• Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Very much disagree. This was the responsibility of the firearms master and barring that the prop master.

    As an actor on a professional set, it would be irresponsible to mess with a potentially dangerous prop in a way not indicated by the individual in charge of it. It could be a specialized gun modified in such a way that trying to remove a round makes a specialized effect charge go off. Way to go Alec. Now we need to take a 2 hour break as the prop master resets your fuck up when you were supposed to set off that smoke charge pulling the trigger.

    It’s the actor’s job to get into the moment and act, there are other roles explicitly in charge of on set safety. Their prop master failed at their job. A professional pretender is one of the few situations where it is not their responsibility to actually know everything about what they’re supposed to be pretending to do.

    It isn’t an actor’s job to send a sample of sugar glass to a lab to make sure it’s safely fragile enough to throw a co-star through, or rip open the foam bag they’re supposed to push a Co star “off a building” into to check for sharp objects. Such a disruptive actor wouldn’t get very far in their career.

    • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      “It isn’t an actor’s job”

      Yeah… But he wasn’t just an actor. Baldwin was a Producer. An actor and producer who ON THE DAY BEFORE HIS WEAPON WENT OFF had his stunt double have an accidental discharge of a weapon on set that fired a real ass bullet. I repeat. He had a complete dry run of the accident with his own fucking stunt double where nobody gor hurt because of complete chance after which he had crew approach him with extreme concerns over which a number resigned in protest. If he had been working on a union show they would have shut the whole thing down for a bloody week when the stunt double discharged that bullet but they didn’t… Because union shows and studios have chains of safety liability that are designed to stop productions cold when they are in danger of causing a death. This serves not just to protect workers but Producers because if something goes wrong they are liable. Studios generally employ Production Managers who in exchange for veto power over Producers decisions assume the liability for safety.

      Independent shows do not have those safety nets. If your Production manager comes to you and says “This has to stop” in an independent show that’s more of a suggestion then a firm veto. In this case, the Producers flagrantly ignored those warnings and said that they would continue as is. People generally don’t know what a Producer’s role is… Hell Producers sometimes do not realize their full list of responsibilities because a lot of the less fun parts get outsourced but tje fact is if you are paying to make a show you are an employer who is liable for the safety of your employees.

      In 2014 camera assist Sarah Jones was killed on a film set because Producers decided to okay a camera set up on train tracks for a shot. All but one was charged with manslaughter. The whole trial situation here missed the fucking point. They just as well told these rich independent nut jobs that they can get away with making shows under dangerous work conditions as long as they are popular.

    • dukeofdummies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ordinarily I would agree, but there are a few issues with that.

      For one, he’s not just an actor. He’s also credited as one of the 13 producers and co-producers. That producer hat does not disappear once the director yells action. That alone should open up a door for all 13 of these guys to get charges applied if they ignored warnings about safety. Not saying it’s an open and shut case, hell maybe he’s only producer in name for bragging rights and never attended a meeting, it’s a valid argument he can make. But I think it definitely opens the door.

      Secondly, the amount of star power he has does give him some power in this film. If people are complaining about safety and he’s domineering over people going “Shut up! I need filming done in 3 months so I can move to x film, give me the gun lets go”. He’s culpable in my eyes. He actively silenced and ignored concerns in that hypothetical and proceeded to roll the dice himself. Again no idea if that happened but it would absolutely open the door for charges.

      The fact that the case is being dropped suggests that maybe they thought they had a case in these two veins, but ultimately couldn’t make the argument to a reliable degree.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      3 days ago

      If the actor doesn’t know how to handle a fire arm, he has no business holding one at all.

      Movie set doesn’t get soem sort of exception to these rules. Guns are made to kill peopel, the only reason why society permits non state actor handle guns is with understanding that you know how to handle the weapon. If you don’t know, then use a fake.

      A dead victim so actors can play with real guns for a circus for the plebs is unacceptable