Alec Baldwin Shooting

[onlinebiker]

Two klansman can run down a black man and shoot him to death and you're nothing but wait and see.  Alec baldwin fires a prop gun...and you're pretty sure he needs to be in a cell.

It;d be funny if it were a joke.

You make up some stupid shit.

It would be funny - but the joke is you.


....

[Spongebob]

I read that one of the reasons for using real fire arms on sets was that the sound and recoil of an actual powder discharge creates a more realistic reaction from the actors, which I found interesting.  Also there are cases where they want to show smoke emanating from the gun itself.  I'm certainly not in a position to argue, but they are "actors".  

I suppose that the script itself is more of a factor to me than little things like this.  If anyone has seen the film, "The Devil all the Time", that's a film that has an incredible story and great acting.  Guns are used in the story a few times and I really don't think 100% realism with the guns is as important as what was taking place in the story in that case.

That may be true, but humans have put men on the moon, I don't think it is impossible to improve special effects and make fake weapons that are 100% safe. Hollywood needs to work on that.

You aren't disagreeing with me; you're just confirming what I said.  I said I don't care if they use special effects vs real weapons and I said the script is more important to me than what type of effects they use.

[Brian37]

That may be true, but humans have put men on the moon, I don't think it is impossible to improve special effects and make fake weapons that are 100% safe. Hollywood needs to work on that.

You aren't disagreeing with me; you're just confirming what I said.  I said I don't care if they use special effects vs real weapons and I said the script is more important to me than what type of effects they use.

The key to entertainment is "suspension of disbelief". It is why Jaws made me shit my pants. I get that. But I am not talking about the desire to escape for a couple of hours. I am talking about real life safety to the makers of such stories. 

I simply do not see why a real gun with live ammo should ever be on a movie set. Post production and CGI should suffice.

[onlinebiker]

For once I agree with 37.


For the most part - very few people pick up on the inaccuracies of guns in films.

Most can' t tell a Colt Army single from a Ruger Blackhawk - and it does nothing to the story line.

Only someone like me that can tell the make, model and generation at a glance does it make a difference.

And it' s sort of fun picking out the ones they get wrong.

Worst offender - Dead in Tombstone - and I think Danny Trejo is awesome..... I kind of wonder if they did some of it on purpose?

[slartibartfast]

Of course it matters. Context is everything. It's the same as saying if I drive my car in the real world I am responsible for the safety of said car. Which is true if I am the owner. If someone hands me a car (such as, say on a movie set) and asks me to drive the car for a scene in the movie, the car then has faulty brakes and I run someone over would you then say "well you were driving the car, you should have checked the brakes". 

Which in the scenario of acting is of course, ridiculous, as the responsibility for making sure any equipment I am supplied on set by my employer is fit for purpose, and works as described. If Baldwin had brought his own gun to the set, then you would be right, however you are not. 

If I am doing a scene with a realistic looking - but soft - rubber knife and I have to convincingly stab someone, but the assistant hands me a real knife instead, I am not to blame.

So I think your ideas are completely fucked up.... and I am glad I don't live in your world. 

BTW. You calling me Jesus should be slightly offensive to me as an Atheist? 

You can' t tell the difference between a real knife and a rubber one simply by picking it up?

You' re a moron.

If you can' t tell a real knife from a rubber one by simply doing a flex test of the blade -

You' re a fucking moron.

If you take someone's word for it that the deadly looking weapon they hand you is not deadly - and you kill someone with it you a fucking negligent moron.

And you should be placed in the cell next to Mr Baldwin.

As per usual you are nit-picking on details and completely missing the point.

[Brian37]

You can' t tell the difference between a real knife and a rubber one simply by picking it up?

You' re a moron.

If you can' t tell a real knife from a rubber one by simply doing a flex test of the blade -

You' re a fucking moron.

If you take someone's word for it that the deadly looking weapon they hand you is not deadly - and you kill someone with it you a fucking negligent moron.

And you should be placed in the cell next to Mr Baldwin.

As per usual you are nit-picking on details and completely missing the point.

I don't think anyone should give Alec a complete pass. It was his production. I would argue on his behalf that sometimes the boss gets brain dead. I do think he should be civil liable to some degree. But I do not think there was criminal intent. 

I can tell you in my entire working lifetime of jobs, where I saw my boss doing something stupid and caught it and saved their ass. This comes across to me as Alec simply taking things for granted.

---

On some detective show I saw a story of movie producers whom had part of a script where the story had the actors on a railroad bridge depicting the life and death of one of the actors on a hospital gurney. They did not have legal permission to film on the bridge. The crew had no idea about the real train schedule, and while filming a real train came down the tracks, and the actors and crew did not have enough time to get out of the way, and one of the crew died as as  result.

[The Architect Of Fate]

You make up some stupid shit.

It would be funny - but the joke is you.

Debbie you are a walking punchline so shush

[Spongebob]

The key to entertainment is "suspension of disbelief". It is why Jaws made me shit my pants. I get that. But I am not talking about the desire to escape for a couple of hours. I am talking about real life safety to the makers of such stories. 

I simply do not see why a real gun with live ammo should ever be on a movie set. Post production and CGI should suffice.

Again, no argument.  Makes total sense to me.

Also makes me wonder what all those magicians use when they perform the "catch a bullet in the teeth" trick.

---

For once I agree with 37.


For the most part - very few people pick up on the inaccuracies of guns in films.

Most can' t tell a Colt Army single from a Ruger Blackhawk - and it does nothing to the story line.

Only someone like me that can tell the make, model and generation at a glance does it make a difference.

And it' s sort of fun picking out the ones they get wrong.

Worst offender - Dead in Tombstone - and I think Danny Trejo is awesome..... I kind of wonder if they did some of it on purpose?

OK, since you mentioned this, I have a question for anyone.  I have noticed that most times you see someone handling a handgun (just handguns for this particular issue) in a film, it rattles a lot when they move it around, even slightly.  I own a Colt semi-automatic and it makes no sound whatsoever when I move it unless I shake it really hard (mag/chamber empty of course).  I've also done this with a couple of pistols my father owns, both revolvers, and they make very little sound.  But whenever you see someone on TV or a movie move a pistol even an inch, it sounds like a tin can full of rocks.  Why do they do this?

[Brian37]

The key to entertainment is "suspension of disbelief". It is why Jaws made me shit my pants. I get that. But I am not talking about the desire to escape for a couple of hours. I am talking about real life safety to the makers of such stories. 

I simply do not see why a real gun with live ammo should ever be on a movie set. Post production and CGI should suffice.

Again, no argument.  Makes total sense to me.

Also makes me wonder what all those magicians use when they perform the "catch a bullet in the teeth" trick.

---

For once I agree with 37.


For the most part - very few people pick up on the inaccuracies of guns in films.

Most can' t tell a Colt Army single from a Ruger Blackhawk - and it does nothing to the story line.

Only someone like me that can tell the make, model and generation at a glance does it make a difference.

And it' s sort of fun picking out the ones they get wrong.

Worst offender - Dead in Tombstone - and I think Danny Trejo is awesome..... I kind of wonder if they did some of it on purpose?

OK, since you mentioned this, I have a question for anyone.  I have noticed that most times you see someone handling a handgun (just handguns for this particular issue) in a film, it rattles a lot when they move it around, even slightly.  I own a Colt semi-automatic and it makes no sound whatsoever when I move it unless I shake it really hard (mag/chamber empty of course).  I've also done this with a couple of pistols my father owns, both revolvers, and they make very little sound.  But whenever you see someone on TV or a movie move a pistol even an inch, it sounds like a tin can full of rocks.  Why do they do this?

I don't know what to argue considering the decades I have debated firearms other than to say that they are dangerous.

[Spongebob]

I don't know what to argue considering the decades I have debated firearms other than to say that they are dangerous.

You would have provided more information relevant to my question if you posted about pistachio ice cream.