remove the hazard from the workplace, then that option must be selected.
In the USA a workplace is a workplace, no matter the industry.
For years now, I’d say a couple of decades at least, movies have had muzzle flash and smoke etc. added in post.
Basically people involved in the production of this movie took the easy way out and it cost a life. To get to the point of a fatality, lots of other safety failures lead up to the event. Blame cannot fall onto one person.
Modern safety standards dictate that if a safer option exists, the safer option must be implemented regardless of cost to the company. If there’s an option to completely remove the hazard from the workplace, then that option must be selected.
In the USA a workplace is a workplace, no matter the industry.
For years now, I’d say a couple of decades at least, movies have had muzzle flash and smoke etc. added in post.
Basically people involved in the production of this movie took the easy way out and it cost a life. To get to the point of a fatality, lots of other safety failures lead up to the event. Blame cannot fall onto one person.
Stagpanther, I took the link to the NY Times article, got to read the first two lines then a popup required me to create an account and gave me no option to decline, other than exiting the site.
A) because its cheaper
B) because movies have been using functional firearms as props as long as there have been movies. Done right, the risk is minimal. Done wrong, it can be lethal.
There is no doubt in my mind that Baldwin is responsible for what he did. Whether or not those actions and inactions meets the legal standard to be convicted of certain crimes is for the jury to decide.
Yes, had the movie company decided not to allow functional firearms on location the shooting could not have happened the way it did. Regardless of which person made that decision, responsibility comes back to Baldwin, as "captain of the ship" for allowing the decision to stand.
Here's a point I just can't get past, yes the gun should not have been loaded, and yes, under SAG rules Baldwin wasn't required to check it, those rules weren't followed. And it was entirely Baldwin's choice to point the gun at a person and operate the mechanism. THAT makes him responsible for her death, in my view.
IF he had pointed it somewhere else, we'd be looking a news blurb about an accidental discharge on the set, maybe a camera or some other prop damaged or destroyed. But he wasn't pointing the gun at any of those things when it went off. He was aiming at a person.
Circumstances may not warrant a criminal conviction, that's not my call, but conviction or not, nothing changes what he did, and that a death and an injury resulted from what HE DID!
I just don’t understand, with today’s technology, why are functional firearms even allowed near a movie set?
A) because its cheaper
B) because movies have been using functional firearms as props as long as there have been movies. Done right, the risk is minimal. Done wrong, it can be lethal.
I still think some kind of culpability for Baldwin is inescapable--but we'll see how it goes.
There is no doubt in my mind that Baldwin is responsible for what he did. Whether or not those actions and inactions meets the legal standard to be convicted of certain crimes is for the jury to decide.
Yes, had the movie company decided not to allow functional firearms on location the shooting could not have happened the way it did. Regardless of which person made that decision, responsibility comes back to Baldwin, as "captain of the ship" for allowing the decision to stand.
Here's a point I just can't get past, yes the gun should not have been loaded, and yes, under SAG rules Baldwin wasn't required to check it, those rules weren't followed. And it was entirely Baldwin's choice to point the gun at a person and operate the mechanism. THAT makes him responsible for her death, in my view.
IF he had pointed it somewhere else, we'd be looking a news blurb about an accidental discharge on the set, maybe a camera or some other prop damaged or destroyed. But he wasn't pointing the gun at any of those things when it went off. He was aiming at a person.
Circumstances may not warrant a criminal conviction, that's not my call, but conviction or not, nothing changes what he did, and that a death and an injury resulted from what HE DID!
Jim Watson
New member
We see one conviction, one plea bargain, and one Deal to walk, which takes care of the middle of the pack.
My layman's opinion of Baldwin is that he is culpable at both the front and the back of the case. He pulled the trigger, he cut corners on capabilities to observe industry standards.
My layman's opinion of Baldwin is that he is culpable at both the front and the back of the case. He pulled the trigger, he cut corners on capabilities to observe industry standards.
Board dumped my post. I don't feel like re-typing it all. The last bit was this:
Hollywood's claims of needing realism don't hold water with me. They didn't need to kill Hutchins in order to make the gun-non-fight look 'real' (yes, I grasp that was not even part of the script; just Baldwin being a moron). I don't find old westerns less entertaining because they were only firing blanks off in a safe direction. I don't need (nor want!) to have an ACTUAL serial killer play the lead in some dumb movie. I don't need (nor want!) an ACTUAL new war between the Axis and the Allies in order to film Band of Brothers. It's ACTING for crying out loud!
Hollywood's claims of needing realism don't hold water with me. They didn't need to kill Hutchins in order to make the gun-non-fight look 'real' (yes, I grasp that was not even part of the script; just Baldwin being a moron). I don't find old westerns less entertaining because they were only firing blanks off in a safe direction. I don't need (nor want!) to have an ACTUAL serial killer play the lead in some dumb movie. I don't need (nor want!) an ACTUAL new war between the Axis and the Allies in order to film Band of Brothers. It's ACTING for crying out loud!
Going by what I can find on the internet, the number of people shot and killed by "prop" guns on movie/tv sets is 3.
The earliest listed one is in 1984. The next one is in 1993. And the last one is the RUST shooting. Only one of those was during a scripted scene, the others were the result of the actors "screwing around".
There were no other listings, so, either the list didn't look any further back, or possibly, because there were no other previous deaths caused by guns on movie & tv sets recorded anywhere.
I think it quite likely no one was accidently shot and killed on movie sets prior to the one in 84 because, generally speaking, more people were familiar with firearms and took steps to be sure real guns used as props were as safe as possible.
The 1984 death was self inflicted. The actor intentionally shot himself in the head with a pistol loaded with blanks.
The 1994 death was the result of a prop gun, previously loaded with dummy rounds, having one of the bullet stuck in the gun, and later the gun was loaded with blanks (without being checked to ensure the barrel was clear) and then fired in a scene where the stuck bullet shot and killed Brandon Lee.
and then there is what happened on the RUST set...
The earliest listed one is in 1984. The next one is in 1993. And the last one is the RUST shooting. Only one of those was during a scripted scene, the others were the result of the actors "screwing around".
There were no other listings, so, either the list didn't look any further back, or possibly, because there were no other previous deaths caused by guns on movie & tv sets recorded anywhere.
I think it quite likely no one was accidently shot and killed on movie sets prior to the one in 84 because, generally speaking, more people were familiar with firearms and took steps to be sure real guns used as props were as safe as possible.
The 1984 death was self inflicted. The actor intentionally shot himself in the head with a pistol loaded with blanks.
The 1994 death was the result of a prop gun, previously loaded with dummy rounds, having one of the bullet stuck in the gun, and later the gun was loaded with blanks (without being checked to ensure the barrel was clear) and then fired in a scene where the stuck bullet shot and killed Brandon Lee.
and then there is what happened on the RUST set...
There were no other listings, so, either the list didn't look any further back, or possibly, because there were no other previous deaths caused by guns on movie & tv sets recorded anywhere.
Were the two others you listed deaths ? Maybe it's harder to find AD/ND that resulted in injury only . To be fair the number I'd like to see is the AD/ND on sets . If there is a lot of those, then maybe people need to stop using real guns . I mean we know of at least 3 ND on Rust . How many others over the years ?
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Yes.Metal god said:Were the two others you listed deaths ?
1984: Jon-Erik Hexum, on the set of CoverUp! This was the guy who shot himself in the head (intentionally) with a revolver loaded with blanks at point-blank range. Basically, he blew a chunk of his skull through his brain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum
1993 was Brandon Lee. That one was as already described.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Lee
Ok , my overall point is we only have three deaths . How many AD/ND resulting in injury ? Id bet that number is much bigger then 3 . Then there’s the point , how many are even reported. Cops aren’t being called every time theres a ND/AD like we had here with the two prior to the fatal shot . Im not trying to drum up an argument, only pointing out we don’t know what we don’t know .
What would be a good interview Is interviewing somebody like Sylvester Stallone or Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc. And see if they had any AD/ND On any of their movies because those movies had some of the most Firarms used and or fired that I’ve ever seen . I guess the other question would be , Would they even be honest about it?
What would be a good interview Is interviewing somebody like Sylvester Stallone or Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc. And see if they had any AD/ND On any of their movies because those movies had some of the most Firarms used and or fired that I’ve ever seen . I guess the other question would be , Would they even be honest about it?
Hexum supposedly was goofing around during a lull in filming, playing russian roulette with a blank without realizing how dangerous it was.The 1984 death was self inflicted. The actor intentionally shot himself in the head with a pistol loaded with blanks.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Correct.JohnKSa said:Hexum supposedly was goofing around during a lull in filming, playing russian roulette with a blank without realizing how dangerous it was.
I'm old enough that I was an adult at the time and I recall reading multiple articles about it. The show was about a CIA agent using being a male model as a cover. Hexum was the male model.
Just got done reading a pretty extensive Wiki list of accidents and deaths on movie sets from the 1910s to the 2020s.
specifically looking for deaths and injuries caused by guns. Only found 4.
One was in 1915 the movie was
the other three have already been mentioned.
Literally hundreds of people from crew to stunt people and even stars have been killed on movie and tv sets, from accidents involving crashes (planes, helicopters, cars, trucks and motorcycle's), falls (from heights or off horses), drownings and even explosions, and many many more have been permanently injured from stunts or special effect gone wrong.
being shot with a loaded gun seems to be the least likely thing to happen.
specifically looking for deaths and injuries caused by guns. Only found 4.
One was in 1915 the movie was
The Captive (1915). During filming of a scene where soldiers were required to break down a locked door, the extras fired at the door using live ammunition to give the scene more realism. Director Cecil B. DeMille then ordered the extras to reload with blanks in order to film the next shot in which the door is broken down. One of the extras inadvertently left a live round in his rifle which discharged, shooting another extra, Charles Chandler, in the head, killing him instantly.
the other three have already been mentioned.
Literally hundreds of people from crew to stunt people and even stars have been killed on movie and tv sets, from accidents involving crashes (planes, helicopters, cars, trucks and motorcycle's), falls (from heights or off horses), drownings and even explosions, and many many more have been permanently injured from stunts or special effect gone wrong.
being shot with a loaded gun seems to be the least likely thing to happen.
being shot with a loaded gun seems to be the least likely thing to happen.
Very interesting and goes against what I would have thought . If true that does seem to clearly indicate that SAG and whom ever before have done a pretty good job with there guide lines and any enforcement over the years .
stagpanther
New member
Sometimes they'll let you see one article for free, most news services do that to bait you into subscribing.Stagpanther, I took the link to the NY Times article, got to read the first two lines then a popup required me to create an account and gave me no option to decline, other than exiting the site.
If true that does seem to clearly indicate that SAG and whom ever before have done a pretty good job with there guide lines and any enforcement over the years .
Going by the available information, hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people have worked making movies and TV shows over the past century +.
Thousands have been injured, hundreds have been killed, but only a tiny few from being shot. AND, the majority (3/4) on those have been in last 40 years or so.
Personally, I think this is because in the earlier days, real guns on movie sets were treated as real guns, and not harmless props. And most of that time was before there were SAG rules specifically about that.
"Trust, but verify" is not a new concept, and when used faithfully keeps us out of a lot of trouble. On the RUST set there was trust, too much, and misplaced, but until someone got shot they didn't know the trust was misplaced, because they failed the "verify" part, completely.
Minor thread veer here:
A very interesting book on movie sets and stunts is:
"Stuntman!: My Car-Crashing, Plane-Jumping, Bone-Breaking, Death-Defying Hollywood Life" by Hal Needham.
He's got some fascinating stories about what goes on at some of the film sets.
IIRC he tells about a fifties cowboy and Indian TV series where the director wanted to film a soldier defending the fort getting shot with an arrow. The stunt guys thought about how to do this and decided to just shoot the actor with an arrow. They padded him up, got somebody that was pretty good with a bow and arrow and shot a weakly driven arrow and hoped they hit the padded portion of the guy's body.
He's also got some fun stuff about making some WWII movies and cop and robbers movies too.
P.S. Hal Needham is mainly responsible for the 'Smokey and the Bandit' movie but don't hold that against him.
A very interesting book on movie sets and stunts is:
"Stuntman!: My Car-Crashing, Plane-Jumping, Bone-Breaking, Death-Defying Hollywood Life" by Hal Needham.
He's got some fascinating stories about what goes on at some of the film sets.
IIRC he tells about a fifties cowboy and Indian TV series where the director wanted to film a soldier defending the fort getting shot with an arrow. The stunt guys thought about how to do this and decided to just shoot the actor with an arrow. They padded him up, got somebody that was pretty good with a bow and arrow and shot a weakly driven arrow and hoped they hit the padded portion of the guy's body.
He's also got some fun stuff about making some WWII movies and cop and robbers movies too.
P.S. Hal Needham is mainly responsible for the 'Smokey and the Bandit' movie but don't hold that against him.
Sentencing hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q--R5YBBphw
.
.
.
.
Spoiler below
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Hanna was just sentenced to the maximum of 18 months in prison .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q--R5YBBphw
.
.
.
.
Spoiler below
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Hanna was just sentenced to the maximum of 18 months in prison .
Last edited: