Movies, in general, take a long time to make. You spend a half hour setting up lighting, sound, color checks, etc. call the actors in, they do about 10 seconds of film, walk away, and you start the whole thing over again.
That’s probably why filming hours are crazy. If you only worked from 8 to 5, you’d barely get a scene in the can and you’d be there forever. It would feel like you weren’t accomplishing anything ever day. Once you get two scenes in, at least it starts to feel like you’re making headway on the script.
I’m not sure with professional films but in my experience editing takes about 4X longer than filming so that’s got to be tedious as all get out. People who are into it have to really be into it for its own sake, I guess. For me, it slowly drains my soul.
And, I assume, special effects are probably so laborious that there’s no way to do it except to farm the work out to big warehouses of artists. (Though, I have no experience with that part, so I couldn’t say for sure.)
I do agree this is likely the end of Baldwin’s show business career. Note that Baldwin himself had even said some years ago that while he had a good run on TV, his movie career has largely been a failure for the last 20 years; he had a few big titles under his belt in the late 80s/90s, but it mostly hasn’t been amazing since then.
30 Rock really kind of resurrected his career, and kept him relevant and viable for doing things like his SNL appearances. Doing movies like Rust in the first place likely shows where his career was at–the famous but in senescence stage, so this wasn’t a super vibrant movie career he had left in him in any case. I suspect he’s just done after this.
Alec Baldwin had a pretty good recent run as a supporting character in the latest Mission Impossible movies, which have been hugely successful. He’s not the main draw, obviously, but still.
By the way, in Mission Impossible: Fallout (the most recent one), his character pulls out a gun, has it grabbed away by the Henry Cavill character, then pulls out another and says, “I think this one is loaded. Wanna find out?”
I don’t want this to come off crass or minimize the tragedy–but as someone who has spent most of my life regularly around and using guns, I find it…I’m not sure what word I’d use, but I find it something that hardcore anti-gun guy Alec Baldwin probably would be doing lucky to hit a human sized target at more than 20’ range with a pistol on command if his life depended on it.
People assume pistols are “point and click”, but the reality is even at relatively close range they are incredibly inaccurate if you don’t know how to aim and fire them correctly. Myself, if I go too long without shooting a pistol, I notice my accuracy drops off a ton. With a long gun, the effect is much more limited–while anytime you go from shooting regularly to irregularly, you lose accuracy, I’ve always had far less of a drop off from going stretches of time without shooting a long gun vs pistol. Pistol shooting I really think the bare minimum to be “genuinely good” with one is monthly target practice.
I think they practice a lot more now, but I used to chuckle at some of my cop friends who only had to qualify at the range once or twice a year–and some of them weren’t even shooting more frequently than that. I’m by no means a badass shooter, never have been, I grew up hunting, had a career in the Army, and have always enjoyed target shooting, skeet shooting with shotguns etc, but I’m a hobbyist. I’ve shot with guys who have been on the Olympic teams and they’re as far beyond a regular schlub like me as you’d expect, but I’ve seen enough inexperienced people with pistols to say the tragic fucking thing is…a guy like Baldwin given one round to try and shoot someone at 15-20’ range probably misses 70% of the time. [I am not clear on how far away he was from Halyna.]
I’m sure its a law of the internet that someone has to pop up and tell me I’m using it wrong. But I’m pretty sure this spot on the definition of the word irony (not dramatic irony, but irony as its the last thing you’d expect)
I agree that criminal charges are unlikely for the reasons you state, and certainly not homicide – criminal negligence or recklessness would be more likely based on the limited information we’ve seen so far. But a DA may want to move forward with charges for a few reasons. It could be good politics – DAs are elected positions, and showing the locals that he or she isn’t afraid to take on a Hollywood heavyweight hiding behind his high-priced lawyers could be a useful political message. And Baldwin’s interest probably doesn’t lie in fighting this all the way through a very public court battle that would highlight every damning failure on the set. The DA could be counting on a quick plea bargain.
As the series progressed the budgets increased but even in the last one you can easily see the blood and muzzle flashes are fake. With so much going on they hope the distraction makes you not notice. I didn’t go in to watching the movie with the intention of trying to see how the sausage was made but as soon as I noticed the CGI I couldn’t unnotice it. Sometimes practical effects just look better.
New Mexico has been pushing really hard to attract filmmaking, I am skeptical it ultimately is something the local power brokers want to see. The short term juice from the anti-Baldwinites would be outweighed by a desire to court the industry.
Also while it makes good TV, most elected District Attorneys aren’t showboaters or glory hounds. There are thousands of these posts in our country and the vast majority will never make waves. Most are quiet, serious legal professionals with deep ties to the court system in their communities. The woman holding this office in the first judicial district is a woman who built her career as a public defender, deputy district attorney and was a prominent advocate for victims of sexual assault.
These people generally take their obligations to their community seriously. If she believes she would be likely to secure a conviction against Baldwin she would pursue one. If she thought it was a tossup, discretion would likely dictate not pursuing it. It would be highly unlikely she would prosecute if she believed it was a waste of public resources simply to get attention.
I have a question for those who work in the business
Is there a normal definition for what a hot or cold gun is? Sorry if it was stated before , I did read through the thread but have missed if there is an actual accepted useage.
Is it
a Hot gun is a gun loaded with actual real life intended to kill bullets
a hot gun is a gun loaded with blanks/dummy fake rounds that make a bang that would be used in the actual shot and have some serious safety implications and have to be handled appropriately
is a cold gun as described in 2, ie will go bang and is dangerous
is a cold gun something that has no blanks or bullets in but it could if loaded with them, so has to be handled as if it could.
What’s the Accepted term for something that just looks like a gun but absolutely can not ever fire because it’s made of rubber and has no firing mechanism.