290
submitted 1 week ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

Fewer than three weeks before actor Alec Baldwin is due to go on trial in Santa Fe, New Mexico, prosecutors have said that he “engaged in horseplay with the revolver”, including firing a blank round at a crew member on the set of Rust before the tragic accident occurred.

Baldwin is facing involuntary manslaughter charges in the 2021 shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

In new court documents, prosecutors said they plan to bring new evidence to support their case that the 66-year-old actor and producer was reckless with firearms while filming on the set and displayed “erratic and aggressive behavior during the filming” that created potential safety concerns.

Prosecutors in the case, which is due to go to trial on 10 July, have previously alleged that to watch Baldwin’s conduct on the set of Rust “is to witness a man who has absolutely no control of his own emotions and absolutely no concern for how his conduct affects those around him”.

In the latest filing, special prosecutors Kari Morrissey and Erlinda Johnson allege that Baldwin pointed his gun and fired “a blank round at a crew member while using that crew member as a line of site as his perceived target”.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Kalkaline@leminal.space 162 points 1 week ago

There's no good reason to use a functional gun in film and theater, change my mind.

[-] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 42 points 1 week ago

The only reason to do it is verisimilitude, and that's not compelling because a fake is easy enough to acquire/create.

[-] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 57 points 1 week ago

In 2024 having a real firearm on set is unconscionable. Especially without a proper armorist. This was not only avoidable, but the situation shouldn’t have even presented itself.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 27 points 1 week ago

Actors miming shooting looks ridiculous. Like laser tag guns. Actual recoil looks much more realistic.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago

❌When the recoil looks fake

✔️Action hero only ever gets shot in shoulder despite thousands of rounds shot at them, bullets used by bad guys never hollow point

[-] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

It’s like a bad accent.

Some people won’t notice, but for those who can see/hear the difference it takes the suspension of disbelief away immediately

[-] Fillicia@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago

The must be a way to create "false" gun in the sense that they only takes blanks and have nonfunctional barrels. Or I'm I too optimistic?

[-] PugJesus@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago

Unfortunately, guns are deceptively simple. Just about anything that can detonate a realistic looking blank is capable of firing an actual bullet. And even if it's just a blank, any obstruction in the barrel can end up becoming an ad-hoc projectile by the force. Every once in a while, you have that happen in Civil War re-enactments.

[-] VelvetStorm@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

Thats also how Brandon Lee died. Iirc there was a squib malfunction that they didn't notice so when they shot a blank, the round was pushed out and killed him.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

We could get around this by having specific calibers that only come in blanks.

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Not really though because still, if anything is in the barrel, it becomes a projectile.

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

Ok but that's a separate issue and something that can happen with a regular gun loaded with a regular caliber blank, what they're saying is fake guns for movies should use a caliber for which no bullets exist, solving the main part of the issue, i.e. the fact that someone can load a normal bullet in a gun that is to be used as a prop.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago

This would help avoid this specific death, but not most others where the projectile wasn't an actual bullet from a live round, but something stuck in the barrel, like the other person says.

This situation was unusual in the sense that an incompetent armorer had live rounds on set, and the gun was loaded with one.

What I mean is that the main part of the issue is exactly not this.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

If the armorer wasn't willfully negligent it wouldn't be a problem. Not a problem for the vast majority of film sets. Just pure lack of professionalism from the armorer whose sole core responsibility is to ensure safety.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

if Baldwin wasn't waiving a gun around like a moron, a negligent armorer wouldn't have been a problem, either.

the armorer being negligent (and she was), doesn't mean that Baldwin wasn't also being negligent. and lets be perfectly clear: the reason Gutierrez-Reed was hired over other more professional armorers is precisely because she was "less professional"- or more bluntly, because she was willing to not insist on proper safety protocols that caused delays in shooting.

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

Woah woah woah. Baldwin should be allowed to do whatever the fuck he wants with a prop gun. If an armorer gives him a gun on a set, why would he reasonably believe it was able to hurt or kill someone?

If an actor is given a prop pipe bomb, and he throws it at a cast member in jest and it explodes...because the explosive expert gave him a live explosive why the fuck is that the actors fault?

Why is is Alec's fault he was horsing around with what effectively should have been a toy. It should have been a fancy cap gun at worst.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Woah woah woah. Baldwin should be allowed to do whatever the fuck he wants with a prop gun. If an armorer gives him a gun on a set, why would he reasonably believe it was able to hurt or kill someone?

because it's a fucking weapon. he knew it was a weapon.

secondly, it was Hall (another producer) that gave him the weapon, not HGR.

thirdly, you don't fuck around with even the non-firing propguns precisely because of how easy it is to mistake them. He fucked around, and Alyna Hutchins found out. Ergo, it's negligent homicide

[-] Tyfud@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Hate to say it, but I agree here.

This is the price paid for not treating real guns with respect. Prop bullets or otherwise.

[-] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 6 points 1 week ago

Wouldn't the live round have shot someone no matter what? The point of a blank round is so you can aim a gun at someone and not kill them.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

HGR definitely didn't do right here but a lot more went wrong. This was a perfect storm of negligence. Multiple people could have taken minor stands to have prevented this tragic tale. So many people spoke out and zero action was taken to address their concerns.

A layered safety approach is a great idea. But it only works when at least one person in a position to do so does what's right.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] ArgentRaven@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

In Blade Runner 2049, Weta Workshop had their laser pistols set up with a solenoid that moved back and forth with a trigger pull. Adam Savage looked at them in a Tested video. I don't know if it's cost prohibitive, but it sure seemed like the right way to do it.

However, you don't get smoke with that. You can definitely rig something up as they did it with a knock off nerf blaster in the 80's or even a cap gun, but at some point I assume the level of complexity makes modifying a real gun cheaper.

You could weld shut the barrel of a gun, which is what a lot of them do, but it seems like it's a cost cutting measure when they used real guns that would retain their value. Alec (as a producer) used a cheap setup with a cheap armorer that didn't know what they were doing. It's both of their faults.

[-] modifier@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 week ago

Man, I am a cinema buff and I just really don't think I care if the smoke is there at all, much less just right. Obviously botched attempts at realism are another matter entirely but this just seems like an area ripe for creativity and artistic reinterpretation.

Point is, we cede ground to the theater of the mind all the time, I don't know why realistic gunfire can't be treated similarly, and I think the lack of verisimilitude itself could be approached many different ways and that's even kind of exciting.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[-] billwashere@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Modify the dang things so they can’t take real ammo. Make it keyed somehow or odd shaped. Problem solved.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Pacmanlives@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

It’s funny I recently bumped into a guy who is a gunsmith and worked in Hollywood sets before so we talked about this. There are reasons to have a fully functional gun on set and the different rounds they use on set because there are a bunch of different types depending on the scene and lighting. They use different charges for different shots and a bunch of other things. Especially if it’s a practical effects movie.

The issue is making sure live ammo is not on set or around the guns on set. If you have access to these guns you can use them after filming is done with live rounds.

Alex trusted the people around him to do their jobs and they didn’t make it a safe set. This is like flipping the keys to Dodge Hellcat to your 15 1/2 year old son with a learners driving permit and his 18 year old friend riding shotgun. It’s not a good idea. They should be driving Kia Sportage.

[-] PancakeTrebuchet@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

With all the money spent on films, I'm amazed there isn't regulated "Hollywood" caliber firearms. Something incapable of chambering anything on the market, and only functions with the certified blanks.

Something akin to the way fake currency is controlled.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] dezmd@lemmy.world 69 points 1 week ago

https://apnews.com/article/alec-baldwin-politics-new-mexico-state-government-clovis-prop-gun-shooting-4318dd3bce9974099a8cdb599264f876

This was always a political bag of bullshit. They even had to fund it as a special prosecution with legislation, going so far as to assign a special prosecutor that happened to also be a state Republican legislator.

The gymnastics people keep using to align blame for manslaughter onto Bladwin have slowly become accepted as if it is factual like propaganda is meant to do.

[-] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Even if the armorer was at fault, he's still the producer, he ultimately hired and vetted the person. Apparently there were complains about safety on set too.

[-] hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world 67 points 1 week ago

Yeah been following the rust cases closely.

Kari Morrissey was the one who secured the conviction for Hannah Gutierrez Reid.

Important things to note for Alec Baldwin's case: he's got more money and resources for his defense. There's a bunch of high class attorneys that entered appearance for Baldwin. But he has 2 major problems: those attorneys are not from new Mexico. A good lawyer knows the law and a great lawyer knows the judge. Additionally, he is known for being bad at safety and security. That was already becoming clear in HGR's trial. But legally things are bad as well: he held the weapon. Now in other states that doesn't make him more culpable than HGR, but in new Mexico basically everyone holding a weapon is held accountable for the consequences of whatever they do while holding the weapon. This, together with what I would predict are looking like pretty bad facts for him rn, is an indication that he has a steep climb to make, unless Morrissey fucks up in a major way.

[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

Pretty solid summarization of the situation. I definitely think that Baldwin's on site safety problems and the seemingly rushed nature of production are going to bite him.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

I think lying about pulling the trigger will become an issue as well.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 18 points 1 week ago

but in new Mexico basically everyone holding a weapon is held accountable for the consequences of whatever they do while holding the weapon

Which is how it should be.

[-] manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml 34 points 1 week ago

Remember that this occured during a strike, and Baldwin brought in scabs to fill the positions, and then pushed one of those scabs to be the fallguy, despite baldwin being both the one in the position of power, and the one who fired the gun without checking it was loaded.

[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 52 points 1 week ago

It's not the actor's job to check if a prop is a functional weapon. They have other things to be focusing on.

But since he hired the people and set the policies, he's still responsible.

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
290 points (92.9% liked)

News

21656 readers
4709 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS