Actor fires "prop gun," kills cinematographer and wounds director on-set

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been thinking a lot about responsible gun handling in the context of movie making lately, most of it spurred by the comments on this thread, some of which I concur with, some of which I don't. I understand that a Hollywood actor might not know anything about firearms. Or care. I also understand that their are supposed to be many checks and balances in place to prevent injury. I understand that the word on the street was that this movie was being done on the cheap, without paying for some of those checks and balances, which the producers may not have thought they needed on a low budget production. I understand that it appears that Baldwin trusted the assistant director that the pistol was not dangerous, and he had likely done so several times before this tragedy without incident.

All of the above leads me to this: If the scene called for Baldwin to place the muzzle to his temple and fire, would he have checked the gun himself before . . . ?

Everything else is just window dressing . . .
 
...All of the above leads me to this: If the scene called for Baldwin to place the muzzle to his temple and fire, would he have checked the gun himself before . . . ?.
My guess is that he would not have. I saw him on the news talking about how in the movie biz they rely on experts to tell them what to do.

I bet in the future, if ever called to shoot at someone or his own head in a movie, he'll think pretty carefully about it.

Actors should at least be taught how to distinguish a live round from a blank/dummy, and taught how to check the guns they use themselves. (Fine to have an armorer or AD or whatever looking over your shoulder. Better yet, let the guy being shot at check the gun, too.)
 
It's about the old admonishment
that whatever you say may and
can be used against you.

Even the most innocent phrase
no matter how benign might be
twisted by a smart lawyer and
all lawyers are smart, aren't they?
 
Jon-Erik Hexum

My guess is that he would not have. I saw him on the news talking about how in the movie biz they rely on experts to tell them what to do.

I bet in the future, if ever called to shoot at someone or his own head in a movie, he'll think pretty carefully about it.

Actors should at least be taught how to distinguish a live round from a blank/dummy, and taught how to check the guns they use themselves. (Fine to have an armorer or AD or whatever looking over your shoulder. Better yet, let the guy being shot at check the gun, too.)

Arlo—I am surprised no one has mentioned this or I may have missed it in all the posts, but that very thing happened in 1984. I remember reading about it and was stunned someone would put a .44 Magnum to his head and fire. I think that was my first realization that not everyone is a gun person or grew up around firearms. When I read the initial coverage of the incident it mentioned that a lot of Hollywood types know nothing about firearms and that the muzzle blast from a blank round can kill you just as dead as a 240 grain hollow-point.

This young man was playing on the set with a .44 Mag, simulating Russian Roulette. The wadding from the blank did not penetrate his skull but a coin sized piece of his skull was blown into his brain from the muzzle blast.

Who was Jon-Erik Hexum? All about the actor who killed himself with a prop gun, as internet draws comparisons to Alec Baldwin incident
 
How things change........

1930s gangster movies used live rounds from Thompson's to make the effects before squibs were used, the most explicit of these shots is when james cagney and edward woods duck around a corner as they are sprayed by gunfire, quite a novel idea at the time, but not very long lasting.
 
Those statements don't square up with what I asked . . .
Sorry, I must have misunderstood the question.

****

Re shooting one's self in the head, years ago, probably close to forty, I read in the news of a guy who was, per the article, playing with his .357 revolver in front of his young daughter and her friend. The friend became nervous, and asked of he were sure the gun was unloaded.

He replied, "If it were loaded, would I do this?!," and put the gun to his head, pulled the trigger and blew his brains out.
 
Last edited:
The question is would he have done so? Your fella did, but he didn't have somebody else announcing it was a "cold gun. . . " And your fella' didn't point it at anyone else . . .



Sorry, I must have misunderstood the question.

****

Re shooting one's self in the head, years ago, probably close to forty, I read in the news of a guy who was, per the article, playing with his .357 revolver in front of his young daughter and her friend. The friend became nervous, and asked of he were sure the gun was unloaded.

He replied, "If it were loaded, would I do this?!," and put the gun to his head, pulled the trigger and blew his brains out.
 
Muss, my fella, separated by the asterisks, was meant to be a separate incident, no connection to the Baldwin case. I meant to show an example of the inexplicably foolish, dangerous, fatal things people do with guns...

***

Re Baldwin, I understood you to say that you wondered what Baldwin would have done if he had been told — by the script or the director, I presume — shoot himself in the head. I speculated — don't know, of course — that he would have done so, based on his statement that on movie sets actors do what the "experts" tell them to do.

But, hey, it's all good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top