If a normal bullet was in a gun, in the middle of a film set, set up as a prop then you’re always going to be dealing with sabotage or gross negligence.
Hanlon’s Razor says the latter. It’s also a such a grossly negligent way to try and sabotage the set - if it’s a union issue - that you may as well still call it gross negligence anyways.
But, in general if there’s a cool, interesting, gossip worthy explanation and a boring and sad one, you should bet on boring.
Yeah, if I understand the terms right, “cold” gun is supposed to mean that it is set so when you squeeze the trigger there’s going to be nothing but “click”. All the different steps between “gun in shipping box” and “gun in hand, finger on trigger” will need to be reviewed to see where the (literally) fatal error(s) happened. And if the guns were just sitting there, available to be grabbed, not really secured, that is huge IMO.
At the end of the chain there are also several repetitions of assumption/expectation folly or complacency: of the armorer, that nobody would handle the firearms without her immediate supervision; of the AD, that if firearms were laid out it meant they were all verified safe; of Baldwin and the filming crew, that the AD saying “cold gun” meant he knew, rather than assumed, it was.
A couple of people have suggested sabotage on the part of the crew members who departed earlier. But that doesn’t absolve the armorer of responsibility, as she should have maintained custody of the guns or at least re-checked them prior to their use. (My understanding is that hours passed from when the crew members left to when the shooting occurred.)
I would agree, if that proves true. The best argument you could make for her would be that the others shouldn’t have been messing with her stuff during rehearsals. Plausibly, she wasn’t supposed to get there until real shooting was supposed to begin and plausibly she had told people to not touch anything without her.
I assume, her lawyer would make that case for as much of it as is accurate. I don’t see it doing much to help her in court (if they’re not supposed to mess with it, why wouldn’t it be in a safe?), but it’s probably the best they can do.
“Her stuff” shouldn’t accessible if she’s not there.
The projectile went through one human body and impacted the one behind with sufficient force to cause injury. I would call that “actual ammunition”. It sure as hell is not a blank round.
There has been a lot of messy reporting around this, but the “went through one person and hit the other behind” has been reported multiple times and seems pretty certain.
Of course it’s not expected that actors suffer injuries, or anyone else for that matter. There are supposed to be safety rules and precautions in place even for stunt people, even more so for everyone else.
Do accidents happen? Of course. But there are rules and practices in place to minimize the risk and avoid the worst consequences. They only work when actually followed, though.
Many, many, many people have been asking that question.
That would be a very bad and unsafe thing to do.
Yep. Been there done that as well. Worst as my attempt to use an air mattress in the back of my Nissan Quest in the long-term parking lot at JFK Airport. Because it was safer than the roach motel I was offered. Abysmal and dangerous.
To clarify something stated up above, IATSE Local 44 oversees Armorers. They have stated that the person on set that day was non-Union and not in any way affiliated with them. They were a scab like the other scabs.
From this article on the event, I quote.
" Now, new updates to the incident include the fact that a live bullet had somehow been inside the prop gun discharged by Baldwin. As reported by IndieWire, IATSE Local 44, which covers prop masters, sent out an email to its members announcing that the prop gun used in the scene being filmed contained a “live round.” Additionally, the union noted that the production’s prop master was not a member of Local 44. "
To clarify: There was one armorer. Apparently neither she nor the prop master was part of that union that includes prop masters and typically also armorers.
They were “scabs,” but not recent replacements on this set.
(Actually, the armorer might have been union, but the prop master wasn’t. Not particularly relevant at all — just the union trying to distance itself from this.)
I’ve been reading statements from Set Armorers.
It seems that the Assistant Director runs the set and oversees safety. He/She should have acted if the Armorer wasn’t following protocols.
Unfortunately the AD gave Baldwin the gun. Breaking protocol. That’s the Armorer’s job to provide & supervise the use of the guns.
IMHO At least two people are in a lot of trouble. Possibly facing criminal charges. I don’t think Baldwin is responsible. But he will have to live with the trauma of the shooting. That’s going to weigh heavily on him.
There’s also the question of who brought live ammo to a movie set. I’d certainly hope the Armorer wasn’t that foolish.
My sister and brother in law are both actors; both have used weapons on set. Both read this story, and both struggled to believe it. It’s so over the top reckless it’s like something out of a story from the 1920s, or written into an outlandish movie-within-a-movie farce.
That’s the budget. But how much has been spent?
That quote is confusing, though, because it uses both the term live round and live bullet. A blank is a live round, but does not contain a bullet.
The link leads to an article that is much clearer, and never makes the claim a bullet was in the weapon.
The fact that weapons were misfiring before raises the possibility that this might have been a mishap similar to the one that killed Brandon Lee.
What you describe sounds more like a ‘producer’ than ‘executive producer’.
It makes sense that two people are supposed to confirm a gun is cold (unloaded) before giving to the actor.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/23/entertainment/alec-baldwin-rust-shooting-saturday/index.html
I suspect talent agencies are being deluged by artists right now wanting to amend their terms to exclude any role that requires them to be on either end of a firearm.
Wouldn’t it be wild if this incident, thru de-incentivizing Hollywood to make movies and shows involving guns, somehow reduced American’s demand for guns?
I have read first-person accounts from crew members on this show that the entire budget is 2 million, with $ 700,000 going to Alec Baldwin.
Even for an IATSE Tier 1 show, that’s both very low budget AND wonky in terms of fees to the Producer/ Star. But hey, you get the funding and you’re an actor, you get the money.
In 1995 I shot a low-budget movie. It had a few medium-level stars and one out and out star. The budget was $ 3.5 million.
By 2021 standards, $ 2 million is just above a Graduate Thesis.
It seems it was a live round ( lead bullet ) that was confused with a crimp blank.
Unacceptable.
Wow, thanks.
It will be interesting to see exactly how this mistake was made. Mistaken purchase, days or weeks before? Or (as rumor has it) use of the same gun(s) to do a little real shootin’ for some R and R, a day or so before the incident, and the ammo got mixed together?
ETA: Martin Hyde cited TMZ that it was the latter. That is very, very bad.
Everything I’ve read says just the existence of single live spent or unspent cartridge with primer, propellant and solid bullet on set should have be enough to have the whole thing shutdown to work out what happened, even if it was never fired.
Basically an accident with a blank round is unthinkable enough (as this is specifically what killed Brandon Lee and led to a raft of safety changes), and definitely some people may go to prison for it, but an actual real “live” bullet ending up in a prop gun is beyond even that.
TMZ is reporting the gun was regularly taken off set for target practice (recreational), target practice was done with real bullets. Additionally the real bullets for the gun were stored in the same location as the various “Hollywood” less-dangerous rounds.
It’s starting to come together now that unspeakable negligence occurred.