• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Strange Deaths

Sounds like a list of errors that on there own you get away with but together end in disaster
 
Didn’t I read somewhere that some guys had walked off the set as some sort of industrial action just prior to this incident?
I immediately wondered if some miscreant had interfered with the gun to bring the production into disrepute with unintended horrendous results.
A lot of people I talk to have been speculating along those lines.
Even if that was the case, the nefarious activity should have been discovered IF all the correct protocols were followed on the set, I.e. the weapon was checked properly and made safe before being handed to the talent.
Personally I think the whole thing was a cluster fuck, poor on set working conditions, inexperienced specialists, unhappy crew, unprofessional activities occuring in down time, budget issues and egos. To name a few contributing factors.
 
Didn’t I read somewhere that some guys had walked off the set as some sort of industrial action just prior to this incident?
I immediately wondered if some miscreant had interfered with the gun to bring the production into disrepute with unintended horrendous results.
The person who was in charge of the armoury that day was very inexperienced. I guess she had been brought in to replace someone who'd gone on strike, or maybe she was just cheap non-union labour.
This was only her second film and there were 'issues' on the set of her first film (she had handed a gun to an 11 year old girl on-set).
That woman won't work in the film industry again.

I don't think there was any deliberate sabotage, just stupidity and an unprofessional approach to the handling of guns.
 
The person who was in charge of the armoury that day was very inexperienced. I guess she had been brought in to replace someone who'd gone on strike, or maybe she was just cheap non-union labour.
This was only her second film and there were 'issues' on the set of her first film (she had handed a gun to an 11 year old girl on-set).
That woman won't work in the film industry again.

I don't think there was any deliberate sabotage, just stupidity and an unprofessional approach to the handling of guns.
The armourer was Hannah Gutierrez Reed, daughter of Threll Reed, a legendary quick draw specialist and Hollywood weapons specialist, here is some info about her.

Screenshot_20211025-220308_Chrome.png


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...hins-alec-baldwin-rust-shooting-b1944122.html
 
I think ultimately the 1st AD is in the biggest trouble regarding this tragedy.

"Two other “Rust” production sources questioned if Assistant Director Dave Halls followed proper procedure before the tragic incident.

“He’s supposed to be our last line of defense and he failed us,” one source told The Daily Beast. “He’s the last person that’s supposed to look at that firearm.”

Halls was named in the affidavit calling out “cold gun,” indicating its safety before giving the weapon to Baldwin.

Another source confirmed that it should be the assistant director’s job to test each gun for being “hot” — loaded with live rounds, or “cold” — loaded with blank rounds.

“This check alone should’ve prevented this incident,” the person told The Daily Beast."

https://nypost.com/2021/10/23/rust-...-reed-once-gave-unchecked-gun-to-child-actor/
 
The armourer was Hannah Gutierrez Reed, daughter of Threll Reed, a legendary quick draw specialist and Hollywood weapons specialist, here is some info about her.

View attachment 47192

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...hins-alec-baldwin-rust-shooting-b1944122.html
Yes, I know that. It does not mean that she learned everything that was necessary.
She had a problem with loading blanks and had to get her Dad to coach her very quickly ('loading blanks' I take to mean removing the bullet from the cartridge, removing some powder and then sealing it all up).
Even so, she maybe does not have the maturity for such a role.
 
Yes, I know that. It does not mean that she learned everything that was necessary.
She had a problem with loading blanks and had to get her Dad to coach her very quickly ('loading blanks' I take to mean removing the bullet from the cartridge, removing some powder and then sealing it all up).
Even so, she maybe does not have the maturity for such a role.
I agree
 
Yes, I know that. It does not mean that she learned everything that was necessary.
She had a problem with loading blanks and had to get her Dad to coach her very quickly ('loading blanks' I take to mean removing the bullet from the cartridge, removing some powder and then sealing it all up).
Even so, she maybe does not have the maturity for such a role.
There are reports that her methods on the set of her previous, and only other job as head armour left a lot to be desired, such as loading blanks into a gun on the gravelled floor and failing to check the barrel was clear of debris afterwards, which led to the production being halted whilst someone else checked the weapon.
 
There are reports that her methods on the set of her previous, and only other job as head armour left a lot to be desired, such as loading blanks into a gun on the gravelled floor and failing to check the barrel was clear of debris afterwards, which led to the production being halted whilst someone else checked the weapon.
What kind of professional doesn't have a table with tools, etc. close to hand? Just asking for trouble.
 
She had a problem with loading blanks and had to get her Dad to coach her very quickly ('loading blanks' I take to mean removing the bullet from the cartridge, removing some powder and then sealing it all up).

The phrase “loading blanks” is ambiguous, and could refer to the processes of either:

a) Manufacturing blank ammo, or;

b) Inserting blank ammo into a firearm.

I’d hope that blanks for film sets wouldn’t be made by removing bullets from “live” cartridges, as there’d be too much room for mistakes; blanks in a huge range of calibres are readily available.

Manufacturing blanks is typically done by cutting down an appropriate longer cartridge case (.45ACP pistol blanks can be made from .30-06 rifle cases, for example), charging with powder under a styrofoam retaining wad, then crimping the case mouth. The question is: why would a film set armourer bother when professionally-made rounds are available off the shelf?

maximus otter
 
If the gun had what we Brits would call a real bullet in it, where did it come from?

OK, people make mistakes and pick up the wrong thing, but how could a real bullet be mixed up with the blanks?

What business did an actual shooty projectile have being anywhere near a gun that was being used as a cinematic prop?

That's the armourer's responsibility. She sounds pretty much incompetent.
 
Mods, how about a separate thread for the Baldwin shooting?
 
The phrase “loading blanks” is ambiguous, and could refer to the processes of either:

a) Manufacturing blank ammo, or;

b) Inserting blank ammo into a firearm.

I’d hope that blanks for film sets wouldn’t be made by removing bullets from “live” cartridges, as there’d be too much room for mistakes; blanks in a huge range of calibres are readily available.

Manufacturing blanks is typically done by cutting down an appropriate longer cartridge case (.45ACP pistol blanks can be made from .30-06 rifle cases, for example), charging with powder under a styrofoam retaining wad, then crimping the case mouth. The question is: why would a film set armourer bother when professionally-made rounds are available off the shelf?

maximus otter
Exactly - blanks are readily available and can be bought by anyone in the UK don't suppose it's different in the US. Live rounds on the set suggests that someone was arsing about.
 
If the gun had what we Brits would call a real bullet in it, where did it come from?

OK, people make mistakes and pick up the wrong thing, but how could a real bullet be mixed up with the blanks?

What business did an actual shooty projectile have being anywhere near a gun that was being used as a cinematic prop?

That's the armourer's responsibility. She sounds pretty much incompetent.
According to reports, the crew were using the productions firearms for target practice, near to the set, in their down time.

"A prop gun that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in an accidental shooting had allegedly been used for off-set target practice, according to a report by celebrity website TMZ.

Sources told the site the prop gun fired by Alec Baldwin on the set of the western movie Rust on Thursday had also been used to fire real bullets by crew members."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ins-baldwin-gun-target-practice-b1945077.html
 
That's the armourer's responsibility. She sounds pretty much incompetent.
Incompetent and criminally negligent, together with the shooter causing the gun to be pointed where others were standing.

As a slight aside, but nonetheless somewhat relevant, I've noticed an increasing trend for people to hold themselves out to be an "expert" in some subject or field, when really they've had a days training if that, or have "read a lot" about the subject or similar. When the health or safety of others is concerned they can become dangerous liabilities. I came across this very recently where the person concerned should not have been allowed anywhere near other people.
 
Incompetent and criminally negligent, together with the shooter causing the gun to be pointed where others were standing.

As a slight aside, but nonetheless somewhat relevant, I've noticed an increasing trend for people to hold themselves out to be an "expert" in some subject or field, when really they've had a days training if that, or have "read a lot" about the subject or similar. When the health or safety of others is concerned they can become dangerous liabilities. I came across this very recently where the person concerned should not have been allowed anywhere near other people.
My old manager used to say "Never trust anyone who calls themselves an expert."
 
See it with you own eyes, validate and verify, you cant go wrong :)
That's OK if you are competent to understand what you're being shown. Come to guns, which I used to fire on ranges and had to load myself, I couldn't say whether one was correctly prepared or not.
 
According to reports, the crew were using the productions firearms for target practice, near to the set, in their down time.

"A prop gun that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in an accidental shooting had allegedly been used for off-set target practice, according to a report by celebrity website TMZ.

Sources told the site the prop gun fired by Alec Baldwin on the set of the western movie Rust on Thursday had also been used to fire real bullets by crew members."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ins-baldwin-gun-target-practice-b1945077.html
(Note use of the technical term real bullets there! :wink2:)

That's just shocking.

It wouldn't happen in the UK if only because we're not generally interested in guns and they'd be locked up anyway.
 
Incompetent and criminally negligent, together with the shooter causing the gun to be pointed where others were standing.

As a slight aside, but nonetheless somewhat relevant, I've noticed an increasing trend for people to hold themselves out to be an "expert" in some subject or field, when really they've had a days training if that, or have "read a lot" about the subject or similar. When the health or safety of others is concerned they can become dangerous liabilities. I came across this very recently where the person concerned should not have been allowed anywhere near other people.
When I worked at the Magistrates' Courts the term 'expert' was taken very seriously indeed. Sometimes a defendant would claim to be an expert on something and the Clerk would say 'No, you are not an expert recognised by the Court.'

In a legal context an 'Expert' is called or appointed by the Court. That's the standard we should look to.
 
That's OK if you are competent to understand what you're being shown. Come to guns, which I used to fire on ranges and had to load myself, I couldn't say whether one was correctly prepared or not.
I would never use a tool unless I was competent in using it
 
Read in a newspaper a long time ago:
Ex = a has been
Spurt = a drip under pressure
I can claim to have invented the following variation that I'd trot out in the context of my AI R&D work decades ago:

Expertise:
Ex = a has-been
Spurt = a drip under pressure
Tease = the claim or promise of something you cannot in fact deliver
 
According to reports, the crew were using the productions firearms for target practice, near to the set, in their down time.

"A prop gun that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins in an accidental shooting had allegedly been used for off-set target practice, according to a report by celebrity website TMZ.

Sources told the site the prop gun fired by Alec Baldwin on the set of the western movie Rust on Thursday had also been used to fire real bullets by crew members."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ins-baldwin-gun-target-practice-b1945077.html

Well I think this case is solved. FFS.
 
When I worked at the Magistrates' Courts the term 'expert' was taken very seriously indeed. Sometimes a defendant would claim to be an expert on something and the Clerk would say 'No, you are not an expert recognised by the Court.'

In a legal context an 'Expert' is called or appointed by the Court. That's the standard we should look to.
As long as one doesn't automatically assume qualifications = expert. Practical experience should count as well.
 
Back
Top