Fatal accident on movie set - Alec Baldwin shoots cinematographer

[Frank Cox]

Is it always possible to avoid, though?

I'm thinking of a scene where bad guy A has grabbed hostage B by the neck and holding a gun to her head. Everything is so close together that I don't see how alternating shots could make that work.

That's where you would be using a toy gun instead of a real one instead, right?

[Bobby Henderson]

If a camera shot is close up enough and/or sharp enough in detail using a real, yet unloaded, gun is going to be important for the "reality" of the camera shot.

It has been commonplace where unloaded weapons are "dry-fired" at actors in certain camera shots. Look at the opening action sequence of Speed. Dennis Hopper dry fires an empty shotgun at Keanu Reeve's face inside an elevator. I'll have to look at how that was edited again, but the scene still makes me nervous as hell.

The #1 rule of firearm safety is NEVER point a gun at someone unless you intend to shoot them.

Actually that's cardinal rule #2. Rule #1 is always treat guns as if they are loaded. Rule #3 is keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire. Rule #4 is identify your target AND what is behind your target.

Follow all four rules and it will be impossible to unintentionally shoot yourself or anyone else. Most shooting "accidents" involve violating 2 or more of those 4 cardinal rules of gun safety.

It shouldn't be necessary to point a gun at anyone during a rehearsal or take.

Yeah, the actor could just mime out the motion for the camera. Some productions will have rubber guns for things like fight scenes. They could have also made doubly sure the gun wasn't loaded and the actor was competent in his pistol drawing technique. From what I understand the shooting occurred on a rehearsal of the take. No reason to pull the trigger. Anyone "green" or not well-practiced at handling firearms may be shaky on the technique of drawing a pistol without grabbing the trigger. I think Baldwin could have just as easily shot himself in the leg.

[Frank Cox]

It's absolutely news to me that they even use real guns on movie sets, for anything at all.

I had always assumed that weapons like that were models or replicas or toys. Especially the way some of those guys throw a 40+ pound sniper rifle around, I thought they couldn't possibly be real guns.

I just found a webpage (http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers) that says the guns in Starship Troopers were real rifles and shotguns, which I find absolutely mind boggling, and they fired over 300,000 blank cartridges during the filming.

I can understand that the filmmakers want stuff to look real, but doesn't that sound over-the-top to you?

[Marcel Birgelen]

Realistic props are often more expensive than the real thing. Also, if you're using a fake gun, you don't get stuff like realistic report, muzzle flash, recoil and the actor's resulting actions. Adding in those things digitally isn't cheap or is often practically impossible.

I just heard last week that the "Captain's Chair" they used for the Enterprise D set (the one where Picard sat on), got stolen twice during the run of the shows and the movie it was featured in and a replacement came in at USD 50k, not corrected for inflation. You can buy a DCI projector for that money. :P

[Randy Stankey]

My GF's father worked on television shows before he made movies and he told me a story about shooting an episode of a TV series in Japan.

They needed guns for props but, in the 1960s, it was impossible to import guns into Japan.
There was much wrangling and gnashing of teeth, trying to figure out a way to get some guns but no-go!

Finally, Dad was walking around in a toy store in Japan and found a bunch of plastic, toy guns that were realistic enough to use for the TV show.

One of the top ten most famous gunfight scenes in Western movie history: The Mexican Standoff scene in "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly."
It is one of the most pivotal scenes in the whole movie but there is only one gunshot in the whole thing and it was filmed from far enough away that you can't tell whether the gun in Blondie's hand was actually pointed at Angel Eyes or whether it was pointed slightly to one side.

The scene was planned and shot so that it would be impossible to tell where any guns were actually pointed yet it was still riveting to watch.

I have no faith that the people in charge of "Rust" put any such thought and planning into their movie. No wonder two people got shot!

I will be very disappointed if somebody doesn't go to jail for criminal negligence (minimum) or at least get their ass sued off because of this.

[Bobby Henderson]

Realistic props are often more expensive than the real thing. Also, if you're using a fake gun, you don't get stuff like realistic report, muzzle flash, recoil and the actor's resulting actions. Adding in those things digitally isn't cheap or is often practically impossible.

Yeah, in short, it takes a real gun, but one shooting blank cartridges to generate an authentic look on a movie set. A fake, toy gun isn't going to do that. The muzzle flash and spent brass flying out the ejection port are details you won't see from a fake gun.

Blank cartridges loaded in something like a semi-auto pistol or semi-auto rifle need enough of a gun powder "charge" packed into the cartridge for the firearm to function. It takes a good amount of force/recoil to blow back the slide of a handgun against the internal spring wrapped around the barrel. The blow-back ejects the spent shell casing out of the ejection port. As the slide rams forward back into place the next round is fed into the chamber from the magazine.

Finally, Dad was walking around in a toy store in Japan and found a bunch of plastic, toy guns that were realistic enough to use for the TV show.

When I lived in Japan in the late 1970's (as a Marine Corps brat), I was amazed at how truly awesome the toy guns were over there. These things were very realistic. One of my friends got a toy pistol that looked and felt exactly like the .44 magnum Clint Eastwood used in Dirty Harry. The thing was made of metal, not plastic. I had a plastic M-16 rifle nearly as big as the real thing. A bunch of the toy guns shot little, round gray plastic pellets. The pellets didn't fire at any harmful speeds, like that of a BB gun. The pellets wouldn't leave a mark or even hurt. Me, my brother and our friends would have some epic pellet gun fights with those toys. I shot my brother up his nose at least a couple times. He'd have to call time-out to do the snot-rocket to get the pellet out of there.

Japanese cartoons and live action super hero shows were often really violent and even gory. But the country had extremely strict laws about real guns.

I will be very disappointed if somebody doesn't go to jail for criminal negligence (minimum) or at least get their ass sued off because of this.

One detail I heard today was that one of the crew members took the pistol in question out shooting and hunting the day before. The crew member brought that gun back to the movie set still loaded with regular handgun ammo. If that's the case then it's pretty damning for that crew member. I don't know if the bullets were FMJ, full metal jacket "ball" ammo (for range practice) or JHP, jacketed hollow point ammo (for self defense or killing things). I'm guessing FMJ since the round passed completely through the cinematographer and then hit the director. Hollow point rounds expand out and stop very quickly when entering a target. FMJ rounds will do more to over-penetrate. A back-stop is necessary, such as the ones at a shooting range. All people involved with handling this handgun failed to check the kind of ammo loaded in it, just assuming it was loaded with blanks.

[Lyle Romer]

One detail I heard today was that one of the crew members took the pistol in question out shooting and hunting the day before. The crew member brought that gun back to the movie set still loaded with regular handgun ammo. If that's the case then it's pretty damning for that crew member. I don't know if the bullets were FMJ, full metal jacket "ball" ammo (for range practice) or JHP, jacketed hollow point ammo (for self defense or killing things). I'm guessing FMJ since the round passed completely through the cinematographer and then hit the director. Hollow point rounds expand out and stop very quickly when entering a target. FMJ rounds will do more to over-penetrate. A back-stop is necessary, such as the ones at a shooting range. All people involved with handling this handgun failed to check the kind of ammo loaded in it, just assuming it was loaded with blanks.

If that is true, the crew member should be charged with negligent homicide or something similar. To leave any gun loaded after going shooting is careless. To do it with a gun that you know is being used for filming is extremely negligent.

This still should have been caught by the crew because they should have done safety checks but live ammo should never have been brought to the set, period.

[Dave Macaulay]

The "prop" guns are often real guns.
This is a western, meaning single action revolvers. You need to cock the hammer. If you let it go while cocking but it isn't in battery: bang!
There should NEVER be live rounds on set. Period.
Typically an armorer holds all guns until needed, then takes the gun and ammo to be used to the AD in charge of the scene, shows the rounds and loads the gun or the AD does it. If a revolver is to be filmed close up there are dummy rounds so it looks loaded - these are a cartridge case with bullet in place but with no powder and usually some small ball bearings or BBs inside so they have a definite rattle when shaken - powder does not rattle.
The facts (facts?) released over the weekend indicate a really fucked up movie shoot. They only had one camera operator (the rest walked out) and short staffed crew overall. They were behind schedule and trying to do what they could. The scene apparently had the gun drawn and fired at the camera. There was a plexiglass shield to stop what a blank fires - burning powder and packing. The gun table was unattended for several periods. The director called "cold gun" obviously without having checked it - this means NO ammunition loaded, not blanks, not anything. This is how rehearsals are done, only on a "take" is a loaded gun handed to the actor.
It's clear that the whole thing was a SNAFU. I expect someone will get the blame - probably whoever gave the gun to him to do a rehearsal with. But the entire set was a disaster zone.
I read that this was not an IA set. I don't know what the crew was, non union or under a different one. IA just settled a labor dispute over working conditions but it is far too common to work crews crazy long hours with early calls after a late night working. Tired people make mistakes.

[Martin McCaffery]

Some more on protocols:
Crew member: Baldwin careful with guns before fatal shooting
The Associated PressBy RYAN PEARSON and GILLIAN FLACCUS - Associated PressOct 25, 2021, 4:46 AM
[snip]

Jeffrey Wright, who has worked on projects including the James Bond franchise and the upcoming movie “The Batman,” was acting with a weapon on the set of “Westworld” when news broke of the shooting Thursday at a New Mexico ranch. “We were all pretty shocked. And it informed what we did from that moment on,” he said in an interview Sunday at the Newport Beach Film Festival.

“I don’t recall ever being handed a weapon that was not cleared in front of me — meaning chamber open, barrel shown to me, light flashed inside the barrel to make sure that it’s cleared,” Wright said. “Clearly, that was a mismanaged set.”

Actor Ray Liotta agreed with Wright that the checks on firearms are usually extensive.

“They always — that I know of — they check it so you can see,” Liotta said. “They give it to the person you’re pointing the gun at, they do it to the producer, they show whoever is there that it doesn’t work.”

[Leo Enticknap]

I read that this was not an IA set.

I don't know whether it was formally a union set (as in, staffed exclusively by IATSE members), but it was reported that union guys and gals from more than one local had walked off the set the previous day after paychecks hadn't materialized, and they deemed working conditions to be unsafe and in breach of contracts. They were hurriedly replaced by nonunion workers. It was also reported that at the time of the accident, Hutchins was the only IATSE member (Local 600) still working on the set. Presumably her seniority in the production team was such that she didn't have to do the hour-long drives to and from hotels, hence she didn't consider herself to be involved in the dispute.

[Jon Dent]

Ultimately someone (or someones) really screwed up. What is disheartening to see is how quickly the vultures on both sides came out and made it political. Some of the venom being spewed at Baldwin like he somehow 'deserved this' is truly depressing.

[Randy Stankey]

...Some of the venom being spewed at Baldwin like he somehow 'deserved this' is truly depressing.

I'd say that Baldwin is mostly a victim, here.

When I was a kid and my father was teaching me about guns, he would often hand me a gun at random. There might have been a round in the chamber or there might not. It could be an empty cartridge. It could be a round in the magazine but not chambered. I never knew.

The first thing I had to do upon taking possession of any gun was to open the action and check it. Sometimes, he would lie to me and tell me that the gun was empty when it wasn't. The only way to know for sure was to check. That was the point of the exercise. If I didn't check, I got hit HARD!

While I believe in teaching gun safety, I draw the line at hitting. (Maybe yelling but not hitting...but that's a discussion for another day.)

One time, I was at a skeet shooting range with my father and a couple of his buddies. It was my turn to shoot and my father handed me a loaded shotgun and told me to take my place.

Number-2 High. I holler "Pull!" Bird flies out. Boom! I hit it!
Number-2 Low. Pull! Bam! Another hit!

One of my father's buddies takes the gun, reloads it and hands it back.
"Now, shoot doubles," he said.

"Pull!" ... Bam! First bird down!
I recovered, drew a bead on the second bird and fired... Ka-BLAM!
Next thing I know, I'm on the ground nursing a bruised shoulder while my father and his buddies laugh like hyenas.

My father's buddy loaded a 3 inch magnum shell in the second chamber and didn't tell me.
My father crosses his arms and says, "That's what you get for trusting somebody else when they hand you a gun!"

Forty years later, I still check every gun, every time I pick one up.

If somebody did to Alec Baldwin (rhetorically speaking) what my father did to me, this whole incident probably wouldn't have happened.

But, okay... Throw the guy a bone. He was on a movie set under (supposedly) controlled conditions.
When somebody who is supposed to be a professional hands him a gun and says it's okay, he does have the right to take the guy at his word. Doesn't he?

Personally, I don't like to use jargon like "Cold Gun" and I try not to use those terms.
I prefer to say, "Unloaded" or "Chamber Empty." If there's a round in the chamber, I might say, "Locked and Loaded" or "Round in Mag" if there's one in the magazine. If the gun is loaded with blanks, I'll say, "Blank Round." If there is a bullet, I'll say, "Bullet."
There's just too much opportunity for people to misunderstand if you say, "Hot" or "Cold."

People were obviously playing it fast and loose with guns on the set of "Rust" but I still give Baldwin the benefit of the doubt because, when it comes down to brass tacks, he was following instructions.

I don't know, for sure, because nobody really knows what they would do if they were in another man's shoes but I'd like to believe that my experience on the skeet field taught me a lesson. I hope I would have, at least, asked for confirmation... "Are you sure?"

This whole incident is fucked up! The gun was SUPPOSED to go off! Baldwin would have expected it!
It probably would have taken him a few seconds to realize that two people had been shot. The dawning realization would have been utterly sickening!
I don't blame the guy for breaking down, crying! He probably fared a lot better than I would have. I'd probably go out of my mind if that happened to me!

Yeah, there's a lot of gray area, here, but I come down on Alec Baldwin's side. He's as much a victim as the people who got shot.

We would have to get an opinion from a lawyer but, if you ask me, Alec Baldwin should have grounds to sue because of this.

[Leo Enticknap]

It all boils down to a question of trust. If you're working in a safety critical job (or even if you're not), to what extent can you trust your co-workers to have done what they've claimed to have done, and done it correctly? All people are different, and some safety cultures are more effective than others. Working on installs, I had a co-worker that I trusted completely and utterly when he told me that a breaker was off and was protected by a red lockout clamp. If it was someone I hadn't worked with before or had reason not to trust, I'd check myself. We all make that kind of judgment call all the time. It's part of life.

Of course, now that something very bad has happened, questions are being asked about the trustworthiness of the assistant director and armorer publicly, that, it is reported, had been asked privately and repeatedly, going back for years. If even some of these allegations are true, the question needs to be asked in turn as to why Baldwin trusted them without doing his own due diligence. This was a low budget flick, that, as all of them do, hired behind-the-camera talent that were either early career and relatively inexperienced (e.g. Hutchins and Gutierrez-Reed), or had a problematic reputation (notably the assistant director). In other words, they couldn't afford the leading professionals in their field. When you're in that situation, you need more oversight and due diligence going on - it's as simple as that.

As for the political angle, Baldwin has, for several years, been very vocal and active in respect of the politics of firearms ownership and use. It's therefore inevitable that this was going to be brought up, especially by opponents of his opinions. That is irrelevant to learning the lessons of this accident, IMHO.

[Carsten Kurz]

The armorer is the armorer. She definitely should have been the person to give out that gun immediately before it's use on that day, and should have checked it properly and not assume it to be in the same condition as the day before. It was not her job to let the AD do that or assume the same. The only exception would have been if the AD took it to Baldwin without her knowledge. But then again, she was responsible for that not to happen as well. They should have been locked away over night, and even then she was responsible for checking it again before it was used. That's why she was there, she has no other responsibility.

You can not expect actors on set immediately before rehearsing or performing to do the final check on their own. It may appear easy to do with a revolver, but there are much more complicated weapons than that and you simply do not want actors having to deal with that while they are doing THEIR job. They'd freak out on that responsibility.

That said - given the amount of movies that are produced with all sorts of shooting scenes, I would think that the actual level of security is very high in that area. It appears as if the rare cases like this actually prove the high level of professional dealing with weapons on set over all the years of filmmaking. The exception proves the rule.
The AD may have been an asshole as is circulated around the media, but personally I think the armorer is to blame, at least if the AD gave the gun to Baldwin in the exact condition he received it from her. Maybe she was indeed too young and/or unexperienced, or simply not fit for the job. If that gun was used/handed out to mess around with it loaded with real bullets the night before, that was the first mistake. But following rules properly could have solved that issue the next day.

All said under the assumption that there was actually a bullet involved and not shrapnel or other unexpected matter.

I heard the police will issue a preliminary official statement covering their initial findings today or tomorrow.

[Jon Dent]

As for the political angle, Baldwin has, for several years, been very vocal and active in respect of the politics of firearms ownership and use. It's therefore inevitable that this was going to be brought up, especially by opponents of his opinions. That is irrelevant to learning the lessons of this accident, IMHO.

No doubt he has been vocal, but so has Sigourney Weaver in the past (regarding "Aliens" specifically).

What sickens me is the people taking some level of personal pleasure from this accident. Right wing is saying he deserved it because he's anti-gun (and anti-Trump, which is a factor even if a lot won't admit it), left wing is saying everyone deserved it because firearms should be illegal, etc.... Let's ignore that a person died and several others are going to carry mental scars for the rest of their lives just as long as we can get a cheap shot in.