• QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 年前

    “Industry-wide practice” that goes against every firearms safety standard anywhere else. From what I remember it wasn’t even during a scene, he was just playing with it.

    I personally think, with the budgets of Hollywood Movies, there’s no reason they couldn’t have a gunsmith make/modify one to shoot only blanks.

    • bustrpoindextr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 年前

      From what I remember it wasn’t even during a scene, he was just playing with it.

      No, they were going over the scene right before filming. The shot in question was filming down the barrel of the gun, which is why it was pointed in the direction it was.

    • CapraObscura@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 年前

      Wow, almost like being on a movie set isn’t like being in a fucking shooting range.

      No, he was not “playing with it.” He was blocking out a scene and rehearsing. He removed the gun he was given from the holster and it fired.

      He should never have been handed a live firing gun. The armorer’s responsibility is to track all firearms at all times.

      I personally think, with the budgets of Hollywood Movies, there’s no reason they couldn’t have a gunsmith make/modify one to shoot only blanks.

      The firearm Baldwin was handed was unmodified. There was also one that had been modified to not fire anything, and another that was a resin cast replica. In other words, the entire industry is literally decades ahead of you in terms of safety and knowledge.

      You do not need to ensure a firearm shoots only blanks if you just… and I can’t stress this enough… DON’T INTENTIONALLY BRING REAL AMMUNITION ONTO A FILM SET.

      Which the armorer did.